Do not have a lawyer send the letters. It is considered unethical for a lawyer to send a letter to the another lawyer's cleint and it is really the client you want to get to.
I have no idea where you're pulling that from, but it's gotta be a place where the sun ain't shining too often.
But the worst in our system is how senators get elected, by "great electors", most of which are mayors, of which most are of small towns, so that right-leaning types are over-represented.
and I think my health suffered because of it. At first I was annoyed. Then I got mad. And then I was completely flabbergasted.
The opposition asked thousands of extremely well informed and technically pointed questions. There was at times a hundred time more people watching the video stream than usual. They got tons of emails, which their staff would parse, print and bring to them during the discussions. They mentioned that several times. The majority never ever did, just sticking to their ridiculous talking points or, towards the end, not even bothering to reply.
The law is unbelievable. Its entire purpose is to circumvent the judiciary and castrate any right to a fair trial, because as soon as a normal legal recourse is available, the sheer mass of defendants would topple the rotten thing instantly.
This alone explains the many bizarre provisions of the law. For instance, when you get (or not, there is no hard requirements of delivery) an email warning, it doesn't mention what you were allegedly (or actually, what your connection was used for) downloading. That's right, they don't tell you. They just say, on that date and time, your connection was used to pirate shit, make it cease now, and here's a nice list of legal websites.
The official purpose for this non-disclosure is because the download might be pornographic, and that might cause problems for families if, say, the spouse finds out. I'm not making shit up, that's what the retarded sponsor Frank Riestert (a car salesman) said, it's in the record. But the real purpose is so that you can't easily dispute the allegations. In fact, it's almost impossible to find out what's been reported against you at the "warning" phase, you can only do so when the decision to cut you off has been taken.
Furthermore, the law explicitly limits the possibility for the accused to find out who detected the alleged infringement and how. You get to know (eventually) the copyright holder, but not which private policing outlet it had mandated for that purpose. Obviously this aims to limit the possibilities of suing for libellous accusations, or at least delay so much as to make it useless and therefore remove the incentive for the victims to sue so that this is not a bottleneck.
Said outlets' employees will have to swear an oath to be truthful in their reports, but the law says nothing about any due diligence. In other word, as long as they don't blatantly lie, it doesn't matter if the evidence is as flimsy as a mere IP address being advertised in a Pirate Bay tracker. As you may know, it only takes *one* HTTP request to put *any* IP in there.
This whole thing is insane. It is extremely likely to be thoroughly censored by the Constitutional Council (~ Supreme Court in this case) but that doesn't mean the end result won't be a disaster. The only hope is in the European Parliament, and if they finally pass their anti-3 strike amendment, it's on the European Court of Justice.
The majority, esp. under Emperor Naboleon Sarkozy, has quasi tyrannical powers, and can employ various tricks to make sure the minority can't pull a trick like showing up en masse when the majority's away.
Furthermore they employed various procedural tricks -- they tend to do that almost all the time now actually -- to ram their laws through parliament without leaving any chance for the opposition to delay or discuss.
Now this certainly does not excuse the main opposition party for not showing up, with few exceptions such as my own representative Mr. Bloche, but it couldn't possibly have made any difference in the legislative process.
I watched most of the debates on this law in the lower chamber, and the majority never even responded to very precise, technical questions asked by critics of the law, including members of their own party.
An interesting side note: the very few opponents of the law in the ruling party are the only IT professionals, such as Tardy who owns a small IT consultancy, and Dionis du Sejour who used to be the CIO of a major company. All their colleagues had no fucking clue what they were talking about; take for instance the minister herself, who believes OpenOffice is or has a firewall. I shit you not.
If you don't come down hard on a teenage girls sending nude pictures of themselves to their boyfriend, they could possibly eventually hypothetically in the future end up having problems because of it, somehow.
Instead, let's throw them in jail and brand them as sex offenders.
We're facing an uphill battle. The evil forces of Sarkozy-Universal are occupying the territory; they will probably be stopped by the European Parliament, but there will be much blood.
