I didn't know you were still so bitter about the last US federal election. My condolences... now get over it. Ahem.
On a more serious note, your post does reflect a textbook case of bitterness: obsessing about some slight that you can take no action on. It can develop into a feedback loop that eventually turns a person into a Unabomber or a Tim McViegh or an Osama bin Laden. Maybe that's the point you were trying to make through irony?
Quite true, but this applies to many physical disorders as well. The pollution in the air affects asthma and lung diseases, the food we eat can bring about diabetes, and so on.
The problem with curing a harmful social environment is that there aren't as many "crunchy bits". You can't measure social relationships like you can inanimate particles. And each problem we solve (after all, European society really has gotten progressively better over history) creates new problems (you may not be subject to torture for heresy or "witchcraft", but you now have to deal with complex and confusing social mores, and with suppressing your own fight-or-flight primitive instincts).
I personally think this is a step in the right direction: chronic bitterness poisons a person's health in many ways, but often it needs outside impulses to break the feedback loop. I'm just cautious as to what the proposed treatment is, since there are so many causes for bitterness.
Relax, I was just trying to turn a troll into a funny. In all honesty I'm of the camp that thinks the OS should be as unobtrusive as possible, meaning it's never used. It's just there and gets out of your way so that you can work (or play games).
Of course, I could also remind you that calling Vista the best OS you've seen out of Microsoft is damning with faint praise...
It's the old chimera of "secret teachings",and impossible to disprove. Give somebody access, and the reaction will be "oh, this is just a ruse to hide the REAL secrets!"
But having secrets not available to the uninitiated is what makes clubs and organisations like the Freemasons so popular: often the secret is merely "the real secret is that we just pretend to have a secret", but it still amazes me how well it works. I even tried it out myself, and there's still a guy out there convinced I know more than I do, and that I am hiding the true teachings of the Illuminati.
The Church of Scientology has been denied church status, and has been under investigation for attempting to overthrow the German constitution. Unlike the US constitution, the German constitution opens with a bill of rights - Article One is "the dignity of a person is inviolate". Since part of the Church of Scientology's tenets is to have its members take control of all secular organisations. That's why they've been investigated for conspiracy against the constitution.
Germany has these sorts of clauses due to a certain organisation back in the 1930's, and they don't want another case of loons coming in and tossing out the rule of law. (There. I've just proven Godwin's law again, that any comment thread will eventually mention Nazis. Are you happy?)
If you're confused, consider it filing a claim against, say, the Archdiocese of Belleville for fraud perpetrated by its Parish of Saint Fnordius. If said parish was stripped of its church status for abusing the privileges, then it would be even easier. This wouldn't even be considered an attack on the religion, but on a "bad apple", an organisation promoting it.
Don't confuse the organisation with the belief. It's the organisation that is denied church status and that is under attack. Anybody else who wishes to spread the belief is free to do so.
That's what's going on in France (and to a lesser degree Germany): the Church of Scientology is considered a for-profit enterprise, and cannot simply call themselves a church. This is mostly a tax issue and an advertising/promotion issue. Were a local parish of an established church to engage in the same behaviour, then that parish would lose its status as a church; the religious belief is not at stake, just the organisation promoting it.
Well yeah. He even says "It's hard to sell a legal DVD when it can be stolen without any repercussions." If the pirates gave away DVDs for free, and Sony charged a reasonable price for DRM-free downloads of new content, then Sony would have a fantastic business model.
It's also easy to see how faulty his logic is. Bootleg copies (I abhor the term "pirated") are often of lower quality but of higher convenience. Sony thinks its right to a monopoly on making copies is where the money is at, but that horse left the barn long ago.
Apple showed that what earns money isn't merely offering the music, but having trustworthy quality. You pretty much know that the song you buy from them has proper metadata and is of high quality. People pay money for trust, and that's what record companies ought to sell: guaranteed quality and an assurance that the artist is paid.
This is why I'd go with a simple hardware choice of giving everybody Mac Books, and letting them use XP/Vista from Boot Camp if they so desire. With only one laptop to worry about and backups, it ought to be easier to swap out equipment should one go bad.
Yes, the Mac Books make good Windows or Linux platforms. The hardware inside is good quality and all standardised, and the new glass trackpads have a clever way of right-clicking (older Apple laptops still had the one-button mouse)
Despite the claim to "no video editing", I would still recommend Apple equipment so that the Final Cut workstations after filming can be integrated into the mesh more smoothly.
