Probably several different things, combining as one. For starters, the economy has been terrible, and when the economy is terrible, humans act their worst. As such, seeing something like this, a device which costs a fair amount of money, and separates the haves from the have nots...well, there may be some jealousy in play there.
Additionally, there are the privacy concerns brought on by such devices. Camera phones which are occasionally on are different from a device which is seen as always on. It's like having a CC camera mounted to someone's head.
And that took quite a lot of effort, from what I can tell.
Think about it: in order for the public to be the way it is, that is, broken with regards to how it treats its fellow human beings, some sort of self-sustaining design with negative feedback cycles has to be developed. This is, of course, assuming that human beings are, on the majority, naturally empathic beings, who do not wish each other harm...perhaps with the odd exception. Now, is it this way because of some natural evolution, or because it's simply the only way things can work when they get this large, or is it because of some mandates by each passing generation, compounding the error?
We can see in smaller communities how this status quo can be altered (the Amish, etc. are not broken). And we can see in certain larger communities elsewhere, in some countries, that they are not broken, or are broken along different lines. So...what are we missing?
Dude, you're trying to espouse the benefits of Open Source vs. Closed Source, and we've all been down this road before.
As for suggesting PHP (*shudders*), I believe there's a subreddit for that: http://www.reddit.com/r/lolphp, dedicated to all the things that your programming language's professor would have a heart-attack over, if he / she ever actually read some of these posts.
People tend to choose.Net because not only does it work, it works well. C# is a phenomenally quick and clean language for writing code in, code which tends to be both fast and easily understood. What more,.Net itself actually isn't limited to the MS world, as Mono and ASP.NET do run (at last check) on other OSs, and are free, last I checked: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4738168/how-does-running-asp-net-on-linux-compare-to-the-standard-microsoft-centric-solu.
Indeed. Off the top of my head, I can think of several things responsible for unintentional weight gain, and which are not going to fix themselves through 'exercise and working out.' #1 is cancer (tumors, etc.) which are always fun to find...is it in the person's brain, is it in the thyroid gland, is it...etc., #2 is H.Pylori...nasty bacteria which, once it colonizes a stomach, coaxes you into eating more to prevent feeling pain, and is also a PITA to destroy, #3 is diabetes, which is a catch-all these days, and the first thing I discount, as the pharms have a rather unhealthy fascination with it, #4 would be mono, or rather any viral disease that would affect someone's metabolism / energy / comfort level / etc., #5 is malaria, always a fun thing, might as well check for protozoa in the blood, #6 is actual gastrointestinal damage...i.e. are the walls of the stomach still there? Do we have Crohn's Disease lurking somewhere lower?, #7 is depression, another thing I place on the watch list because of the unhealthy fascination from pharms with it (it's a catch all, IMHO, and usually a sign that you're missing something).
More bothersome is that doctors are not pursuing the cause of the disease like a wanted criminal, investigating every avenue. This is, after all, someone's life we are talking about.
Hmm, it does appear to be a popular diagnosis these days: "The problem is you're fat, and you need to lose weight to cure the disease." "Yes doctor, but what led to the change to a sedentary lifestyle, when I was fairly active before?" "That would be the at." "Right...med school isn't doing so well these days, is it?"
Actually, this might be a good thing. See, up until now, human beings have engaged repeatedly in trying to cover up their mistakes; this would not be such an issue if it did not require making more mistakes.
By allowing for a more accurate record of mistakes, society will be forced to evolve beyond its current idiotic game of 'hide the sin, then seize the moral high ground' which many of its officers currently engage in. The only potential problem are the paranoid powerful ones who think ghosts are chasing them seeking vengeance for their past actions -> they're the ones likely to set a match to civilization to try and burn any copies of their past mistakes. "Though no one is chasing them, they still run."
But then, the human ego is a delicate thing, and much of humanity has evolved to be a social species...like coral....so the thought of the scrutiny of the world, tempered like a blade, suddenly thrust upon a single person, is perhaps too much to bear.
The problem I have here is the assumed guilt, without a trial. I can have no part in this, as it lacks any sense of truth, only the vile evil of a group acting in unison to its own self-righteous ends.