In any case, that's good news from NZ, something for the resistance forces to use during the upcoming parliamentary debates.
Doing a multithreaded GUI is hard, and very prone to bugs, and on top of that there are quite a number of assumptions made by JS code that force monothreading. But anyway, FF does multithreading, in fact in the 3.1+ you can spawn new worker thread from unpriviledged javascript; however that code won't be able to touch the DOM, only pass and receive JSON-encoded messages.
We have two workstations, one is PCI compliant, connected to the production network and runs RHEL 5. The other supposedly runs Windows XP and its assorted collection of required junk (Norton....), but I just installed F10 and run (rarely) the gaming OS within a VM.
I'm a Linux sysadmin. If they pulled that shit on me I'd just rip the damn PC open and replace the hard drive. And if they wanted to fire me for it, well, they couldn't, because I'd have quit before that.
But seriously, where do you work where they do that kind of moronic shit?
That's a new one. I didn't take latin for long, but I do remember that plurals were/much/ more complicated than replacing "us" with "i." And indeed, see wiktionary.
The whole idea of importing the plural from the language of origin is very misguided pedantry, esp. considering how you're not transposing the various cases (nominative, accusative, etc.)
I don't know (nor care) what you call "communism," but Soviet Russia has been called "communist" by billions (literally) of people, and there and then the state owned the corporations.
Slashdot Mirror
Do not have a lawyer send the letters. It is considered unethical for a lawyer to send a letter to the another lawyer's cleint and it is really the client you want to get to.
I have no idea where you're pulling that from, but it's gotta be a place where the sun ain't shining too often.
Not to defend the FBI's stupidity, but their approach is not that different from those Black Hole Lists that many Slashdotters defend.
If I put you in a black hole list you can't send mail to some people.
If I take your datacenter, you can't send to anyone, can't receive, and may have lost a lot of business.
If you can't understand the difference, you're a moron.
Only certified private entities can report violations.
... there is no run-off ("second tour") there.
But the worst in our system is how senators get elected, by "great electors", most of which are mayors, of which most are of small towns, so that right-leaning types are over-represented.
Or as you guys say (but we don't): "touché"
and I think my health suffered because of it. At first I was annoyed. Then I got mad. And then I was completely flabbergasted.
The opposition asked thousands of extremely well informed and technically pointed questions. There was at times a hundred time more people watching the video stream than usual. They got tons of emails, which their staff would parse, print and bring to them during the discussions. They mentioned that several times. The majority never ever did, just sticking to their ridiculous talking points or, towards the end, not even bothering to reply.
The law is unbelievable. Its entire purpose is to circumvent the judiciary and castrate any right to a fair trial, because as soon as a normal legal recourse is available, the sheer mass of defendants would topple the rotten thing instantly.
This alone explains the many bizarre provisions of the law. For instance, when you get (or not, there is no hard requirements of delivery) an email warning, it doesn't mention what you were allegedly (or actually, what your connection was used for) downloading. That's right, they don't tell you. They just say, on that date and time, your connection was used to pirate shit, make it cease now, and here's a nice list of legal websites.
The official purpose for this non-disclosure is because the download might be pornographic, and that might cause problems for families if, say, the spouse finds out. I'm not making shit up, that's what the retarded sponsor Frank Riestert (a car salesman) said, it's in the record. But the real purpose is so that you can't easily dispute the allegations. In fact, it's almost impossible to find out what's been reported against you at the "warning" phase, you can only do so when the decision to cut you off has been taken.
Furthermore, the law explicitly limits the possibility for the accused to find out who detected the alleged infringement and how. You get to know (eventually) the copyright holder, but not which private policing outlet it had mandated for that purpose. Obviously this aims to limit the possibilities of suing for libellous accusations, or at least delay so much as to make it useless and therefore remove the incentive for the victims to sue so that this is not a bottleneck.
Said outlets' employees will have to swear an oath to be truthful in their reports, but the law says nothing about any due diligence. In other word, as long as they don't blatantly lie, it doesn't matter if the evidence is as flimsy as a mere IP address being advertised in a Pirate Bay tracker. As you may know, it only takes *one* HTTP request to put *any* IP in there.
