Those would actually make some sort of sense. Not that I'd support that either in this case, but Government mandates to give new technology a push can actually give the technology the foothold it needs. No such need for FM radio. I think it's pretty well established.
True, but driving a car on the public highway is explicitly illegal according to said passed laws, unless certain conditions are met. These include having passed a driving test, not being drunk, and various others.
Well, I have sympathy because while I believe what he did was wrong, a lot of it was due to a really badly managed department and a genuine belief that the people asking for passwords would cause harm to the network.
He was wrong. This was not his call to make and his response was highly inappropriate but I can't see it as being 4 years worth of wrong.
Please cite a legal authority for your assertion that passwords are "property". Since they are intangible, I can only think that Intellectual Property laws would have bearing on that assertion. But, since the passwords were neither patented nor trademarked nor copyrighted (copywritten?), I don't see how your assertion can hold up.
True. The servers were property and he was withholding access to that property.
Essentially what they got him on was "denying services to authorized users", which takes quite a bit of intellectual contortion, since no-one ever proved that his actions directly prevented services to any end-users, only that his inaction (i.e. his initial refusal to disclose passwords after his employment was terminated) temporarily inconvenienced administrators,
The administrators are authorised users as well. They are authorised at a higher level. Why does the anti-hacking statute not cover this?
But the law doesn't really work like that. Intent is quite important. It seems likely that Childs deliberately arranged things in such a way that it would be extremely difficult for his replacement to administer the servers he had a right to administer.
What is even more amazing is there was a (supposedly) tech-savvy member of the jury, who should have been able to explain what a crock this was, but was swayed by the tech-illiterate arguments of the prosecution and thus could not, or would not, prevent this travesty of justice. He's even posted here on/. trying to rationalize his actions, and his vote.
He had access to all the evidence, and had an explanation of how the law works rather than the interpretation of a computer user, expecting the law to work like a computer and have no flexibility in interpretation at all.
All James Earl Jones has to do is say a few lines.
Actually this would be quite expensive. A-list actors aren't going to work for Equity minimum, and I can't imagine JEJ bothering to go to the effort for the sake of faking a deleted scene.
Heck, they're sufficiently innocuous enough that they might be from the audio recordings Jones made at the time (they had the luxury of not having to match dialog to a visible mouth so there might have been several audio takes of slightly varied dialog).
Actually they do put a lot of work into whipping up the audience before the show starts (at least with the live recordings I've been to). Tey get them into a state of mind to cheer anything.
Where would this have been in the actual movie? Seems like it would have to be right at the start so really not a very interesting way to start things.
Interesting that they added the blade special effect. Either this was cut very late or they added the special effects for the cutscene.
The iPod was another mp3 player. iTunes is a nice service but so is XBox Live and Google Maps. The iPad is another tablet PC with the marketing push to give both platform and software at the same time. The iPhone doesn't seem to be inherently different from a Sony P800, except that for several years worth of incremental technology improvements.
Mainly Apple is about presentation, marketing and integrating services and products. All worthwhile things but nothing groundbreaking.
It wasn't defended, so they basically charged $60000 for submitting the brief.
Actually that's a bit unfair. They didn't know this was going to be uncontested so they had to make sure all the evidence was checked out and in order, and research appropriate case law. Still seems like a fair whack of cash though.
No, that's fine. Just get rid of some of the crap in Mos Eisley, make Han shoot first again, redub Fett's accent (seriously, George - accents aren't hereditary), put the original Aniken at the end of RotJ and I think we'll be okay.
I can live with windows in Cloud City. I think I prefer them. The non-transparent Snowspeeders wee a definite improvement. There's a lot of subtle stuff like that that I actually quite like.
Really? |I'm not sure what the hosting company did wrong.
I can't see what they "copied". They provided an alternative service for people who legitimately bought copies of WoW. Disallowing use of private servers sounds like Microsoft disallowing difference search engines for Internet Explorer.
Well, I have helped solve real world problems in an interview. Naturally they offered me the job. If you do know that much more about the domain than the people hiring you they'd be fools not to take you on.
Really, to about 80% of users, C# and.Net are pretty much interchangable (unless VB is a lot more popular than I expected). C++/CLI seems to be mainly used as an interface layer for C/C++, and the other languages are really of minority interest.
