That's my approach to the new Fantastic Four movie. I've seen it offered already, but I've heard such awful things from those who watched it that I'm not going to waste my time.
--- (v) A statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
'(vi) A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed. ---
The perjury part applies only to (vi) - that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the copyright holder and that the contents of the claim are accurate. The actual infringement needs only a good faith belief. It's arguable if an automated enforcement system can really be called that, as the use of fully automated takedown bots was not envisioned when the legislation was created, but I have never heard of any prosecution for that, and I can't find any with a bit of googling
The DMCA makes it clearly illegal to knowingly submit a false DMCA claim, but there is no offense committed for submitting false complaints due to incompetence, haste or cost-cutting. This is not just my own uneducated reading: It's the defense used by some major copyright holders who have committed exactly the same overzealous errors in the past: https://torrentfreak.com/warne... The judge in that case never decided if that defense was valid, as the parties reached a settlement.
It does, but it only applies if the false claim is false in the sense that it wasn't filed by the copyright holder or someone they appointed to represent them. There is no penalty for a claim made in error, so long as it was authorized by the copyright holder of the allegedly infringed work.
I'm in the UK. We have exactly one cable company in the country - there used to be more, but there was a string of mergers until only one stood. The one is Virgin Media, and they insist on the use of their own branded router, the 'Superhub.' You can set it to disable all the routing functionality and just act as a dumb modem though.
You can for ADSL routers. Cable service routers usually combine modem and router into one box, and DOCSIS authenticates this device with the other end of the network cryptographically - even if you wanted to replace it, you couldn't. If you check the fine print you'll usually find that the modem-router is the property of the cable company and serves as the demarcation point.
All of which are indirect references to John George Haigh, an actual murderer who did use acid to destroy the bodies of his victims. He used concentrated sulfuric, and it worked very well. The police couldn't even identify most of the remains as a corpse, and certainly not identify it. They only succeeded with one, because the victim wore acid-proof artificial dentures. That was the only part to survive in recognizable form.
Gay marriage only really affects gay people. Regardless of the outcome of that debate, society is going to look exactly the same in fifty years - unless you're gay and wish to marry, or know someone who meets those criteria. For the vast majority of people it makes no difference at all.
He certainly screwed up. It just wasn't because of a general lack of intelligence. More of a personality flaw: He desired to be a great president, one who would be remembered for his leadership and success. It's hard to be a great president during a time of peace, and he saw a good war as his ticket into the history books - a military victory would surely secure his place of honor. When the 9/11 attack gave him a good excuse, he jumped at the chance.
Many drugs are chemically addictive. But that isn't why they are banned - if it were the reason, nicotine would also be banned, as that is a fairly addictive drug itsself. Public safety is also not the reason, because if it were then alcohol would be banned (again) too - it kills more people each year than every other recreational drug put together.
Pretty much: Trillions have been spent fighting the war on drugs, and they are still commonly available and not too hard to get. Copying files is even easier than growing a plant or synthesizing a chemical.
I think there are certain issues like abortion that the two major parties have agreed upon as suitable for political theater - it distracts the public from the other issues on which they are in agreement, and would rather the public not talk about.
I think Bush is smarter than people give him credit for - he just deliberately acted dumb a lot of the time, because it fit his political image. He ran as an everyman, a typical American - not some elitist science-type who thinks he knows better than the common voter. He never made a big deal of his academic record, he holidayed at the most American of places, and he deliberately styled himself as a Texas cowboy and spoke in common vernacular and accent whenever possible. It was all a carefully crafted image, and it worked.
It turned out well in the end, but they did go through a period of much violence and killing after their revolution. There was a lot of public fear that those who opposed the revolution were underground, plotting their counter-revolution, building a secret army. In response to this the new leaders started systematically executing anyone judged to show even slight sympathy towards the old aristocracy.
Revolutions are bloody affairs, even when they work.
I've seen a few prominent figures on the religious right argue that welfare is an attack on the position of churches, because it undermines their god-appointed duty of caring for the poor. If government is keeping people from poverty, then how are christians supposed to fill their obligation to minister to them?
The superconductors themselves are expensive. There are many high-temperature (relatively speaking) superconductors, but they are all exotic alloys of very precise crystal structure. Expensive to manufacture, and you'd have to coat a whole skate park in them. Plus the enclosed cooling system, and a durable insulator on top - you don't want people falling off into the inch-deep lake of liquid nitrogen, it isn't healthy.
You could ride easily enough on a rapidly alternating magnetic field above a conductive surface - but again, there is the problem of powering such a thing. It's a neat trick to levitate a bowling ball in the air, but it takes many kilowatts of power to hold it up there, and a human is heavier. Current technology can't possibly fit all the gear for that in a board.
Slashdot Mirror
That's my approach to the new Fantastic Four movie. I've seen it offered already, but I've heard such awful things from those who watched it that I'm not going to waste my time.
