No - I forced the tech to update the firmware - they did not want to update it, as they hadn't been given the training on the update software.
If I had wanted to wait a week for the *trained* employee to come back, it probably would have worked. Since I told them to do it, it became my responsibility, not theirs. Now, would you take responsibility for *YOUR FUCKING DECISION*, or would you still try to blaim them? I made the choice, I took the chance - it got fucked up. Now, SkullOne - shut the fuck up - and go spin your one remaining neuron somewhere else, you fucking wanker.
Better yet, go visit your local protein factory, and slip quietly (or noisily for all I care) into the machinery and do something good for once in your life, and fucking DIE!
I'm quite certain that you did not mean "nano-give-a-shits" as that would be overly generous.
Next time, consider "pico-give-a-shits" or possible "femto-give-a-shits" - either would be more appropriate, although I might even try to come up with a combination of "femto-give-a-shits-for-one-unit-of-planck-time"
Many states - the one I live in, included, do not allow lengthy contractual obligations regarding services.
Where I live, the statuatory limit to service contracts is 4 months. Once you've hit 4 months, regardless of the contract verbage, you are no longer bound to it's terms.
So - look them up, check them out - and then make certain to write down the relevant code section so you can use it when you use that as a leverage point to get things you want from service providers.
Case in point - My cell phone had died (a bad firmware update done by the local store zombie). I called the service line and stated that I would go elsewhere if I did not get my phone upgrade at a substantially discounted price. The customer service zombie stated that I still had over a year and a half left on my contract. Once I read the relevant code to the zombie, and informed them that half a year was beyond the 4 months, that I was no longer obligated nor bound by the contract. 2 supervisors later, I had my new phone, at a substantially discounted price, without any new (or extended) contractual terms.
I guess I'm just stating to be aware of the options you have available to you, depending on where you live.
Actually, with innovations like dtrace, and their RSN (real soon now) zetafs, I think I can honestly say that Sun will be a force to contend with.
Things that they are researching include Wireless (nearly traceless) motherboards - where chips communicate with each other via nano-radio transmitter/receiver pairs - faster than they can with current circuit traces.
Add to that asynchronous processors, and very cool software, they may not be the power-house they were in the day, but they will certainly be around, and bringing new relevant things to market.
I'm not sure if I can express myself properly in this.
It has to do with wanting it to be you (or at least as much you as is possible) that creates the life. That goes for the mother as well as the father.
By giving both parents the ability to be part of the life giving process, it enables them to be more emotionally involved, as well a the physical contribution (even when it's via harvesting).
I'm not saying that if there's no chance for a female to donate, that a donor wouldn't work, or that parents would love that child any less. It's just that there's that something *extra* there, knowing that you contributed to the result. It's not something you can easily explain. Sorry if it's not clear.
You think working on a car is equal to having a child? A hunk of metal equal to a human life? Or was it your "desire" that you were referencing? You think the desire to have a child is just about "opening legs"? It has *nothing* to do with the physical act, it has everything to do with wanting to raise a child, to give back to someone the same way our parents gave to us.
You sir, by way of your post, are a sick individual - maybe you can get some *mental* leave and go check into a facility to get some help.
So, the fact that someone's parents chose to create a child, that by chance had a defect (not carried by the parents, but a transcoding flaw during the combination of the 2 components) should never have children of their own?
Trust me, if that's *truly* how you feel, then by all means, do NOT have children of your own, and leave the world a better place.
Otherwise allow science to give hope to couples who wish to have children, but do not wish to pass on the health problems they had to deal with during their lifetime.
I happen to be a parent, who would have dearly loved to have this as an option, to make 100% certain that nothing was passed on to our child.
I understand, that you may have been making an attempt at humor. In my opinion, you failed miserably.
If it wasn't an attempt at humor, then I feel sorry for you.
Write some scripts, to use in the inetd.conf (or xinetd, if you like), that write numbers into a temporary file. The numbers will be converted into an IP address, by the final "trigger" script.