No, Apple isn't the best choice for every task, but in a film crew I do believe that choosing a platform that can run all major operating systems is the best choice. At the moment, Apple is the only company that (legally) offers Mac OS, and that limits the choices.
Still, a documentary crew will need to consider other factors, such as battery life and availability of spare parts when overseas. I personally think Apple has a pretty good reputation in these areas, and enough film crews use them that there are already some good workflow solutions out there to ease the setup workload of the IT support guy.
So yeah, I think Apple's the way to go. No low-end "disposable" laptops, but the setup is such that you save time and money in the long run.
I'll give my classic example (still not fixed), in iTunes:
Insert a CD It should "just work" and start ripping the CD, but it doesn't. Look for an error message.. there is none. Search the menus, look for a button, nope, there's no way to actually *tell* iTunes that you want it to rip the CD. etc.
Um, that's a problem I've yet to ever see. iTunes on both Mac OS X and Windows show the CD in the list of media and playlists. Ripping a CD can be done by button, by dragging the CD into a playlist or the library, or even set in the preferences to rip as soon as it is entered into the computer.
I've had similar experiences with wireless.
"Do you have wireless here?" "Sure do." "Umm.. I don't see it." "Well, it's there, it's called NETGEAR." "Yeah, it's not coming up. I'd tell you why, but when I click on the little wifi icon it does nothing."
And that's why I say:
It "just works" until it "just doesn't" and then you're "just fucked".
This is also a problem I haven't come across. I've been able to access every 802.11 router that was within range of my antenna. If the network owner also provides me with a password, I can also connect to WPA and WEP protected routers.
I suspect you are merely quoting anecdotal cases, and have no real day-to-day experience in using Apple hardware.
I know I'm repeating a point I made elsewhere, but I have to point out again that disappointment does not mean failure, just a failure to meet expectations. Ubuntu was hyped as a Windows killer, sure, but that hype never really registered as realistic. I can see it being an honorable mention, but not actually on the list.
Instead, perhaps Linux as a whole ought to have been mentioned and not merely Ubuntu, as the late Nineties saw a sudden surge in belief that Linux was going to take over the entire computing world from mainframes to toaster ovens. Many a Linux fan from that era waited with bated breath, and some still hope for that day yet.
I think you need to remember two things. First, the article is about disappointments, but not failures. Ubuntu is a success, but it failed to live up to the hype that surrounded it when it first appeared. Second, Ubuntu is only an "honourable mention" precisely because the hype wasn't all that widespread. Ubuntu isn't a disappointment as an operating system, far from it; it is merely a disappointment as a Windows killer.
I think that's the thing here: it's not so much the product's end form that makes a disappointment as much as the expectations created before it comes out. Were Ubuntu to arrive on the scene without much preamble, then we would recognise it for the system that it is. As it stands, though, it had to fight off unrealistic expectations for how fast it would be adopted first.
As a side note, I think this is why Steve Jobs tries to keep new products secret, to avoid getting burned like he did with Lisa. Part of the iPod's success lies in how they caught the tech press by surprise.
You know, I think this may be more a condemnation of the business model rather than of the high prices or the piracy. But it begs the question of how the author should be compensated.
In the case of a college-level textbook, the sort that a student must buy himself, I think the author needs to be paid on commission rather than by royalties. The university or some other group representing the professors can then assign grants to authors to write the darn thing, drawing the funds from a pool (either added to tuition or some other "lab fee" style arrangement). Then the book itself is offered for a minimal fee to cover the costs of printing/maintaining a trusted copy on the servers.
I think the main thing is to remember that authors need recognition as well, so that they can sell other books. If their textbooks become popular outside of the classes where they were required reading, then perhaps it can lead to the author getting better deals in the future, or even a chance to write a more mainstream version.
I'm intrigued by the idea of this monument. It seems to turn what was once the landmark of Franconia Notch into a viewing platform to see the valley's natural beauty. And the highway that runs up through it. Er.
The interesting part is putting it in where the original Old Man used to be, and shaping it to resemble the original rock formation. A homage without trying to rebuild, and that makes sense.