From section three:
---
(v) A statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
'(vi) A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
---
The perjury part applies only to (vi) - that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the copyright holder and that the contents of the claim are accurate. The actual infringement needs only a good faith belief. It's arguable if an automated enforcement system can really be called that, as the use of fully automated takedown bots was not envisioned when the legislation was created, but I have never heard of any prosecution for that, and I can't find any with a bit of googling
The DMCA makes it clearly illegal to knowingly submit a false DMCA claim, but there is no offense committed for submitting false complaints due to incompetence, haste or cost-cutting. This is not just my own uneducated reading: It's the defense used by some major copyright holders who have committed exactly the same overzealous errors in the past: https://torrentfreak.com/warne...
The judge in that case never decided if that defense was valid, as the parties reached a settlement.
It does, but it only applies if the false claim is false in the sense that it wasn't filed by the copyright holder or someone they appointed to represent them. There is no penalty for a claim made in error, so long as it was authorized by the copyright holder of the allegedly infringed work.
No, but it can make watching you sufficiently expensive and impractical as to render it impossible on a non-targetted basis.
SSL interception is possible, but if any ISP or intelligence service does it on a large scale it will inevitably be noticed.
I'm in the UK. We have exactly one cable company in the country - there used to be more, but there was a string of mergers until only one stood. The one is Virgin Media, and they insist on the use of their own branded router, the 'Superhub.' You can set it to disable all the routing functionality and just act as a dumb modem though.
You can for ADSL routers. Cable service routers usually combine modem and router into one box, and DOCSIS authenticates this device with the other end of the network cryptographically - even if you wanted to replace it, you couldn't. If you check the fine print you'll usually find that the modem-router is the property of the cable company and serves as the demarcation point.
All of which are indirect references to John George Haigh, an actual murderer who did use acid to destroy the bodies of his victims. He used concentrated sulfuric, and it worked very well. The police couldn't even identify most of the remains as a corpse, and certainly not identify it. They only succeeded with one, because the victim wore acid-proof artificial dentures. That was the only part to survive in recognizable form.
Concentrated sulfuric does the job very well, according to research conducted by John George Haigh.
North Korea has clocks?
Second dumbest thing. Don't forget daylight savings.
The UK is not on the same time zone as the UK half the year. Get rid of summer time first, then we can deal with zones.
Gay marriage only really affects gay people. Regardless of the outcome of that debate, society is going to look exactly the same in fifty years - unless you're gay and wish to marry, or know someone who meets those criteria. For the vast majority of people it makes no difference at all.
He certainly screwed up. It just wasn't because of a general lack of intelligence. More of a personality flaw: He desired to be a great president, one who would be remembered for his leadership and success. It's hard to be a great president during a time of peace, and he saw a good war as his ticket into the history books - a military victory would surely secure his place of honor. When the 9/11 attack gave him a good excuse, he jumped at the chance.
Many drugs are chemically addictive. But that isn't why they are banned - if it were the reason, nicotine would also be banned, as that is a fairly addictive drug itsself. Public safety is also not the reason, because if it were then alcohol would be banned (again) too - it kills more people each year than every other recreational drug put together.
I think the diference is going to be between 'ridiculously expensive' and 'tremendously expensive.'
Pretty much: Trillions have been spent fighting the war on drugs, and they are still commonly available and not too hard to get. Copying files is even easier than growing a plant or synthesizing a chemical.
I think there are certain issues like abortion that the two major parties have agreed upon as suitable for political theater - it distracts the public from the other issues on which they are in agreement, and would rather the public not talk about.
Reducing the profits of corporations is economic terrorism.
It would work equally well either way - and supermagnets too are very expensive.
Definition is impossible - as the term is a media creation, not technical, it is used with wild inconsistency.
I think Bush is smarter than people give him credit for - he just deliberately acted dumb a lot of the time, because it fit his political image. He ran as an everyman, a typical American - not some elitist science-type who thinks he knows better than the common voter. He never made a big deal of his academic record, he holidayed at the most American of places, and he deliberately styled himself as a Texas cowboy and spoke in common vernacular and accent whenever possible. It was all a carefully crafted image, and it worked.
It turned out well in the end, but they did go through a period of much violence and killing after their revolution. There was a lot of public fear that those who opposed the revolution were underground, plotting their counter-revolution, building a secret army. In response to this the new leaders started systematically executing anyone judged to show even slight sympathy towards the old aristocracy.
Revolutions are bloody affairs, even when they work.
I've seen a few prominent figures on the religious right argue that welfare is an attack on the position of churches, because it undermines their god-appointed duty of caring for the poor. If government is keeping people from poverty, then how are christians supposed to fill their obligation to minister to them?
The superconductors themselves are expensive. There are many high-temperature (relatively speaking) superconductors, but they are all exotic alloys of very precise crystal structure. Expensive to manufacture, and you'd have to coat a whole skate park in them. Plus the enclosed cooling system, and a durable insulator on top - you don't want people falling off into the inch-deep lake of liquid nitrogen, it isn't healthy.
The plasma would also damage the surface beneath.
You could ride easily enough on a rapidly alternating magnetic field above a conductive surface - but again, there is the problem of powering such a thing. It's a neat trick to levitate a bowling ball in the air, but it takes many kilowatts of power to hold it up there, and a human is heavier. Current technology can't possibly fit all the gear for that in a board.