You misunderstand their intent. Part 1: From their limited vantage point, allowing people to speak freely about fringe political viewpoints allows for them to become bolder, to assemble in various places, and plan to change the status quo to whatever their particular fringe viewpoint specifies. Part 2: By acting on this objective, with this predicted reaction, spinners and their like can claim that more interference / ruling is needed, thus allowing the government to justify its future and current actions to the plebians^H^H^H^H^Hpeople.
See 'Fallacies of Rulers, Chapter 3, Paragraphs 4-7' for further details.
I must be missing something, as it has been a while since I've attempted to read the MPEP, but...when did we start patenting viruses? Last I checked, biotechnology patents related to genes were limited to patents on implementations on finding a gene...
Hmm...the poster is being incredibly vague, which makes this difficult to gauge.
Are we talking about unwanted behavior in the form of a user accidentally deleting their install / corrupting something important, or are we talking unwanted behavior ala 'You didn't read the fine print at the bottom of the EULA' & the default setup option installs a bazillion adware apps? Or are we talking unwanted behavior as in borderline illegal...probably going to get a call from the DoJ / FBI / DoD (with a tank parked outside) kind of illegal?
And that's why advertising service as 'Unlimited' when they are not is grounds to be sued.
Seriously, how many times do the telecoms have to be dragged into court for blatantly lying to people about what they are and are not offering, before they realize that the courts are never going to suddenly say "Oh yeah, I can see that with normal usage, that's totally what you meant. Hell, I don't even know why people bother with contracts, since they obviously know what each party wants / means with regards to every minor detail." This is, I don't know, a repeat of the past several court cases that involved telecoms and hidden limits? Do the courts need to raise the size of the fines or something? Because they seem to keep forgetting the lesson they just learned not even a year or so ago.
Having said as much, the data from the article is incredibly limited.
From the article: "That's just on premises. Houkouonchi also owns a 2U server running in a colocation facility with 12TB of disk on dual gigabit connections, "which I push quite a bit from as well. It runs game-servers and hosts what used to be the only LA SpeedTest.net server and a bunch of other stuff.""
What I'm seeing is people bugging out at the idea of someone having a rack at home, and crying "Fie' prematurely on this one. It is not rare for a tech to have a server, or several, at home, nor for them to use more bandwidth than others. What more, the 'server' definition Verizon is using in their terms is somewhat loosey-goosy...I say this, as even a regular computer, on a 56K modem, acts as a server with regards to certain services. I believe Verizon's intent is more towards people operating an actual business on a consumer line, as opposed to someone transiting data to and from their business on a consumer line (ala checking your email, but on steroids). Mind you, Verizon's engineers were probably looking with the mind towards illegal or illicit activities, couldn't find any, and ended up calling him (under the premise that illegal activities are responsible for the majority of massive usages). They were, perhaps, hoping this was the case, as it would make terminating his account easier, for the simple reason not that what he was doing was illegal, but because he was less profitable than they had hoped. Again, 77TB is a lot in terms of traffic for the US...but spread across the hundreds / thousands of accounts that Verizon has in that area, it's a drop in the pool of the supposed ocean of bandwidth that Verizon is on the hook for.
That is, unless Verizon has been overselling its capacity. Something which ISPs have a nasty tendency to do. At which point, it becomes a business decision of keeping one tech soaking up 77TB of data, or dropping him and acquiring 77 new customers all using 1 TB of data each; more profitable, the latter, while the former requires putting in a request for more bandwidth, which costs more money.
Still, I think it's odd that Verizon, who is considered a regional Tier-1 provider, would engage in this. They are not, supposedly, lacking in bandwidth. And since techs in general have been responsible for a lot of FiOS's good word of mouth, I find it interesting that Verizon would appear to be engaging in a silly change in policy.
