That was quite impressive, you spent the whole time bemoaning celebrities that you failed to point out why you would have the right to film someone against their wishes in a private establishment.
Police should wear a cam because they are individuals in a profession that is going to put them in a situation at some point where we need to know what happens. Not want to know. They are going to be put into a position where they might have to fire their gun or use other physical force. We need to know if that's justified or not. It's a way of watching the watchers. It's a way for the Police to get some vindication when they are falsely accused of doing something wrong. There's so much benefit to it as a public servant that it makes sense. We don't require them to wear it home.
Performers are being a bit ridiculous in not wanting to be recorded, but I do kind of understand it. They don't want to be distracted with flashes during a performance, they don't want their material leaked and stolen online, they don't wan't a joke taken seriously that was highly inappropriate. They know it's inappropriate but a good comedian might tell it anyway to emphasize a point, shock people. They don't want it taken out of context.
You only want to record them. Take a step back and think about it for a second. Do you have to allow me into your house with a video camera and record everything you do? Maybe, but you sure don't have to let me. You don't even have to let a police officer into your home with a camera, they would need a warrant. So why you as a public citizen who rented a space can't deny people from entering your rented venue can't deny it.
Now you go and learn how to properly debate instead of skirting an issue and changing the subject.
Waiting for VR to get 4K resolution is silly. It's like waiting for TV's to get 8K resolution then 12K and so on before you start selling them. Yeah you will get there eventually but do you need it? People thought TV was fine with 480 for years. Yes it will be better, yes it will increase what you can do with it, but that doesn't take away what can be done now in it. Which is very cool stuff. Using it for Autocad work to see a design before it's finished, watching a movie(granted at a lower resolution some people might not enjoy that) in a huge theater, with friends who live across the world. Playing a video game and being able to look around your surroundings. You can do all of these things now with the current resolution. Granted resolutions aren't the greatest, and like you said, rendering right now at higher resolutions is very taxing. It will be just around the corner though and Apple from this statement are ignoring all that, not because the tech isn't at 4k, but because it will disconnect you from the world. The same thing people said about iphones, computers, TVs and countless other things.
Even with VR in it's infancy it's still amazing technology, and it's something that could drive sales of hardware in the future.
My point wasn't that they should partner up, it was more that they couldn't even do that. If they started today they would be behind and no innovating. That was my point. The fact that he is even commenting on it makes the technology at least worth looking into, but he doesn't want to because why? It's not a form of connecting people? Like using a computer, iphone or what ever has been described as in the past?
He's saving face calling it a shitty tech rather than admit that they didn't invest in any kind of research.
Why would he start supporting VR now, they are late to the bus. Microsoft, google have already started partners with companies or are working on their own thing. Apple is really late to the party and everyone has partnered up. Who are they going to get on board with? Valve? Unlikely.
So you have them with likely little R&D into the subject two major companies with offerings already out there. If Apple jumps on it now it makes them look weak. They were late to the party, they weren't courageous or innovative. Things they want to be known for. Using the human contact things such bullshit to try and drive attention away from the fact that they missed an opportunity. They aren't going to start now and be innovative, there's enough buzz on the pixels VR capabilities, the Gear VR, the Vive and Rift. They would be a 4th player to the party and they don't want that image.
I don't think it's like the 1000-in-one type kits. t's quite a bit different, though you did point out something it's exactly like, Lego Mindstorm. It's no different than that. As for if this will take off or not? Well google is heavily used in the classroom for education in north america, and I could see that being leveraged to expand education programming for this. Schools love lego mindstorm and this seems like a step to overtake that market. I don't see anyone buying it really for home use, as a gift really but in school they will eat that up.
Even with a non functioning spine it could increase the life span of an individual if they wish, by keeping the body going. Muscle degenerating diseases as far as I know(I'm not a doctor) typically kill you. This could extend peoples lives even without an intact spinal chord. It would be a huge breakthrough on a lot of levels even if not fully successful.
That is to say it works at all. I'm also skeptical of it working, at least in the first attempt. I'm just saying the spinal thing might not detract everyone from perusing it if it did.
With a finger print scan you could limit the number of scans before you lock out that mode of authentication. You then have to verify with an actual password. There should be no way to brute force the fingerprint scanner. You can maybe get 6-10 through before it should lock out, that's all assuming your database even has something close to what's stored in the phone.
