(IAAL. This is how thing work on paper, how they are supposed to work according to the law. In practice, ymmv)
In Brazil, copyright infringement is a crime. Actually, a set of crimes. The smaller one being a simple copyright violation, which carries a penalty of 3 month up to 1 year jail, or a fine. The bigger one carrying a penalty of 2 to 4 years jail.
Once the part if found guilty, the holder of the copyright can sue him in civil court of ACTUAL damages. And although the existence of the damage is already establish in the criminal court, the extent still have to be proven on civil court. And that damage is limited to restitution. There are no punitive damages, since there is already a criminal conviction. Also, in the Brazilian legal system there is a rule that forbids enrichment without a cause. That also helps limit the extent of the civil indemnity.
This limitation on "enrichment without a cause" is quite interesting, actually. It means that punitive damages must never be a source of money for the autor of the suit. In a cause like the famous McDonald's "hot coffee", those $3mil punitive damages would not go do the consumer that got burned. Instead, it would go to a non-profit of some kind, probably one that fights for consumer rights. The consumer herself would only get actual damages (material and moral damages), probably in the order of $50 grand.
CentOS is nothing more than a free version of RedHat. So, as far as "popularity" goes, they should be counted together. Just like one is bundling up different versions of the same distribution.
That would give us: RedHat EL (+CentOS) = 33.34% Slackware = 22.40%
PS: Oracle could also be grouped with RedHat and CentOS, but no one care because no one uses it anyway:) PS2: Considering the very low total number of votes (366) and the different in votes between CentOS and Slackware, statistically speaking, even if you disconsider RHEL, those two are tied in at 80 and 82 votes each.
That would be an average of aprox. 1% on the low sedentary time/low sedentary bolt end, and about 5% on the high sedentary time/low sedentary bolt end. (Legend: Adjusted cumulative mortality according to joint associations of total sedentary time and prolonged, uninterrupted sedentary bouts).
There paper is much more complete, and is available at DOI: 10.7326/M17-0212 (http://annals.org/aim/article/2653704/patterns-sedentary-behavior-mortality-u-s-middle-a).
Regardless, the paper is absolutely worth reading.
(...) even people who have done nothing wrong (...). And anybody who has done something wrong should (...)
The problem is that everyone has some something wrong. There is some kind of law, statute or rule that you broke... or didn't follow strictly. This day and age there are so many rule, such broad law, that everyone had some something. Even if it as minor as jaywalking. Or driving over the speed limit for a couple minutes. Or parking a little too far from the sidewalk. Or something else completely different that in a given place is a misdemeanor.
I'm not screaming "evil big government here". I'm actually a law student and an intern in a attorney office. We all break some law several times every day. But these are such minor things that the legal system simply don't care. Maybe it is not a criminal law, but only enough for a civil lawsuit. But we are still breaking the rules.
In the eyes of the law, no one is 100% guiltless, even if they are innocent.
This is one of the problems why the legal system doesn't work. We punish too many things, so we punish badly. And, in that scenario, when the policing forces (local, state or federal) get increased powers and broader mandates, they get carte blanche to so pretty much what they want to anyone they want. After all, everyone is guilty of something.
Since when is 30 in 100 equal to 1 in 2, as the headline suggests? In addition to their other shortcomings, are/. editors like BeauHD incapable of using a calculator, if their math skills are so abysmal?
That's because 30% of the time, they will switch every time.
You are right. If only people would invent a way to use celulars outside the data plan. I think I'll work on it. I even have a name already. I'll call it WiFi.
Brazil wants information that they can't legally get.
Actually, they CAN legally have (I can provide you with the relevant laws, if you want). However, they can't TECHNICALLY have. And thus, the judge, in a sadly usual display of technological ignorance, wants to force a square peg into a round hole.
As all other times before this, this decisions will soon be overthrown.
A recent web petition revealed that a large majority of US citizens want Muslim immigration stopped.
I find it hard to believe that the majority (50%+1) of US citizens even participated on the petition, let along the vast majority.
And if it wasn't the vast majority actually participating, then you fall into statistics. And statistics require methodology. What was the methodology for the sampling? What was the error margin? Standard deviation?
No wonder you are posting anonymously. You are a moron.
Then said citizen, besides being a coward that won't name himself, is also a moron. Giving the state arbitrary powers is much more damaging than any politician can do in his lifetime.