This whole thing is insane. It is extremely likely to be thoroughly censored by the Constitutional Council (~ Supreme Court in this case) but that doesn't mean the end result won't be a disaster. The only hope is in the European Parliament, and if they finally pass their anti-3 strike amendment, it's on the European Court of Justice.
The majority, esp. under Emperor Naboleon Sarkozy, has quasi tyrannical powers, and can employ various tricks to make sure the minority can't pull a trick like showing up en masse when the majority's away.
Furthermore they employed various procedural tricks -- they tend to do that almost all the time now actually -- to ram their laws through parliament without leaving any chance for the opposition to delay or discuss.
Now this certainly does not excuse the main opposition party for not showing up, with few exceptions such as my own representative Mr. Bloche, but it couldn't possibly have made any difference in the legislative process.
I watched most of the debates on this law in the lower chamber, and the majority never even responded to very precise, technical questions asked by critics of the law, including members of their own party.
An interesting side note: the very few opponents of the law in the ruling party are the only IT professionals, such as Tardy who owns a small IT consultancy, and Dionis du Sejour who used to be the CIO of a major company. All their colleagues had no fucking clue what they were talking about; take for instance the minister herself, who believes OpenOffice is or has a firewall. I shit you not.
There was a paper reviewing bona fide climatology paper, and it found 99%+ supporting the idea.
My PC has what, 10 or 100 billion transistors?
Yes, it's not the same thing. PCs don't have a soul. If you think your PC is haunted or hates you, maybe you shouldn't have installed Vista.
If you don't come down hard on a teenage girls sending nude pictures of themselves to their boyfriend, they could possibly eventually hypothetically in the future end up having problems because of it, somehow.
Instead, let's throw them in jail and brand them as sex offenders.
Better not leave it to chance.
The judge is about as smart as a fireman not stopping a fire in a burning building because of a "no trespassing" sign.
/linux
Eclipse + VMWare ... you'll love every bit above 4G.
We're facing an uphill battle. The evil forces of Sarkozy-Universal are occupying the territory; they will probably be stopped by the European Parliament, but there will be much blood.
In any case, that's good news from NZ, something for the resistance forces to use during the upcoming parliamentary debates.
Doing a multithreaded GUI is hard, and very prone to bugs, and on top of that there are quite a number of assumptions made by JS code that force monothreading.
But anyway, FF does multithreading, in fact in the 3.1+ you can spawn new worker thread from unpriviledged javascript; however that code won't be able to touch the DOM, only pass and receive JSON-encoded messages.
We have two workstations, one is PCI compliant, connected to the production network and runs RHEL 5. The other supposedly runs Windows XP and its assorted collection of required junk (Norton ....), but I just installed F10 and run (rarely) the gaming OS within a VM.
High security environment or what?
I'm a Linux sysadmin. If they pulled that shit on me I'd just rip the damn PC open and replace the hard drive. And if they wanted to fire me for it, well, they couldn't, because I'd have quit before that.
But seriously, where do you work where they do that kind of moronic shit?
Problem solved.
greasemonkey, CustomizeGoogle, FlashBlock ...
That's a new one. I didn't take latin for long, but I do remember that plurals were /much/ more complicated than replacing "us" with "i." And indeed, see wiktionary.
The whole idea of importing the plural from the language of origin is very misguided pedantry, esp. considering how you're not transposing the various cases (nominative, accusative, etc.)
Step 1: have them sign a statement to the effect that they donate their body to science
Step 2: shoot them
Step 3: if necessary, shoot them again
Mission accomplished!
I don't know (nor care) what you call "communism," but Soviet Russia has been called "communist" by billions (literally) of people, and there and then the state owned the corporations.
IBM has contributed a lot to Apache, for example Derby.
Not saying they've done more than Sun, but that's not just a few scraps.
China spends MUCH less of its GDP on its military (1.4% vs 4% for the US.)