The final trigger script, takes the different numbers, compiles them into the IP address (use Hex, if you prefer, for fewer knocks), then writes a temporary sshd_conf file to use with a non daemon sshd spawn.
This limits the connection availability to a single shot. Once you've connected, done your business, and disconnected, that's it. It cannot be re-used.
I also spawn a timer for the SSHD which only allows it to stay awake for 60 seconds, and with the config file written to only allow connections from the single IP address, it works pretty slick.
By having multiple ports that write the same numbers, and multiple triggers, you can go through quite a few connections, without ever repeating the same port sequences.
Now, if only I were to take the time to write this up in C, instead of shell, I could even just make it a combination knock (kind of like a Dial-a-Lock) that worked for the originating IP address.
This whole practice can be a nuisance if you are being scanned =D (this is why the C routine would be nice)
Read one of the latest issues of Scientific American.
It highlights the growing population, and discusses decisions that will have to be made during the next 50 years, when the population is estimated to be close to 9 billion.
Now, let's see them re-do the numbers, but take into account population growth as well as population migration, and I'd be willing to wager that we'll see the numbers are only slightly elevated over previous.
If you really want someone who's put up with the BS for quite some time, look for someone who's worked at the same company for more than a year or 2.
The longer they worked there, the more BS they've put up with.
All a college degree means, is that you managed to learn the rhetoric and opinion that the professors spew at you. Higher education is merely the opinions of those who teach. Very little of what is taught is actual facts that will stand the test of time.
However, those things learned while doing, will prove out again and again.
That's the difference I believe, between self taught (you learn what works, not what *should* work)
You're statement about inviting an enemy in is ludicrous.
First off, I don't have any enemies. Second, I wouldn't invite one into my house if I did, regardless. 3rd, I'm not looking to kill anyone, unless it's in defense of myself or my family (even then I'm going to do my best that the individual remains outside).
As stated repeatedly, if the individual finds a way into the house, after being informed they were not welcome (either by voice, alarm or locks), then they really DO deserve what's coming to them.
Let's take your drunkard example.
If a person is out driving around (already drunk) they have already broken multiple laws. Then, intoxicated, they come up to a locked house, with the lights out. They think, whoa, there's a party going on. They then proceed to break down the door, and look for the party.
The homeowner comes out to see what the noise was, finds a car, with the lights on, crunched into the tree in their front yard, and an individual smelling like a brewery yelling "Where's the beer?". In that instance, I think very few people would have trouble blowing that danger to society away. Especially once their informed that there is no party, and that there is no beer, the person (already drunk) decides to get violent.
Under what circumstances, would you consider someone ignoring your statements to "Go away", "Do not enter" or better yet "Get the fuck off my property, before I fill your stinking guts full of lead", and entering your house anyway, to not have "wrongful intent".
I don't care if the person is injured, has a broken arm, a head injury, or what - if I tell them to leave, they damned well better leave.
If I decide to assist them, I won't be telling them to leave, however, if I decide not to, then they damned well better follow instructions, and not try to break in.
If someone breaks into my house, falls and breaks a leg, then they may possibly live. It depends on whether or not they don't move, when I yell "freeze, don't move, or I'll shoot".
If they don't move, then maybe I'll call the cops, and as long as I'm not put on hold, then maybe the bastard will live long enough to be put in hand-cuffs.
Let's say I am however put on hold. I'm certainly not going to do ANYTHING to assist the bastard. Let's say he's bleeding badly, poor bastards gonna die lying there waiting for the police to answer my call.
The problem with your examples, are that they all seem to do away with "personal responsibility" for ones actions.
If someone breaks into someone's house, and trips/falls and breaks there leg, whose fault is that? The ONLY person whose fault it is, is the person breaking in. If the person's broken bone happens to sever an artery, and the person dies, then whose fault is it? Again, the person who breaks in is the ONLY person at fault.
The person who breaks in, after being informed, that they would be shot, who gets shot, is responsible for their own actions.
The person defending themselves / their family has clearly stated that "If you do this, I will do this". This informs the individual breaking in that there are consequences to their chosen line of action. If the individual chooses to proceed with that action, then in essence they have chosen that consequence.
