$36,000 seems like a small price to pay for a Pulitzer prize fishing expedition. These media companies are private companies, and they ought to pay the city back for the services they use and the time they waste on fishing.
You mean the companies (and individuals therein) that pay tax which goes towards paying for the police?
Reading the article, it will take about 304 hours, at $120 an hour.
This is for an office to review all of the video and make the proper privacy redactions (probably blurring children's faces, license plates, stuff like that).
$120 an hour does still seem excessive, though. Seems like you could hire 2-4 other non-officer people with the appropriate experience and education to do the work, and keep that officer on the street instead of behind the desk.
If the police force was a for profit organisation maybe. Basically, it cost the police whatever the hourly rate of the guy who's job it is. Which I highly doubt would be an officer. Most of them barely have the technical skills to operate their guns never mind video editing.
Do you want a gang banger killing you and your family because a police body cam caught you telling a cop you could identify the robber if you saw them again? How about even just threatening you of that if you say anything else or identify the right person?
Do you seriously think that all this footage is going to be live streamed where anyone can just tune in or access a depository of all footage with a handy little search footage feature? Just take one department, How many hours of footage do you think they'll create in a single day with an average sized force and then you'd have to go through all of that just to find a possible mention of someone saying they could identify you. And if that was even a remotest possibility do you not think that a new measure might be put in place so you don't have to just walk up to a cop and start blabbing, Maybe they could, I don't know, get a phone number, outside the box thinking I know,
The public has a right to know if a cop is being honest, truthful, etc. But that is something quite different than seeing every minute of the cop's day, hearing every conversation.
It's not like they're public servants or anything. If they have nothing to hide then they have nothing to fear and all that.
The question is flawed anyway. There could be a chilli with a hotness rating of a few bazillion kajillion and all I have to do is throw it down the back of my throat and swallow. Anything that happens after that would not change the fact I ate it.
I'm not saying you're wrong, because I don't know, but that doesn't make logical sense. Everything we have ever known has had a cause. We might not know what that cause is, but there has to be a cause there. It may simply be inaccessible to us. If the universe is everything we have ever known, then it's by definition not possible to know what came before it. But that doesn't mean that there was no before. It just means it's imperceptible to us. If you want to say that it makes no difference if there was a before, that's another matter, but it's not the same thing.
Given that God is infinite, and that the universe is also infinite... would you like a toasted teacake?
I beg your pardon, but this is already old news. It has been relayed by other channels at least two days ago. If/. still want to pretend being news for nerds, they have to catch up and post news when they are news, not two days later.
This comment is old news. Seeing as slashdot isn't a news site it's always been like that, it has no writers or reporters. All it is, is some people that put up interesting articles from elsewhere and then we all bitch and moan about all kinds of things, sometimes the original article may get a mention or may not depending how it goes.
Contracts work both ways (or they should). If the consumer has to pay for service for a minimum period, then the provider must continue to provide the service paid for. If they stop providing the service then they must compensate the consumer, either by releasing the consumer from having to continue to pay or paying compensation for loss of service.
*We reserve the right to stop or change any service at any time with no notice.
Isn't it great how Greedy Holywood and other content creators is these stupid geographical restrictions? If you are paying for content shouldn't you have the right to see from anywhere in the world? No wonder why some folks don't have a problem ripping off content.
And why does it have to be exclusive contracts? Why not just sell the rights to show your show to any who will pay. Why do the people who do this think that their content being available only on this one service and only in certain parts of the world is a good thing? They want to sell the same thing multiple times, which is ok I guess but they should be selling to different providers rather than different regions. The internet is as good as it's own country. If it's on the internet, it's available worldwide, end of story.
No, you see, because I don't have to play their game. They are powerless because I access through a VPN, and they are powerless if they go after Netflix because I switch to torrenting what I want (like I did before).
