Ok, even if you presume that all 6000 deaths are from cell phone use, that's still only 14% of car fatalities and 0.2% of fatalities nationally. Realistically though distracted driving comes in many forms and the number of fatalities that are from users of proper hands-free equipment is likely to be a small fraction of the overall. So we are threating the states to take action ( which most have already done ) to combat something that is already on the books.
In terms of severity 7000 people drown each year in the US, 16000 are murdered, 42000 die from lack of health insurance, 63000 from the seasonal flu, or our number 1 killer heart disease at 631,636.
Raising the price of gas to $4 would prevent more than 6000 fatalities every year!
The other problem with these stats is that despite growth in both miles driven and explosive growth in cell phone use over the past decade, traffic fatalities have remained fairly constant. People can argue that cars are safer, but I doubt cars have gotten *that* much safer over the past decade in order to mask the growth in cell phone use. In the end I think it comes down to stupid people will do stupid things with or without laws that restrict the general population. Also the problem with TXT'ing will quickly become something else next year and will the nanny state be back to square 1 demanding action on another activity that should already be covered under standard "distracted driving" laws.
Congress needs to grow some balls and look at this problem in perspective; then move on to something that might actually make a difference.
SMP = Symmetric Multi-Processing. GCD, in theory, will also allow access to Asymmetric Multi-Processing as well since you can take advantage of GPU resources and cores as well.
Worse yet his theory of damages in this case is weak at best, a crapshoot at worst, but has taken to censoring his blog when people bring up this hole in his argument.
Statutory damages can only be unconstitutional if congress did not have the authority to set them. If they had a legitimate purpose and gave enough guidance then they will withstand court scrutiny. He likes to conflate statutory with punitive; in the latter double digit awards over actual are *probably* unconstitutional.
Appellate judges can add new interpretations of the law, trial court judges are there to apply the laws and precedents that are already in place. This makes sense because a judge should not rule on a topic that is "not ripe" for adjudication.
Statutory damages is a policy issue clearly within the bounds of congress to set. NYCL tends to conflate punitive and statutory damages because it better meets his theory that it's somehow unconstitutional for congress to set these statutory limits.
RIAA is civil, not criminal so the same burden of proof is not applicable.
I doubt the phone records were the only "proof" that the alibi was bogus. Once they knew where the person was and/or wasn't it shouldn't have been too hard to find corroborating evidence.
BMW v Gore was punitive damages, not statutory. Different standards in review.
"Harris v. Mexican Specialty Food" is a much better case. Civil courts, statutory damages, due process claim. The circuit courts slapped down all of the arguments that were brought up and even give a nod to copyright law. It's a good read and eviscerates the due process claim here as well as were proffered in Lindor.
2) A crash of ubuntu ended up removing *ALL* group and other permission on a laptop drive. Not just those altered within 2 minutes of the crash, but of every single file in the system leading to a system that non-root users could not log into.
Neither of those are acceptable. For now it's still ext3 only until ext4 has had some more time to mature.
ssh keys with passwords are the best bet. Run an agent so you only have to give your password occasionally and there really is not a lot to steal. They can take the private keyfile, but without the password it is useless. They can use ssh/scp on your behalf, but only until the session ends.
Putty has an agent for windows, OSX Leopard has an agent integrated with keychain, and Linux has agents that integrate with PAM. OSX and Linux allow it to be SSO with little risk of password/credential theft.
The difference in my mind is that GPS tracking is blind to the public/private barrier that a warrantless surveillance would have.
The GPS log would track well inside "private" areas that can not be seen from public, it gives excruciating time and location details. The GPS does not turn off just because it's been driven off the public roads. The GPS in effect is not just public surveillance, but covert surveillance of your movements while off private roads. It's a foot in the door for more intrusive searches in the private sphere.
That on top of the fact that they are interfering with the operation of my property without permission or a warrant. You can claim that a GPS logger is harmless, but that is really besides the point.
The last point I would make is that when in doubt the police should always ask for the warrant. It prevents the possible loss of trial evidence that could be crucial to a conviction. They generally don't do this as some sort of power trip, they generally have a reason to do this and there would have been little to no reason not to approve the warrant.
All it would take is one or two more "wins" for the little guy and their cookie-cutter cases will be taken down by cookie-cutter responses? Every piece of information released reduces how much they can take people for in their shakedown.
I can believe that, but I doubt the judge would buy it.
We here on Slashdot may have no love for the RIAA. But in general, defendants shouldn't be forced into exposing sensitive information, like trade secrets or business strategies, as a means to blackmail them into settling.
You mean like the RIAA does in every single one of their cases? Turning over all computer in the house probably with privilege information all over it as well as the only way these defendants have to contact and organize a defense.
2. Media Sentry not holding state investigative licenses is irrelevant because the information they gathered was publicly available.
The important word there is *was* available. The courts are being asked to take the word of a company for hire where they have the only record of what happened. The courts are being told that the process is a secret, but somehow the results are valid and should be used in court proceedings.
States require investigation licenses in order to protect the integrity of the information brought before the courts.
I would also add that the timing of these cases is suspect as it seems like the RIAA is "sitting" on the cases just long enough to prevent any reasonable person from being able to mount a reasonable defense. Come on, how many people have a record of what was on their computer ( or even have the computer ) over 2 years after an event takes place?
*Does not count if you have any other software, including MS Office installed. Does not count for Vista system that need to be upgraded to SP2 post-install.