My main quibble would be the amount of construction needed. How does the architect plan to get the materials and the machines up there and back out without causing a lot of damage to the environment? How would it be supplied with electricity and sewage? And how the heck do visitors get there? Will the current parking area be converted? And finally, is the view by itself worth it?
I was born in New Hampshire, and so I feel some attachment to the area. If this becomes a monument to the beauty of Franconia Notch without spoiling it, then I am for it. But only if that's the case. We don't need another monument to something that the monument itself paved over.
Considering that T-Mobile has the German contract, O2 has the UK contract, and so on, it's only logical that the other GSM net providers would want in on the deal, the ability to switch the SIM card, and so on.
Come to think of it, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple planned it this way when they chose T-Mobile, O2, Orange and so on. Roaming within Europe is due to become a lot cheaper, so they may have set it up as a way to break the telco's hold much like they turned the tables on the music publishers with the iTunes Music Store...
It shows the heavyhandedness of cops at a certain level - this wasn't done in the interest of gaining evidence or preventing a crime, but for intimidation purposes. I think this was also prompted by economic minister Guttenberg's claim that the cabinet was going to submit a new bill to force all ISP's to blacklist child porn pages. However, this particular incident has backfired, drawing negative publicity.
As for why they don't simply take them down, the reason is because often the pages themselves are "offshore", the domains and servers located in countries where the laws are laxer. And yes, this is simple look-busy activity, as they freely admit that simple tricks can circumvent any filter.
Me, I think it's a bad idea because any filter would be riddled with false positives and other errors. Trying to dam child pornography with filters only addresses the symptom, and doesn't even do a good job at that. Some of the bills I've seen bandied about were even worse, making it possible to convict a person as a sex offender if their computer had been exploited by malware, hosting porn without their knowledge.
To use a bad anolgy (this is Slashdot, after all), it's like trying to filter toxic waste from the Mississippi instead of trying to catch the guy who dumped the waste in it in the first place. Too much emphasis is being placed on the filters, and not enough on cutting out the polluters.
The only other thing I can think of is to tell the individual users that you are busy covering their arses as well, since an audit may cost them all their jobs. And don't let them think it ends there, give them a ray of hope such as "well, we're examining the accounting records as well."
After all, you might get lucky and accounting might have the purchase receipts. Then you can blame it on bad bookkeeping while you untie the Gordian knot.
There is no one reason why it happened, but an entire series of precautions failed. Some of the ones I noticed:
the shooter was depressed or otherwise mentally troubled, but no warnings were noticed. This is the one phase that most people ignore. In fact, there is no real pattern of warning signs, especially when the potential shooter is actively masking them.
the father, not recognising the above, gave the shooter training in using and caring for the weapon. This too is harder to condemn, since the father might have had good intentions of helping his son learn the respect and discipline that comes in such clubs. We don't know this, so it's hard to say.
the father did not maintain proper caution in storing either the weapon or the ammunition. This is the worst moment of negligence, as the son had easy access to the weapon. Sure, he could have gotten it by stealing the gun cabinet keys, or starting the shooting spree at the gun club, but those scenarios also involve more planning, more of a chance to abort.
Some media sources say the shooter played a 3D shooter game before going on his spree. The reports beg the question of why he was playing:
Was he getting psyched up as the media claims? I doubt it.
Was he hoping to blow off anger and not go on the spree? Also doubtful.
Was he performing a dry run, going over his plan? That's what I suspect, that he was using the 3D shooter to test his tactics.
Of the reasons why this happened, the first three are the hardest to correct: there is no good way to defuse every potential shooter, and no good way to inspect and ensure that all gun owners follow storage rules without a massive invasion of privacy. Computer games are the scapegoat not because they play such a large role, but because banning them seems like the only thing that can be done, slaking the thirst to do something, anything.
Well, I prefer Apple over Sony, and I prefer Sony over Lenovo, and Lenovo over Dell, and Dell over... you get the idea.
In all reality, I prefer Apple because in the past, I've also noted a longer usable lifetime with my Apple-bought hardware. Saving 30% in price doesn't compute when you end up replacing the machine twice as often (caveat: my past experience, and I admit that it could be different nowadays). Also, the workflow on the Apple seems to fit my personal workflow, and that saves me time.
So much like you, I'm on the cusp - only I'm on the other side, where the purchase price disadvantage is offset by perceived savings down the road.
