Aside from that, does it also happen to full citizens that they are made to feel that just leaving the US for whatever reason is somehow an insult to the country, as if there couldn't be any good reason to spend time somewhere else? Of course, I can't help but see that as ironic coming from people who work in the travel business. And that's not to even mention the way I see them treat people who don't speak much English as if they were retards.
Wow, this sounds drastically different from my view, although this could just be the customs people you're refering to. The airlines that I've taken internationally usually go out of their way to have people who speak other languages, or otherwise might speak English as a second language.
Of course, this is obvious on Lufthansa, but on my United Airlines flight, it was a little weird. We're flying in to Frankfurt from Washington DC, and they had a Francophone, two German speakers, a Chinese speaker, and a Spanish speaker. And while they all have to speak English, they all seemed to at least understand simple details in German, such as "Apple Juice, please", and "I'll take the beef." But it kind of bothers me that a flight directly into German wouldn't have a higher concentration of German speakers. *shrug*
Come on, you're not seriously advocating that the U.S. abolish customs are you?
No, not abolish. That would be stupid. I could drag all sorts of things that are cheaper overseas back over here. But there's a difference between treating everyone like an untrustworthy criminal, and treating people like responsible trustworthy adults.
You almost have to wonder, why does America have such a distrust of even their own citizens that they can't trust their own adult citizens to do the right thing, and declare anything that's inappropriate.
Of course, when I told my sister that I got stuck talking to customs because I had been around horses, the response was, "You're not supposed to tell them that." Uh... they fucking asked, and it makes fucking sense, and I'm a responsible citizen. Of course, this is the same sister who told me that I should get out of jury duty despite being between college and a job.
WTF? Awesome responsibility there to your country, sister.
Red channel. This is where you go if you are importing goods over your duty free allowance and you want to voluntarily declare them. You show customs what you're declaring and they tell you how much you need to pay. Why not chance the green channel and save some money? Because they do spot checks on people going through the green channel and you'll be in trouble if caught out. Most likely you'll have to pay more than if you were honest.
This is actually the way most EU countries work... er... let me correct that. That's how most things in Germany work. You don't actually have to prove that you're allowed to get on the U-Bahn or S-Bahn before you actually get on it. In fact, in an entire month of being in Munich, I only had my S-Bahn ticket checked once, no wait... twice, within a week of each other.
Now, here's where the math gets you. I paid 45 for a month-long ticket. If I had neglected to buy the month-long ticket, I'd have gotten stuck with a 40 fine both times. 80 or 45? It generally pays to just do the right thing in Europe, but at least they don't treat you like an untrustworthy child at every turn.
Of course, the way the US works, it's a wonder if you could even trust the citizenry enough to do something like this... If politicians are actually a reflection of the citizens of that country, I don't think you could trust the average American further than you can throw them.
Actually, I heard from some people that they fly into Canada rather than the US. Since I live in Seattle, many times its easier to fly to Canada, and avoid the customs hassles, then drive back down, where the customs inquisition is lighter.
Meh, for me I don't know if it's all that worth it, but then because of customs I missed my flight into Seattle, and since they were sold out, I just drove up to Seattle from Portland, so I guess it would have been just as effective to go either way.
Then again I have been doing it for years, and for me that is business as usual.
Right, the key here is that the action is an unusual behavior.
Maybe they trigger on unusual behavior, like folks that make minimum payments forever on their card, with the balance slowly growing over years on several cards, all of a sudden sending in a big chunk of money (which IMHO $6,500 isn't - there are days I wear that much in jewelry - hell there are some days I have that much on me in cash) sets of some flags.
Wow, you wear some expensive jewelry. I'm definitely not poor, but even for me $6,500 would take 2~4 paychecks to save up, so about two months. Now, consider that I get paid more than any of my friends, most of my friends in New Mexico hardly make 6,500 in a quarter of a year.
Sure, $6,500 may not seem like much to you, but usually the people paying minimum on their credit card do *not* have the kind of money to just whip out $6,500 and pay it off.
Point 1 in your post has merit, but the last thing on a suicidal person's mind is trying to maintain his credit rating (point 2 in your post.)
