They didn't follow procedure, that's a command issue - reprimand those in charge, correct the procedure, move forward.
What? So if police suddenly started outright lying during criminal proceedings, you'd call that a command issue that needs a reprimand?
I'm sorry, but falsifying data used for criminal convictions is essentially perjury. Because stuff being used in court was based on a lie.
I can totally see why the GP is pissed... as much as we often see examples to the contrary, if you can't trust your police to act within the bounds of the law, then you're screwed.
Faking your test results in this case goes beyond just fraud and not following procedure.
I hope nothing like that happens where you work, I don't think you could handle it.
I've spent a fair few years working in regulated industries. If you side step the controls, there are potential legal consequences as you have to attest that you did all of the required steps.
If you did that in any of those industries, your ass would be fired, and quite possibly wind up in court. Depending on what it was, you could end up in jail. Would you want your airline mechanic to just simply say "oh, sure, I checked it for cracks"?
When the police start lying, cheating, and otherwise bending the rules, shit goes wrong really fast. It's hard not to see this as a criminal act.
This is fraud: A police officer accepted a paycheck for work and services he did not perform. That's fraud, and the officer should be relieved of duty and terminated from employment.
Not just that, it could effectively be perjury.
I'm sure that somewhere in that paperwork it basically says "I swear that these test results are accurate according to the prescribed tests".
At a certain point, sworn, legal testimony hinges on those tests. In this case, that was a bold-faced lie.
I should think a good number of defense lawyers are basically preparing a motion to overturn or whatever else they can think of on the basis that there is no credible evidence anymore.
Though, somehow I'm skeptical that this will be prosecuted like it ought to be.
I'm sure I've seen this before. Ahh, yes here it is, almost two years ago.
I guess not the exact same thing, since the last story didn't explicitly mention Donkey Kong... but certainly the NP-hard part has been discussed for a while.
Is it OCD if your email client checks your POP server every 10 minutes?
No, but recording it for statistical purposes, knowing the number of steps you took in a day, and having a count of your keystrokes? Well, then you might be getting into the OCD realm of things.
Of course, he's a mathematician, so it's not like OCD is a liability... you're supposed to have a little I gather.;-)
He presents visualizations of the times and frequency of a third of a million emails since 1989, 100 million keystrokes since 2002, phone calls, meetings, modification times on his personal files, and even the number of footsteps he takes in a day.
OCD much? Seriously, who keeps track of this kind of stuff?
Anyway, the preliminary reviews of the new version sound promising so I am at least a little hopeful. I am still quite frustrated, however, that I've had to deal with such awful software for well over a year on a brand new vehicle that cost almost $40k.
That, unfortunately, is a problem with being an early adopter.
This strikes me as the kind of stuff you wait for version 3 before you buy it. Because if this is essentially a rewrite, it's likely still a Steaming Heap of Innovative Technology with an entirely new set of bugs.
Pfst....Not if you know what you're doing. Back in my day we didn't have that fancy vt100 and we liked it.
Maybe we're using the term "console" differently... I guess I simply meant a command prompt. But, I guess that's probably technically incorrect.
My first year of university I had to use a line editor over a 300 baud modem... which was remarkably not much different than a VT-52 at 1200 baud which you'd get in the labs.:-P
However, I still love to see some poor schmuck that needs Emacs with all of their add-on modes to be able to do anything. I once watched a co-worker stuck in front of an old Sun workstation who simply could not use vi, there was no emacs, and he wasn't allowed to install it.
Nobody is protesting the fact that the future's model will probably be digital purchases stored in the cloud and accessed anywhere.
I'm not protesting it... but I'm not going there until I have no other choice.
I want my media contained on my machine, and in a way that doesn't require an internet connection or make it possible for someone to decide that I've "unbought" it.
I'm not paying my ISP for the bandwidth to download something I already have... I for one will not be putting anything into the cloud, because you basically lose control over it.
Their "position" is irrelevant. The law says otherwise.
For now.
Don't forget, due to lobbying pressures by the *AAs, some countries are moving to make it a criminal act to circumvent any form of copyright encryption.
And, game manufacturers are trying to establish that a video game is a "service" not a "good" so they can yank it out from underneath you anytime they like.
They are trying very hard (and succeeding to a certain extent) in convincing lawmakers that the current laws are inadequate to maintain their desired level of revenue.
They don't care about what's legal now, they want to make it all illegal... and then make sure everything you do can be monetized so you have to pay for every time you watch (and for every person watching). Hell, Sony would be the first company to argue against what they argued for with the early Beta VCRs... that you don't have the right to record for personal use to watch later.