For any kind of laws of robotics to work the machines would have to be intelligent enough for them to matter. They would have to understand what was living and what wasn't. While that could be done on some level, machines that work in factories are stupid. They are calibrated and programmed to run a specific routine, that is all. That is why there is a specific set of safety protocols that are used to maintain these machines, which appears to have not been followed in this case. It is unfortunate, and sad, but it was human error.
That can be a driving factor but even if they copyright expires publishing of said materials can still continue. There are plenty of free domain books that get sold by major publishers that make money. It's not like the money train has to stop once copyright has expired. Live performances of music and so on can generate lots of income.
The way that releasing copyright in a reasonable amount of time can help creativity is that people could use the beat track and write new lyrics. They could pull out samples and work them into other derivative works as well. Full covers could be done in a different tempo and style that would be new and exciting. As an example https://youtu.be/m3lF2qEA2cw it's the same but totally different at the same time.
Locking in copyright over a long period of time can stifle creativity.
The problem with a short copyright on music is this though. You have a new and upcoming band who hasn't had a breakthrough. They produce an awesome song or sound and it's just not caught on yet. Some major label finds it after it's gone past it's copyright and hands it over to one of the artists they have commissioned they produce it and make millions while the original creator of the content is stuck with a thumb up their nose wondering why the hell do they even bother. In that sense a low copyright on music and other materials can be harmful to the creator. Cutting a good balance is hard, but 70 years is way too long and so is 50 for that matter. Something that would give a 20 year old a good shot would be nice, say 10-20 years somewhere in there. That would be good for everyone. New artists could use the material that basically influenced them as a kid and the artists music has usually ran it's course by then. 3 years is too short.
I think a lot of these problems are that it was an illegal market with people probably using a properly secured TOR connection so that they couldn't be traced. They got bored of what they were doing and said "HOLY SHIT, there's 12 million here, untraceable" so instead of the normal walk away, they took the money and walked away. You are going to run into this in any illegal venture, with untraceable currency, where the operator is unknown. Anyone shocked by this needs to give their head a shake. Don't drop a crap ton of money, to someone you don't know, who has no real incentive to help you out. You don't even need a regulatory body, just someone you can hold accountable. You are never going to get someone to hold accountable in a market like that because, well they will be held legally accountable as well.
I agree it is useless, I wouldn't even say it's almost completely useless. I do see the appeal in doing it though, doing crazy hacks like that can be fun. So I would say it was for entertainment value. It is interesting to see that the Nintendo could handle any kind of video like that.
I would say it was more of a proof of concept. The developers go into detail on how they were going to get the pi to stream, convert and write new frames to the cart. https://news.ycombinator.com/i...
It seems like it's quite possible with enough time you could do it, but why would you. They proved a concept and there's not much point in continuing really. https://news.ycombinator.com/i...
You are right, you have to weigh the pro's and con's of it. My point was more on par with that there is a need beyond illegal activities when it comes to online transactions and bitcoin. Most use case scenarios people would still be using credit card or something with similar features. Credit Card companies are awesome at charge backs and fraud cases.
I would say that illegal activity is a large part of it, but I do think it serves an important purpose. If everyday buying of bitcoins wasn't more expensive than using my credit card on a website(try buying bitcoins online it's expensive) I would be all over it. Private transaction without the worry of someone stealing my credit information. Someone online can only fleece me out of what I put in without linking to an account with a credit card of bank account attached. There are other options in this area though. Also while I'm not into illegal activities I don't necessarily want people tracking my every movement online.
Say if I had wanted to donate money to wikileaks back when credit cards were rejected. I'm not doing anything illegal by support that site but my credit card wouldn't be accepted. Paypal will hose you on anything if you aren't careful just look at what happened to Notch when minecraft started pulling in mad cash.
I don't want to be limited just because someone THINKS I'm doing something illegal.
The real problem is, is that his whistle blowing makes him a traitor. It shouldn't, what he did was a service to the people and country. Those that wish to prosecute him and hang him are only doing so because the cat got out of the bag. The government should never have been doing a vast majority of what they were doing. His whistleblowing was justified and if he's a traitor to the U.S. it's a travesty.
If I recall a lot of those star trek fan fiction and even the season 5 had the go ahead from Gene's estate to continue them. Though I do believe Paramount still holds a lot of the copyright and trademark they seem to have given the approval as long as they don't make a profit. That's their call though, it's my understanding that Paramount could put its' foot down and end it at any time and they would have to just walk away.