Heh. I don't know if you haven't taken a look at the judiciary lately...but they tend to be chosen from the same profile. Number one requirement? Belief that the system of justice they are presiding over is actually just. This typically removes any philosophers from the bunch, as they'd spend waaaay too much time weighing each decision, and questioning whether they were really doing justice. You also need people who believe they have heard it all, that there is a singular set model for living life, and that they are living proof of it: hence any time they need to figure out what someone did wrong, or should have done, they need only confer with themselves; anyone who even begins to think that there might be several different models to life or living, and that they don't know the correct answers, is going to be super dangerous on the bench. They also need to be chosen from what can be considered morally upstanding individuals: i.e. people whom there is little to find fault with over their personal life-style, as well as limiting (in hypothesis) blackmail attempts; the reality is that if you sit a judge who doesn't care about his or her wilder years on the bench, and wouldn't mind publishing photos / videos / re-creations of those events on demand, they are VERY difficult to control: they aren't hemmed in by social values (need to appeal to the masses), and they are immune to blackmail since they don't care what's published about them ("Hey guys, I heard you were publishing some photos of that one time that I was doing coke while making love to a prostitute and midget, in the back of a bus, which was smuggling Anthrax over the border for use in terrorist weapons; I've included some additional photos, and I'd take it as a personal favor if you'd choose one which gives a good shot of my face...those teenage years, oils and bacteria, acne, you understand; gotta run, just about the deliver a verdict on that one case everyone is scared to touch.").
Well, look at it this way: according to the various Abrahamic religions, theft was the first sin. The Lord's prayer includes, in some versions, something to the effect of "forgive us for our thefts."
Why should anything ever change? Is not the goal, at the end of the day, to be the one to change the laws, such that you are now the one being stolen from, and have every right to exploit others as a form of social justice? Is this not what the whole of human history has, through one vantage point, reflected? Consider the Monarch, whose injury comes not just from his or her being afflicted with violence or disease, but his or her laws being violated, such that it is considered, with each violation, as an affliction of violence or disease upon the body of the Monarch.
It bothers me more than so many 'authorities' are submitting their wills to fear of the unknown.
Mind you, if I worked for the CIA, I'd be absolutely tickled at the idea of some power (foreign or native...not like they care these days) were scared shitless that there might be a bomb hidden in every tree on their way to work, or that mosquitoes might be loaded with a neuro-toxin and let loose near their window...as that level of paranoia is something the CIA works HARD to achieve in targets. Still, as a citizen of the USA, for what little that's worth these days...Americans going insane without reason could potentially cause problems for me in the future at an inopportune moment, so as such, it does constitute a problem for me, no matter my displeasure with how things are being run, or how arrogant, blasphemous, and illusory their wanna-be authorities might be.
So, here's some advice, and feel free not to take it, as I 'win' either way: stop chasing after unknown unknowns. Unknown unknowns, or rather, attempting to protect against all of them using vague laws and understandings, creates more problems than it solves. Contemplating unknown unknowns, attempting to calculate all possibilities, is an act of madness; God might be able to do it, and survive...but anyone less than Him is going to get hurt (I have); stick to what is real, what is known, and do not let your mind(s) think thoughts which you cannot prove are true; finally, learn that everything is on a case by case basis, subject to present information and understanding, and that there is no loss in realizing or admitting that you have made a mistake (the loss is purely a construction of uncomfortable emotions...even in cases of great financial or material loss, the emotional burden is the real problem, I believe).
This experiment, this girl...should never have been charged. The law quoted was designed, perhaps, with the intent to protect, but instead harmed. The harm has been somewhat reversed, but it shows a serious lack of concern for exceptions and understanding. As such, it should be rewritten, amended, or what have you, to prevent further damage.
A much larger concern, unwritten here, is the cold water that this throws on science in this country, at a time when it is not needed. Yes, I am aware of the petty fights between organized religion and those purportedly representing science, as well as the straw-men and debater's tricks used by both sides. I will not digress into that mire at this time. My issue is one of America failing its progeny: once upon a time, the maths and science, I believe, were given second billing in education to other subjects; a little satellite called Sputnik, launched over our heads, changed that, and the US mandated that maths and science be taught; I am now looking at a country in decline, as the sciences have become optional, and it is possible for someone to graduate from high school, possibly even college, without learning even a modicum of Physics, Biology, or Chemistry; and it shows...especially compared to children of other countries, who have learned maths and sciences, to say nothing of second or third languages, which put our nation to shame. How can our inventors invent, if they have no knowledge of electricity, or mechanics, or algebra? Perhaps we will maintain our level of independence by continuing to import talent from abroad, or perhaps we can rely on the things we are good at, like marketing, and 'out slogan' our country's competitors?
Not going to happen. The US, and other parts of the world, have been very Marie Antoinette about internet / technology literacy, and the implications of a populous dependent on using said devices where the culture is set to super-apathy mode. They just...they don't care, and the way things are setup, there is no way to make them care, until the inevitable something horrid happens to them, then it's "why can't you guys do anything about this?"
