did it once upon a time why can't someone else do it in the future. Bemoaning the lack of creativity based on the marketplace seems counterproductive. classic business model applies here: 1. Create something everybody wants 2. Market it. 3. Profit! 4. Build an aerospace company!!!
a half-million slashdot monkeys typing away couldn't create a shakespearean play? Oh well, there goes that theory. I am going back to my cubie/cage and throw some crap at the boss.
Not really in order to do this you just put ths FCC in charge of the (us) internet. Webpages are broadcast (almost) right? So then you get to same regulations against indecency that are applied against radio broadcasts.
far-fetched? Sure. But then so are the broadening of the powers of the executive branch *cough*patriot act*cough*
If I were a terrorist I would make sure that I properly marked my weapon delivery vehicle as a hazmat carrier. McVean and Nichols did it all wrong and put theirs in a UHAUL - sheesh
Well said. I think however, as I have blurred the lines of probable cause and guilt, so could a judge if enough time passes to where evidence gathered in such a manner becomes enough to convict you. This same thing happened to Breathalizers - they were challenged and have become accepted as evidence enough to convict. I still shudder at the thought of taking one - what if it screws up?
This seems to be almost universally true in our legal system (U.S.). Sure there are stories (and Hollywood movies) of someone taking the big companies and winning, but these are not the rule these are the exceptions. I still feel that it worth at least trying to fight if you think you are right. And I know, yes it would suck to be bankrupted over such issues, but maybe you could win.
Well my problem with this is that it my your word against say a picture of your car running a stop light (what if you are not in it, but your kid is?). Or your word against the fact that the file resides on your server. What if security on your box has been compromised and it is being used as a file server by someone other than you? Is it far-fetched? Probably, but this is where your presumption of innocence and the laws burden of proof are supposed to come in.
_And_ I believe I was wrong to say constitutional in my question above -- burden of proof and presumption of innocence are not mentioned AFAIK in the constitution.
Of course this means that it could be bypassing a persons presumption of innocence. I wonder if this could be constitutional grounds from throwing such evidence out?
Might this not be one part of the larger scheme? An attempt, albeit feeble, to keep any other o.s. from making inroads to M$ territory? If the interoperabilty between various operating systems suffers then the logical choice of o.s. is the one that we already have installed and working(barely). This will prevent mid-sized businesses from even trying an alternative o.s.
Just speculation, M$ would never engage in such practices I'm sure:p
that when he is 18 he wont be able to drink a beer but he WILL be able to be drafted and even right now he is NOT responsible for his contractual obligations but he CAN be tried as adult if he got caught hacking into NASA. I wish we had at least some consistency in our laws (other that being inconsistent).
my $.02
Slashdot Mirror
They are aware that this is the same Internet used to steal food from the mouths of their housekeepers via file sharing right?
did it once upon a time why can't someone else do it in the future. Bemoaning the lack of creativity based on the marketplace seems counterproductive.
classic business model applies here:
1. Create something everybody wants
2. Market it.
3. Profit!
4. Build an aerospace company!!!
I just want a button that makes MTV play music videos again.
'Ipod killed the video star'
a half-million slashdot monkeys typing away couldn't create a shakespearean play? Oh well, there goes that theory. I am going back to my cubie/cage and throw some crap at the boss.
'Some of us type more than ten times faster than we write and like to transfer our text conveniently.'
and some of what we write isn't even legible. I love that I can type rather quickly - but penmanship sucks now.
Today is *not* April first it is March first.
Thank you, and now feel free to recind the joke article.
Windows has actually become quite stable in the last few releases. In a stand-alone configuration these systems are fairly reliable platforms.
I want my doctors, my airplanes, and my iron lungs to be more than fairly reliable.
Not really in order to do this you just put ths FCC in charge of the (us) internet. Webpages are broadcast (almost) right? So then you get to same regulations against indecency that are applied against radio broadcasts.
far-fetched? Sure. But then so are the broadening of the powers of the executive branch *cough*patriot act*cough*
If they get any more monkeys they may actually create, through the monkey/typewriter theory, something artful - do we really want that?
If I were a terrorist I would make sure that I properly marked my weapon delivery vehicle as a hazmat carrier. McVean and Nichols did it all wrong and put theirs in a UHAUL - sheesh
Well said. I think however, as I have blurred the lines of probable cause and guilt, so could a judge if enough time passes to where evidence gathered in such a manner becomes enough to convict you. This same thing happened to Breathalizers - they were challenged and have become accepted as evidence enough to convict. I still shudder at the thought of taking one - what if it screws up?
Anyway just a thought.
This seems to be almost universally true in our legal system (U.S.). Sure there are stories (and Hollywood movies) of someone taking the big companies and winning, but these are not the rule these are the exceptions. I still feel that it worth at least trying to fight if you think you are right. And I know, yes it would suck to be bankrupted over such issues, but maybe you could win.
Just my $0.02.
Well my problem with this is that it my your word against say a picture of your car running a stop light (what if you are not in it, but your kid is?). Or your word against the fact that the file resides on your server. What if security on your box has been compromised and it is being used as a file server by someone other than you? Is it far-fetched? Probably, but this is where your presumption of innocence and the laws burden of proof are supposed to come in.
_And_ I believe I was wrong to say constitutional in my question above -- burden of proof and presumption of innocence are not mentioned AFAIK in the constitution.
oh and of course -- IANAL
Of course this means that it could be bypassing a persons presumption of innocence. I wonder if this could be constitutional grounds from throwing such evidence out?
Might this not be one part of the larger scheme? An attempt, albeit feeble, to keep any other o.s. from making inroads to M$ territory? If the interoperabilty between various operating systems suffers then the logical choice of o.s. is the one that we already have installed and working(barely). This will prevent mid-sized businesses from even trying an alternative o.s.
:p
Just speculation, M$ would never engage in such practices I'm sure
that when he is 18 he wont be able to drink a beer but he WILL be able to be drafted and even right now he is NOT responsible for his contractual obligations but he CAN be tried as adult if he got caught hacking into NASA. I wish we had at least some consistency in our laws (other that being inconsistent).
my $.02