So why do they allow it? Because it's good for the fan base. It helps breed a culture of die hard fans and feeds their need for content. If they wanted to do a reboot of the series with darker tones it could be damaging to their brand as well. Though I think the creator said specifically they didn't want to.
This is a high quality short that I could see the originator being pissed about because it's not what they want power rangers to be. Unless they can figure out how to stand on the parody but I think that's a flimsy defense.
I know what censorship means, I can self censor I can censor someone else I can do all those things and have it not be illegal. This is censoring pornographic material on googles web platform. It's just not illegal, evil or anything. It's a policy change. It's minor news and those affected have had warning to move along.
It's not so cut and dry though. This has gone through the courts multiple times and EULA have been enforced and not enforced multiple times. It seems to depend on more of which court you take it to. Now the issue here isn't only things that would be covered by the EULA. If it were this would be mildly interesting, the meat of it is the fact that they also are talking about leaving computers/users open for attack and damaging the equipment and hurting people(not physically obviously). It's really interesting, and I wonder if a company can be held liable for poorly written software like that. If they can be held liable who's responsible? Lenovo for probably taking some money to put this on their computer or komodia for having shitty security and poor design.
If this goes for the people filing I wonder if it will have a positive affect and make manufacturers think before they do something like this in the future.
Does anyone recall what happened with the Sony Rootkit deal?
Theoretically this patent covers the ability to insert and remove the display from the headset, as well as detection of the display so that it can switch into HMD mode. I'm not saying it's new tech or that they deserve the patent but it is unique from the VR and older HMD headsets that I'm familiar with that have it built in. I'm not sure if this would cover other ways of inserting the display and if there are loopholes to get around it but that's what it is.
Jon Stewart made that show, but it's established. The formula has been set and it's a good one. John Oliver showed that a good man behind that chair can carry it on. Jon does do some of the leg work on the show and I hear he still does but he is by no means needed to carry it on anymore. Which probably makes it easier for him to step back from it, enjoy his new freedom and seek new ventures, or even hang out with his family.
It's a bit different though isn't? Updating versions on your phone is more like upgrading to the newest service pack instead of buying a new OS. The OS is available for anyone to grab free of charge, updated patched and new features even. Free of charge.
That's not the same as letting support of XP die and quite frankly I had no problem with it in the first place. That OS is decades old now and the people bitching about security holes were most likely using it for custom software that was probably just as buggy as the OS at that point. I know first hand it can be hard to get custom software companies to update their software but it's not Microsofts fault either.
If the people who take Android and put it on phones are unwilling to release updates for it, that's the vendors fault. They take Android and fork it to suite them, then don't bother updating it when a new version comes out. That's how open source software works when you think about it. The main distro is out there free for the taking. Vendors take it and fork it how they see fit, it no longer is the main channels responsibility.
If we have a problem with this, we are really talking about having a problem with opensource software. Then we can discuss the other issue which is when do we can support on outdated versions?
Exactly, I'm not going to say classic shell doesn't have it's place but it's not really feasible in a corp. environment. Also at this point you might as well wait to roll out windows 10.
If I were to roll out windows 8 people would freak out. Windows 10 seems like a much better leap as far as the UI is concerned. I can see us rolling that out a year after it's initial release and we have our policies setup and tested. That means probably 2 more years of Windows 7 on our upgrade cycle.
I just put in a new extruder today and it didn't even work out of the box. Keeps jamming. I wish I had never bought one based on previous model qualities I thought it would be good.
I think you are over complicating this. Use the analogy of a bridge. The bridge is designed to allow people to pass over it, and if it's designed properly it will allow people to pass over it. If the bridge collapses it becomes a question of was the bridge built properly was it checked to see if it would fail before hand was it built according to the original plan. If there is a design flaw someone(typically the engineer who stamped the documents) can be held liable.
I think the same could be said here. If the design was flawed in that it bought illegal things that's one thing when it's suppose to be searching say amazon. Here I would question it's design because it was designed to buy things from where it did. In the design there was a decent chance it could hit illegal materials, and it did. I think if they didn't build anything to compensate for that it's on them. It's like asking, is it really assault if you close your eyes and start swinging at the air and just happen to hit people?
Slashdot Mirror
That was quite impressive, you spent the whole time bemoaning celebrities that you failed to point out why you would have the right to film someone against their wishes in a private establishment.
