If you're going to chug hot cofee you deserve to get your stomach burned. If you don't understand how coffee works you're really not qualified to participate in this discussion.
You sip it, slowly. You don't chug the whole cup in 2 seconds and you don't pour it down your pants. It's that simple.
Of course his client was being accused of deliberately maiming their customers in order to save money on coffee, when they were simply following industry guidelines of making and serving coffee.
all that happened as a result of this lawsuit is that restuarants take greater care in not having their heating pads for their coffee turned up to rediculously high levels.
Yeah it's ridiculous, we have to endure coffee that's too cold to drink because the restaurant has to serve it at a temperature that's appropriate for pouring down your pants rather than drinking.
People, for the record, Coffee is made with boiling or near boiling water. Depending on whether it is kept warm or how much time has passed since it was brewed it could be anywhere up to that temperature. I can't believe so many people keep spouting this line about it would burn you if you drank it at that temp. etc. If you routinely buy a cup of coffee and pour the thing straight down your throat without any caution then expect to be burned. Likewise for pouring the entire cup into you lap.
I believe that she also removed the lid - it's nearly impossible to grip a styrofoam or paper cup between your legs with the lid off without spilling on yourself.
The burns from the coffee are to entirely to be expected if your pour HOT coffee into your lap. Now nobody in the country can get a hot cup of coffee because of this stupid case. I keep hearing how the coffee was unexpectedly hot - this is such crap - coffee is made by passing BOILING water through the grounds. Boiling water is hot.
And like Linus said that is a stupid point of view. Nobody is violating the copyright of the Kernel developers by seperately distibuting a binary module that happens to load into that kernel. Even if the kernel were only licensed commercially and not under the GPL, the copyright holder would still have no rights to tell you what modules you could load. The GPL was written to give you more rights that you have under normal copyright and not less.
The stats are rising because it's only *very* recently that victims have felt able to report the violations without them being stigmatized by society. The rising stats are a positive sign that crimes are being reported and prosecuted and not that more people are being victimized than before.
First let me say that judges do make bad decisions.
Second, when the idea of judges was invented it was believed that they do know better than everybody else because a) they are usually trained in the law and have experience in legal practice and b) they have to sit through the whole trial rather than listening to the little bits Nancy Grace chooses to play for you.
For the record the USA already passed basically this law some years ago.
It failed in the Supreme Court on the basis that making a movie or play of Romeo & Juliet would be a felony and that in any case it was trying to prevent a thought crime.
I talked to sprint one day about the fact I was charged for roaming while in Helena, Montana. They're response was that they have no home network coverage anywhere in Montana. So I asked why it was described as a nationwide network, the said "well it works on both coasts".
Doesn't work for me. The purpose of the law (in the USA anyway) is to stop the government from performing illegal searches, if the government can still use illegally obtained evidence then there's no incentive to obey the law.
I'm not sure about the quality of the circumstantial evidence yet... there's a world of difference between "couldn't rule out Mrs Reiser as the donor of the blood spatter" and saying that it's actually her blood.
Sanctions are so rare it's ridiculous. The only person I've ever heard of being penalized for perjury in a civil case is Bill Clinton... oh and Jeffrey Archer (you'll probably have to look that one up). Even at the criminal level it's rare that lawyers get any kind of punishment for lying in court.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're going to chug hot cofee you deserve to get your stomach burned. If you don't understand how coffee works you're really not qualified to participate in this discussion.
You sip it, slowly. You don't chug the whole cup in 2 seconds and you don't pour it down your pants. It's that simple.
Of course his client was being accused of deliberately maiming their customers in order to save money on coffee, when they were simply following industry guidelines of making and serving coffee.
all that happened as a result of this lawsuit is that restuarants take greater care in not having their heating pads for their coffee turned up to rediculously high levels.
Yeah it's ridiculous, we have to endure coffee that's too cold to drink because the restaurant has to serve it at a temperature that's appropriate for pouring down your pants rather than drinking.
OMG ..... A Known dangerous temperature ?