Consider this: your average secretary for a CEO / Chairman / President of a company may or may not have the technological literacy to know whether or not his / her machine has become infected, and is now sending the VIP's electronic Rolodex / tax returns to some bad people. But the VIP is totally cool with how things are, until some insider breaks his company, or personally targets him. And then it's asking IT / the FBI to track down some people who have had a six month start, and probably swept their tracks right before their big heist. This is how technology illiteracy is killing companies.
Good for you. There are some people out there for whom 2 GB of email storage space is enough, or a 32 GB SSD is big enough. Or 32-bit processors are good enough.
Technology, progress in life, is driven by people for whom the status quo was not good enough. We have 64-bit processors because some people decided that 32-bit processors simply wouldn't do. This is the same reason we use light bulbs, instead of candles, to illuminate our homes, and why you don't spend most of your life being chased by something bigger and angrier and quite possibly hungrier than you are...because some of those people, who had been chased by Muthgar the Lion of Doom across the Savannah of Africa decided that it simply wasn't the life for them. Chasing after Muthgar, on the other hand, in what closely resembles a tank, and paying his kin back for the numerous ancestors they wandered off with, however, was. As it stands, Muthgar is on such shaky ground at the moment, that he and his kin need to be kept inside a patrolled in area, so that there will a Muthgar in the future for people to remember what one looked like. Such are human beings -> they hate being prey to anything, and they hate being uncomfortable, and they hate having their freedoms restricted.
And why is that? Because people see laptops as disposables. There is little pressure for an OEM to spec a motherboard with a few extra SO-DIMM sockets, when people aren't planning to upgrade their laptops most of the time, or are going to buy a new one when they do (which will come with the more RAM).
Slashdot Mirror
Hmmm. Was wondering why the trains weren't stored overnight in maintenance bays.
Meh, they once had it, and the universe still existed. Rediscovery of it is unlikely to result in its destruction.
Probably several different things, combining as one. For starters, the economy has been terrible, and when the economy is terrible, humans act their worst. As such, seeing something like this, a device which costs a fair amount of money, and separates the haves from the have nots...well, there may be some jealousy in play there.
Additionally, there are the privacy concerns brought on by such devices. Camera phones which are occasionally on are different from a device which is seen as always on. It's like having a CC camera mounted to someone's head.
And that took quite a lot of effort, from what I can tell.
Think about it: in order for the public to be the way it is, that is, broken with regards to how it treats its fellow human beings, some sort of self-sustaining design with negative feedback cycles has to be developed. This is, of course, assuming that human beings are, on the majority, naturally empathic beings, who do not wish each other harm...perhaps with the odd exception. Now, is it this way because of some natural evolution, or because it's simply the only way things can work when they get this large, or is it because of some mandates by each passing generation, compounding the error?
We can see in smaller communities how this status quo can be altered (the Amish, etc. are not broken). And we can see in certain larger communities elsewhere, in some countries, that they are not broken, or are broken along different lines. So...what are we missing?
Dude, you're trying to espouse the benefits of Open Source vs. Closed Source, and we've all been down this road before.
As for suggesting PHP (*shudders*), I believe there's a subreddit for that: http://www.reddit.com/r/lolphp, dedicated to all the things that your programming language's professor would have a heart-attack over, if he / she ever actually read some of these posts.
People tend to choose .Net because not only does it work, it works well. C# is a phenomenally quick and clean language for writing code in, code which tends to be both fast and easily understood. What more, .Net itself actually isn't limited to the MS world, as Mono and ASP.NET do run (at last check) on other OSs, and are free, last I checked: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4738168/how-does-running-asp-net-on-linux-compare-to-the-standard-microsoft-centric-solu.