Let's take your breaking and entering, broken leg example a step further.
Let's say that the homeowner has gone on vacation, and has shut off their network (hence their phone, as they are using a VOIP), and the individual breaks in, breaks their leg, severs an artery in the process, and then crawls to a room, finds a phone, tries to dial and gets nothing. Then on the way down the stairs, stumbles again, and breaks their neck.
The homeowner then comes back from vacation, finds the corpse at the bottom of the steps, calls the police, and they come along and pick up the body, ask questions, etc...
Now, by your definition, where people are not held accountable for their choices or actions, would the hom
Since I don't have a *security camera*, I don't see that they are unarmed.
I assume that they are. They have zero reason to trespass. At that point I take direct action - prior to them leaving the house. If their down, and dead in the house, it doesn't matter.
If it happens in the house, and they had zero reason to be there, it will NEVER go to trial.
It's that simple.
If the person gets out of the house, then yes - you can't touch them, but if they haven't left the house, then they're fair game.
Since it would never go to court, there would be no reason to testify.
As I stated previously. The officials would show up, pick up the body, take a few notes, and that would be the extent of it.
If a person needs help, or have no *wrongful* intent, they knock on your door and wait to be let in.
If they let themselves in, or break in after being denied entry, then they have *wrongful* intent, and deserve anything that happens to them, up to and including death. However, due to some money grubbing lawyers out there, if one were to decide to take action, the only course of action left to take is to kill the person.
If the person is only injured, then they can / have sued the individual for bodily injury, regardless of the fact that they carried a lethal weapon into the persons house, where they were clubbed repeatedly by a baseball bat / golf club / whatever.
It doesn't matter what the individuals thoughts or reasonings were behind their decision to illegally enter another persons dwelling. Once they've taken that action, anything done in defense of that action is reasonable.
Since you stated that YANALY, I assume that you have decided to become a lawyer. That also in my opinion is detrimental to society, as you have proven that you are more into the letter of the law, and not the spirit of the law. I could see you being the one who tries to milk Donald Trump out of millions because you were fired from a law firm, and your boss used the words "You're fired", and since they obviously got that from a television show, and it was such a traumatic event, you could no longer work, and so would be due millions of lost revenue. Or, worse yet, you'll go work for the RIAA/MPAA.
If you're in someone's house, and they didn't want you there, you're toast.
End of story.
A vengeful or overzealous ADA isn't going to help you, you'll still be dead.
Get it.
The laws are there to say "If you do this, this is what will happen. Unless."
Breaking into a persons domicile, against their wishes fully meets most states definition of "extenuating circumstances", and since no-one can truly read the mind of another, they can honestly say "I don't know what their intensions were, I was just scared for my life (or the lives of my family), so I capped their sorry ass."
To put it simply, it has a lot to do with the Van Allen (sp?) radiation belts / which are essentially tied to the Earth's magnetic field.
Since the magnetic field radiates out from the poles, surrounding the planet, to end at the opposing pole, the ends end up being close to a donut shape. Where that hole is, is where more radiation can get in, causing the ozone to break down.
According to scientists, there's always been, and always will be a hole at the poles, however, our CFC production/release as well as changes in green house gas production have affected the cycles of growth / shrinkage normally associated with the holes.
People who trade files illegally are the same ones who would record music off the radio (or XM, or whatever)
The piece of information that the RIAA (as well as the MPAA) have failed to understand, is the fact that those who file-share, are the ones who would lend out CDs, albums, cassettes, VCR tapes, DVDs etc.
They aren't *losing* a penny, as they wouldn't have bought the music / movie in the first place. They'd have just done without.
Now, once they've sampled the goods (granted, by what's considered illegal means) - and no, a 30 second snippet is not a preview, you have to see the whole thing, or listen to the whole song to know whether it's good or not - they may decide that a particular band, or director is worth spending money on.
In the end, they make more money than they ever did prior to the file-sharing.
Now to the "fuck the RIAA/MPAA" segment.