Police should wear a cam because they are individuals in a profession that is going to put them in a situation at some point where we need to know what happens. Not want to know. They are going to be put into a position where they might have to fire their gun or use other physical force. We need to know if that's justified or not. It's a way of watching the watchers. It's a way for the Police to get some vindication when they are falsely accused of doing something wrong. There's so much benefit to it as a public servant that it makes sense. We don't require them to wear it home.
Performers are being a bit ridiculous in not wanting to be recorded, but I do kind of understand it. They don't want to be distracted with flashes during a performance, they don't want their material leaked and stolen online, they don't wan't a joke taken seriously that was highly inappropriate. They know it's inappropriate but a good comedian might tell it anyway to emphasize a point, shock people. They don't want it taken out of context.
You only want to record them. Take a step back and think about it for a second. Do you have to allow me into your house with a video camera and record everything you do? Maybe, but you sure don't have to let me. You don't even have to let a police officer into your home with a camera, they would need a warrant. So why you as a public citizen who rented a space can't deny people from entering your rented venue can't deny it.
Now you go and learn how to properly debate instead of skirting an issue and changing the subject.
Waiting for VR to get 4K resolution is silly. It's like waiting for TV's to get 8K resolution then 12K and so on before you start selling them. Yeah you will get there eventually but do you need it? People thought TV was fine with 480 for years. Yes it will be better, yes it will increase what you can do with it, but that doesn't take away what can be done now in it. Which is very cool stuff. Using it for Autocad work to see a design before it's finished, watching a movie(granted at a lower resolution some people might not enjoy that) in a huge theater, with friends who live across the world. Playing a video game and being able to look around your surroundings. You can do all of these things now with the current resolution. Granted resolutions aren't the greatest, and like you said, rendering right now at higher resolutions is very taxing. It will be just around the corner though and Apple from this statement are ignoring all that, not because the tech isn't at 4k, but because it will disconnect you from the world. The same thing people said about iphones, computers, TVs and countless other things.
Even with VR in it's infancy it's still amazing technology, and it's something that could drive sales of hardware in the future.
My point wasn't that they should partner up, it was more that they couldn't even do that. If they started today they would be behind and no innovating. That was my point. The fact that he is even commenting on it makes the technology at least worth looking into, but he doesn't want to because why? It's not a form of connecting people? Like using a computer, iphone or what ever has been described as in the past?
He's saving face calling it a shitty tech rather than admit that they didn't invest in any kind of research.
Why would he start supporting VR now, they are late to the bus. Microsoft, google have already started partners with companies or are working on their own thing. Apple is really late to the party and everyone has partnered up. Who are they going to get on board with? Valve? Unlikely.
So you have them with likely little R&D into the subject two major companies with offerings already out there. If Apple jumps on it now it makes them look weak. They were late to the party, they weren't courageous or innovative. Things they want to be known for. Using the human contact things such bullshit to try and drive attention away from the fact that they missed an opportunity. They aren't going to start now and be innovative, there's enough buzz on the pixels VR capabilities, the Gear VR, the Vive and Rift. They would be a 4th player to the party and they don't want that image.
This is what damage control looks like.
I don't think it's like the 1000-in-one type kits. t's quite a bit different, though you did point out something it's exactly like, Lego Mindstorm. It's no different than that. As for if this will take off or not? Well google is heavily used in the classroom for education in north america, and I could see that being leveraged to expand education programming for this. Schools love lego mindstorm and this seems like a step to overtake that market. I don't see anyone buying it really for home use, as a gift really but in school they will eat that up.
Even with a non functioning spine it could increase the life span of an individual if they wish, by keeping the body going. Muscle degenerating diseases as far as I know(I'm not a doctor) typically kill you. This could extend peoples lives even without an intact spinal chord. It would be a huge breakthrough on a lot of levels even if not fully successful.
That is to say it works at all. I'm also skeptical of it working, at least in the first attempt. I'm just saying the spinal thing might not detract everyone from perusing it if it did.
With a finger print scan you could limit the number of scans before you lock out that mode of authentication. You then have to verify with an actual password. There should be no way to brute force the fingerprint scanner. You can maybe get 6-10 through before it should lock out, that's all assuming your database even has something close to what's stored in the phone.