It has nothing to do with maintaining his credit rating. In fact, people in this sort of a situation, where they're making low payments all the time will actually likely get penalized for paying off their credit card (!!!). The issue here is that paying off debts is one way of resolving earthly matters, this is usually a reasonable indicator for suicide.
The idea is that if say, a parent feels "forced" into suicide, they may know that by paying off their debt it will save their children headaches. Pay off all your debts, except now you don't have any money left to live with. But that wouldn't be an issue for very long, would it? Now, their children are saved from their mounting debt, and they've resolved the issue.
That's what's weírd. Out of my three flights back from Europe, I believe I only had to do this once, with Lufthansa....
Although, now that I think of it, maybe I did do it each time. Either way, it's annoying. Can't the airline collect this information, and not force me to go around asking people for a pen before I can board my damn flight?
Obviously you haven't been doing much traveling. Check out Cuba, Nicaragua, Israel, Croatia (until recently), etc. No matter where I've been the U.S. has always welcomed me back with open arms compared to some of the places I've traveled.
I can understand such things as these places, and I'm certain that there are states with more crazy control laws than the US. Truth be told I've only been to EU states, where customs consists of two doors, one green, the other red. If you walk through the green one, and you don't look suspicious, and you're not randomly selected, there's absolutely no questions. Just grab your stuff, and walk through.
The US meanwhile dictates that you declare everything that you're bringing into the country and puts you in long lines where the customs people ask generally more prying questions about where you're going, and what you were up to than in Europe. This last time, my whole interaction with the entrance process in Germany was:
Passkontrol: What is your final destination? Me: Düsseldorf Passkontrol: *looks odd for a sec, shrugs unnoticably and stamps passport*
I know there is a form for non-immigrant foreign nationals who visit the United States, but U.S. citizens have all the documentation they need: their passports.
Not entirely correct. You need to fill out a customs form:
On this form, you're supposed to list all items purchased abroad, which you are bringing back into the US.
Non-US citizens, who are not permanent-residents need declare everything that they're bringing into the country that is intended to remain in the country.
If you were flying a foreign airline then that airline may have wanted you to fill out a form, but you can hardly blame the government for that.
I was flying with Lufthansa, but when the surly customs agent requests the customs form declaring what you're bringing back, and also such things as "have you been in contact with livestock", it most certainly is the governments fault.
hahahahahahahaha! RIGHT! You, sir, have no concept of the suicidal mind...
If you have some incredible insight into the suicidal mind, why are you either a) not dead yet, or b) post as a logged in user as a respected member of the psychiatric community.
There are a number of people who choose to commit suicide because they feel they were forced into that position, but they don't want to punish those who they know and love. They feel that their death is the only real solution for the whole matter.
Putting it bluntly, paying off large amounts of a debt is an action, which can easily be construed as resolving worldly details, which people often do when they know their death is imminent. Whether that knowledge comes from knowledge of a fatal disease/condition, or an intention on their part to end their life.
In all cases, if someone is depressed and starts paying off debts, that's a very bad sign, and would suggest to any compitent psychiatric personal who knows about him would take as a big red flag. There are other indicators that indicate a likelihood that someone might commit suicide, such as feeling alone, sudden and/or drastic change in their life, or feeling insignificant/meaningless.
But anyone who is suddenly putting earthly affairs in order is definitely a danger to themselves if they're in otherwise perfect health.
All that energy to BOO something that wasn't ment to be a correction while ignoring the post that was attached to it.
Look AC, I was raised in New Mexico, where parts of it you have to cross border control points to get further into the United States.
Frankly, I've seen the impact of illegal immigrants into an area, and it just. ain't. that big of a deal to me. Frankly, I could give a shit if you don't like illegal immigrants, or you don't like that they're still coming.
I neglected the post's content entirely just because it was uninteresting and a stupid and useless topic to me. I've lived in areas of high illegal-immigrant population, and it just doesn't bother me like it does all the racist bigots.
DAMN IT. Well, I say stupid English spelling anyways.
