Sony brought down the PSN. They said they did. They did it so they could audit access because a remote intrusion was detected. The remote intrusion did not cause the outage, Sony did.
At point X Car A is speeding according to our court-accepted radar. I suspect *insert magic here* is more radar or some other court-accepted technique. What they do NOT do is give a means to "cross-examine the witness," er, cross-examine the radar.
mass measurements relate back via water at 4 degrees celcius (water is most dense at this point)
Citation needed.
Of course, you won't find one, so allow me to provide my own citation for the TRUE origin of mass measurements, or at least, the kilogram. May I present this.
A quick Google search will show you numerous comments from people that are pissed off because a feature for which they purchased the system was forcibly removed.
And there are thousands of people that 'spent large amounts of money on a PS3 so that they can do one particular thing with it:' and that's use the OtherOS feature that Sony took away for no reason.
Secondly, Anonymous didn't directly DDoS PSN, and as soon as they realized their DDoS was affecting PSN, they stopped attacking (http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2011/04/08/anonymous_stops_its_assault_on_psn). The LOIC that Anonymous uses and controls via hivemind was not pointed or directed at PSN servers, but at the website.
Thirdly, cry me a river, then build a bridge and get over it.
And finally, saying all the headaches you've encountered are directly tied to Geohot is like saying it is Bill Gate's fault that Windows Vista flopped just because he was involved in the creation of the first Windows OS.
Since all IsoHunt does is INDEX other website's torrents, how can one reasonably assume that the INTENT of IsoHunt is to find copyright-infringing material?
I can build a website with the INTENTION of indexing images from a variety of sites, how would it then be my fault if Website X (that my website indexes) begins a child pornography section, and the images are picked up by my indexing software?
Same concept here - my INTENTION is to provide a legal image repository of images gathered from the web, yet through no fault of my own illegal images get indexed. This is why we have DMCA takedowns and places like ChillingEffects.org (the organization responsible for assisting with removing exactly this type of thing from Google's results).
So long as IsoHunt would abide by DMCA, etc. requests, they should not be legally accountable for content hosted at other places. Period.
So if I added a Google Search box to my website and pre-filled it with "filetype:torrent", would I be at risk of being sued for facilitating copyright infringement?
Did you check out any reviews online for said camera? Or perhaps read about the camera in a magazine? Maybe a friend told you about it? Was there a sign in the store about the camera?
All forms of marketing. The OP never said ADVERTISING, which is what you're talking about. However, reading reviews, taking advice from friends, reading the technical specifications of the camera in a magazine, etc. - all MARKETING.
Try again, AC.
In order to obtain a warrant to perform a raid on my house, law enforcement is required to show evidence that justifies their action.
All that is required in this instance is someone saying "hey, whatever.com could potentially infringe my copyright!" and the court can order it shut down.
There is no evidence required. There is no panel to vote whether or not whatever.com is actually performing infringing activities or just offering a service that SOME people have abused for the purposes of infringement.
If some kid posts a clip of a TV show on You Tube, under this 'law', the courts could block access for every single citizen, even though YouTube is not directly responsible for that kids' actions.
The majority are the working class, who's time is taken up by things like work, school, and children and who's thoughts tend to focus on things like what bills are due, if their kids are healthy, etc.
The minority, in this case politicians, don't "care" more about the issue. They just don't have the day-to-day issues that the majority has to worry about. Why should what they, being in the minority, want hold more weight than what we, the majority, want? They must forget, we may be in a lower "class", but we are the blood that flows through the veins and keeps this country running, pay the bills of these politicians, and our voices should be heard louder than theirs.
My beef is that it made it through a government committee with no opposition, when the majority of citizens do not or would not wish to give these powers to the government, who is supposed to act in the best interests of the majority.
I don't know that it will make it through the H.O.R. (haha "whore") but it's shocking to see not a single 'nay' vote on something in such dispute in the real world.
Slashdot Mirror
They'll have me sold too.
I got me a 55" HDTV, an Xbox 360, and a black Wii.
The Wii's output looks like SHIT.
Sony brought down the PSN. They said they did. They did it so they could audit access because a remote intrusion was detected. The remote intrusion did not cause the outage, Sony did.
At point X Car A is speeding according to our court-accepted radar.
I suspect *insert magic here* is more radar or some other court-accepted technique.
What they do NOT do is give a means to "cross-examine the witness," er, cross-examine the radar.
Except, these don't use radar of any kind....
All those people need to do is appeal - they cannot legally charge them with a crime committed by a device that they have ruled as faulty.