For any kind of laws of robotics to work the machines would have to be intelligent enough for them to matter. They would have to understand what was living and what wasn't. While that could be done on some level, machines that work in factories are stupid. They are calibrated and programmed to run a specific routine, that is all. That is why there is a specific set of safety protocols that are used to maintain these machines, which appears to have not been followed in this case. It is unfortunate, and sad, but it was human error.
That can be a driving factor but even if they copyright expires publishing of said materials can still continue. There are plenty of free domain books that get sold by major publishers that make money. It's not like the money train has to stop once copyright has expired. Live performances of music and so on can generate lots of income.
The way that releasing copyright in a reasonable amount of time can help creativity is that people could use the beat track and write new lyrics. They could pull out samples and work them into other derivative works as well. Full covers could be done in a different tempo and style that would be new and exciting. As an example https://youtu.be/m3lF2qEA2cw it's the same but totally different at the same time.
Locking in copyright over a long period of time can stifle creativity.
The problem with a short copyright on music is this though. You have a new and upcoming band who hasn't had a breakthrough. They produce an awesome song or sound and it's just not caught on yet. Some major label finds it after it's gone past it's copyright and hands it over to one of the artists they have commissioned they produce it and make millions while the original creator of the content is stuck with a thumb up their nose wondering why the hell do they even bother. In that sense a low copyright on music and other materials can be harmful to the creator. Cutting a good balance is hard, but 70 years is way too long and so is 50 for that matter. Something that would give a 20 year old a good shot would be nice, say 10-20 years somewhere in there. That would be good for everyone. New artists could use the material that basically influenced them as a kid and the artists music has usually ran it's course by then. 3 years is too short.
I think a lot of these problems are that it was an illegal market with people probably using a properly secured TOR connection so that they couldn't be traced. They got bored of what they were doing and said "HOLY SHIT, there's 12 million here, untraceable" so instead of the normal walk away, they took the money and walked away. You are going to run into this in any illegal venture, with untraceable currency, where the operator is unknown. Anyone shocked by this needs to give their head a shake. Don't drop a crap ton of money, to someone you don't know, who has no real incentive to help you out. You don't even need a regulatory body, just someone you can hold accountable. You are never going to get someone to hold accountable in a market like that because, well they will be held legally accountable as well.
Hilarious indeed.
I agree it is useless, I wouldn't even say it's almost completely useless. I do see the appeal in doing it though, doing crazy hacks like that can be fun. So I would say it was for entertainment value. It is interesting to see that the Nintendo could handle any kind of video like that.
But yes very useless.
I would say it was more of a proof of concept. The developers go into detail on how they were going to get the pi to stream, convert and write new frames to the cart.
https://news.ycombinator.com/i...
It seems like it's quite possible with enough time you could do it, but why would you. They proved a concept and there's not much point in continuing really.
https://news.ycombinator.com/i...
You are right, you have to weigh the pro's and con's of it. My point was more on par with that there is a need beyond illegal activities when it comes to online transactions and bitcoin. Most use case scenarios people would still be using credit card or something with similar features. Credit Card companies are awesome at charge backs and fraud cases.
I would say that illegal activity is a large part of it, but I do think it serves an important purpose. If everyday buying of bitcoins wasn't more expensive than using my credit card on a website(try buying bitcoins online it's expensive) I would be all over it. Private transaction without the worry of someone stealing my credit information. Someone online can only fleece me out of what I put in without linking to an account with a credit card of bank account attached. There are other options in this area though. Also while I'm not into illegal activities I don't necessarily want people tracking my every movement online.
Say if I had wanted to donate money to wikileaks back when credit cards were rejected. I'm not doing anything illegal by support that site but my credit card wouldn't be accepted. Paypal will hose you on anything if you aren't careful just look at what happened to Notch when minecraft started pulling in mad cash.
I don't want to be limited just because someone THINKS I'm doing something illegal.
http://rt.com/usa/214007-datac...
http://www.escapistmagazine.co...
The real problem is, is that his whistle blowing makes him a traitor. It shouldn't, what he did was a service to the people and country. Those that wish to prosecute him and hang him are only doing so because the cat got out of the bag. The government should never have been doing a vast majority of what they were doing. His whistleblowing was justified and if he's a traitor to the U.S. it's a travesty.
If I recall a lot of those star trek fan fiction and even the season 5 had the go ahead from Gene's estate to continue them. Though I do believe Paramount still holds a lot of the copyright and trademark they seem to have given the approval as long as they don't make a profit. That's their call though, it's my understanding that Paramount could put its' foot down and end it at any time and they would have to just walk away.