I had though it was Catcher in the Rye because Rye is a grain, and I personally remember the title by imagining in a rye field. Of course, I'm quick to admit fallability if I'm not confident in my memory.
Thanks for setting me straight though. And boo the AC for leading me astray. BOOO!!!
Isn't there supposed to be some NJ law that'll make me not have to read these AC comments;)
Hello, this is Homeland Security calling. We have noticed that your 1.8026175 × 10^12 furlongs per fortnight are well above your average rate of 6.
Be aware that until you have sufficiently raised your average rate to within 9.86153 × 10^5 furlongs per fortnight of your current speed, travelling at 1.8026175 × 10^12 furlongs per fortnight is a danger to this country's health.
Well, this is ridiculous, that's the same speed my image has always approached other people, irrespective of my speed or orientation. There must be something wrong with your instruments if they're telling you that this value has changed recently.
I have no idea why a much larger than normal payment would trigger red flags for suspicious behavior. But then, I'm not responsible for Homeland Security.
There are two possible reasons that I can personally think of.
You suddenly came into a lot of money--likely illegally--and you're using it now to pay off your debts. Related to this is, if you had the money to make such a large payment now, why haven't you been paying more of it off faster.
You're desperate, and on the edge, and you're planning on offing yourself, but to avoid problems for your heirs and such, you pay off significant amounts of your debt. It's likely that this can be a red flag before someone runs out and commits mass-murder, or some other equally stupid action against society that the DHS is supposed to protect us from.
Basically, anything sudden is a big red flag to the DHS, and other authorities. Most people don't do sudden stuff like suddenly pay off ~$6,500 of their credit card debt in one payment. It's unusual, and also carries a significant enough amount of a question as to intent that the action was done, that the rarity of investigating it, is outweighed by the potential gain if it catches just one terrorist, or "domestic perpetrator of violence".
Seriously, it's getting pretty bad. Everything you have to notify the government for.
When I was flying back from Europe, I had to fill out a form with who I was, and my home address, and an emergency contact (if I so wished).
They set it up like it's some sort of idea that all flights into the US require all US citizens to be recognized and accounted for, so that if it goes down? or something like that? that they can know for sure who was on board, and can start contacting people ahead of time?
The requirements for entering the US are so ridiculously more complex than any other country I've visited.
So in this case, you're almost certainly right -- if New Jersey criminalized anonymous posting, I doubt very much if most states in the Union, let alone most Western countries, would honor an extradition request. But as a general rule, you do not escape a state's jurisdiction merely because you don't live there.
The other good thing to note here, is that even if no one grants your NJ extradition charge, if you end up within their jurisdiction, they can arrest you there.
Let's take a small example, you're in say, New Mexico, you maintain a forum, and someone posts something offensive and potentially libelous about a NJ legislator (like say Biondi) and they get all mad, and demand criminal action be taken, because you as the forum maintainer didn't keep records of who posted it, so they want to get at someone, so they're going after you.
All happens as above, and they send the extradition charge to the NM governer, and they say, "Pfff... whatever."
But then a few months down the road, you decide you want to fly to Europe, and you land in Newark and when you attempt to board your plane, they tell you that they have a "very special treat for you, and they'd like to escort you to the first class lounge to redeem your prize!" Yeah, next thing you know, you're in cuffs, and you're screwed.
Basically, even if someone can't extradite you doesn't mean you're even safe; it just means you have to be damn careful about where you travel after that.
And yet, people always remember to "Ask Slashdot," where they get tons of legal advice from people who got their legal educations from Judge Judy.
Hey! Some of us got it from Law and Order, which apparently told me yesterday that just CC'ing an email to your lawyer makes it priviledged.
Which it doesn't. It has to be seeking legal advice, and not be sent to any third parties... but they didn't cover any of that in that Law and Order episode.
This is like, the first thing I should have said. From now on, I'm going to try and remind myself to start off all pseudo-legal advice with "First, talk to a lawyer. If you don't want to do that, this is what I've heard, but if you have any doubts about what I'm talking about, or are thinking of following my recommended course of action, I recommend that you talk to a lawyer first, just to make sure I'm not talking out my ass."