Is the "liberal (European sense view" really that anxious to believe that the person who facilitates the criminal interactions of other people isn't part of the problem? That urgent desire to ignore causality and accountability is one of the reasons that the only cure they can think of for every problem is to raise taxes and increase the power of the Nanny State.
You've just made the MPAA's original case against the VHS videorecorder. No wonder the studios performed so farcically in the Pirate Bay case.
As for the rest of your rant, well, please try not to conflate European liberals (libertarians in the USA) with socialists. The European liberal is closer to Grover Norquist than to any social democrat. Or did you purposefully ignore what this discussion was about?
I think the structure of the Swedish court means that appealing to strict legal guidelines has a better chance. The panel is less subject to emotional appeals than a jury would be. Scandinavian courts pride themselves on their soberness.
Also, I found it a clever feint. By suggesting that they would take the emotional defence, they misled the plaintiffs and led them on a merry goose chase. I think the record companies shot themselves in the foot here.
"Libertarian" is a term used mostly in the USA for those views that Europe calls "liberal". This is because authoritarian/conservative pundits and politicians have used the term to mean what Europe calls "social democrat".
Libertarians value personal freedom above all else, but in the USA that has led to strange bedfellows. In their quest to win more freedom from society in the form of government, they have teamed up with authoritarians (often mislabelled conservatives) who follow the same goal, but with a different purpose: the authoritarians see government as a rival to their authority as owners or as church scions.
This was not always the case. Part of why liberal became a term for social democrats in the USA is because most social democrats see the government as a tool to ensure personal liberty. To them, government is the tool that keeps one person from infringing on another's liberty, though if overdone it can lead to a nanny mentality.
Oh, and note that social democrat is slightly different from socialist. The social democrat is middle of the road, believing in a mixture of capitalism and state-owned properties. A typical social democrat position is that the roads should be state property, but the trucking and bus companies should be privately owned.
As for what this has to do with the Pirate Bay case, Sweden is an example of a balanced social democrat state, and the laws that it operate under reflect this. I think the Pirate Bay operators will get off the hook because no matter the morals of what they do, they were careful to obey the letter of the law. They provided a map to where you could get [X], but did not actually provide [X] nor guarantee that you could really get [X] from where they told you it was. It is the internet equivalent of "If you want weed, Johnny over there says he has some." No effort was made to see if Johnny really did have weed. From a liberal (European sense) view, as long as they don't touch the contraband in any way, they aren't liable for what the giver and taker do. Both parties are responsible for their own actions.
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't know you were still so bitter about the last US federal election. My condolences... now get over it. Ahem.
On a more serious note, your post does reflect a textbook case of bitterness: obsessing about some slight that you can take no action on. It can develop into a feedback loop that eventually turns a person into a Unabomber or a Tim McViegh or an Osama bin Laden. Maybe that's the point you were trying to make through irony?
Quite true, but this applies to many physical disorders as well. The pollution in the air affects asthma and lung diseases, the food we eat can bring about diabetes, and so on.
The problem with curing a harmful social environment is that there aren't as many "crunchy bits". You can't measure social relationships like you can inanimate particles. And each problem we solve (after all, European society really has gotten progressively better over history) creates new problems (you may not be subject to torture for heresy or "witchcraft", but you now have to deal with complex and confusing social mores, and with suppressing your own fight-or-flight primitive instincts).
I personally think this is a step in the right direction: chronic bitterness poisons a person's health in many ways, but often it needs outside impulses to break the feedback loop. I'm just cautious as to what the proposed treatment is, since there are so many causes for bitterness.
Relax, I was just trying to turn a troll into a funny. In all honesty I'm of the camp that thinks the OS should be as unobtrusive as possible, meaning it's never used. It's just there and gets out of your way so that you can work (or play games).
Of course, I could also remind you that calling Vista the best OS you've seen out of Microsoft is damning with faint praise...
No one's using Vista anyway.
No, but many are forced to tolerate it.
It's the old chimera of "secret teachings",and impossible to disprove. Give somebody access, and the reaction will be "oh, this is just a ruse to hide the REAL secrets!"
But having secrets not available to the uninitiated is what makes clubs and organisations like the Freemasons so popular: often the secret is merely "the real secret is that we just pretend to have a secret", but it still amazes me how well it works. I even tried it out myself, and there's still a guy out there convinced I know more than I do, and that I am hiding the true teachings of the Illuminati.