Think of the whole HDMI spec being required to implement HDCP -- I know people who bought HDTVs 10+ years ago that can't actually get an HD image anymore because the TV isn't "allowed" to receive it.
Give it time, it will be made illegal, and they'll probably try to make it retroactive, so that possessing stuff that was ripped before the law is still illegal.
If a cell phone jammer can penetrate into your pacemaker and interfere with it then they need to design them better. Why would a pacemaker be responsive to cell phone frequencies anyway?
It was more of a what-if scenario, but given that they have some with internet monitoring, it's not outside the realm of conceivable that jamming could have consequences beyond just phones.
All I'm saying is one should know the ramifications of this before just deciding that restaurants and theaters should begin deploying these.
You may well be right, and it's no danger... but I'm far from the first person to wonder if this could cause problems for other devices.
My proposal for movie theaters and restaurants. By default, these facilities should have cell phone jamming technology enabled with a clear sign stating as such.
My biggest fear of this would be interfering with some implanted medical devices.
Make some poor bastards pacemaker stop working, and you're gonna be in for a world of hurt when the lawyers show up.
I think the unintended consequences of this needs to be better understood before we just go deploying these things around to make people stop using their phones.
Of course, in a movie theatre the MPAA will probably argue that it could be used to record some of the movie and therefore their rights take precedence and you can't come to a movie with a pacemaker. But, again, I can't see an entire group of people being told they're not allowed to go see a movie is going to be well received either.
filing patent now for version that uses standard measurement on the ruler instead of metric.
Yeah, because gallons per furlong is a useful measurement.
What you call 'standard' measurement, the rest of us see as mostly a random collection of measures based on fairly arbitrary things. Hogsheads, firkins, furlongs, leagues, cubits, gills, rods, and other random old school things really make no sense to most of us. The dick-length of the 3rd Earl of Canterbury is kind of a stupid measure (ok, it's not a real one, but it's not that far off the mark).
Granted, I grew up during the transition to metric... so my height and weight is feet and pounds, but pretty much everything is metric.
They were obligated by law to remove the image. Asking the uploader first would have put them at jeopardy of losing safe harbor protections allowed for in the DMCA. I.E. they could then have been sued.
Which is why the DMCA is fundamentally flawed... it requires no proof, merely an assertion on official sounding letter head.
It gives far too much power to the people claiming to be the rights holders, and has little or no controls to make sure the process isn't abused.
It's a classic example of idiot lawmakers who don't really understand the technology they're passing laws about.
Does it mean its legal to pirate music on iPods because the copyright lobby is getting paid for the sale of the item because it could be used for piracy? Like their blank CD tax...
Again, another case of them wanting to have their cake and eat it too.
They want the tax, er, levy... and they want to make sure any form of copying is also illegal.
They're talking about making it a criminal offense to break any form of digital lock, for any reason. So, my old copy of DVD Decryptor is now a WMD. So much for fait use and some of our other rights.
Talk about the apparent obliteration of citizens rights.... I thought the US was starting to turn to the darkside, but Canada is working hard eh?
Sadly, this is likely coming from American groups applying pressure. There seems to be a lot of lobbying by foreign organizations on this front.
The copyright lobby won't be happy until they've managed to make sure that the internet can only function according to their rules. And they want everyone else to pay for it.
In this case, the site SHOULD have been shut down, because they have evidence they were taking US customers.
So what? I can shop from Amazon.com instead of Amazon.ca... I've bought stuff from Japan and Europe over the internet as well. If I buy something illegal, my government can charge me, but charging the vendor with breaking Canadian laws would be absurd.
So why does the fact that Americans don't want their citizens gambling place any legal obligations on a company not operating in the US?
But there are CHANNELS for taking the sites down through CANADIAN law
The site it perfectly legal according to Canadian law. So why on Earth do you believe there would be a way for it to be shut down by using Canadian law?
This is a case of someone saying "waaah, you didn't stop our citizens from doing something we didn't want them to".
Should it be possible for, say, Iran to shut down a US web site because it didn't prevent Iranian citizens from accessing something it deems illegal? Of course not, because Iran are the "bad guys".
If you don't see this as the US applying their laws to external entities, you're missing the entire point. Because the business was operating legally within Canada. If the Americans want to be sure their citizens can't access sites on the rest of the internet... well, then I suggest implementing the Great American Firewall, and give up the pretense that you're in favor of freedom. It's not up to other countries to implement your laws.