Neither the RIAA nor the MPAA help the artists. They only help themselves. A bunch of fucking suits who sit around doing abso-fucking-lutely nothing all day, every day, while they collect xx% of the purchase price of every main-line DVD/Movie sold so that they can cushion the wallet between their sorry fat asses and their over-cushioned seats. All of this just because somewhere along the line, these do-nothings decided that they would "help" the artists out for a nominal fee. Who knows, maybe at first they actually did help some of them out. Now, however, they (the MPAA and RIAA) are the real problem with the entertainment industry.
Once they've taken their xx% cut, then the artists, directors, gaffers, painters, set-makers, etc get their cut.
Once the RIAA/MPAA are wiped off of the face of the earth, along with their ambulance chasing lawyers, the artists might actually have a chance to earn a decent cut of their products, and prices would actually drop.
The MPAA/RIAA kind of reminds me of the line from space-balls.
Whoa. Watchout - you'll be having some folks who spent years and thousands of dollars on their college educations pound you into the ground for calling their "well rounded" education a "Certification".
As stated in another thread, certifications are nothing more than a financial vehicle to allow software vendors to rake in more money than they would with just software licenses.
A college education can (and usually will) get you a job much faster than having a handfull of certifications in your resume.
Now, counter to that, with over 20 years of professional experience under my belt, with ZERO college, ZERO certifications, I've yet to have ANY problems finding a job, or advancing in my career.
You only have to have 2 things to be successful in any endeavor.
Those two things are attitude and aptitude.
The attitude that you show to others, that says you can-do it.
The aptitude that backs up the can-do attitude, by allowing you to know / understand the work with little or no effort.
Without attitude / aptitude, you can have your college degree, your briefcase full of certifications, and still work at McDonald's flipping burgers, as that's all you're good for.
Certifications were developed by a marketer. Someone in marketing thought to themselves, "Hmmmm, how can I make more money for the company?". Then a light-bulb went off - let's create "Certifications", but let's not bother verifying identities of those taking the tests, or whether or not they *reallY* know the materials. As long as they pay us, we'll throw some bullshit material at them, and as long as they memorize what we wrote (regardless of accuracy or applicability to real world configurations), we'll pass them.
Thus the certifcation craze was born.
I have yet to meet a single individual who has been certified in anything who actually knew the actual workings of the material they were certified for.
Don't even get me started into the arguments that I've had when it came to installing systems. I finally had to get 2 identical systems, with identical software products, and told the individual to do their install their way, and that I'd do mine, my way.
Not only was i done with mine in a fraction of the time it took the *CERTIFIED* individual to set it up, mine was the only one that worked. Our network security group wouldn't even allow the other box onto our network because it was full of security holes.
I personally am 100% self taught, over a 20 year period. Information that I haven't used in years, still sits ready, and available for use. Mostly because I learned it (and most everything else) the hard way. Once you've learned something that way, it doesn't just go away.
Remember folks, the higher up the management chain you go, the more brain cells you have to be willing to sacrifice. Don't you dare appear to be more intelligent than your boss.
None of the car *formats* are incompatible. They all use the same *media*.
They can all drive on blacktop, gravel, even dirt roads.
Some vehicles have the ability to traverse areas not covered in roads, but still maintain the *compatibility* to travel along the standard media shared by all road based vehicles.
So while I can sort of see where you were headed with your pathetic attempt at a witty retort, I also can see that you utterly failed to reach your destination.
Slashdot Mirror
Look for the telecom version of the pizza boxes - they run off of pure, externally powered, DC.
No AC adapters there.
No - I forced the tech to update the firmware - they did not want to update it, as they hadn't been given the training on the update software.
If I had wanted to wait a week for the *trained* employee to come back, it probably would have worked.
Since I told them to do it, it became my responsibility, not theirs.
Now, would you take responsibility for *YOUR FUCKING DECISION*, or would you still try to blaim them?
I made the choice, I took the chance - it got fucked up.
Now, SkullOne - shut the fuck up - and go spin your one remaining neuron somewhere else, you fucking wanker.