Just to clarify:
The Church of Scientology has been denied church status, and has been under investigation for attempting to overthrow the German constitution. Unlike the US constitution, the German constitution opens with a bill of rights - Article One is "the dignity of a person is inviolate". Since part of the Church of Scientology's tenets is to have its members take control of all secular organisations. That's why they've been investigated for conspiracy against the constitution.
Germany has these sorts of clauses due to a certain organisation back in the 1930's, and they don't want another case of loons coming in and tossing out the rule of law. (There. I've just proven Godwin's law again, that any comment thread will eventually mention Nazis. Are you happy?)
Actually, you could do this in the USA.
If you're confused, consider it filing a claim against, say, the Archdiocese of Belleville for fraud perpetrated by its Parish of Saint Fnordius. If said parish was stripped of its church status for abusing the privileges, then it would be even easier. This wouldn't even be considered an attack on the religion, but on a "bad apple", an organisation promoting it.
Don't confuse the organisation with the belief. It's the organisation that is denied church status and that is under attack. Anybody else who wishes to spread the belief is free to do so.
That's what's going on in France (and to a lesser degree Germany): the Church of Scientology is considered a for-profit enterprise, and cannot simply call themselves a church. This is mostly a tax issue and an advertising/promotion issue. Were a local parish of an established church to engage in the same behaviour, then that parish would lose its status as a church; the religious belief is not at stake, just the organisation promoting it.
Well yeah. He even says "It's hard to sell a legal DVD when it can be stolen without any repercussions." If the pirates gave away DVDs for free, and Sony charged a reasonable price for DRM-free downloads of new content, then Sony would have a fantastic business model.
It's also easy to see how faulty his logic is. Bootleg copies (I abhor the term "pirated") are often of lower quality but of higher convenience. Sony thinks its right to a monopoly on making copies is where the money is at, but that horse left the barn long ago.
Apple showed that what earns money isn't merely offering the music, but having trustworthy quality. You pretty much know that the song you buy from them has proper metadata and is of high quality. People pay money for trust, and that's what record companies ought to sell: guaranteed quality and an assurance that the artist is paid.
This is why I'd go with a simple hardware choice of giving everybody Mac Books, and letting them use XP/Vista from Boot Camp if they so desire. With only one laptop to worry about and backups, it ought to be easier to swap out equipment should one go bad.
Yes, the Mac Books make good Windows or Linux platforms. The hardware inside is good quality and all standardised, and the new glass trackpads have a clever way of right-clicking (older Apple laptops still had the one-button mouse)
Despite the claim to "no video editing", I would still recommend Apple equipment so that the Final Cut workstations after filming can be integrated into the mesh more smoothly.
No, Apple isn't the best choice for every task, but in a film crew I do believe that choosing a platform that can run all major operating systems is the best choice. At the moment, Apple is the only company that (legally) offers Mac OS, and that limits the choices.
Still, a documentary crew will need to consider other factors, such as battery life and availability of spare parts when overseas. I personally think Apple has a pretty good reputation in these areas, and enough film crews use them that there are already some good workflow solutions out there to ease the setup workload of the IT support guy.
So yeah, I think Apple's the way to go. No low-end "disposable" laptops, but the setup is such that you save time and money in the long run.
I'll give my classic example (still not fixed), in iTunes:
Insert a CD
It should "just work" and start ripping the CD, but it doesn't.
Look for an error message.. there is none.
Search the menus, look for a button, nope, there's no way to actually *tell* iTunes that you want it to rip the CD.
etc.
Um, that's a problem I've yet to ever see. iTunes on both Mac OS X and Windows show the CD in the list of media and playlists. Ripping a CD can be done by button, by dragging the CD into a playlist or the library, or even set in the preferences to rip as soon as it is entered into the computer.
I've had similar experiences with wireless.
"Do you have wireless here?"
"Sure do."
"Umm.. I don't see it."
"Well, it's there, it's called NETGEAR."
"Yeah, it's not coming up. I'd tell you why, but when I click on the little wifi icon it does nothing."
And that's why I say:
It "just works" until it "just doesn't" and then you're "just fucked".
This is also a problem I haven't come across. I've been able to access every 802.11 router that was within range of my antenna. If the network owner also provides me with a password, I can also connect to WPA and WEP protected routers.