That's their problem. We were all torrenting because trying to buy the stuff was a nightmare. Give us an easy way to buy it and we will, we said. So they did, for a while, and all was well. Until they wanted the control back of how, where and who can watch what and when. So we start to say fuck you again and go back to piratebay and their ilk.
Because Hollywoid isn't getting paid licensing fees from Netflix. This is an attack on Hollywood.
Hollywood isn't even a thing to attack. It's just a place where movie makers haven't had an original idea in decades and instead try to find the safest way to recycle old stuff. Usually by filling it with CG and casting the latest hot young actors whose acting ability is bottom of their list of skills.
Well that's all fine, but still, all I said was a gun isn't the same, I never said anything about they should or shouldn't be legal and what types should be anything. And I totally agree that you should be able to buy ex-military vehicles, I'm sure the types of people who would go through all that are extremely responsible and you don't have to worry about them using them to try and rob a bank or some such. Those hinds are cool as fuck as is the mig, best of luck to them.
I'm not worried about anything. I'm not even American. All I said was a gun today isn't what a gun was then to counter your a militia isn't the same thing. You were the one who brought machine guns in to it because you seem to think if the army can have it then everyone should.
Go one then, what type of gun causes 95% of the firearm deaths in the US and how is it relevant? What have gangs go to do with it now? Do the police count as a gang?
So it is perfectly reasonable that average citizens should be able to own machine guns, as these are the tools of the modern army.
It is perfectly legal for me to own a machine gun, even today. Remind me how many machine guns have been used in crime in the past 30 years?
Oh right, in that case you should also be able to drive a tank, as those are the vehicles of the modern army. I'm sure way back when the regular folks had better horses and carts than the army. It might be perfectly legal for your average Joe to own a machine gun but reasonable is a whole different kettle of fish. How many machine guns used in crime, I haven't got a clue but it's more than one and that's too many.
The Paris terrorists used un-encrypted communications repeatedly prior and during the attacks... so... ?
That's true but do you not remember the kneejerk claims of communication via encrypted ps4 chat. That's the line they're running with and be damned if a little thing like the truth stands in the way.
Yup... as I said as a part of another response, while our elementary and high schools "allow" walkers (now it has to be "allowed," apparently), the middle school charges a f@#king fee for a "walker permit."
The coddling has gone too far. We're waiting so long to let kids mature, a lot of them never make it.
Wait, what? Your local school charges kids for tuning up on foot? That's just.......what the fuck? How much do they charge and how do they justify it?
Your argument is reasonable, just not based on constitutional principles. I don't think this law abides by the constitution, even if it seems reasonable enough. How do you reckon the feds have authority in such matters?
So, what it seems like your're saying is the Government have no authority to demand a thing be up to the people, but if they have no authority there then surely by default it would up to the people. So it's what they said but not because they said so?
For those curious; after the retirement of the 50 øre coin, a purchase of 9.49 kroner is rounded down to 9.00 while a purchase of 9.50 kroner is rounded up to 10.00
Would it not be easier just to have everything priced appropriately? That way everyone pays the same, or would it just be 'economically harmful' to bother with changing the prices. I'd be willing to bet there are a lot more products priced to round up rather than down sitting on the shop shelves.
Or, you know, interpret the second amendment as written and require gun owners to be part of a well regulated militia.
Or, you know, you could learn what "well regulated militia" meant in the 1700s and you could then buy a clue...
It doesn't mean what your 2016 brain thinks it means, BTW...
On the flipside I don't think armed means quite the same now as it did then. They were talking about hand loaded muskets taking a minute to reload and all that, not semi automatic handguns that can fire as fast as you can pull the trigger and reload in seconds, and that's just the bottom rung so to speak.
Slashdot Mirror
$36,000 seems like a small price to pay for a Pulitzer prize fishing expedition. These media companies are private companies, and they ought to pay the city back for the services they use and the time they waste on fishing.
You mean the companies (and individuals therein) that pay tax which goes towards paying for the police?
It's actually not $200 an hour.
Reading the article, it will take about 304 hours, at $120 an hour.
