Not all of us follow the standard diurnal schedule. I work nights (and have for most of the last eight years), and I eat my dinner around noon. Speaking of which....
The only thing I can think of is that you pretty much need to pass the E.I.T (Engineer In Training) exam while still in college. At least, that's what I had to do.
Actually, Doctor-patient privilege would prevent a doctor from telling the cops that one of his patients used drugs. The only point where he could release that information to others would be if the patient gave express permission or if the information was necessary to save the patient's life. (And even then, the confidentiality clause would extend to other medical personnel informed of the drug abuse.)
Pants man had to represent himself, though. Any WoWer who goes to a lawyer with the 'important' case of "WAAAH! MY PHAT LOOTZ IZ GONE!" would almost certainly be told to not let the door hit his ass on the way out.
It's not the slashdot effect. It started much earlier this morning when several hundred thousand WoW fans started reloading the page every three seconds in the vain hope that this splash page related to the WoW expansion "Wrath of the Lich King".
So if NYCL is our enemy, as you claim, then what the screaming budgie fuck does that make the RIAA lawyers? Boy scouts, paragons of humanity, and the future leaders of the free world? I think not. The RIAA lawyers, truth be told, are trying to get their clients a victory in civil court. But they are going about it in such a way, that even if NYCL was the stereotypical ambulance chaser kind of lawyer and the kind that carries a spare neck brace for defendants in auto accident cases, he would still look like the good guy in this by comparison.
Snidely Whiplash, tying Little Nell to the train-tracks, would look like a good guy by comparison.
It it collapses because of your deliberate mistakes, then yes, you can be sued over it. The suit against you may not succeed, but you damn well can be taken to court over it.
Likewise, these RIAA lawyers should face some form of penalty or review before an ethics board. Will they? Probably not. But they should.
Yes, but if doesn't have all of those "wonderful qualities" that we just so admire in Jack Thompson, then there's also the possibility that he will be able to engage in a debate on video games without degenerating into name calling and wild speculation. Imagine someone who wants to block violent video games from children's ready access, but is willing to discuss the matter in a calm and rational manner?
Florida has a statute which requires all judges (among other state officials) to sign a loyalty oath requiring them to uphold the Constitution of the United States. (Actually, I believe the state law affirms the Federal Law requiring the same thing, but hey....)
One of Jumpin' Jack Thompson's ploys is that one or more of the judges who are obviously in collusion against him have either not signed said loyalty oath, or forged it, or whatever. He's also tried to have the Florida Bar Association declared unconstitutional, asked the Federal Government to investigate the Florida Bar on possible racketeering charges, tried to sue the Florida Bar, and so on. So, he doesn't confine his nut-jobbery to the video game world. He's also been tilting at windmills against basically the entire Florida state legal system for over a decade and a half.
Let's see, this also means that the various shit-brained news media should stop having him offering commentary on anything, because "disbarred lawyer" doesn't have that same ring of confidence as "crazy old coot" does.
It's more of a "Person X has a computer. Person X has a static IP address. Someone at Person X's IP address was detected uploading every single Top 40 song from 2007. We cannot say for absolute certain that Person X was the one doing the uploading, but it is more likely then not that Person X did do it." The same could play out for an IP range at a university, where certain blocks are allocated to certain dorms. "Person Y has a computer. Person Y lives in Dorm Z. Dorm Z uses this block of IP addresses. Someone using an IP address in that block uploaded every single Top 40 song from 2007. Upon review of Person Y's computer, we found copies of all of the infringed songs. While it is possible that someone other then Person Y did the infringing, based on this evidence, it is more likely then not that Person Y did it." Now, the defense lawyers get to show their own evidence, and the jury in the civil trial (or the judge, if there is no jury) weighs the evidence accordingly.
Imagine all the plaintiff's evidence on one pan of a set of scales. Imagine all of the defendant's evidence on the other pan of the set of scales. Whichever set of evidence carries more weight is the side that should win. (Please note, there is a difference between the side that should win and the side that does win. Poorly presented evidence can and does hamper a case.)
With regards to your example, any of the RIAA lawyers who walked into a civil court and tried to pull a "black people are more likely to steal music, the defendant is black, ergo, he must have done it" as the entirety of their case would be lucky if the judge only ripped him a new one in court, not withstanding any possible judicial sanction.
How is this flamebait? It's correct. Yeah, he could have been a little more friendly in his tone, but honestly, we can't have a/. story on an RIAA case without some nimrod getting criminal and civil cases confused.
In civil cases, the burden of guilt is based on preponderance of evidence. In other words, if it is more likely then not that you committed the act in question, that is all that is required in a civil trial. This, BTW, is how O.J. Simpson was found liable for the deaths of Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman... although he was found not guilty in the criminal trial, the same evidence was used to find him liable for their deaths because the burden of proof was that much lighter.
