You've got nothing to brag about. That decision, like all similar ones (plenty in the US, a decade before your precious citation), no doubt was based on the theory that just because you "link" information, that's not the same as being it's "publisher."
In this case, the guy curated a series of links to copyrighted downloads, actively encouraging infringement and profiting off of it. That's quite a bit different than neutrally linking to someone else's content, which one does not endorse. Or have you never heard of the phrase "contributory copyright infringement?"
The two examples are thus apple and orange. Not the same thing. Black, white. Got it? Or is your Canuck brain frozen?
>Any fool can talk, but it takes a wise man to listen.
You're telling me.
If you bothered to read, you'd see that this is clearly a crime in all jurisdictions, and a standard extradiction request. Anyone writing the home secretary, might bother to not make a fool out of themselves based on/. inaccuracy, FUD and hype.
As stated in several other articles, what the guy did is also a crime in the UK, and is just being pursued by the US DoJ instead of the UK because the victims are US companies. Which makes this a fairly normal extradiction, not about linking etc etc.
Why is this not one of those days when I have 15 modpoints? I would have gotten rid of all of them shooting down people on this thread.
Do you people read the fucking articles? Obviously not.
1) What he did was a crime in the UK. Since it happens to affect parties in the US more than the UK, US DoJ is pursuing rather than UK authorities. And shit. Shit. You people are fucking, fucking lazy and stupid. Everytime something fits your ignorant wannabe liberal-anti-autority hacker prejudices, you go with it without reading a goddamned word of reality.
2) Miliary immunity for battlefield actions is entirely different, but I assure you, if an active duty US military personnel committs a felony while off-active-duty in a first-world nation with a mutual extradiction treaty, the US will honor an extradiction request (except in fairly rare circumstances wher they would be subject to courts-martial; and I also assure you, the courts-martial are going to give them worse chances than most European jurisdictions). Again, fuck, shit, your reaction is so much goddamned brain-dead paranoid ideology, that someone should put you out of our misery.
Wirklich? Ich habe Deutsch studiert seit über 20 Jahren vorher, und lebte in Deutschland über zwei Jahren. Aber ohne weiteres, ich habe kein Ahnung, was die korrekte Syntax für "hard" Brötchen ist. Veilleicht, koentte man "Pointers" uben, das heißt, ein Zeigefinger benutzen!
In a city such as Nashville, things as basic as business ownership and property records are not available online. In states such as New Jersey, public records such as basic corporate filings (officers, operating address/address for service of process) are accessible only for a fee.
What concrete actions can citizens confronting such situations, take to encourage accessibility and accountability?
Hmm. You are aware that the US is not primarily a common (as opposed to civil law) system, right, the majority of states being mixed jurisdictions? Didn't think so.
#1 is true of much of the US (private law schools, some of which give scholarships for the first year but take them away if you're not in the top 10%).
#2 is true of much of the US (heard of Ford Motors?).
#3... ha. Ever been in a courtroom outside a metro area, in the US.
One might well compare any ten year period in the intellectual life of Heidelberg or Jena, to the entire history of thought produced by the United States. Even any ten-year period, before life arose on Earth.
Hmm... it seems you missed that I said "before 2004." The point is that many people in the US complained of higher taxes in Europe, while paying roughly equivalent taxes.
A more common (and often used) metric is taxation as a percentage of GDP, which, given various loopholes and other factors, may represent more of a reality-- as taxes on businesses, for instance, can raise prices.
Equally, the tax rates on the average American do not necessarily matter so much-- depending on what you're looking at and who you are. If you tax 10,000 people making 10,000/year at ten percent, you're doing roughly the same thing as taxing 35 people making $5,000,000 per year at 42%.
Note that Europe effectively has no people making the equivalent of $10,000 per year, as someone earning 7K Euro/year will receive benefits that put them far above the US's "poverty line."
Before you call Americans smart you should read a book........like a history book. A little over 7 years ago the American people were stupid enough to **VOTE** in George Bush, and follow him down his ruinous path.
>However, average tax rates are quite high: about 50% of the gross income, including social security contributions.