This is for an office to review all of the video and make the proper privacy redactions (probably blurring children's faces, license plates, stuff like that).
$120 an hour does still seem excessive, though. Seems like you could hire 2-4 other non-officer people with the appropriate experience and education to do the work, and keep that officer on the street instead of behind the desk.
If the police force was a for profit organisation maybe. Basically, it cost the police whatever the hourly rate of the guy who's job it is. Which I highly doubt would be an officer. Most of them barely have the technical skills to operate their guns never mind video editing.
Do you want a gang banger killing you and your family because a police body cam caught you telling a cop you could identify the robber if you saw them again? How about even just threatening you of that if you say anything else or identify the right person?
Do you seriously think that all this footage is going to be live streamed where anyone can just tune in or access a depository of all footage with a handy little search footage feature? Just take one department, How many hours of footage do you think they'll create in a single day with an average sized force and then you'd have to go through all of that just to find a possible mention of someone saying they could identify you. And if that was even a remotest possibility do you not think that a new measure might be put in place so you don't have to just walk up to a cop and start blabbing, Maybe they could, I don't know, get a phone number, outside the box thinking I know,
The public has a right to know if a cop is being honest, truthful, etc. But that is something quite different than seeing every minute of the cop's day, hearing every conversation.
It's not like they're public servants or anything. If they have nothing to hide then they have nothing to fear and all that.
The question is flawed anyway. There could be a chilli with a hotness rating of a few bazillion kajillion and all I have to do is throw it down the back of my throat and swallow. Anything that happens after that would not change the fact I ate it.
I'm not saying you're wrong, because I don't know, but that doesn't make logical sense. Everything we have ever known has had a cause. We might not know what that cause is, but there has to be a cause there. It may simply be inaccessible to us. If the universe is everything we have ever known, then it's by definition not possible to know what came before it. But that doesn't mean that there was no before. It just means it's imperceptible to us. If you want to say that it makes no difference if there was a before, that's another matter, but it's not the same thing.
Given that God is infinite, and that the universe is also infinite... would you like a toasted teacake?
I beg your pardon, but this is already old news. It has been relayed by other channels at least two days ago. If /. still want to pretend being news for nerds, they have to catch up and post news when they are news, not two days later.
This comment is old news. Seeing as slashdot isn't a news site it's always been like that, it has no writers or reporters. All it is, is some people that put up interesting articles from elsewhere and then we all bitch and moan about all kinds of things, sometimes the original article may get a mention or may not depending how it goes.
and Walt Disney would lose the value of the sale of that cartoon.... which is zero because they don't sell it.
...and it's shit.
I would rtfa, but I'll do it later.
Contracts work both ways (or they should). If the consumer has to pay for service for a minimum period, then the provider must continue to provide the service paid for. If they stop providing the service then they must compensate the consumer, either by releasing the consumer from having to continue to pay or paying compensation for loss of service.
*We reserve the right to stop or change any service at any time with no notice.
You'll usually find a line like that somewhere.
Isn't it great how Greedy Holywood and other content creators is these stupid geographical restrictions? If you are paying for content shouldn't you have the right to see from anywhere in the world? No wonder why some folks don't have a problem ripping off content.
And why does it have to be exclusive contracts? Why not just sell the rights to show your show to any who will pay. Why do the people who do this think that their content being available only on this one service and only in certain parts of the world is a good thing? They want to sell the same thing multiple times, which is ok I guess but they should be selling to different providers rather than different regions. The internet is as good as it's own country. If it's on the internet, it's available worldwide, end of story.
No, you see, because I don't have to play their game. They are powerless because I access through a VPN, and they are powerless if they go after Netflix because I switch to torrenting what I want (like I did before).
That's their problem. We were all torrenting because trying to buy the stuff was a nightmare. Give us an easy way to buy it and we will, we said. So they did, for a while, and all was well. Until they wanted the control back of how, where and who can watch what and when. So we start to say fuck you again and go back to piratebay and their ilk.