More likely, depraved indifference. I mean, let's face it, when a 40 year old woman basically manipulates an emotional fragile teenager, and the teenager ends up killing herself, and the adult should have known better.... well, depraved indifference.
It doesn't matter if the teenager would have killed herself a month, a year, three years later. If her life was shortened by even an hour as a direct result of the actions of this woman, the woman deserves to go to jail.
Yes indeed it was much worse. They are contemptible hypocrites.
Which should not really come as a shock to anyone who has been paying attention to the various shenanigans put on by the RIAA, including, but not limited to: Suing children, suing dead people, suing people who barely know how to use computers, suing people who don't even own computers, the "work for hire" controversy, price fixing, fudging the stats on piracy numbers, and possibly not using licensed investigators in their attempts to prove that everyone, everywhere, owes them money.
"Hi, I'm a shadowy figure, God knows who I really work for, but probably that government that controls nearly every aspect of your life, and I'm conducting a poll. Would you be in favor of continued government control of a method of communication that would be restricted to deliberately limit your view of the outside world, or should we just haul you away to a prison right now as a subversive?"
Oh, I know (now) about the Japanese version. But when I first saw Speed Racer as a kid, I had no idea about it.
And really, let's face it. If there was a live-action movie based on Mach GoGoGo (the English name of the original Japanese anime), it would probably have been done by the Japanese, and then, a year or two later, we'd get the crappy American remake of that movie. (For references to this sort of "can't think for ourselves" shit from Hollywood, may I refer you to Ringu -> The Ring and other J-Horror -> crappy American remake movies.)
I refuse to consider anything I say about a cartoon that is 40 years old to be a spoiler. It's like talking about how King Kong dies at the end of the movie. It's been out a while. There's a time limit on this shit.
And really? A Thundercats movie? That's just fucking sad.
Well, it's one thing if the Italian restaurant doesn't have chopsticks at all. But if the Chinese restaurant has Dish A with lemon, and Dish B without lemon, and you order Dish B but ask them to add lemon, and they say "we can't do that", it's a bit more odd.
Slashdot Mirror
Not all of us follow the standard diurnal schedule. I work nights (and have for most of the last eight years), and I eat my dinner around noon. Speaking of which....
The only thing I can think of is that you pretty much need to pass the E.I.T (Engineer In Training) exam while still in college. At least, that's what I had to do.
Am I the only one here that is seeing this Icahn guy as just a greedy dick?
Actually, Doctor-patient privilege would prevent a doctor from telling the cops that one of his patients used drugs. The only point where he could release that information to others would be if the patient gave express permission or if the information was necessary to save the patient's life. (And even then, the confidentiality clause would extend to other medical personnel informed of the drug abuse.)
Pants man had to represent himself, though. Any WoWer who goes to a lawyer with the 'important' case of "WAAAH! MY PHAT LOOTZ IZ GONE!" would almost certainly be told to not let the door hit his ass on the way out.
It's not the slashdot effect. It started much earlier this morning when several hundred thousand WoW fans started reloading the page every three seconds in the vain hope that this splash page related to the WoW expansion "Wrath of the Lich King".
Right, because no building contractor has ever deliberately used substandard materials to cut costs, even when they had to know it would end badly.
So if NYCL is our enemy, as you claim, then what the screaming budgie fuck does that make the RIAA lawyers? Boy scouts, paragons of humanity, and the future leaders of the free world? I think not. The RIAA lawyers, truth be told, are trying to get their clients a victory in civil court. But they are going about it in such a way, that even if NYCL was the stereotypical ambulance chaser kind of lawyer and the kind that carries a spare neck brace for defendants in auto accident cases, he would still look like the good guy in this by comparison.
Snidely Whiplash, tying Little Nell to the train-tracks, would look like a good guy by comparison.
It it collapses because of your deliberate mistakes, then yes, you can be sued over it. The suit against you may not succeed, but you damn well can be taken to court over it.
Likewise, these RIAA lawyers should face some form of penalty or review before an ethics board. Will they? Probably not. But they should.
Obviously, you weren't someone's little brother. Kick to the groin always beats rock.
How's that?
Would it be "course of Slashdot!" or "!esruoc fo todhsalS"
Yes. but Billy-boy was also the President. I think that commands just a wit bit more respect then "out of touch loonie".
Yes, but if doesn't have all of those "wonderful qualities" that we just so admire in Jack Thompson, then there's also the possibility that he will be able to engage in a debate on video games without degenerating into name calling and wild speculation. Imagine someone who wants to block violent video games from children's ready access, but is willing to discuss the matter in a calm and rational manner?
Do they already have a lot of disbarred lawyers on staff? If they don't already, I'm not sure they're eager to start hiring now.
Florida has a statute which requires all judges (among other state officials) to sign a loyalty oath requiring them to uphold the Constitution of the United States. (Actually, I believe the state law affirms the Federal Law requiring the same thing, but hey....)