Better yet, go visit your local protein factory, and slip quietly (or noisily for all I care) into the machinery and do something good for once in your life, and fucking DIE!
I'm quite certain that you did not mean "nano-give-a-shits" as that would be overly generous.
Next time, consider "pico-give-a-shits" or possible "femto-give-a-shits" - either would be more appropriate, although I might even try to come up with a combination of "femto-give-a-shits-for-one-unit-of-planck-time"
Many states - the one I live in, included, do not allow lengthy contractual obligations regarding services.
Where I live, the statuatory limit to service contracts is 4 months. Once you've hit 4 months, regardless of the contract verbage, you are no longer bound to it's terms.
So - look them up, check them out - and then make certain to write down the relevant code section so you can use it when you use that as a leverage point to get things you want from service providers.
Case in point -
My cell phone had died (a bad firmware update done by the local store zombie). I called the service line and stated that I would go elsewhere if I did not get my phone upgrade at a substantially discounted price. The customer service zombie stated that I still had over a year and a half left on my contract. Once I read the relevant code to the zombie, and informed them that half a year was beyond the 4 months, that I was no longer obligated nor bound by the contract. 2 supervisors later, I had my new phone, at a substantially discounted price, without any new (or extended) contractual terms.
I guess I'm just stating to be aware of the options you have available to you, depending on where you live.
Actually, with innovations like dtrace, and their RSN (real soon now) zetafs, I think I can honestly say that Sun will be a force to contend with.
Things that they are researching include Wireless (nearly traceless) motherboards - where chips communicate with each other via nano-radio transmitter/receiver pairs - faster than they can with current circuit traces.
Add to that asynchronous processors, and very cool software, they may not be the power-house they were in the day, but they will certainly be around, and bringing new relevant things to market.
I'm not sure if I can express myself properly in this.
It has to do with wanting it to be you (or at least as much you as is possible) that creates the life. That goes for the mother as well as the father.
By giving both parents the ability to be part of the life giving process, it enables them to be more emotionally involved, as well a the physical contribution (even when it's via harvesting).
I'm not saying that if there's no chance for a female to donate, that a donor wouldn't work, or that parents would love that child any less. It's just that there's that something *extra* there, knowing that you contributed to the result. It's not something you can easily explain. Sorry if it's not clear.
You think working on a car is equal to having a child?
A hunk of metal equal to a human life?
Or was it your "desire" that you were referencing?
You think the desire to have a child is just about "opening legs"?
It has *nothing* to do with the physical act, it has everything to do with wanting to raise a child, to give back to someone the same way our parents gave to us.
You sir, by way of your post, are a sick individual - maybe you can get some *mental* leave and go check into a facility to get some help.
So, the fact that someone's parents chose to create a child, that by chance had a defect (not carried by the parents, but a transcoding flaw during the combination of the 2 components) should never have children of their own?
Trust me, if that's *truly* how you feel, then by all means, do NOT have children of your own, and leave the world a better place.
Otherwise allow science to give hope to couples who wish to have children, but do not wish to pass on the health problems they had to deal with during their lifetime.
I happen to be a parent, who would have dearly loved to have this as an option, to make 100% certain that nothing was passed on to our child.
I understand, that you may have been making an attempt at humor. In my opinion, you failed miserably.
If it wasn't an attempt at humor, then I feel sorry for you.
What happens, when you're on the road, and need to do some admin work from a friends broadband connection? Or a hotel's Wi-Fi?
Write some scripts, to use in the inetd.conf (or xinetd, if you like), that write numbers into a temporary file. The numbers will be converted into an IP address, by the final "trigger" script.
The final trigger script, takes the different numbers, compiles them into the IP address (use Hex, if you prefer, for fewer knocks), then writes a temporary sshd_conf file to use with a non daemon sshd spawn.
This limits the connection availability to a single shot. Once you've connected, done your business, and disconnected, that's it. It cannot be re-used.
I also spawn a timer for the SSHD which only allows it to stay awake for 60 seconds, and with the config file written to only allow connections from the single IP address, it works pretty slick.
