It's a loop hole in the law. This law is a (very bad) attempt to plug the loop hole. It has to do with how the machines are operated and how they operate. It's stupid, but it is another example of the law not keeping up with technology.
First off, these aren't the kind of internet cafe' one can go to and get on-line and check one's email or visit a web site. The computers only have gambling program(s) and it is basically a virtual slot machine. These places don't even offer wifi so you can bring your own computer. They are, in effect, illegal casinos.
Second, the law specifically defines the establishments and computers. It only applies to computers which are set up to ONLY run programs that are games of chance and the establishments that have them.
Third, the reason the law talks about internet cafe's is because that is what these places call themselves.
You should visit one of these "internet café's". It would be amusing to watch you try to go online and visit Slashdot or check your email, because one can't. As you have never seen or experienced these places, you are going on the name they are using. They aren't calling themselves casinos, slot parlors, gambling dens, etc. because those are illegal. Instead they are using virtual slot machine software on networked computers. There is no general internet access.
The "internet cafe's" are not what you think of as an internet café. Basically, these are slot machine casinos. You can't get on the internet to check your email or visit a random website. All the computers are essentially virtual slot machines.
That is because you don't understand what is being called an "internet café". There are places here that call themselves "internet cafés" who offer "games" which are actually nothing more than slot machine parlors using virtual slot machines running on PCs.
There is a difference between an innocuous person sitting at a bus stop with a tube and a man holding a gun near the leader of a nation. Security for leaders tend to shoot first and ask questions later because later might mean a dead leader. Would you like to bet that if your dad's friend had put the tube on his shoulder like he was going to fire it, the reaction would have been quite different?
Watch "In the Line of Fire", where an assassin played by John Malkovich tires to kill the president using a plastic gun. He makes his two shot pistol himself using high density compsite. The pistol is made of several parts and is designed to be smuggled in to the event in the cummerbund of his tuxedo. It uses springs, which are brought in inside a ball-point pen, to operate the hammers. He sneaks the ammunition through security insides a rabbit's foot on his key chain.
Someone doesn't realize that embassies are foreign soil. You clearly are assuming that what they are doing is illegal and not sanctioned under national security. See, you are just making an ass out of yourself and YOU KNOW IT or you wouldn't be posting as an anonymous coward.
If he didn't want it known, he shouldn't have gone out and publicized it. I am surprised anyone on Slashdot thinks being a traitor is a bad thing. Just look at all the praise for Manning and Snowden, both of home are traitors to their country. I have seen plenty of people claiming they would hire both of them, including an article in a newspaper, so your argument is proven false.
Honor and integrity mean nothing to WikiLeaks and Anonymous. They mean nothing to Assange, Manning, and Snowden. This individual was associated with a group of people who had no honor or integrity to begin with, thus he had none either.
Now, stop assigning me beliefs and acting like you know me when you admittedly don't know anything about me at all.
Loss of rep? Really? Ooooh, that is sooo bad. Maybe they will tease him at school too.
He may have violated laws, but probably not. But, as has so often been shown here, the SlashMob doesn't care about that.
Give us a reasonably likely scenario of the last. I am sure it should be amusing.
To me, it sounds like this guy thought he would be some valuable double agent and the reality was he was used by the professionals, which is what happens to wanna-bes, so he is spouting off about his misadventure.
I haven't committed treason against anyone. Manning did and is paying the price for it. Assange, WikiLeaks and the enemies of the U.S. are the ones who gained anything and they don't give a damn what happens to Manning. And, Snowden is as bad as Manning, maybe worse.
Fuck Swartz, he was an asshole who did something he knew was illegal then was so surprised he was going to be punished, he offed himself.
Fuck Stallman, he is a crazy piece of shit who thinks he should have the right to take what others do without paying for it. He isn't a communist, he is a fucking two year old.
She has said she didn't pre-emptively attack. What evidence do we have that she didn't? Your so-called "released facts" are her blog post, her story, and her word. Please explain in detail why we should believe her at her word.
No, that is YOUR definition and you want to use it because the real definition works against you. As to your hypothetical situation, you are setting up an impossible situation and saying "What if this impossible situation happened?" You may as well ask "What if all the oxygen in the world gathered at the north pole?" What if Snowden has a list of spies and has traded it for protection?
Slashdot Mirror
It's a loop hole in the law. This law is a (very bad) attempt to plug the loop hole. It has to do with how the machines are operated and how they operate. It's stupid, but it is another example of the law not keeping up with technology.
First off, these aren't the kind of internet cafe' one can go to and get on-line and check one's email or visit a web site. The computers only have gambling program(s) and it is basically a virtual slot machine. These places don't even offer wifi so you can bring your own computer. They are, in effect, illegal casinos.