I suspect you are merely quoting anecdotal cases, and have no real day-to-day experience in using Apple hardware.
I know I'm repeating a point I made elsewhere, but I have to point out again that disappointment does not mean failure, just a failure to meet expectations. Ubuntu was hyped as a Windows killer, sure, but that hype never really registered as realistic. I can see it being an honorable mention, but not actually on the list.
Instead, perhaps Linux as a whole ought to have been mentioned and not merely Ubuntu, as the late Nineties saw a sudden surge in belief that Linux was going to take over the entire computing world from mainframes to toaster ovens. Many a Linux fan from that era waited with bated breath, and some still hope for that day yet.
I think you need to remember two things. First, the article is about disappointments, but not failures. Ubuntu is a success, but it failed to live up to the hype that surrounded it when it first appeared. Second, Ubuntu is only an "honourable mention" precisely because the hype wasn't all that widespread. Ubuntu isn't a disappointment as an operating system, far from it; it is merely a disappointment as a Windows killer.
I think that's the thing here: it's not so much the product's end form that makes a disappointment as much as the expectations created before it comes out. Were Ubuntu to arrive on the scene without much preamble, then we would recognise it for the system that it is. As it stands, though, it had to fight off unrealistic expectations for how fast it would be adopted first.
As a side note, I think this is why Steve Jobs tries to keep new products secret, to avoid getting burned like he did with Lisa. Part of the iPod's success lies in how they caught the tech press by surprise.
You know, I think this may be more a condemnation of the business model rather than of the high prices or the piracy. But it begs the question of how the author should be compensated.
In the case of a college-level textbook, the sort that a student must buy himself, I think the author needs to be paid on commission rather than by royalties. The university or some other group representing the professors can then assign grants to authors to write the darn thing, drawing the funds from a pool (either added to tuition or some other "lab fee" style arrangement). Then the book itself is offered for a minimal fee to cover the costs of printing/maintaining a trusted copy on the servers.
I think the main thing is to remember that authors need recognition as well, so that they can sell other books. If their textbooks become popular outside of the classes where they were required reading, then perhaps it can lead to the author getting better deals in the future, or even a chance to write a more mainstream version.
I'm intrigued by the idea of this monument. It seems to turn what was once the landmark of Franconia Notch into a viewing platform to see the valley's natural beauty. And the highway that runs up through it. Er.
The interesting part is putting it in where the original Old Man used to be, and shaping it to resemble the original rock formation. A homage without trying to rebuild, and that makes sense.
My main quibble would be the amount of construction needed. How does the architect plan to get the materials and the machines up there and back out without causing a lot of damage to the environment? How would it be supplied with electricity and sewage? And how the heck do visitors get there? Will the current parking area be converted? And finally, is the view by itself worth it?
I was born in New Hampshire, and so I feel some attachment to the area. If this becomes a monument to the beauty of Franconia Notch without spoiling it, then I am for it. But only if that's the case. We don't need another monument to something that the monument itself paved over.
Considering that T-Mobile has the German contract, O2 has the UK contract, and so on, it's only logical that the other GSM net providers would want in on the deal, the ability to switch the SIM card, and so on.
Come to think of it, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple planned it this way when they chose T-Mobile, O2, Orange and so on. Roaming within Europe is due to become a lot cheaper, so they may have set it up as a way to break the telco's hold much like they turned the tables on the music publishers with the iTunes Music Store...
It shows the heavyhandedness of cops at a certain level - this wasn't done in the interest of gaining evidence or preventing a crime, but for intimidation purposes. I think this was also prompted by economic minister Guttenberg's claim that the cabinet was going to submit a new bill to force all ISP's to blacklist child porn pages. However, this particular incident has backfired, drawing negative publicity.
As for why they don't simply take them down, the reason is because often the pages themselves are "offshore", the domains and servers located in countries where the laws are laxer. And yes, this is simple look-busy activity, as they freely admit that simple tricks can circumvent any filter.
Me, I think it's a bad idea because any filter would be riddled with false positives and other errors. Trying to dam child pornography with filters only addresses the symptom, and doesn't even do a good job at that. Some of the bills I've seen bandied about were even worse, making it possible to convict a person as a sex offender if their computer had been exploited by malware, hosting porn without their knowledge.