By having multiple ports that write the same numbers, and multiple triggers, you can go through quite a few connections, without ever repeating the same port sequences.
Now, if only I were to take the time to write this up in C, instead of shell, I could even just make it a combination knock (kind of like a Dial-a-Lock) that worked for the originating IP address.
This whole practice can be a nuisance if you are being scanned =D
(this is why the C routine would be nice)
Read one of the latest issues of Scientific American.
It highlights the growing population, and discusses decisions that will have to be made during the next 50 years, when the population is estimated to be close to 9 billion.
Now, let's see them re-do the numbers, but take into account population growth as well as population migration, and I'd be willing to wager that we'll see the numbers are only slightly elevated over previous.
If you really want someone who's put up with the BS for quite some time, look for someone who's worked at the same company for more than a year or 2.
The longer they worked there, the more BS they've put up with.
All a college degree means, is that you managed to learn the rhetoric and opinion that the professors spew at you. Higher education is merely the opinions of those who teach. Very little of what is taught is actual facts that will stand the test of time.
However, those things learned while doing, will prove out again and again.
That's the difference I believe, between self taught (you learn what works, not what *should* work)
You're statement about inviting an enemy in is ludicrous.
First off, I don't have any enemies. Second, I wouldn't invite one into my house if I did, regardless. 3rd, I'm not looking to kill anyone, unless it's in defense of myself or my family (even then I'm going to do my best that the individual remains outside).
As stated repeatedly, if the individual finds a way into the house, after being informed they were not welcome (either by voice, alarm or locks), then they really DO deserve what's coming to them.
Let's take your drunkard example.
If a person is out driving around (already drunk) they have already broken multiple laws. Then, intoxicated, they come up to a locked house, with the lights out. They think, whoa, there's a party going on. They then proceed to break down the door, and look for the party.
The homeowner comes out to see what the noise was, finds a car, with the lights on, crunched into the tree in their front yard, and an individual smelling like a brewery yelling "Where's the beer?". In that instance, I think very few people would have trouble blowing that danger to society away. Especially once their informed that there is no party, and that there is no beer, the person (already drunk) decides to get violent.
Under what circumstances, would you consider someone ignoring your statements to "Go away", "Do not enter" or better yet "Get the fuck off my property, before I fill your stinking guts full of lead", and entering your house anyway, to not have "wrongful intent".
I don't care if the person is injured, has a broken arm, a head injury, or what - if I tell them to leave, they damned well better leave.
If I decide to assist them, I won't be telling them to leave, however, if I decide not to, then they damned well better follow instructions, and not try to break in.
If someone breaks into my house, falls and breaks a leg, then they may possibly live. It depends on whether or not they don't move, when I yell "freeze, don't move, or I'll shoot".
If they don't move, then maybe I'll call the cops, and as long as I'm not put on hold, then maybe the bastard will live long enough to be put in hand-cuffs.
Let's say I am however put on hold. I'm certainly not going to do ANYTHING to assist the bastard. Let's say he's bleeding badly, poor bastards gonna die lying there waiting for the police to answer my call.
The problem with your examples, are that they all seem to do away with "personal responsibility" for ones actions.
If someone breaks into someone's house, and trips/falls and breaks there leg, whose fault is that? The ONLY person whose fault it is, is the person breaking in. If the person's broken bone happens to sever an artery, and the person dies, then whose fault is it? Again, the person who breaks in is the ONLY person at fault.
The person who breaks in, after being informed, that they would be shot, who gets shot, is responsible for their own actions.
The person defending themselves / their family has clearly stated that "If you do this, I will do this". This informs the individual breaking in that there are consequences to their chosen line of action. If the individual chooses to proceed with that action, then in essence they have chosen that consequence.
Let's take your breaking and entering, broken leg example a step further.
Let's say that the homeowner has gone on vacation, and has shut off their network (hence their phone, as they are using a VOIP), and the individual breaks in, breaks their leg, severs an artery in the process, and then crawls to a room, finds a phone, tries to dial and gets nothing. Then on the way down the stairs, stumbles again, and breaks their neck.