Second, the law specifically defines the establishments and computers. It only applies to computers which are set up to ONLY run programs that are games of chance and the establishments that have them.
Third, the reason the law talks about internet cafe's is because that is what these places call themselves.
Exactly. Same thing, different location.
You should visit one of these "internet café's". It would be amusing to watch you try to go online and visit Slashdot or check your email, because one can't. As you have never seen or experienced these places, you are going on the name they are using. They aren't calling themselves casinos, slot parlors, gambling dens, etc. because those are illegal. Instead they are using virtual slot machine software on networked computers. There is no general internet access.
The "internet cafe's" are not what you think of as an internet café. Basically, these are slot machine casinos. You can't get on the internet to check your email or visit a random website. All the computers are essentially virtual slot machines.
That is because you don't understand what is being called an "internet café". There are places here that call themselves "internet cafés" who offer "games" which are actually nothing more than slot machine parlors using virtual slot machines running on PCs.
The Dangers of Bad Project Management
The Dangers of Scope Creep
The Dangers of your eyes being bigger than your stomach.
There is a difference between an innocuous person sitting at a bus stop with a tube and a man holding a gun near the leader of a nation. Security for leaders tend to shoot first and ask questions later because later might mean a dead leader. Would you like to bet that if your dad's friend had put the tube on his shoulder like he was going to fire it, the reaction would have been quite different?
Watch "In the Line of Fire", where an assassin played by John Malkovich tires to kill the president using a plastic gun. He makes his two shot pistol himself using high density compsite. The pistol is made of several parts and is designed to be smuggled in to the event in the cummerbund of his tuxedo. It uses springs, which are brought in inside a ball-point pen, to operate the hammers. He sneaks the ammunition through security insides a rabbit's foot on his key chain.
Someone doesn't realize that embassies are foreign soil. You clearly are assuming that what they are doing is illegal and not sanctioned under national security. See, you are just making an ass out of yourself and YOU KNOW IT or you wouldn't be posting as an anonymous coward.
Especially the board walk. Not because it is hard to get to but because people should see it.
Set them on fire.
If he didn't want it known, he shouldn't have gone out and publicized it. I am surprised anyone on Slashdot thinks being a traitor is a bad thing. Just look at all the praise for Manning and Snowden, both of home are traitors to their country. I have seen plenty of people claiming they would hire both of them, including an article in a newspaper, so your argument is proven false.
Honor and integrity mean nothing to WikiLeaks and Anonymous. They mean nothing to Assange, Manning, and Snowden. This individual was associated with a group of people who had no honor or integrity to begin with, thus he had none either.
Now, stop assigning me beliefs and acting like you know me when you admittedly don't know anything about me at all.
Loss of rep? Really? Ooooh, that is sooo bad. Maybe they will tease him at school too.
He may have violated laws, but probably not. But, as has so often been shown here, the SlashMob doesn't care about that.
Give us a reasonably likely scenario of the last. I am sure it should be amusing.
To me, it sounds like this guy thought he would be some valuable double agent and the reality was he was used by the professionals, which is what happens to wanna-bes, so he is spouting off about his misadventure.
I haven't committed treason against anyone. Manning did and is paying the price for it. Assange, WikiLeaks and the enemies of the U.S. are the ones who gained anything and they don't give a damn what happens to Manning. And, Snowden is as bad as Manning, maybe worse.
committing treason on your people
You mean like Manning actually did for free?
What work and risk? What is the risk he is taking?
Why shouldn't someone part of WikiLeaks, a secret leaking site, leak WikiLeaks' secrets? Surely you can't be surprised by this.
Fuck Swartz, he was an asshole who did something he knew was illegal then was so surprised he was going to be punished, he offed himself.
Fuck Stallman, he is a crazy piece of shit who thinks he should have the right to take what others do without paying for it. He isn't a communist, he is a fucking two year old.
She has said she didn't pre-emptively attack. What evidence do we have that she didn't? Your so-called "released facts" are her blog post, her story, and her word. Please explain in detail why we should believe her at her word.
No, that is YOUR definition and you want to use it because the real definition works against you. As to your hypothetical situation, you are setting up an impossible situation and saying "What if this impossible situation happened?" You may as well ask "What if all the oxygen in the world gathered at the north pole?" What if Snowden has a list of spies and has traded it for protection?
SHE stated she hit him with a coffee cup. Or, didn't your read that?
I love it when I get modded "Troll" for speaking the truth. How about you refute any part of what I posted?
Wow, look, you don't like the truth. Go bury your head in the sand.