Indeed. Off the top of my head, I can think of several things responsible for unintentional weight gain, and which are not going to fix themselves through 'exercise and working out.' #1 is cancer (tumors, etc.) which are always fun to find...is it in the person's brain, is it in the thyroid gland, is it...etc., #2 is H.Pylori...nasty bacteria which, once it colonizes a stomach, coaxes you into eating more to prevent feeling pain, and is also a PITA to destroy, #3 is diabetes, which is a catch-all these days, and the first thing I discount, as the pharms have a rather unhealthy fascination with it, #4 would be mono, or rather any viral disease that would affect someone's metabolism / energy / comfort level / etc., #5 is malaria, always a fun thing, might as well check for protozoa in the blood, #6 is actual gastrointestinal damage...i.e. are the walls of the stomach still there? Do we have Crohn's Disease lurking somewhere lower?, #7 is depression, another thing I place on the watch list because of the unhealthy fascination from pharms with it (it's a catch all, IMHO, and usually a sign that you're missing something).
But then, IANAD. ;-)
More bothersome is that doctors are not pursuing the cause of the disease like a wanted criminal, investigating every avenue. This is, after all, someone's life we are talking about.
Hmm, it does appear to be a popular diagnosis these days: "The problem is you're fat, and you need to lose weight to cure the disease." "Yes doctor, but what led to the change to a sedentary lifestyle, when I was fairly active before?" "That would be the at." "Right...med school isn't doing so well these days, is it?"
Actually, this might be a good thing. See, up until now, human beings have engaged repeatedly in trying to cover up their mistakes; this would not be such an issue if it did not require making more mistakes.
By allowing for a more accurate record of mistakes, society will be forced to evolve beyond its current idiotic game of 'hide the sin, then seize the moral high ground' which many of its officers currently engage in. The only potential problem are the paranoid powerful ones who think ghosts are chasing them seeking vengeance for their past actions -> they're the ones likely to set a match to civilization to try and burn any copies of their past mistakes. "Though no one is chasing them, they still run."
But then, the human ego is a delicate thing, and much of humanity has evolved to be a social species...like coral....so the thought of the scrutiny of the world, tempered like a blade, suddenly thrust upon a single person, is perhaps too much to bear.
The problem I have here is the assumed guilt, without a trial. I can have no part in this, as it lacks any sense of truth, only the vile evil of a group acting in unison to its own self-righteous ends.
You misunderstand their intent. Part 1: From their limited vantage point, allowing people to speak freely about fringe political viewpoints allows for them to become bolder, to assemble in various places, and plan to change the status quo to whatever their particular fringe viewpoint specifies. Part 2: By acting on this objective, with this predicted reaction, spinners and their like can claim that more interference / ruling is needed, thus allowing the government to justify its future and current actions to the plebians^H^H^H^H^Hpeople.
See 'Fallacies of Rulers, Chapter 3, Paragraphs 4-7' for further details.
I must be missing something, as it has been a while since I've attempted to read the MPEP, but...when did we start patenting viruses? Last I checked, biotechnology patents related to genes were limited to patents on implementations on finding a gene...
Hmm...the poster is being incredibly vague, which makes this difficult to gauge.
Are we talking about unwanted behavior in the form of a user accidentally deleting their install / corrupting something important, or are we talking unwanted behavior ala 'You didn't read the fine print at the bottom of the EULA' & the default setup option installs a bazillion adware apps? Or are we talking unwanted behavior as in borderline illegal...probably going to get a call from the DoJ / FBI / DoD (with a tank parked outside) kind of illegal?
That I am alive would imply that I'm still relevant. ;-)
And that's why advertising service as 'Unlimited' when they are not is grounds to be sued.
Seriously, how many times do the telecoms have to be dragged into court for blatantly lying to people about what they are and are not offering, before they realize that the courts are never going to suddenly say "Oh yeah, I can see that with normal usage, that's totally what you meant. Hell, I don't even know why people bother with contracts, since they obviously know what each party wants / means with regards to every minor detail." This is, I don't know, a repeat of the past several court cases that involved telecoms and hidden limits? Do the courts need to raise the size of the fines or something? Because they seem to keep forgetting the lesson they just learned not even a year or so ago.
Having said as much, the data from the article is incredibly limited.
From the article: "That's just on premises. Houkouonchi also owns a 2U server running in a colocation facility with 12TB of disk on dual gigabit connections, "which I push quite a bit from as well. It runs game-servers and hosts what used to be the only LA SpeedTest.net server and a bunch of other stuff.""