Hopefully, that would avoid a modding of "Funny" on a post intended in serious earnest.
But, to CYA, your best bet is to just write up the specs as you understand them, then have someone else write the driver for the community.
You don't even have to share those specs. Give the author the specs, have him write the driver, then publish it, without your specs. Now, anyone who wants to reverse engineer the driver you wrote, is investigating a full layer of indirection from you. They're not even looking at the specs you wrote, but rather the code that was written upon those specs.
English present tense is often used as a "non-past" tense. This is pretty typical thing for Germanic languages. "Ich gehe morgens in die Stadt." (I'm going into the city tomorrow.) If you know German, you'll see that both of these sentences are not in the future tense, they just have a prepositional phrase indicating the future, and the present tense.
The issue here is that AT&T is *intending* to aquire Bellsouth, or are hoping to aquire Bellsouth. This matter is completely irrelevent as to tense (they wanted to in the past, before this information became public, it's true now, and it will be true in the future).
I will concede though, that the headline is confusing. But the issue is deeper than just "tense". Even if it were to say "AT&T will aquire Bellsouth", this wouldn't indicate in any way that the deal might not go through. This deal is by no means guarenteed to go through, and indicating it in the indicative future tense would no less solve the problem of a confusing headline.
Main Entry: tax Function: noun Usage: often attributive 1 a : a charge usually of money imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes b : a sum levied on members of an organization to defray expenses
I'm sorry, I was under the assumption that AOL was an authority, and that they were imposing a charge of money to access their otherwise public service.
Of course, the 1b definition fits even without me being facetious.
Now, I'll thank you for hijacking a +5: Funny thread just because it's the first post to the article, simply because you're afraid that if it's any deeper into the comment tree no one will see it, or care about it.
Slashdot Mirror
Aside from that, does it also happen to full citizens that they are made to feel that just leaving the US for whatever reason is somehow an insult to the country, as if there couldn't be any good reason to spend time somewhere else? Of course, I can't help but see that as ironic coming from people who work in the travel business. And that's not to even mention the way I see them treat people who don't speak much English as if they were retards.
Wow, this sounds drastically different from my view, although this could just be the customs people you're refering to. The airlines that I've taken internationally usually go out of their way to have people who speak other languages, or otherwise might speak English as a second language.
Of course, this is obvious on Lufthansa, but on my United Airlines flight, it was a little weird. We're flying in to Frankfurt from Washington DC, and they had a Francophone, two German speakers, a Chinese speaker, and a Spanish speaker. And while they all have to speak English, they all seemed to at least understand simple details in German, such as "Apple Juice, please", and "I'll take the beef." But it kind of bothers me that a flight directly into German wouldn't have a higher concentration of German speakers. *shrug*
Come on, you're not seriously advocating that the U.S. abolish customs are you?
No, not abolish. That would be stupid. I could drag all sorts of things that are cheaper overseas back over here. But there's a difference between treating everyone like an untrustworthy criminal, and treating people like responsible trustworthy adults.
You almost have to wonder, why does America have such a distrust of even their own citizens that they can't trust their own adult citizens to do the right thing, and declare anything that's inappropriate.
Of course, when I told my sister that I got stuck talking to customs because I had been around horses, the response was, "You're not supposed to tell them that." Uh... they fucking asked, and it makes fucking sense, and I'm a responsible citizen. Of course, this is the same sister who told me that I should get out of jury duty despite being between college and a job.
WTF? Awesome responsibility there to your country, sister.
Red channel. This is where you go if you are importing goods over your duty free allowance and you want to voluntarily declare them. You show customs what you're declaring and they tell you how much you need to pay. Why not chance the green channel and save some money? Because they do spot checks on people going through the green channel and you'll be in trouble if caught out. Most likely you'll have to pay more than if you were honest.
This is actually the way most EU countries work... er... let me correct that. That's how most things in Germany work. You don't actually have to prove that you're allowed to get on the U-Bahn or S-Bahn before you actually get on it. In fact, in an entire month of being in Munich, I only had my S-Bahn ticket checked once, no wait... twice, within a week of each other.