However, if those people entered in a guilty plea, as some did, not much they can do.
mass measurements relate back via water at 4 degrees celcius (water is most dense at this point)
Citation needed.
Of course, you won't find one, so allow me to provide my own citation for the TRUE origin of mass measurements, or at least, the kilogram. May I present this.
Uh...yeah.
A quick Google search will show you numerous comments from people that are pissed off because a feature for which they purchased the system was forcibly removed.
And there are thousands of people that 'spent large amounts of money on a PS3 so that they can do one particular thing with it:' and that's use the OtherOS feature that Sony took away for no reason.
Secondly, Anonymous didn't directly DDoS PSN, and as soon as they realized their DDoS was affecting PSN, they stopped attacking (http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2011/04/08/anonymous_stops_its_assault_on_psn). The LOIC that Anonymous uses and controls via hivemind was not pointed or directed at PSN servers, but at the website.
Thirdly, cry me a river, then build a bridge and get over it.
And finally, saying all the headaches you've encountered are directly tied to Geohot is like saying it is Bill Gate's fault that Windows Vista flopped just because he was involved in the creation of the first Windows OS.
If I had mod points I'd mod you up, this OBVIOUS point is missed all the time.
"It took 5 years for someone to break the PS3".
How many of those years was the OtherOS option available, 3 1/2? 4? Once Sony removed OtherOS, it wasn't long until it was broken.
Since all IsoHunt does is INDEX other website's torrents, how can one reasonably assume that the INTENT of IsoHunt is to find copyright-infringing material? I can build a website with the INTENTION of indexing images from a variety of sites, how would it then be my fault if Website X (that my website indexes) begins a child pornography section, and the images are picked up by my indexing software? Same concept here - my INTENTION is to provide a legal image repository of images gathered from the web, yet through no fault of my own illegal images get indexed. This is why we have DMCA takedowns and places like ChillingEffects.org (the organization responsible for assisting with removing exactly this type of thing from Google's results). So long as IsoHunt would abide by DMCA, etc. requests, they should not be legally accountable for content hosted at other places. Period.
So if I added a Google Search box to my website and pre-filled it with "filetype:torrent", would I be at risk of being sued for facilitating copyright infringement?
Did you check out any reviews online for said camera? Or perhaps read about the camera in a magazine? Maybe a friend told you about it? Was there a sign in the store about the camera? All forms of marketing. The OP never said ADVERTISING, which is what you're talking about. However, reading reviews, taking advice from friends, reading the technical specifications of the camera in a magazine, etc. - all MARKETING. Try again, AC.
Netflix?
YOUR ENTIRE POST
What the fuck are you talking about?
universal power supply
Uh, chimpo...it's 'Uninterruptable Power Supply'...
Someone mod this excellent post UP!
Do you remove it as a trusted root on your browsers?
Good question...
We await your answer, x0ra...
AHAHAHAHAHAHA Awesome! +1 Funny if I had mod points!
Completely.
Utterly.
Entirely.
Correct.
Ok..."A court order ALONE is not due process."
Fucking /.
If you look at it that way...
The working class pays their salaries.
The corporations pay their bonuses.
They still get their cut from our tax dollars, so yes, we DO pay the politicians.
In order to obtain a warrant to perform a raid on my house, law enforcement is required to show evidence that justifies their action.
All that is required in this instance is someone saying "hey, whatever.com could potentially infringe my copyright!" and the court can order it shut down.
There is no evidence required. There is no panel to vote whether or not whatever.com is actually performing infringing activities or just offering a service that SOME people have abused for the purposes of infringement.
If some kid posts a clip of a TV show on You Tube, under this 'law', the courts could block access for every single citizen, even though YouTube is not directly responsible for that kids' actions.
I have to disagree here.
The majority are the working class, who's time is taken up by things like work, school, and children and who's thoughts tend to focus on things like what bills are due, if their kids are healthy, etc.
The minority, in this case politicians, don't "care" more about the issue. They just don't have the day-to-day issues that the majority has to worry about. Why should what they, being in the minority, want hold more weight than what we, the majority, want? They must forget, we may be in a lower "class", but we are the blood that flows through the veins and keeps this country running, pay the bills of these politicians, and our voices should be heard louder than theirs.
My beef is that it made it through a government committee with no opposition, when the majority of citizens do not or would not wish to give these powers to the government, who is supposed to act in the best interests of the majority.
I don't know that it will make it through the H.O.R. (haha "whore") but it's shocking to see not a single 'nay' vote on something in such dispute in the real world.
To further clarify that...
Getting a court order is not due process.
No, the majority do not want to give the government the power to censor or restrict our freedoms without due process of law.