To use a bad anolgy (this is Slashdot, after all), it's like trying to filter toxic waste from the Mississippi instead of trying to catch the guy who dumped the waste in it in the first place. Too much emphasis is being placed on the filters, and not enough on cutting out the polluters.
The only other thing I can think of is to tell the individual users that you are busy covering their arses as well, since an audit may cost them all their jobs. And don't let them think it ends there, give them a ray of hope such as "well, we're examining the accounting records as well."
After all, you might get lucky and accounting might have the purchase receipts. Then you can blame it on bad bookkeeping while you untie the Gordian knot.
There is no one reason why it happened, but an entire series of precautions failed. Some of the ones I noticed:
Of the reasons why this happened, the first three are the hardest to correct: there is no good way to defuse every potential shooter, and no good way to inspect and ensure that all gun owners follow storage rules without a massive invasion of privacy. Computer games are the scapegoat not because they play such a large role, but because banning them seems like the only thing that can be done, slaking the thirst to do something, anything.
Well, I prefer Apple over Sony, and I prefer Sony over Lenovo, and Lenovo over Dell, and Dell over ... you get the idea.
In all reality, I prefer Apple because in the past, I've also noted a longer usable lifetime with my Apple-bought hardware. Saving 30% in price doesn't compute when you end up replacing the machine twice as often (caveat: my past experience, and I admit that it could be different nowadays). Also, the workflow on the Apple seems to fit my personal workflow, and that saves me time.
So much like you, I'm on the cusp - only I'm on the other side, where the purchase price disadvantage is offset by perceived savings down the road.
Is the "liberal (European sense view" really that anxious to believe that the person who facilitates the criminal interactions of other people isn't part of the problem? That urgent desire to ignore causality and accountability is one of the reasons that the only cure they can think of for every problem is to raise taxes and increase the power of the Nanny State.
You've just made the MPAA's original case against the VHS videorecorder. No wonder the studios performed so farcically in the Pirate Bay case.
As for the rest of your rant, well, please try not to conflate European liberals (libertarians in the USA) with socialists. The European liberal is closer to Grover Norquist than to any social democrat. Or did you purposefully ignore what this discussion was about?
Consider the spectrum as such:
Capitalism is a battle royale tourney.
Social democracy is rugby, with rules and referees.
Socialism is touch football, with strict roles set for each player.
Communism is chess, where the pawns have no chance for individual initiative.
I think the structure of the Swedish court means that appealing to strict legal guidelines has a better chance. The panel is less subject to emotional appeals than a jury would be. Scandinavian courts pride themselves on their soberness.
Also, I found it a clever feint. By suggesting that they would take the emotional defence, they misled the plaintiffs and led them on a merry goose chase. I think the record companies shot themselves in the foot here.
Drifting further off topic, I know...
"Libertarian" is a term used mostly in the USA for those views that Europe calls "liberal". This is because authoritarian/conservative pundits and politicians have used the term to mean what Europe calls "social democrat".
Libertarians value personal freedom above all else, but in the USA that has led to strange bedfellows. In their quest to win more freedom from society in the form of government, they have teamed up with authoritarians (often mislabelled conservatives) who follow the same goal, but with a different purpose: the authoritarians see government as a rival to their authority as owners or as church scions.
This was not always the case. Part of why liberal became a term for social democrats in the USA is because most social democrats see the government as a tool to ensure personal liberty. To them, government is the tool that keeps one person from infringing on another's liberty, though if overdone it can lead to a nanny mentality.
Oh, and note that social democrat is slightly different from socialist. The social democrat is middle of the road, believing in a mixture of capitalism and state-owned properties. A typical social democrat position is that the roads should be state property, but the trucking and bus companies should be privately owned.
As for what this has to do with the Pirate Bay case, Sweden is an example of a balanced social democrat state, and the laws that it operate under reflect this. I think the Pirate Bay operators will get off the hook because no matter the morals of what they do, they were careful to obey the letter of the law. They provided a map to where you could get [X], but did not actually provide [X] nor guarantee that you could really get [X] from where they told you it was. It is the internet equivalent of "If you want weed, Johnny over there says he has some." No effort was made to see if Johnny really did have weed. From a liberal (European sense) view, as long as they don't touch the contraband in any way, they aren't liable for what the giver and taker do. Both parties are responsible for their own actions.