Note than until 2004, the average family in the US was taxed at a rate of 25% or higher, (higher the farther you go back, at least for ~50 years).
Add state income tax (5-10%), social security (~7.5%), sales taxes (5-10%) and various other assements, and it is was not hard to find US-Americans paying a higher effective rate than comparable Europeans.
Sounds like company is run by a bunch of idiots, and their lawyers aren't too bright either. Our financial clients are often mandated by law to preserve email indefinitely, and the various legislation has enough potential bleed that we advise all clients to preserve email indefinitely. In many cases, the Court is going to have a presumption that destruction is "destruction of evidence." In sum, your Company is likely taking on a liability. YMMV.
The problem with that, is that there are retention requirements in various industries/sectors, such as health care. If the other party could prove that the above was said and led to actual implementation, the other side would have a strong presumption that its positions were correct because of the intentional destruction of evidence for discovery.
My strategy in San Francisco was to drive a junker-- leave the windows down. I left a laptop on the back seat all the time, no problem. (We also typically left our doors open.)
Well... if you're hiring for a basic-level position, why interview someone whose experience/resume commands twice the salary you're offering? Common sense says they're going to leave.
On the other hand, I find young people as or more resistent to change, than older people, on average. Young people often think that someone has always been the way they see it, and that's the only way to do it. In the same situation, some older people may have seen things done ten or fifteen different ways, and be far more capable of imagining change, implementing it, and adapting to it-- where in the same place, a young person may balk.
It all depends, and you have to look at the person.
As for misogyny, of course it's out there. On the other hand, many workplaces wish to hire women to meet diversity initiatives. And I can't recall the last time I saw an older than 50 woman applying for a tech line position. The few women I know of that age in tech, started at line positions 25 years ago, and are in senior management positions at this point-- tech was a very very good choice for them, because given the gender offset 25 years ago, they were guaranteed to be hired.
Finally: look, if you're community college C-average quality, you're community college C-average quality, it is what it is. Too many of these stories seem to be based on anecdotes from levels of the industry that dont' really apply to other levels.
This is silly. It's (somewhat) like saying that the half-life of McDonalds workers is 3 years, and you don't see anything but teenagers behind the counter.
First, I have a lot of friends at Google. Guess what? They went to Google in their twenties, and they're now working at Google in their 30s. Think about it. The OP has said nothing; peoiple in their 20s are more likely to go to a startup like what Google was 10-plus years ago.
Second, line tech is line tech. It's somewhat the bottom of the pole. People naturally move on, either to supervisory or management positions, or outside. New blood is, as in the example above, naturally younger-- you don't hire old guys like me, because there are fewer of us applying, and our experience (those "old technologies" on our resume) makes us valuable elsewhere.
(Aside: find me a COBOL guy with experience in medical systems. I'll kill for as many as you can find. I don't give a damn if they know anything "newer"-- every hospital I know, has chosen to preserve its legacy systems and layer them with APIs, and experienced COBOL guys are gold).
Third, if you don't plan, you plan to fail. Nothing profound here.
Score 5 informative? It's also utter BS. A signed emailed document is a signed document. There may be evidentiary issues (in a murder case!) but it's a signed document and should be recognized as such in any US Court.
>The Earth is an impressive thing, but even more impressive is the complete universe, especially if it is indefinitely branched into a multiverse infinity. >Why can't religious people see this as a much, much greater feat of creation, resulting in God being infinitely more omnipotent?
Er, as a religious person of sorts, I'd say you just defined religion (reasonably well) in your multiverse expression. Using the Pentcostal Church in Hicksville, USA (Russian Federation wherever) as an example, is not an accurate portrait of religion-- ignorance is ignorance. Not every religious person has an IQ of 90.:P
Slashdot Mirror
O idiocy!
You've got nothing to brag about. That decision, like all similar ones (plenty in the US, a decade before your precious citation), no doubt was based on the theory that just because you "link" information, that's not the same as being it's "publisher."
In this case, the guy curated a series of links to copyrighted downloads, actively encouraging infringement and profiting off of it. That's quite a bit different than neutrally linking to someone else's content, which one does not endorse. Or have you never heard of the phrase "contributory copyright infringement?"