Yes, of course they copied Java. Java copied C++, C++ copied C, C copied B, B copied BCPL, BCPL copied CPL and CPL copied ALGOL.
It's technology. We're trying to improve things not score points for originality. If a language has good features then copy them. C# added useful stuff like operator overloading and named arguments and lambdas. Plus a whole slew of other features that are actually pretty useful.
And as far as "flooding the market" goes, MS had already flooded the market with MFC and Win32..Net is way better tan either of them.
Both situations involve losing control of an aspect of your life.
When you lose your job, it's a problem but if you have savings and you have marketable skills, then there's at least something you can do about it.
If you're the victim of identity theft, there's very little you can do about it. The information is out in the wild and it's extremely likely that the perpetrators will not be caught. People may well be using your identity for fraud for years.
Okay, let's assume I was born 1939, and it's plausible that I was in the vicinity at the time.
I still don't think there's enough evidence for a conviction.
The fact that I can make the claim of having shot him despite having been born in 1976 and never having been to Dallas shos that as far as evidence goes, a forum post is has too much reasonable doubt. It's evidence and useful for building a case, but not nearly enough on its own.
It does make sense to harmonise copyright in all states since you want copyright respected equally in all states. Also since originally copyright required registration it would be something of an imposition asking a creator to register in all states, possibly with different processes, even when there were only 13 states.
It is a fricken series of tubes, or at least it's a decent enough analogy.
Honestly, the guy gave a long and completely hopeless explanation of how the internet works and geeks focus on the one part that he actually got right!
That would be way too difficult to explain to the viewer though, especially in a visual medium.
They're not trying to be predict the future. They're just telling stories - stories that relate to the present at that. Technology that works like current technology but looks a little more futuristic is a much easier way to get the information across.
Slashdot Mirror
Those would actually make some sort of sense. Not that I'd support that either in this case, but Government mandates to give new technology a push can actually give the technology the foothold it needs. No such need for FM radio. I think it's pretty well established.
True, but driving a car on the public highway is explicitly illegal according to said passed laws, unless certain conditions are met. These include having passed a driving test, not being drunk, and various others.
Why let people drive at all after a DUI?
What's to stop potential drunk drivers from getting someone else to blow on it for them?
I'd say that it's getting someone to do so for you. Why would anyone blow on it just to let you drive when drunk? Would you?
Well, I have sympathy because while I believe what he did was wrong, a lot of it was due to a really badly managed department and a genuine belief that the people asking for passwords would cause harm to the network.
He was wrong. This was not his call to make and his response was highly inappropriate but I can't see it as being 4 years worth of wrong.
Please cite a legal authority for your assertion that passwords are "property". Since they are intangible, I can only think that Intellectual Property laws would have bearing on that assertion. But, since the passwords were neither patented nor trademarked nor copyrighted (copywritten?), I don't see how your assertion can hold up.
/. trying to rationalize his actions, and his vote.
True. The servers were property and he was withholding access to that property.
Essentially what they got him on was "denying services to authorized users", which takes quite a bit of intellectual contortion, since no-one ever proved that his actions directly prevented services to any end-users, only that his inaction (i.e. his initial refusal to disclose passwords after his employment was terminated) temporarily inconvenienced administrators,
The administrators are authorised users as well. They are authorised at a higher level. Why does the anti-hacking statute not cover this?
But the law doesn't really work like that. Intent is quite important. It seems likely that Childs deliberately arranged things in such a way that it would be extremely difficult for his replacement to administer the servers he had a right to administer.
What is even more amazing is there was a (supposedly) tech-savvy member of the jury, who should have been able to explain what a crock this was, but was swayed by the tech-illiterate arguments of the prosecution and thus could not, or would not, prevent this travesty of justice. He's even posted here on
He had access to all the evidence, and had an explanation of how the law works rather than the interpretation of a computer user, expecting the law to work like a computer and have no flexibility in interpretation at all.
All James Earl Jones has to do is say a few lines.
Actually this would be quite expensive. A-list actors aren't going to work for Equity minimum, and I can't imagine JEJ bothering to go to the effort for the sake of faking a deleted scene.
Heck, they're sufficiently innocuous enough that they might be from the audio recordings Jones made at the time (they had the luxury of not having to match dialog to a visible mouth so there might have been several audio takes of slightly varied dialog).