Newsflash - a company registered outside the US and not doing business in the US is not bound by ANY type of US law, federal or otherwise. Perhaps someone should remind the US authorities that they don't run the world just yet.
Apparently if it's.com,.biz,.net, and a bunch of other common TLDs they do.
It does highlight a little hypocrisy, because when other countries mess with the internet the US is the first to say the internet should be free so it can foster the things they believe in.
Slashdot Mirror
What? So if police suddenly started outright lying during criminal proceedings, you'd call that a command issue that needs a reprimand?
I'm sorry, but falsifying data used for criminal convictions is essentially perjury. Because stuff being used in court was based on a lie.
I can totally see why the GP is pissed ... as much as we often see examples to the contrary, if you can't trust your police to act within the bounds of the law, then you're screwed.
Faking your test results in this case goes beyond just fraud and not following procedure.
I've spent a fair few years working in regulated industries. If you side step the controls, there are potential legal consequences as you have to attest that you did all of the required steps.
If you did that in any of those industries, your ass would be fired, and quite possibly wind up in court. Depending on what it was, you could end up in jail. Would you want your airline mechanic to just simply say "oh, sure, I checked it for cracks"?
When the police start lying, cheating, and otherwise bending the rules, shit goes wrong really fast. It's hard not to see this as a criminal act.
Not just that, it could effectively be perjury.
I'm sure that somewhere in that paperwork it basically says "I swear that these test results are accurate according to the prescribed tests".
At a certain point, sworn, legal testimony hinges on those tests. In this case, that was a bold-faced lie.
I should think a good number of defense lawyers are basically preparing a motion to overturn or whatever else they can think of on the basis that there is no credible evidence anymore.
Though, somehow I'm skeptical that this will be prosecuted like it ought to be.
I'm sure I've seen this before. Ahh, yes here it is, almost two years ago.
I guess not the exact same thing, since the last story didn't explicitly mention Donkey Kong ... but certainly the NP-hard part has been discussed for a while.
No, but recording it for statistical purposes, knowing the number of steps you took in a day, and having a count of your keystrokes? Well, then you might be getting into the OCD realm of things.
Of course, he's a mathematician, so it's not like OCD is a liability ... you're supposed to have a little I gather. ;-)
OCD much? Seriously, who keeps track of this kind of stuff?
Yes, now if you want to get modded up for bashing anybody, it's gotta be Apple or Sony. Everyone seems to have forgiven Microsoft.
That, unfortunately, is a problem with being an early adopter.
This strikes me as the kind of stuff you wait for version 3 before you buy it. Because if this is essentially a rewrite, it's likely still a Steaming Heap of Innovative Technology with an entirely new set of bugs.
OK, I admit I have zero experience with fighting fires on ships ... But wouldn't you want a larger battery life in case it's a stubborn fire?
I would think the last thing you'd want is all of the robots winding down just before the fire is out.
Well, I get sea-sick, have a slight phobia of parrots, and I'm not surrendering the booty under any circumstances. But I'll keep you in mind.
The wenches, rum and singing sound fun, however, as do the cool hats.
Maybe we're using the term "console" differently ... I guess I simply meant a command prompt. But, I guess that's probably technically incorrect.
My first year of university I had to use a line editor over a 300 baud modem ... which was remarkably not much different than a VT-52 at 1200 baud which you'd get in the labs. :-P
However, I still love to see some poor schmuck that needs Emacs with all of their add-on modes to be able to do anything. I once watched a co-worker stuck in front of an old Sun workstation who simply could not use vi, there was no emacs, and he wasn't allowed to install it.
Boy, did I laugh at him ... good times. :-P
I'm not protesting it ... but I'm not going there until I have no other choice.
I want my media contained on my machine, and in a way that doesn't require an internet connection or make it possible for someone to decide that I've "unbought" it.
I'm not paying my ISP for the bandwidth to download something I already have ... I for one will not be putting anything into the cloud, because you basically lose control over it.
For now.
Don't forget, due to lobbying pressures by the *AAs, some countries are moving to make it a criminal act to circumvent any form of copyright encryption.
And, game manufacturers are trying to establish that a video game is a "service" not a "good" so they can yank it out from underneath you anytime they like.
They are trying very hard (and succeeding to a certain extent) in convincing lawmakers that the current laws are inadequate to maintain their desired level of revenue.
They don't care about what's legal now, they want to make it all illegal ... and then make sure everything you do can be monetized so you have to pay for every time you watch (and for every person watching). Hell, Sony would be the first company to argue against what they argued for with the early Beta VCRs ... that you don't have the right to record for personal use to watch later.