Now, here's where the math gets you. I paid 45 for a month-long ticket. If I had neglected to buy the month-long ticket, I'd have gotten stuck with a 40 fine both times. 80 or 45? It generally pays to just do the right thing in Europe, but at least they don't treat you like an untrustworthy child at every turn.
Of course, the way the US works, it's a wonder if you could even trust the citizenry enough to do something like this... If politicians are actually a reflection of the citizens of that country, I don't think you could trust the average American further than you can throw them.
You know, there are nicer ways to say this. Like, "Actually, no, it isn't a part of the DHS."
Of course I'm known to be a blunt son of a btich myself. But in those cases I try to put up a link to an authority:
Actually, I heard from some people that they fly into Canada rather than the US. Since I live in Seattle, many times its easier to fly to Canada, and avoid the customs hassles, then drive back down, where the customs inquisition is lighter.
Meh, for me I don't know if it's all that worth it, but then because of customs I missed my flight into Seattle, and since they were sold out, I just drove up to Seattle from Portland, so I guess it would have been just as effective to go either way.
Then again I have been doing it for years, and for me that is business as usual.
Right, the key here is that the action is an unusual behavior.
Maybe they trigger on unusual behavior, like folks that make minimum payments forever on their card, with the balance slowly growing over years on several cards, all of a sudden sending in a big chunk of money (which IMHO $6,500 isn't - there are days I wear that much in jewelry - hell there are some days I have that much on me in cash) sets of some flags.
Wow, you wear some expensive jewelry. I'm definitely not poor, but even for me $6,500 would take 2~4 paychecks to save up, so about two months. Now, consider that I get paid more than any of my friends, most of my friends in New Mexico hardly make 6,500 in a quarter of a year.
Sure, $6,500 may not seem like much to you, but usually the people paying minimum on their credit card do *not* have the kind of money to just whip out $6,500 and pay it off.
Point 1 in your post has merit, but the last thing on a suicidal person's mind is trying to maintain his credit rating (point 2 in your post.)
It has nothing to do with maintaining his credit rating. In fact, people in this sort of a situation, where they're making low payments all the time will actually likely get penalized for paying off their credit card (!!!). The issue here is that paying off debts is one way of resolving earthly matters, this is usually a reasonable indicator for suicide.
The idea is that if say, a parent feels "forced" into suicide, they may know that by paying off their debt it will save their children headaches. Pay off all your debts, except now you don't have any money left to live with. But that wouldn't be an issue for very long, would it? Now, their children are saved from their mounting debt, and they've resolved the issue.
That's what's weírd. Out of my three flights back from Europe, I believe I only had to do this once, with Lufthansa. ...
Although, now that I think of it, maybe I did do it each time. Either way, it's annoying. Can't the airline collect this information, and not force me to go around asking people for a pen before I can board my damn flight?
Obviously you haven't been doing much traveling. Check out Cuba, Nicaragua, Israel, Croatia (until recently), etc. No matter where I've been the U.S. has always welcomed me back with open arms compared to some of the places I've traveled.
I can understand such things as these places, and I'm certain that there are states with more crazy control laws than the US. Truth be told I've only been to EU states, where customs consists of two doors, one green, the other red. If you walk through the green one, and you don't look suspicious, and you're not randomly selected, there's absolutely no questions. Just grab your stuff, and walk through.
The US meanwhile dictates that you declare everything that you're bringing into the country and puts you in long lines where the customs people ask generally more prying questions about where you're going, and what you were up to than in Europe. This last time, my whole interaction with the entrance process in Germany was:
Passkontrol: What is your final destination?
Me: Düsseldorf
Passkontrol: *looks odd for a sec, shrugs unnoticably and stamps passport*
No customs interaction.
I know there is a form for non-immigrant foreign nationals who visit the United States, but U.S. citizens have all the documentation they need: their passports.
_ declaration_form.xml
Not entirely correct. You need to fill out a customs form:
http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/travel/vacation/sample
On this form, you're supposed to list all items purchased abroad, which you are bringing back into the US.