You should now stop watching "Cidade Alerta" and such "quality" program on TV and maybe read a little bit on WHY we have due process of law and constitutional guarantees, because you put your foot deeper inside your mouth.
You are correct. Instead of "Due Process of Law", it is called "Devido Processo Legal", specifically stated in the 1988 Constitution, article 5, LIV, among others. If you want, I can cite specific articles from the process law (Código de Processo Penal) that are also applicable.
It is data for an specific users, based on specified phone number, relating to an on going criminal case. This is not a police investigation, but a court order, so there is at least enough evidence that there is a crime and who committed it to to warrant a criminal prosecution.
According to Brazilian law, law enforcement agencies can not request this kind of information without a court order and, to get that order, they have to show "just case", meaning evidence of authorship and materiality (that a crime really happened).
I don't agree with the prison order, which was disproportionate. But the request for data was legal and legitimate. Facebook is hiding behind the "the servers are not physically located in Brazil, so we don't have to comply" argument.
Codeweavers has a very strong business focus, and most of the innovations are based on client requests. You can rest assured that, if they developed it, they already have a client willing to pay for it. Jeremy White is no fool.
Yeah, doesn't this require that all software that supports the format needs to be released as GPLv3 as well?
Who's bright idea was that?
The reference implementation is under GPLv3. Everyone is of course still free to create their own implementation and license it under whichever license they want.
Isn't that exactly the kind of thing that free software was supposed to avoid? Having to reinvent the wheel because some nitwit had it locked on copyright?
Slashdot Mirror
(IAAL. This is how thing work on paper, how they are supposed to work according to the law. In practice, ymmv)
In Brazil, copyright infringement is a crime. Actually, a set of crimes. The smaller one being a simple copyright violation, which carries a penalty of 3 month up to 1 year jail, or a fine. The bigger one carrying a penalty of 2 to 4 years jail.
Once the part if found guilty, the holder of the copyright can sue him in civil court of ACTUAL damages. And although the existence of the damage is already establish in the criminal court, the extent still have to be proven on civil court. And that damage is limited to restitution. There are no punitive damages, since there is already a criminal conviction. Also, in the Brazilian legal system there is a rule that forbids enrichment without a cause. That also helps limit the extent of the civil indemnity.
This limitation on "enrichment without a cause" is quite interesting, actually. It means that punitive damages must never be a source of money for the autor of the suit. In a cause like the famous McDonald's "hot coffee", those $3mil punitive damages would not go do the consumer that got burned. Instead, it would go to a non-profit of some kind, probably one that fights for consumer rights. The consumer herself would only get actual damages (material and moral damages), probably in the order of $50 grand.
This all is to stop "get rich" lawsuits.
So unless there's time travel involved or something.... :-D
I wouldn't put it past them. Sneaky bastards. :D lol
I see coincidence, at the very most. No correlations was demonstrated.
http://www.tylervigen.com/spur...
"Garbage in, garbage out" still applies.
I can vouch for that. I've been scrutinizing porn for years now. ðY
CentOS is nothing more than a free version of RedHat. So, as far as "popularity" goes, they should be counted together. Just like one is bundling up different versions of the same distribution.
That would give us:
RedHat EL (+CentOS) = 33.34%
Slackware = 22.40%
PS: Oracle could also be grouped with RedHat and CentOS, but no one care because no one uses it anyway :)
PS2: Considering the very low total number of votes (366) and the different in votes between CentOS and Slackware, statistically speaking, even if you disconsider RHEL, those two are tied in at 80 and 82 votes each.
Except that when they die, the carbon is put back in the ground, not in the air. Which is fine.
You do know we are not CREATING new carbon, don't you?
Everyone thinks they are an above average driver.
That would be an average of aprox. 1% on the low sedentary time/low sedentary bolt end, and about 5% on the high sedentary time/low sedentary bolt end. (Legend: Adjusted cumulative mortality according to joint associations of total sedentary time and prolonged, uninterrupted sedentary bouts).
There paper is much more complete, and is available at DOI: 10.7326/M17-0212 (http://annals.org/aim/article/2653704/patterns-sedentary-behavior-mortality-u-s-middle-a).
Regardless, the paper is absolutely worth reading.
(...) even people who have done nothing wrong (...). And anybody who has done something wrong should (...)