The homeowner then comes back from vacation, finds the corpse at the bottom of the steps, calls the police, and they come along and pick up the body, ask questions, etc...
Now, by your definition, where people are not held accountable for their choices or actions, would the hom
Since I don't have a *security camera*, I don't see that they are unarmed.
I assume that they are. They have zero reason to trespass. At that point I take direct action - prior to them leaving the house. If their down, and dead in the house, it doesn't matter.
If it happens in the house, and they had zero reason to be there, it will NEVER go to trial.
It's that simple.
If the person gets out of the house, then yes - you can't touch them, but if they haven't left the house, then they're fair game.
Since it would never go to court, there would be no reason to testify.
As I stated previously. The officials would show up, pick up the body, take a few notes, and that would be the extent of it.
If a person needs help, or have no *wrongful* intent, they knock on your door and wait to be let in.
If they let themselves in, or break in after being denied entry, then they have *wrongful* intent, and deserve anything that happens to them, up to and including death. However, due to some money grubbing lawyers out there, if one were to decide to take action, the only course of action left to take is to kill the person.
If the person is only injured, then they can / have sued the individual for bodily injury, regardless of the fact that they carried a lethal weapon into the persons house, where they were clubbed repeatedly by a baseball bat / golf club / whatever.
It doesn't matter what the individuals thoughts or reasonings were behind their decision to illegally enter another persons dwelling. Once they've taken that action, anything done in defense of that action is reasonable.
Since you stated that YANALY, I assume that you have decided to become a lawyer. That also in my opinion is detrimental to society, as you have proven that you are more into the letter of the law, and not the spirit of the law. I could see you being the one who tries to milk Donald Trump out of millions because you were fired from a law firm, and your boss used the words "You're fired", and since they obviously got that from a television show, and it was such a traumatic event, you could no longer work, and so would be due millions of lost revenue. Or, worse yet, you'll go work for the RIAA/MPAA.
Pull your head out of your ass Vengie.
."
If you're in someone's house, and they didn't want you there, you're toast.
End of story.
A vengeful or overzealous ADA isn't going to help you, you'll still be dead.
Get it.
The laws are there to say "If you do this, this is what will happen. Unless
Breaking into a persons domicile, against their wishes fully meets most states definition of "extenuating circumstances", and since no-one can truly read the mind of another, they can honestly say "I don't know what their intensions were, I was just scared for my life (or the lives of my family), so I capped their sorry ass."
Where I live, if someone enters your premises uninvited, you have the right to bar their entry.
If they insist on entering regardless, then you may do anything you would like to prevent them.
If they make it past the threshhold, then yes, you can (and several have) killed the intruder, with no worries about the law.
They stop in, see the intruder's corpse in your house, ask a few questions, get a meat wagon, and that's it. All done.
Just make certain, that if you decide to enter my premises, uninvited, that you have all your affairs in order.
You won't be leaving.
*over simplified explanation*
To put it simply, it has a lot to do with the Van Allen (sp?) radiation belts / which are essentially tied to the Earth's magnetic field.
Since the magnetic field radiates out from the poles, surrounding the planet, to end at the opposing pole, the ends end up being close to a donut shape. Where that hole is, is where more radiation can get in, causing the ozone to break down.
According to scientists, there's always been, and always will be a hole at the poles, however, our CFC production/release as well as changes in green house gas production have affected the cycles of growth / shrinkage normally associated with the holes.
If they're not doing anything useful, or something for someone other than themselves, then they may as well be doing nothing at all.
Those who go through life doing nothing for others may as well never have existed.
Damn - submit - preview - oh well.
ahem - "pizza-the-hut" - not jaba-the-gut - sorry for the misquote... =D
Ghaasp! WoW
People who trade files illegally are the same ones who would record music off the radio (or XM, or whatever)
The piece of information that the RIAA (as well as the MPAA) have failed to understand, is the fact that those who file-share, are the ones who would lend out CDs, albums, cassettes, VCR tapes, DVDs etc.