What I'm seeing is people bugging out at the idea of someone having a rack at home, and crying "Fie' prematurely on this one. It is not rare for a tech to have a server, or several, at home, nor for them to use more bandwidth than others. What more, the 'server' definition Verizon is using in their terms is somewhat loosey-goosy...I say this, as even a regular computer, on a 56K modem, acts as a server with regards to certain services. I believe Verizon's intent is more towards people operating an actual business on a consumer line, as opposed to someone transiting data to and from their business on a consumer line (ala checking your email, but on steroids). Mind you, Verizon's engineers were probably looking with the mind towards illegal or illicit activities, couldn't find any, and ended up calling him (under the premise that illegal activities are responsible for the majority of massive usages). They were, perhaps, hoping this was the case, as it would make terminating his account easier, for the simple reason not that what he was doing was illegal, but because he was less profitable than they had hoped. Again, 77TB is a lot in terms of traffic for the US...but spread across the hundreds / thousands of accounts that Verizon has in that area, it's a drop in the pool of the supposed ocean of bandwidth that Verizon is on the hook for.
That is, unless Verizon has been overselling its capacity. Something which ISPs have a nasty tendency to do. At which point, it becomes a business decision of keeping one tech soaking up 77TB of data, or dropping him and acquiring 77 new customers all using 1 TB of data each; more profitable, the latter, while the former requires putting in a request for more bandwidth, which costs more money.
Still, I think it's odd that Verizon, who is considered a regional Tier-1 provider, would engage in this. They are not, supposedly, lacking in bandwidth. And since techs in general have been responsible for a lot of FiOS's good word of mouth, I find it interesting that Verizon would appear to be engaging in a silly change in policy.
Wouldn't visual defects, such as myopia, or an excess of floaters, impact the results of this exam?
Heh. I don't know if you haven't taken a look at the judiciary lately...but they tend to be chosen from the same profile. Number one requirement? Belief that the system of justice they are presiding over is actually just. This typically removes any philosophers from the bunch, as they'd spend waaaay too much time weighing each decision, and questioning whether they were really doing justice. You also need people who believe they have heard it all, that there is a singular set model for living life, and that they are living proof of it: hence any time they need to figure out what someone did wrong, or should have done, they need only confer with themselves; anyone who even begins to think that there might be several different models to life or living, and that they don't know the correct answers, is going to be super dangerous on the bench. They also need to be chosen from what can be considered morally upstanding individuals: i.e. people whom there is little to find fault with over their personal life-style, as well as limiting (in hypothesis) blackmail attempts; the reality is that if you sit a judge who doesn't care about his or her wilder years on the bench, and wouldn't mind publishing photos / videos / re-creations of those events on demand, they are VERY difficult to control: they aren't hemmed in by social values (need to appeal to the masses), and they are immune to blackmail since they don't care what's published about them ("Hey guys, I heard you were publishing some photos of that one time that I was doing coke while making love to a prostitute and midget, in the back of a bus, which was smuggling Anthrax over the border for use in terrorist weapons; I've included some additional photos, and I'd take it as a personal favor if you'd choose one which gives a good shot of my face...those teenage years, oils and bacteria, acne, you understand; gotta run, just about the deliver a verdict on that one case everyone is scared to touch.").
Well, look at it this way: according to the various Abrahamic religions, theft was the first sin. The Lord's prayer includes, in some versions, something to the effect of "forgive us for our thefts."
Why should anything ever change? Is not the goal, at the end of the day, to be the one to change the laws, such that you are now the one being stolen from, and have every right to exploit others as a form of social justice? Is this not what the whole of human history has, through one vantage point, reflected? Consider the Monarch, whose injury comes not just from his or her being afflicted with violence or disease, but his or her laws being violated, such that it is considered, with each violation, as an affliction of violence or disease upon the body of the Monarch.
So...people with swords, poisons, cars, etc. don't kill people?
Excellent.
It bothers me more than so many 'authorities' are submitting their wills to fear of the unknown.
Mind you, if I worked for the CIA, I'd be absolutely tickled at the idea of some power (foreign or native...not like they care these days) were scared shitless that there might be a bomb hidden in every tree on their way to work, or that mosquitoes might be loaded with a neuro-toxin and let loose near their window...as that level of paranoia is something the CIA works HARD to achieve in targets. Still, as a citizen of the USA, for what little that's worth these days...Americans going insane without reason could potentially cause problems for me in the future at an inopportune moment, so as such, it does constitute a problem for me, no matter my displeasure with how things are being run, or how arrogant, blasphemous, and illusory their wanna-be authorities might be.