So why do they allow it? Because it's good for the fan base. It helps breed a culture of die hard fans and feeds their need for content. If they wanted to do a reboot of the series with darker tones it could be damaging to their brand as well. Though I think the creator said specifically they didn't want to.
This is a high quality short that I could see the originator being pissed about because it's not what they want power rangers to be. Unless they can figure out how to stand on the parody but I think that's a flimsy defense.
IANAL
I know what censorship means, I can self censor I can censor someone else I can do all those things and have it not be illegal.
This is censoring pornographic material on googles web platform. It's just not illegal, evil or anything. It's a policy change.
It's minor news and those affected have had warning to move along.
It's not so cut and dry though. This has gone through the courts multiple times and EULA have been enforced and not enforced multiple times. It seems to depend on more of which court you take it to. Now the issue here isn't only things that would be covered by the EULA. If it were this would be mildly interesting, the meat of it is the fact that they also are talking about leaving computers/users open for attack and damaging the equipment and hurting people(not physically obviously). It's really interesting, and I wonder if a company can be held liable for poorly written software like that. If they can be held liable who's responsible? Lenovo for probably taking some money to put this on their computer or komodia for having shitty security and poor design.
If this goes for the people filing I wonder if it will have a positive affect and make manufacturers think before they do something like this in the future.
Does anyone recall what happened with the Sony Rootkit deal?
Theoretically this patent covers the ability to insert and remove the display from the headset, as well as detection of the display so that it can switch into HMD mode. I'm not saying it's new tech or that they deserve the patent but it is unique from the VR and older HMD headsets that I'm familiar with that have it built in. I'm not sure if this would cover other ways of inserting the display and if there are loopholes to get around it but that's what it is.
Jon Stewart made that show, but it's established. The formula has been set and it's a good one. John Oliver showed that a good man behind that chair can carry it on. Jon does do some of the leg work on the show and I hear he still does but he is by no means needed to carry it on anymore. Which probably makes it easier for him to step back from it, enjoy his new freedom and seek new ventures, or even hang out with his family.
It's a bit different though isn't? Updating versions on your phone is more like upgrading to the newest service pack instead of buying a new OS. The OS is available for anyone to grab free of charge, updated patched and new features even. Free of charge.
That's not the same as letting support of XP die and quite frankly I had no problem with it in the first place. That OS is decades old now and the people bitching about security holes were most likely using it for custom software that was probably just as buggy as the OS at that point. I know first hand it can be hard to get custom software companies to update their software but it's not Microsofts fault either.
If the people who take Android and put it on phones are unwilling to release updates for it, that's the vendors fault. They take Android and fork it to suite them, then don't bother updating it when a new version comes out. That's how open source software works when you think about it. The main distro is out there free for the taking. Vendors take it and fork it how they see fit, it no longer is the main channels responsibility.
If we have a problem with this, we are really talking about having a problem with opensource software. Then we can discuss the other issue which is when do we can support on outdated versions?
Exactly, I'm not going to say classic shell doesn't have it's place but it's not really feasible in a corp. environment. Also at this point you might as well wait to roll out windows 10.
If I were to roll out windows 8 people would freak out. Windows 10 seems like a much better leap as far as the UI is concerned. I can see us rolling that out a year after it's initial release and we have our policies setup and tested. That means probably 2 more years of Windows 7 on our upgrade cycle.
I just put in a new extruder today and it didn't even work out of the box. Keeps jamming. I wish I had never bought one based on previous model qualities I thought it would be good.
I think you are over complicating this. Use the analogy of a bridge. The bridge is designed to allow people to pass over it, and if it's designed properly it will allow people to pass over it. If the bridge collapses it becomes a question of was the bridge built properly was it checked to see if it would fail before hand was it built according to the original plan. If there is a design flaw someone(typically the engineer who stamped the documents) can be held liable.
I think the same could be said here. If the design was flawed in that it bought illegal things that's one thing when it's suppose to be searching say amazon. Here I would question it's design because it was designed to buy things from where it did. In the design there was a decent chance it could hit illegal materials, and it did. I think if they didn't build anything to compensate for that it's on them. It's like asking, is it really assault if you close your eyes and start swinging at the air and just happen to hit people?
also where's the originality http://xkcd.com/576/