They aren't *losing* a penny, as they wouldn't have bought the music / movie in the first place. They'd have just done without.
Now, once they've sampled the goods (granted, by what's considered illegal means) - and no, a 30 second snippet is not a preview, you have to see the whole thing, or listen to the whole song to know whether it's good or not - they may decide that a particular band, or director is worth spending money on.
In the end, they make more money than they ever did prior to the file-sharing.
Now to the "fuck the RIAA/MPAA" segment.
Neither the RIAA nor the MPAA help the artists. They only help themselves. A bunch of fucking suits who sit around doing abso-fucking-lutely nothing all day, every day, while they collect xx% of the purchase price of every main-line DVD/Movie sold so that they can cushion the wallet between their sorry fat asses and their over-cushioned seats. All of this just because somewhere along the line, these do-nothings decided that they would "help" the artists out for a nominal fee. Who knows, maybe at first they actually did help some of them out. Now, however, they (the MPAA and RIAA) are the real problem with the entertainment industry.
Once they've taken their xx% cut, then the artists, directors, gaffers, painters, set-makers, etc get their cut.
Once the RIAA/MPAA are wiped off of the face of the earth, along with their ambulance chasing lawyers, the artists might actually have a chance to earn a decent cut of their products, and prices would actually drop.
The MPAA/RIAA kind of reminds me of the line from space-balls.
Jaba-the-gut accidentally ate himself to death.
Ehhh!
Wrong.
Whoa. Watchout - you'll be having some folks who spent years and thousands of dollars on their college educations pound you into the ground for calling their "well rounded" education a "Certification".
As stated in another thread, certifications are nothing more than a financial vehicle to allow software vendors to rake in more money than they would with just software licenses.
A college education can (and usually will) get you a job much faster than having a handfull of certifications in your resume.
Now, counter to that, with over 20 years of professional experience under my belt, with ZERO college, ZERO certifications, I've yet to have ANY problems finding a job, or advancing in my career.
You only have to have 2 things to be successful in any endeavor.
Those two things are attitude and aptitude.
The attitude that you show to others, that says you can-do it.
The aptitude that backs up the can-do attitude, by allowing you to know / understand the work with little or no effort.
Without attitude / aptitude, you can have your college degree, your briefcase full of certifications, and still work at McDonald's flipping burgers, as that's all you're good for.
*jumping on my soapbox*
Certifications were developed by a marketer.
Someone in marketing thought to themselves, "Hmmmm, how can I make more money for the company?". Then a light-bulb went off - let's create "Certifications", but let's not bother verifying identities of those taking the tests, or whether or not they *reallY* know the materials. As long as they pay us, we'll throw some bullshit material at them, and as long as they memorize what we wrote (regardless of accuracy or applicability to real world configurations), we'll pass them.
Thus the certifcation craze was born.
I have yet to meet a single individual who has been certified in anything who actually knew the actual workings of the material they were certified for.
Don't even get me started into the arguments that I've had when it came to installing systems.
I finally had to get 2 identical systems, with identical software products, and told the individual to do their install their way, and that I'd do mine, my way.
Not only was i done with mine in a fraction of the time it took the *CERTIFIED* individual to set it up, mine was the only one that worked. Our network security group wouldn't even allow the other box onto our network because it was full of security holes.
I personally am 100% self taught, over a 20 year period. Information that I haven't used in years, still sits ready, and available for use. Mostly because I learned it (and most everything else) the hard way. Once you've learned something that way, it doesn't just go away.
*standing down*
Remember folks, the higher up the management chain you go, the more brain cells you have to be willing to sacrifice. Don't you dare appear to be more intelligent than your boss.
WoW - your ability to become confused amazes me.
None of the car *formats* are incompatible. They all use the same *media*.
They can all drive on blacktop, gravel, even dirt roads.
Some vehicles have the ability to traverse areas not covered in roads, but still maintain the *compatibility* to travel along the standard media shared by all road based vehicles.
So while I can sort of see where you were headed with your pathetic attempt at a witty retort, I also can see that you utterly failed to reach your destination.