The two examples are thus apple and orange. Not the same thing. Black, white. Got it? Or is your Canuck brain frozen?
>Any fool can talk, but it takes a wise man to listen.
You're telling me.
If you bothered to read, you'd see that this is clearly a crime in all jurisdictions, and a standard extradiction request. Anyone writing the home secretary, might bother to not make a fool out of themselves based on /. inaccuracy, FUD and hype.
How the FUCK is this informative?
As stated in several other articles, what the guy did is also a crime in the UK, and is just being pursued by the US DoJ instead of the UK because the victims are US companies. Which makes this a fairly normal extradiction, not about linking etc etc.
Why is this not one of those days when I have 15 modpoints? I would have gotten rid of all of them shooting down people on this thread.
Do you people read the fucking articles? Obviously not.
1) What he did was a crime in the UK. Since it happens to affect parties in the US more than the UK, US DoJ is pursuing rather than UK authorities. And shit. Shit. You people are fucking, fucking lazy and stupid. Everytime something fits your ignorant wannabe liberal-anti-autority hacker prejudices, you go with it without reading a goddamned word of reality.
2) Miliary immunity for battlefield actions is entirely different, but I assure you, if an active duty US military personnel committs a felony while off-active-duty in a first-world nation with a mutual extradiction treaty, the US will honor an extradiction request (except in fairly rare circumstances wher they would be subject to courts-martial; and I also assure you, the courts-martial are going to give them worse chances than most European jurisdictions). Again, fuck, shit, your reaction is so much goddamned brain-dead paranoid ideology, that someone should put you out of our misery.
Bang Bang, and hit the ground.
Wirklich? Ich habe Deutsch studiert seit über 20 Jahren vorher, und lebte in Deutschland über zwei Jahren. Aber ohne weiteres, ich habe kein Ahnung, was die korrekte Syntax für "hard" Brötchen ist. Veilleicht, koentte man "Pointers" uben, das heißt, ein Zeigefinger benutzen!
In a city such as Nashville, things as basic as business ownership and property records are not available online. In states such as New Jersey, public records such as basic corporate filings (officers, operating address/address for service of process) are accessible only for a fee.
What concrete actions can citizens confronting such situations, take to encourage accessibility and accountability?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law
Hmm. You are aware that the US is not primarily a common (as opposed to civil law) system, right, the majority of states being mixed jurisdictions? Didn't think so.
Oh come on.
#1 is true of much of the US (private law schools, some of which give scholarships for the first year but take them away if you're not in the top 10%).
#2 is true of much of the US (heard of Ford Motors?).
#3... ha. Ever been in a courtroom outside a metro area, in the US.
Oops. Just noticed you're an AC. Figures.
One might well compare any ten year period in the intellectual life of Heidelberg or Jena, to the entire history of thought produced by the United States. Even any ten-year period, before life arose on Earth.
Hmm... it seems you missed that I said "before 2004." The point is that many people in the US complained of higher taxes in Europe, while paying roughly equivalent taxes.
A more common (and often used) metric is taxation as a percentage of GDP, which, given various loopholes and other factors, may represent more of a reality-- as taxes on businesses, for instance, can raise prices.
Equally, the tax rates on the average American do not necessarily matter so much-- depending on what you're looking at and who you are. If you tax 10,000 people making 10,000/year at ten percent, you're doing roughly the same thing as taxing 35 people making $5,000,000 per year at 42%.
Note that Europe effectively has no people making the equivalent of $10,000 per year, as someone earning 7K Euro/year will receive benefits that put them far above the US's "poverty line."
Hitler was appointed Chancellor by von Hindenberg and retained power thereafter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler#Appointment_as_chancellor
Before you call Americans smart you should read a book........like a history book. A little over 7 years ago the American people were stupid enough to **VOTE** in George Bush, and follow him down his ruinous path.
If they did, each immigrant would lower the average IQ of both countries.
>However, average tax rates are quite high: about 50% of the gross income, including social security contributions.
Note than until 2004, the average family in the US was taxed at a rate of 25% or higher, (higher the farther you go back, at least for ~50 years).