Non-US citizens, who are not permanent-residents need declare everything that they're bringing into the country that is intended to remain in the country.
If you were flying a foreign airline then that airline may have wanted you to fill out a form, but you can hardly blame the government for that.
I was flying with Lufthansa, but when the surly customs agent requests the customs form declaring what you're bringing back, and also such things as "have you been in contact with livestock", it most certainly is the governments fault.
hahahahahahahaha! RIGHT! You, sir, have no concept of the suicidal mind...
If you have some incredible insight into the suicidal mind, why are you either a) not dead yet, or b) post as a logged in user as a respected member of the psychiatric community.
There are a number of people who choose to commit suicide because they feel they were forced into that position, but they don't want to punish those who they know and love. They feel that their death is the only real solution for the whole matter.
Putting it bluntly, paying off large amounts of a debt is an action, which can easily be construed as resolving worldly details, which people often do when they know their death is imminent. Whether that knowledge comes from knowledge of a fatal disease/condition, or an intention on their part to end their life.
In all cases, if someone is depressed and starts paying off debts, that's a very bad sign, and would suggest to any compitent psychiatric personal who knows about him would take as a big red flag. There are other indicators that indicate a likelihood that someone might commit suicide, such as feeling alone, sudden and/or drastic change in their life, or feeling insignificant/meaningless.
But anyone who is suddenly putting earthly affairs in order is definitely a danger to themselves if they're in otherwise perfect health.
All that energy to BOO something that wasn't ment to be a correction while ignoring the post that was attached to it.
Look AC, I was raised in New Mexico, where parts of it you have to cross border control points to get further into the United States.
Frankly, I've seen the impact of illegal immigrants into an area, and it just. ain't. that big of a deal to me. Frankly, I could give a shit if you don't like illegal immigrants, or you don't like that they're still coming.
I neglected the post's content entirely just because it was uninteresting and a stupid and useless topic to me. I've lived in areas of high illegal-immigrant population, and it just doesn't bother me like it does all the racist bigots.
DAMN IT. Well, I say stupid English spelling anyways.
;)
I had though it was Catcher in the Rye because Rye is a grain, and I personally remember the title by imagining in a rye field. Of course, I'm quick to admit fallability if I'm not confident in my memory.
Thanks for setting me straight though. And boo the AC for leading me astray. BOOO!!!
Isn't there supposed to be some NJ law that'll make me not have to read these AC comments
So why is homeland security investigating this then? Why not IRS, or even the FBI. Why homeland security?
Because they're the new shiney branch of the executive branch with the money to actually look into these sorts of things.
Also, correct me if I'm wrong (anyone) but I believe that the FBI is now a part of the DHS.
Hello, this is Homeland Security calling. We have noticed that your 1.8026175 × 10^12 furlongs per fortnight are well above your average rate of 6.
Be aware that until you have sufficiently raised your average rate to within 9.86153 × 10^5 furlongs per fortnight of your current speed, travelling at 1.8026175 × 10^12 furlongs per fortnight is a danger to this country's health.
Well, this is ridiculous, that's the same speed my image has always approached other people, irrespective of my speed or orientation. There must be something wrong with your instruments if they're telling you that this value has changed recently.
BTW, thanks for fixing the title... Stupid non-phonetic English.
There are two possible reasons that I can personally think of.
Basically, anything sudden is a big red flag to the DHS, and other authorities. Most people don't do sudden stuff like suddenly pay off ~$6,500 of their credit card debt in one payment. It's unusual, and also carries a significant enough amount of a question as to intent that the action was done, that the rarity of investigating it, is outweighed by the potential gain if it catches just one terrorist, or "domestic perpetrator of violence".
Seriously, it's getting pretty bad. Everything you have to notify the government for.
When I was flying back from Europe, I had to fill out a form with who I was, and my home address, and an emergency contact (if I so wished).
They set it up like it's some sort of idea that all flights into the US require all US citizens to be recognized and accounted for, so that if it goes down? or something like that? that they can know for sure who was on board, and can start contacting people ahead of time?