The problem is that everyone has some something wrong. There is some kind of law, statute or rule that you broke... or didn't follow strictly.
This day and age there are so many rule, such broad law, that everyone had some something. Even if it as minor as jaywalking. Or driving over the speed limit for a couple minutes. Or parking a little too far from the sidewalk. Or something else completely different that in a given place is a misdemeanor.
I'm not screaming "evil big government here". I'm actually a law student and an intern in a attorney office. We all break some law several times every day. But these are such minor things that the legal system simply don't care. Maybe it is not a criminal law, but only enough for a civil lawsuit. But we are still breaking the rules.
In the eyes of the law, no one is 100% guiltless, even if they are innocent.
This is one of the problems why the legal system doesn't work. We punish too many things, so we punish badly. And, in that scenario, when the policing forces (local, state or federal) get increased powers and broader mandates, they get carte blanche to so pretty much what they want to anyone they want. After all, everyone is guilty of something.
Things are only getting scarier.
Since when is 30 in 100 equal to 1 in 2, as the headline suggests? In addition to their other shortcomings, are /. editors like BeauHD incapable of using a calculator, if their math skills are so abysmal?
That's because 30% of the time, they will switch every time.
You are right. If only people would invent a way to use celulars outside the data plan.
I think I'll work on it. I even have a name already. I'll call it WiFi.
High priority emails are those with a Priority:urgent header.
Except that most antispam software treats that as a clue it's not really high priority, but spam.
You can start here:
http://grupocienciascriminais....
And then go from there. There is even the number of the investigation.
Your guess is wrong.
The legal documents are available for your perusal, so you don't have to guess.
Be my guest.
Brazil wants information that they can't legally get.
Actually, they CAN legally have (I can provide you with the relevant laws, if you want).
However, they can't TECHNICALLY have. And thus, the judge, in a sadly usual display of technological ignorance, wants to force a square peg into a round hole.
As all other times before this, this decisions will soon be overthrown.
A recent web petition revealed that a large majority of US citizens want Muslim immigration stopped.
I find it hard to believe that the majority (50%+1) of US citizens even participated on the petition, let along the vast majority.
And if it wasn't the vast majority actually participating, then you fall into statistics. And statistics require methodology. What was the methodology for the sampling? What was the error margin? Standard deviation?
No wonder you are posting anonymously. You are a moron.
it is discovered there are people who give a rat's ass about what it trending and, even more impressively, think that Facebook is a news platform.
Then said citizen, besides being a coward that won't name himself, is also a moron.
Giving the state arbitrary powers is much more damaging than any politician can do in his lifetime.
You should now stop watching "Cidade Alerta" and such "quality" program on TV and maybe read a little bit on WHY we have due process of law and constitutional guarantees, because you put your foot deeper inside your mouth.
This is Brazil, not the US.
You are correct. Instead of "Due Process of Law", it is called "Devido Processo Legal", specifically stated in the 1988 Constitution, article 5, LIV, among others.
If you want, I can cite specific articles from the process law (Código de Processo Penal) that are also applicable.
It is data for an specific users, based on specified phone number, relating to an on going criminal case.
This is not a police investigation, but a court order, so there is at least enough evidence that there is a crime and who committed it to to warrant a criminal prosecution.
According to Brazilian law, law enforcement agencies can not request this kind of information without a court order and, to get that order, they have to show "just case", meaning evidence of authorship and materiality (that a crime really happened).
I don't agree with the prison order, which was disproportionate. But the request for data was legal and legitimate. Facebook is hiding behind the "the servers are not physically located in Brazil, so we don't have to comply" argument.
Codeweavers has a very strong business focus, and most of the innovations are based on client requests.
You can rest assured that, if they developed it, they already have a client willing to pay for it. Jeremy White is no fool.
Not at all. The goal of free software is that users should have freedom.
You haven't read The Cathedral and the Bazaar, have you?
Yeah, doesn't this require that all software that supports the format needs to be released as GPLv3 as well?
Who's bright idea was that?
The reference implementation is under GPLv3. Everyone is of course still free to create their own implementation and license it under whichever license they want.
Isn't that exactly the kind of thing that free software was supposed to avoid? Having to reinvent the wheel because some nitwit had it locked on copyright?
Then why is Linux used to power rendering clusters and supercomputers, and not FreeBSD?