But that's quite plausible.
Actually they do put a lot of work into whipping up the audience before the show starts (at least with the live recordings I've been to). Tey get them into a state of mind to cheer anything.
Where would this have been in the actual movie? Seems like it would have to be right at the start so really not a very interesting way to start things.
Interesting that they added the blade special effect. Either this was cut very late or they added the special effects for the cutscene.
The iPod was another mp3 player. iTunes is a nice service but so is XBox Live and Google Maps. The iPad is another tablet PC with the marketing push to give both platform and software at the same time. The iPhone doesn't seem to be inherently different from a Sony P800, except that for several years worth of incremental technology improvements.
Mainly Apple is about presentation, marketing and integrating services and products. All worthwhile things but nothing groundbreaking.
They did release official DVDs of the original editions. I believe these were from the same masters as the laserdiscs.
It wasn't defended, so they basically charged $60000 for submitting the brief.
Actually that's a bit unfair. They didn't know this was going to be uncontested so they had to make sure all the evidence was checked out and in order, and research appropriate case law. Still seems like a fair whack of cash though.
No, that's fine. Just get rid of some of the crap in Mos Eisley, make Han shoot first again, redub Fett's accent (seriously, George - accents aren't hereditary), put the original Aniken at the end of RotJ and I think we'll be okay.
I can live with windows in Cloud City. I think I prefer them. The non-transparent Snowspeeders wee a definite improvement. There's a lot of subtle stuff like that that I actually quite like.
Really? |I'm not sure what the hosting company did wrong.
I can't see what they "copied". They provided an alternative service for people who legitimately bought copies of WoW. Disallowing use of private servers sounds like Microsoft disallowing difference search engines for Internet Explorer.
Well, I have helped solve real world problems in an interview. Naturally they offered me the job. If you do know that much more about the domain than the people hiring you they'd be fools not to take you on.
Really, to about 80% of users, C# and .Net are pretty much interchangable (unless VB is a lot more popular than I expected). C++/CLI seems to be mainly used as an interface layer for C/C++, and the other languages are really of minority interest.
Yes, of course they copied Java. Java copied C++, C++ copied C, C copied B, B copied BCPL, BCPL copied CPL and CPL copied ALGOL.
.Net is way better tan either of them.
It's technology. We're trying to improve things not score points for originality. If a language has good features then copy them. C# added useful stuff like operator overloading and named arguments and lambdas. Plus a whole slew of other features that are actually pretty useful.
And as far as "flooding the market" goes, MS had already flooded the market with MFC and Win32.
It's cool tech but it doesn't solve a problem. At the moment neither does a tactile touch screen but it has potential possibilities.
Who has he murdered. While you don't need a body for murder, you do typically need a victim. An explicit victim whose death he intended.
Both situations involve losing control of an aspect of your life.
When you lose your job, it's a problem but if you have savings and you have marketable skills, then there's at least something you can do about it.
If you're the victim of identity theft, there's very little you can do about it. The information is out in the wild and it's extremely likely that the perpetrators will not be caught. People may well be using your identity for fraud for years.
Okay, let's assume I was born 1939, and it's plausible that I was in the vicinity at the time. I still don't think there's enough evidence for a conviction.
The fact that I can make the claim of having shot him despite having been born in 1976 and never having been to Dallas shos that as far as evidence goes, a forum post is has too much reasonable doubt. It's evidence and useful for building a case, but not nearly enough on its own.
I shot JFK.
Do you believe me? If so, you're extremely gullible. If not - the standards of proof in a court are meant to be higher than personal opinion.
It does make sense to harmonise copyright in all states since you want copyright respected equally in all states. Also since originally copyright required registration it would be something of an imposition asking a creator to register in all states, possibly with different processes, even when there were only 13 states.
It is a fricken series of tubes, or at least it's a decent enough analogy.
Honestly, the guy gave a long and completely hopeless explanation of how the internet works and geeks focus on the one part that he actually got right!
That would be way too difficult to explain to the viewer though, especially in a visual medium.
They're not trying to be predict the future. They're just telling stories - stories that relate to the present at that. Technology that works like current technology but looks a little more futuristic is a much easier way to get the information across.