Think of the whole HDMI spec being required to implement HDCP -- I know people who bought HDTVs 10+ years ago that can't actually get an HD image anymore because the TV isn't "allowed" to receive it.
Give it time, it will be made illegal, and they'll probably try to make it retroactive, so that possessing stuff that was ripped before the law is still illegal.
And, for the record, I hope to hell I'm wrong.
Bah, real vi doesn't use X ... it just requires a console.
You guys and your "almost vi" with your namby pamby file menus and clicky buttons.
Well, according to this, 1 football field is 0.4545445 furlongs, or 1 furlong is 2.2000044 football fields.
Happy? :-P
It was more of a what-if scenario, but given that they have some with internet monitoring, it's not outside the realm of conceivable that jamming could have consequences beyond just phones.
All I'm saying is one should know the ramifications of this before just deciding that restaurants and theaters should begin deploying these.
You may well be right, and it's no danger ... but I'm far from the first person to wonder if this could cause problems for other devices.
My biggest fear of this would be interfering with some implanted medical devices.
Make some poor bastards pacemaker stop working, and you're gonna be in for a world of hurt when the lawyers show up.
I think the unintended consequences of this needs to be better understood before we just go deploying these things around to make people stop using their phones.
Of course, in a movie theatre the MPAA will probably argue that it could be used to record some of the movie and therefore their rights take precedence and you can't come to a movie with a pacemaker. But, again, I can't see an entire group of people being told they're not allowed to go see a movie is going to be well received either.
Yeah, because gallons per furlong is a useful measurement.
What you call 'standard' measurement, the rest of us see as mostly a random collection of measures based on fairly arbitrary things. Hogsheads, firkins, furlongs, leagues, cubits, gills, rods, and other random old school things really make no sense to most of us. The dick-length of the 3rd Earl of Canterbury is kind of a stupid measure (ok, it's not a real one, but it's not that far off the mark).
Granted, I grew up during the transition to metric ... so my height and weight is feet and pounds, but pretty much everything is metric.
Which is why the DMCA is fundamentally flawed ... it requires no proof, merely an assertion on official sounding letter head.
It gives far too much power to the people claiming to be the rights holders, and has little or no controls to make sure the process isn't abused.
It's a classic example of idiot lawmakers who don't really understand the technology they're passing laws about.
Haven't you noticed the spread of the evil Starbucks?
It'll be biscotti and triple-foam low-fat chai latte with cinnamon sprinkles before long. :-P
Again, another case of them wanting to have their cake and eat it too.
They want the tax, er, levy ... and they want to make sure any form of copying is also illegal.
They're talking about making it a criminal offense to break any form of digital lock, for any reason. So, my old copy of DVD Decryptor is now a WMD. So much for fait use and some of our other rights.
Sadly, this is likely coming from American groups applying pressure. There seems to be a lot of lobbying by foreign organizations on this front.
The copyright lobby won't be happy until they've managed to make sure that the internet can only function according to their rules. And they want everyone else to pay for it.
Fucking parasites.
Well, then I might just have to remind them of who controls the pipe for the last part of their business model.
I don't game on-line, so disconnecting my XBox from the internet won't hurt my feelings, and they can no longer sell ads on my console.
It also comes with the benefit that I could choose to mod my XBox now.
So what? I can shop from Amazon.com instead of Amazon.ca ... I've bought stuff from Japan and Europe over the internet as well. If I buy something illegal, my government can charge me, but charging the vendor with breaking Canadian laws would be absurd.
So why does the fact that Americans don't want their citizens gambling place any legal obligations on a company not operating in the US?
The site it perfectly legal according to Canadian law. So why on Earth do you believe there would be a way for it to be shut down by using Canadian law?
This is a case of someone saying "waaah, you didn't stop our citizens from doing something we didn't want them to".
Should it be possible for, say, Iran to shut down a US web site because it didn't prevent Iranian citizens from accessing something it deems illegal? Of course not, because Iran are the "bad guys".
If you don't see this as the US applying their laws to external entities, you're missing the entire point. Because the business was operating legally within Canada. If the Americans want to be sure their citizens can't access sites on the rest of the internet ... well, then I suggest implementing the Great American Firewall, and give up the pretense that you're in favor of freedom. It's not up to other countries to implement your laws.
Apparently if it's .com, .biz, .net, and a bunch of other common TLDs they do.
It does highlight a little hypocrisy, because when other countries mess with the internet the US is the first to say the internet should be free so it can foster the things they believe in.
Just don't have a gambling site.
Bravo, sir!