One of Jumpin' Jack Thompson's ploys is that one or more of the judges who are obviously in collusion against him have either not signed said loyalty oath, or forged it, or whatever. He's also tried to have the Florida Bar Association declared unconstitutional, asked the Federal Government to investigate the Florida Bar on possible racketeering charges, tried to sue the Florida Bar, and so on. So, he doesn't confine his nut-jobbery to the video game world. He's also been tilting at windmills against basically the entire Florida state legal system for over a decade and a half.
P A R T .... Why? Because we gotta!
Let's see, this also means that the various shit-brained news media should stop having him offering commentary on anything, because "disbarred lawyer" doesn't have that same ring of confidence as "crazy old coot" does.
That's not how it works.
It's more of a "Person X has a computer. Person X has a static IP address. Someone at Person X's IP address was detected uploading every single Top 40 song from 2007. We cannot say for absolute certain that Person X was the one doing the uploading, but it is more likely then not that Person X did do it." The same could play out for an IP range at a university, where certain blocks are allocated to certain dorms. "Person Y has a computer. Person Y lives in Dorm Z. Dorm Z uses this block of IP addresses. Someone using an IP address in that block uploaded every single Top 40 song from 2007. Upon review of Person Y's computer, we found copies of all of the infringed songs. While it is possible that someone other then Person Y did the infringing, based on this evidence, it is more likely then not that Person Y did it." Now, the defense lawyers get to show their own evidence, and the jury in the civil trial (or the judge, if there is no jury) weighs the evidence accordingly.
Imagine all the plaintiff's evidence on one pan of a set of scales. Imagine all of the defendant's evidence on the other pan of the set of scales. Whichever set of evidence carries more weight is the side that should win. (Please note, there is a difference between the side that should win and the side that does win. Poorly presented evidence can and does hamper a case.)
With regards to your example, any of the RIAA lawyers who walked into a civil court and tried to pull a "black people are more likely to steal music, the defendant is black, ergo, he must have done it" as the entirety of their case would be lucky if the judge only ripped him a new one in court, not withstanding any possible judicial sanction.
How is this flamebait? It's correct. Yeah, he could have been a little more friendly in his tone, but honestly, we can't have a /. story on an RIAA case without some nimrod getting criminal and civil cases confused.
In civil cases, the burden of guilt is based on preponderance of evidence. In other words, if it is more likely then not that you committed the act in question, that is all that is required in a civil trial. This, BTW, is how O.J. Simpson was found liable for the deaths of Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman... although he was found not guilty in the criminal trial, the same evidence was used to find him liable for their deaths because the burden of proof was that much lighter.
More likely, depraved indifference. I mean, let's face it, when a 40 year old woman basically manipulates an emotional fragile teenager, and the teenager ends up killing herself, and the adult should have known better.... well, depraved indifference.
It doesn't matter if the teenager would have killed herself a month, a year, three years later. If her life was shortened by even an hour as a direct result of the actions of this woman, the woman deserves to go to jail.
Yes indeed it was much worse. They are contemptible hypocrites.
Which should not really come as a shock to anyone who has been paying attention to the various shenanigans put on by the RIAA, including, but not limited to: Suing children, suing dead people, suing people who barely know how to use computers, suing people who don't even own computers, the "work for hire" controversy, price fixing, fudging the stats on piracy numbers, and possibly not using licensed investigators in their attempts to prove that everyone, everywhere, owes them money.
Come on, it amounts to the same thing.
"Hi, I'm a shadowy figure, God knows who I really work for, but probably that government that controls nearly every aspect of your life, and I'm conducting a poll. Would you be in favor of continued government control of a method of communication that would be restricted to deliberately limit your view of the outside world, or should we just haul you away to a prison right now as a subversive?"
Please. Do you honestly think the U.S. Government would not find a way to add a tax to make up for any losses in gas taxes, whether real or imagined?
Oh, I know (now) about the Japanese version. But when I first saw Speed Racer as a kid, I had no idea about it.
And really, let's face it. If there was a live-action movie based on Mach GoGoGo (the English name of the original Japanese anime), it would probably have been done by the Japanese, and then, a year or two later, we'd get the crappy American remake of that movie. (For references to this sort of "can't think for ourselves" shit from Hollywood, may I refer you to Ringu -> The Ring and other J-Horror -> crappy American remake movies.)
I refuse to consider anything I say about a cartoon that is 40 years old to be a spoiler. It's like talking about how King Kong dies at the end of the movie. It's been out a while. There's a time limit on this shit.
And really? A Thundercats movie? That's just fucking sad.
Well, it's one thing if the Italian restaurant doesn't have chopsticks at all. But if the Chinese restaurant has Dish A with lemon, and Dish B without lemon, and you order Dish B but ask them to add lemon, and they say "we can't do that", it's a bit more odd.