stray further from real (tangible) value like actual physical commodities (gold, silver, etc.).
Why should gold have value? It doesn't have many uses, no way near to the point that justifies it's current price. Why should society waste effort mining something almost worthless to be passed around as "money"? Would it not be significantly more efficient to not waste time mining and instead use debt as money?
You will always be found, it's always possibly to trace back to the individual, everything leads a trail, data can always be captured; so we will inevitably get to the bottom of who they are, what they've done, on a site or on a system and be able to prove that in a court of law.
Even if they can prove a particular machine was used to commit the offence, how will they prove who used it? That isn't even taking into account things such as TOR. I'd go as far as to say he is downright lying.
At first I was surprised that Google Desktop was going away too, but then I remembered that the cloud is the future and nobody has any need for a desktop anymore.
SD cards are just block storage. Surely it wouldn't modify the underlying filesystem while being connected to a host? Wouldn't that potentially corrupt the filesystem?
Space debris could take out the TV relaying satellites which would be my problem, whereas global warming is my future grandchildren's generation's problem.
So what is your solution? That we all switch to communism and abolish intellectual property? That creators of intellectual property don't get paid? How is that going to work for software developers and book authors?
Computers don't lie. They can get a list of IPs from a torrent tracker and connect to them. If they upload the content, that is proof that the connection is being used to break the law.
Is it meant to give your argument some weight? In either case, it's totally irrelevant.
While it is irrelevant as to whether or not my argument is valid, it shows that I am arguing for myself to be under the same laws that I am arguing for.
This law that has generated protests against because of the lack of oversight, the lack of public input, no legal standard of evidence, no firm way to prove innocence
You mean it has generated protests because people want to complain that they can't get a free ride anymore?
Have you actually read the bill before making statements about it? Specifically section 122MA
An account holder may submit evidence, or give reasons, that show that any 1 or more of the presumptions in subsection (1) do not apply with respect to any particular infringement identified in an infringement notice.
“(3) If an account holder submits evidence or gives reasons as referred to in subsection (2), the rights owner must satisfy the Tribunal that the particular presumption or presumptions are correct.
Just for the record, I am also from New Zealand.
So what? Is that meant to impress upon us how seriously you take IP infringement? Is it meant to give your argument some weight? In either case, it's totally irrelevant.
Slashdot Mirror
This isn't going to be very useful if it requires a user to be already logged in to work.
If it lets the user login over the remote desktop connection, Chrome is going to need to be running as an Administrator.
Uhhh you do realize that Flash and Java (along with all their respective security vulnerabilities) run on Linux and OS X too, right?
It has the most expressive power
Abstraction gives you expressive power. Assembly isn't abstract at all, it lets you do one command in one line.
Languages such as C might let you do ten commands in one line, languages such as Java or C# might let you do 10 times more again.
And then there are functional languages...
You mean like EC2?
U.S. is still one of the best places for free speech.
Mod parent + 1 Funny
It's simple, everyone goes to the class until they pass it. If a teacher already has a clear accent, they immediately pass and don't have to go back.
We have the highest rate of skin cancer in the world because millions of foreigners created a hole in the ozone layer above us.
I just thought I'd say thanks.
stray further from real (tangible) value like actual physical commodities (gold, silver, etc.).
Why should gold have value? It doesn't have many uses, no way near to the point that justifies it's current price. Why should society waste effort mining something almost worthless to be passed around as "money"? Would it not be significantly more efficient to not waste time mining and instead use debt as money?
PayPal, like Microsoft, just want your money. Google, on the other hand, wants to know everything about you.
I'd sooner trust PayPal than Google with my money.
Any entrance level programmer could make a system that alerts a superior of the performance of one of these people.
Say an alert when the losses are over $100,000 then over $1mil, $10mil, $100mil, etc. or maybe after 50 losses in a row.
It says a lot about this bank that this wasn't caught earlier. An alert should have been triggered far before the losses got to the 2bn mark.
If it is impossible to exist, who cares if they have a patent on it?
You will always be found, it's always possibly to trace back to the individual, everything leads a trail, data can always be captured; so we will inevitably get to the bottom of who they are, what they've done, on a site or on a system and be able to prove that in a court of law.
Even if they can prove a particular machine was used to commit the offence, how will they prove who used it? That isn't even taking into account things such as TOR. I'd go as far as to say he is downright lying.
Why would they do that?
Why would anyone care? It's probably buggy and there will likely be a beta out before then that fixes most of the problems.
Hey at least it's not about Bitcoin. ;)
now they can take everyone else's money even faster!
FTFY.
Least Corrupt != Not Corrupt.
Having weak politicians who can be used to purchase laws by foreign companies is another.
ORLY?
I wouldn't think so. Orcon bills based on the day of the month the customer signed up.
At first I was surprised that Google Desktop was going away too, but then I remembered that the cloud is the future and nobody has any need for a desktop anymore.
How would this work?
SD cards are just block storage. Surely it wouldn't modify the underlying filesystem while being connected to a host? Wouldn't that potentially corrupt the filesystem?
Space debris could take out the TV relaying satellites which would be my problem, whereas global warming is my future grandchildren's generation's problem.
Why should I care about someone else's problem?
So what is your solution? That we all switch to communism and abolish intellectual property? That creators of intellectual property don't get paid? How is that going to work for software developers and book authors?
But why are they protesting now and not before? The new law reduces the penalties and makes nothing that was previously legal now illegal.
The new law streamlines infringement cases, and contrary to the FUD many people speak of, innocent people do not have to pay up.
DRM.
It is? How? Because they claim it is?
Computers don't lie. They can get a list of IPs from a torrent tracker and connect to them. If they upload the content, that is proof that the connection is being used to break the law.
Is it meant to give your argument some weight? In either case, it's totally irrelevant.
While it is irrelevant as to whether or not my argument is valid, it shows that I am arguing for myself to be under the same laws that I am arguing for.
This law that has generated protests against because of the lack of oversight, the lack of public input, no legal standard of evidence, no firm way to prove innocence
You mean it has generated protests because people want to complain that they can't get a free ride anymore?
Have you actually read the bill before making statements about it? Specifically section 122MA
An account holder may submit evidence, or give reasons, that show that any 1 or more of the presumptions in subsection (1) do not apply with respect to any particular infringement identified in an infringement notice. “(3) If an account holder submits evidence or gives reasons as referred to in subsection (2), the rights owner must satisfy the Tribunal that the particular presumption or presumptions are correct.
Just for the record, I am also from New Zealand.
So what? Is that meant to impress upon us how seriously you take IP infringement? Is it meant to give your argument some weight? In either case, it's totally irrelevant.