Add state income tax (5-10%), social security (~7.5%), sales taxes (5-10%) and various other assements, and it is was not hard to find US-Americans paying a higher effective rate than comparable Europeans.
>The Greeks are not an example of socialist malpractice, they're an example of corruption, mismanagement and overspending.
Odd. I keep re-reading the above, and each time, it comes out as "The Americans..."
Sounds like company is run by a bunch of idiots, and their lawyers aren't too bright either. Our financial clients are often mandated by law to preserve email indefinitely, and the various legislation has enough potential bleed that we advise all clients to preserve email indefinitely. In many cases, the Court is going to have a presumption that destruction is "destruction of evidence." In sum, your Company is likely taking on a liability. YMMV.
The problem with that, is that there are retention requirements in various industries/sectors, such as health care. If the other party could prove that the above was said and led to actual implementation, the other side would have a strong presumption that its positions were correct because of the intentional destruction of evidence for discovery.
Lessee:
1) Commorode PET / TRS-80s.
2) PDP-11s or thereabouts.
3) Sun 2 series, with SmallTalk-82 or so.
Get the idea? Limitation can be good. Myself-- I'd say something with SmallTalk along the lines of OLPC versions.
My strategy in San Francisco was to drive a junker-- leave the windows down. I left a laptop on the back seat all the time, no problem. (We also typically left our doors open.)
Well... if you're hiring for a basic-level position, why interview someone whose experience/resume commands twice the salary you're offering? Common sense says they're going to leave.
On the other hand, I find young people as or more resistent to change, than older people, on average. Young people often think that someone has always been the way they see it, and that's the only way to do it. In the same situation, some older people may have seen things done ten or fifteen different ways, and be far more capable of imagining change, implementing it, and adapting to it-- where in the same place, a young person may balk.
It all depends, and you have to look at the person.
As for misogyny, of course it's out there. On the other hand, many workplaces wish to hire women to meet diversity initiatives. And I can't recall the last time I saw an older than 50 woman applying for a tech line position. The few women I know of that age in tech, started at line positions 25 years ago, and are in senior management positions at this point-- tech was a very very good choice for them, because given the gender offset 25 years ago, they were guaranteed to be hired.
Finally: look, if you're community college C-average quality, you're community college C-average quality, it is what it is. Too many of these stories seem to be based on anecdotes from levels of the industry that dont' really apply to other levels.
This is silly. It's (somewhat) like saying that the half-life of McDonalds workers is 3 years, and you don't see anything but teenagers behind the counter.
First, I have a lot of friends at Google. Guess what? They went to Google in their twenties, and they're now working at Google in their 30s. Think about it. The OP has said nothing; peoiple in their 20s are more likely to go to a startup like what Google was 10-plus years ago.
Second, line tech is line tech. It's somewhat the bottom of the pole. People naturally move on, either to supervisory or management positions, or outside. New blood is, as in the example above, naturally younger-- you don't hire old guys like me, because there are fewer of us applying, and our experience (those "old technologies" on our resume) makes us valuable elsewhere.
(Aside: find me a COBOL guy with experience in medical systems. I'll kill for as many as you can find. I don't give a damn if they know anything "newer"-- every hospital I know, has chosen to preserve its legacy systems and layer them with APIs, and experienced COBOL guys are gold).
Third, if you don't plan, you plan to fail. Nothing profound here.
OP is FUD, bottom line.
Score 5 informative? It's also utter BS. A signed emailed document is a signed document. There may be evidentiary issues (in a murder case!) but it's a signed document and should be recognized as such in any US Court.
>The Earth is an impressive thing, but even more impressive is the complete universe, especially if it is indefinitely branched into a multiverse infinity.
>Why can't religious people see this as a much, much greater feat of creation, resulting in God being infinitely more omnipotent?
Er, as a religious person of sorts, I'd say you just defined religion (reasonably well) in your multiverse expression. Using the Pentcostal Church in Hicksville, USA (Russian Federation wherever) as an example, is not an accurate portrait of religion-- ignorance is ignorance. Not every religious person has an IQ of 90. :P