Because Hollywoid isn't getting paid licensing fees from Netflix. This is an attack on Hollywood.
Hollywood isn't even a thing to attack. It's just a place where movie makers haven't had an original idea in decades and instead try to find the safest way to recycle old stuff. Usually by filling it with CG and casting the latest hot young actors whose acting ability is bottom of their list of skills.
On the whole, overhyping topics is actually on the decrease
Well that's all fine, but still, all I said was a gun isn't the same, I never said anything about they should or shouldn't be legal and what types should be anything. And I totally agree that you should be able to buy ex-military vehicles, I'm sure the types of people who would go through all that are extremely responsible and you don't have to worry about them using them to try and rob a bank or some such. Those hinds are cool as fuck as is the mig, best of luck to them.
I'm not worried about anything. I'm not even American. All I said was a gun today isn't what a gun was then to counter your a militia isn't the same thing. You were the one who brought machine guns in to it because you seem to think if the army can have it then everyone should.
Go one then, what type of gun causes 95% of the firearm deaths in the US and how is it relevant? What have gangs go to do with it now? Do the police count as a gang?
So it is perfectly reasonable that average citizens should be able to own machine guns, as these are the tools of the modern army.
It is perfectly legal for me to own a machine gun, even today. Remind me how many machine guns have been used in crime in the past 30 years?
Oh right, in that case you should also be able to drive a tank, as those are the vehicles of the modern army. I'm sure way back when the regular folks had better horses and carts than the army. It might be perfectly legal for your average Joe to own a machine gun but reasonable is a whole different kettle of fish. How many machine guns used in crime, I haven't got a clue but it's more than one and that's too many.
The Paris terrorists used un-encrypted communications repeatedly prior and during the attacks ... so ... ?
That's true but do you not remember the kneejerk claims of communication via encrypted ps4 chat. That's the line they're running with and be damned if a little thing like the truth stands in the way.
Yup... as I said as a part of another response, while our elementary and high schools "allow" walkers (now it has to be "allowed," apparently), the middle school charges a f@#king fee for a "walker permit."
The coddling has gone too far. We're waiting so long to let kids mature, a lot of them never make it.
Wait, what? Your local school charges kids for tuning up on foot? That's just.......what the fuck? How much do they charge and how do they justify it?
The constitution forbids laws that forbid things.
Is that not a paradox?
Except that the law says: "responsibly and safely". So you just need to claim that its irresponsible or unsafe to arrest the parent(s).
" by a means the parents believe is age appropriate". As long as you believe it ok for your kids officer fuckwit can go fuck off.
Your argument is reasonable, just not based on constitutional principles. I don't think this law abides by the constitution, even if it seems reasonable enough. How do you reckon the feds have authority in such matters?
So, what it seems like your're saying is the Government have no authority to demand a thing be up to the people, but if they have no authority there then surely by default it would up to the people. So it's what they said but not because they said so?
Land of the free my ass. It's a nation of lunatics ruled by fear.
Home of the Brave, conditioned to fear.
For those curious; after the retirement of the 50 øre coin, a purchase of 9.49 kroner is rounded down to 9.00 while a purchase of 9.50 kroner is rounded up to 10.00
Would it not be easier just to have everything priced appropriately? That way everyone pays the same, or would it just be 'economically harmful' to bother with changing the prices. I'd be willing to bet there are a lot more products priced to round up rather than down sitting on the shop shelves.
Or, you know, interpret the second amendment as written and require gun owners to be part of a well regulated militia.
Or, you know, you could learn what "well regulated militia" meant in the 1700s and you could then buy a clue...
It doesn't mean what your 2016 brain thinks it means, BTW...
On the flipside I don't think armed means quite the same now as it did then. They were talking about hand loaded muskets taking a minute to reload and all that, not semi automatic handguns that can fire as fast as you can pull the trigger and reload in seconds, and that's just the bottom rung so to speak.