People, for the record, Coffee is made with boiling or near boiling water. Depending on whether it is kept warm or how much time has passed since it was brewed it could be anywhere up to that temperature. I can't believe so many people keep spouting this line about it would burn you if you drank it at that temp. etc. If you routinely buy a cup of coffee and pour the thing straight down your throat without any caution then expect to be burned. Likewise for pouring the entire cup into you lap.
I believe that she also removed the lid - it's nearly impossible to grip a styrofoam or paper cup between your legs with the lid off without spilling on yourself.
If you want lukewarm coffee, that's your own problem.
What next you want to sue the maker of grits becuase you burnt yourself pouring them down your pants ?
The burns from the coffee are to entirely to be expected if your pour HOT coffee into your lap. Now nobody in the country can get a hot cup of coffee because of this stupid case. I keep hearing how the coffee was unexpectedly hot - this is such crap - coffee is made by passing BOILING water through the grounds. Boiling water is hot.
Not 1.21GW ?
So there are at least two issues here. One is legislating morality. Lots of people in power like to do that. It's not justified.
The bulk of criminal law is about legislating morality. Its about punishing behavior that society doesn't approve of : murder, robbery, rape etc.
Otherwise I agree. The creation of "gateway" crimes, x leads to y so we must ban x, is dumb.
Usermode drivers may not be able to bluescreen, but the kernel layers that give your driver access to the hardware can still bluescreen :-)
And like Linus said that is a stupid point of view. Nobody is violating the copyright of the Kernel developers by seperately distibuting a binary module that happens to load into that kernel. Even if the kernel were only licensed commercially and not under the GPL, the copyright holder would still have no rights to tell you what modules you could load. The GPL was written to give you more rights that you have under normal copyright and not less.
and I blew it by replying to the quote rather than the original post.
The stats are rising because it's only *very* recently that victims have felt able to report the violations without them being stigmatized by society. The rising stats are a positive sign that crimes are being reported and prosecuted and not that more people are being victimized than before.
First let me say that judges do make bad decisions.
Second, when the idea of judges was invented it was believed that they do know better than everybody else because a) they are usually trained in the law and have experience in legal practice and b) they have to sit through the whole trial rather than listening to the little bits Nancy Grace chooses to play for you.
bizarre. I always thought it was understood that honors were handed out according to how much money you gave to the right politician.
For the record the USA already passed basically this law some years ago.
It failed in the Supreme Court on the basis that making a movie or play of Romeo & Juliet would be a felony and that in any case it was trying to prevent a thought crime.
Not taking sides here ... but stories about how the universe came into being are all about as good as each other, for example the scientific version :
"In the beginning there was nothing, which then exploded for some reason"
Ok - I borrowed this from Terry Prathchett - but he has a point.
wait, isn't incest a sin?
So was sex if you take the story literally.
I don't know, did they ? : Rearing cattle produces more greenhouse gases than driving cars, UN report warns. Note the un.org domain in my link.
Exactly ... why even do the search. Just stuff some "evidence" in a bag and claim you found it during an illegal search of somebody's house.
Both sources were quoting a UN study ... is the entire "Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change" biased against science too ?
Nationwide ... is a bit of a joke really.
I talked to sprint one day about the fact I was charged for roaming while in Helena, Montana. They're response was that they have no home network coverage anywhere in Montana. So I asked why it was described as a nationwide network, the said "well it works on both coasts".
Doesn't work for me. The purpose of the law (in the USA anyway) is to stop the government from performing illegal searches, if the government can still use illegally obtained evidence then there's no incentive to obey the law.
I'm not sure about the quality of the circumstantial evidence yet ... there's a world of difference between "couldn't rule out Mrs Reiser as the donor of the blood spatter" and saying that it's actually her blood.
Sanctions are so rare it's ridiculous. The only person I've ever heard of being penalized for perjury in a civil case is Bill Clinton ... oh and Jeffrey Archer (you'll probably have to look that one up). Even at the criminal level it's rare that lawyers get any kind of punishment for lying in court.