So, here's some advice, and feel free not to take it, as I 'win' either way: stop chasing after unknown unknowns. Unknown unknowns, or rather, attempting to protect against all of them using vague laws and understandings, creates more problems than it solves. Contemplating unknown unknowns, attempting to calculate all possibilities, is an act of madness; God might be able to do it, and survive...but anyone less than Him is going to get hurt (I have); stick to what is real, what is known, and do not let your mind(s) think thoughts which you cannot prove are true; finally, learn that everything is on a case by case basis, subject to present information and understanding, and that there is no loss in realizing or admitting that you have made a mistake (the loss is purely a construction of uncomfortable emotions...even in cases of great financial or material loss, the emotional burden is the real problem, I believe).
This experiment, this girl...should never have been charged. The law quoted was designed, perhaps, with the intent to protect, but instead harmed. The harm has been somewhat reversed, but it shows a serious lack of concern for exceptions and understanding. As such, it should be rewritten, amended, or what have you, to prevent further damage.
A much larger concern, unwritten here, is the cold water that this throws on science in this country, at a time when it is not needed. Yes, I am aware of the petty fights between organized religion and those purportedly representing science, as well as the straw-men and debater's tricks used by both sides. I will not digress into that mire at this time. My issue is one of America failing its progeny: once upon a time, the maths and science, I believe, were given second billing in education to other subjects; a little satellite called Sputnik, launched over our heads, changed that, and the US mandated that maths and science be taught; I am now looking at a country in decline, as the sciences have become optional, and it is possible for someone to graduate from high school, possibly even college, without learning even a modicum of Physics, Biology, or Chemistry; and it shows...especially compared to children of other countries, who have learned maths and sciences, to say nothing of second or third languages, which put our nation to shame. How can our inventors invent, if they have no knowledge of electricity, or mechanics, or algebra? Perhaps we will maintain our level of independence by continuing to import talent from abroad, or perhaps we can rely on the things we are good at, like marketing, and 'out slogan' our country's competitors?
Is potato. Politburo not know.
Well, that's why we have tech, obviously, so that we can make the machine that costs $10M and makes the 'BOING" noise. /s
Not going to happen. The US, and other parts of the world, have been very Marie Antoinette about internet / technology literacy, and the implications of a populous dependent on using said devices where the culture is set to super-apathy mode. They just...they don't care, and the way things are setup, there is no way to make them care, until the inevitable something horrid happens to them, then it's "why can't you guys do anything about this?"
Consider this: your average secretary for a CEO / Chairman / President of a company may or may not have the technological literacy to know whether or not his / her machine has become infected, and is now sending the VIP's electronic Rolodex / tax returns to some bad people. But the VIP is totally cool with how things are, until some insider breaks his company, or personally targets him. And then it's asking IT / the FBI to track down some people who have had a six month start, and probably swept their tracks right before their big heist. This is how technology illiteracy is killing companies.
Good for you. There are some people out there for whom 2 GB of email storage space is enough, or a 32 GB SSD is big enough. Or 32-bit processors are good enough.
Technology, progress in life, is driven by people for whom the status quo was not good enough. We have 64-bit processors because some people decided that 32-bit processors simply wouldn't do. This is the same reason we use light bulbs, instead of candles, to illuminate our homes, and why you don't spend most of your life being chased by something bigger and angrier and quite possibly hungrier than you are...because some of those people, who had been chased by Muthgar the Lion of Doom across the Savannah of Africa decided that it simply wasn't the life for them. Chasing after Muthgar, on the other hand, in what closely resembles a tank, and paying his kin back for the numerous ancestors they wandered off with, however, was. As it stands, Muthgar is on such shaky ground at the moment, that he and his kin need to be kept inside a patrolled in area, so that there will a Muthgar in the future for people to remember what one looked like. Such are human beings -> they hate being prey to anything, and they hate being uncomfortable, and they hate having their freedoms restricted.
And why is that? Because people see laptops as disposables. There is little pressure for an OEM to spec a motherboard with a few extra SO-DIMM sockets, when people aren't planning to upgrade their laptops most of the time, or are going to buy a new one when they do (which will come with the more RAM).