The requirements for entering the US are so ridiculously more complex than any other country I've visited.
So in this case, you're almost certainly right -- if New Jersey criminalized anonymous posting, I doubt very much if most states in the Union, let alone most Western countries, would honor an extradition request. But as a general rule, you do not escape a state's jurisdiction merely because you don't live there.
The other good thing to note here, is that even if no one grants your NJ extradition charge, if you end up within their jurisdiction, they can arrest you there.
Let's take a small example, you're in say, New Mexico, you maintain a forum, and someone posts something offensive and potentially libelous about a NJ legislator (like say Biondi) and they get all mad, and demand criminal action be taken, because you as the forum maintainer didn't keep records of who posted it, so they want to get at someone, so they're going after you.
All happens as above, and they send the extradition charge to the NM governer, and they say, "Pfff... whatever."
But then a few months down the road, you decide you want to fly to Europe, and you land in Newark and when you attempt to board your plane, they tell you that they have a "very special treat for you, and they'd like to escort you to the first class lounge to redeem your prize!" Yeah, next thing you know, you're in cuffs, and you're screwed.
Basically, even if someone can't extradite you doesn't mean you're even safe; it just means you have to be damn careful about where you travel after that.
And yet, people always remember to "Ask Slashdot," where they get tons of legal advice from people who got their legal educations from Judge Judy.
Hey! Some of us got it from Law and Order, which apparently told me yesterday that just CC'ing an email to your lawyer makes it priviledged.
Which it doesn't. It has to be seeking legal advice, and not be sent to any third parties... but they didn't cover any of that in that Law and Order episode.
But most importantly, talk to a lawyer ;)
This is like, the first thing I should have said. From now on, I'm going to try and remind myself to start off all pseudo-legal advice with "First, talk to a lawyer. If you don't want to do that, this is what I've heard, but if you have any doubts about what I'm talking about, or are thinking of following my recommended course of action, I recommend that you talk to a lawyer first, just to make sure I'm not talking out my ass."
Hopefully, that would avoid a modding of "Funny" on a post intended in serious earnest.
Good point. Of course, I was taking the whole thing of "If you have a legal question, talk to a lawyer" as a fundamental unstated rule.
Of course, then you forget to even talk to a lawyer.
But it's still the best legal advice at all times.
Reverse Engineering is generally not illegal.
But, to CYA, your best bet is to just write up the specs as you understand them, then have someone else write the driver for the community.
You don't even have to share those specs. Give the author the specs, have him write the driver, then publish it, without your specs. Now, anyone who wants to reverse engineer the driver you wrote, is investigating a full layer of indirection from you. They're not even looking at the specs you wrote, but rather the code that was written upon those specs.
The issue here isn't tense, it's mood.
English present tense is often used as a "non-past" tense. This is pretty typical thing for Germanic languages. "Ich gehe morgens in die Stadt." (I'm going into the city tomorrow.) If you know German, you'll see that both of these sentences are not in the future tense, they just have a prepositional phrase indicating the future, and the present tense.
The issue here is that AT&T is *intending* to aquire Bellsouth, or are hoping to aquire Bellsouth. This matter is completely irrelevent as to tense (they wanted to in the past, before this information became public, it's true now, and it will be true in the future).
I will concede though, that the headline is confusing. But the issue is deeper than just "tense". Even if it were to say "AT&T will aquire Bellsouth", this wouldn't indicate in any way that the deal might not go through. This deal is by no means guarenteed to go through, and indicating it in the indicative future tense would no less solve the problem of a confusing headline.
I'm sorry, I was under the assumption that AOL was an authority, and that they were imposing a charge of money to access their otherwise public service.
Of course, the 1b definition fits even without me being facetious.
Now, I'll thank you for hijacking a +5: Funny thread just because it's the first post to the article, simply because you're afraid that if it's any deeper into the comment tree no one will see it, or care about it.
'Implementation of this timely and necessary safety and security measure for our members takes place in the next 30 days. Mark it on your calendars.'
That's a pretty large swath of my calender... someone got another highlighter? Mine wore out around March 14th.