I didn't have a problem with them retaining phone book information, wall posts,... my beef was with creative works uploaded. Their land grab on rights in perpetuity was insanity. They could use any image I had uploaded for any purpose including commercial and advertising without any compensation whatsoever. They could sell rights to their image database to publishers, the AP, and others without regard for privacy or payment to me.
Like it or not the stock price is linked to Steves Health. This is for several reasons, none of which the SEC cares too much about.
If Steve or the board, knowingly, withheld information they knew would have a negative ( or positive ) impact on the stock price would be breaking SEC regs.
It's not specifically about his health, but the fact that his health has a material effect on the stock price and therefore investors have a right to know enough information to make informed investment decisions. It's one of the basic requirements for a free market.
As others have noted Sprint was routing Cogent traffic through XO, but Cogent was blackholing the return traffic. Had they updated their BGP the return traffic would have flowed and the end customers would have been unaffected.
The internet could have routed around this had cogent updated it's routing. Sprints customers are suffering because Cogent made this a problem for everyone intentionally.
Cogent could have, at any time during this depeering, allowed the sprint bound traffic to route through one of their other peering points. This would have allowed their customers, including yourself, to continue to reach the entire internet even though it may have been slightly slower. It's the beauty of the internet, they could have easily routed the traffic elsewhere but they CHOSE to route sprint to a blackhole route.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, even if you presume that all 6000 deaths are from cell phone use, that's still only 14% of car fatalities and 0.2% of fatalities nationally. Realistically though distracted driving comes in many forms and the number of fatalities that are from users of proper hands-free equipment is likely to be a small fraction of the overall. So we are threating the states to take action ( which most have already done ) to combat something that is already on the books.
In terms of severity 7000 people drown each year in the US, 16000 are murdered, 42000 die from lack of health insurance, 63000 from the seasonal flu, or our number 1 killer heart disease at 631,636.
Raising the price of gas to $4 would prevent more than 6000 fatalities every year!
The other problem with these stats is that despite growth in both miles driven and explosive growth in cell phone use over the past decade, traffic fatalities have remained fairly constant. People can argue that cars are safer, but I doubt cars have gotten *that* much safer over the past decade in order to mask the growth in cell phone use. In the end I think it comes down to stupid people will do stupid things with or without laws that restrict the general population. Also the problem with TXT'ing will quickly become something else next year and will the nanny state be back to square 1 demanding action on another activity that should already be covered under standard "distracted driving" laws.
Congress needs to grow some balls and look at this problem in perspective; then move on to something that might actually make a difference.
SMP = Symmetric Multi-Processing. GCD, in theory, will also allow access to Asymmetric Multi-Processing as well since you can take advantage of GPU resources and cores as well.
But that is not the Judges decision to make, it's congress.
Worse yet his theory of damages in this case is weak at best, a crapshoot at worst, but has taken to censoring his blog when people bring up this hole in his argument.
Statutory damages can only be unconstitutional if congress did not have the authority to set them. If they had a legitimate purpose and gave enough guidance then they will withstand court scrutiny. He likes to conflate statutory with punitive; in the latter double digit awards over actual are *probably* unconstitutional.
Appellate judges can add new interpretations of the law, trial court judges are there to apply the laws and precedents that are already in place. This makes sense because a judge should not rule on a topic that is "not ripe" for adjudication.
Statutory damages is a policy issue clearly within the bounds of congress to set. NYCL tends to conflate punitive and statutory damages because it better meets his theory that it's somehow unconstitutional for congress to set these statutory limits.
RIAA is civil, not criminal so the same burden of proof is not applicable.
I doubt the phone records were the only "proof" that the alibi was bogus. Once they knew where the person was and/or wasn't it shouldn't have been too hard to find corroborating evidence.
BMW v Gore was punitive damages, not statutory. Different standards in review.
"Harris v. Mexican Specialty Food" is a much better case. Civil courts, statutory damages, due process claim. The circuit courts slapped down all of the arguments that were brought up and even give a nod to copyright law. It's a good read and eviscerates the due process claim here as well as were proffered in Lindor.
It still needs more time. I have played under both ubuntu and rhel 5.3 and run into strange behavior that makes me uncomfortable.
1) Bonnie++ throws errors even on server class hardware that something is wrong when creating and deleting a large number of random files. This is with no errors in the filesystem and everything operating normally. https://www.redhat.com/archives/ext4-beta-list/2009-February/msg00000.html
2) A crash of ubuntu ended up removing *ALL* group and other permission on a laptop drive. Not just those altered within 2 minutes of the crash, but of every single file in the system leading to a system that non-root users could not log into.
Neither of those are acceptable. For now it's still ext3 only until ext4 has had some more time to mature.
ssh keys with passwords are the best bet. Run an agent so you only have to give your password occasionally and there really is not a lot to steal. They can take the private keyfile, but without the password it is useless. They can use ssh/scp on your behalf, but only until the session ends.
Putty has an agent for windows, OSX Leopard has an agent integrated with keychain, and Linux has agents that integrate with PAM. OSX and Linux allow it to be SSO with little risk of password/credential theft.
The difference in my mind is that GPS tracking is blind to the public/private barrier that a warrantless surveillance would have.
The GPS log would track well inside "private" areas that can not be seen from public, it gives excruciating time and location details. The GPS does not turn off just because it's been driven off the public roads. The GPS in effect is not just public surveillance, but covert surveillance of your movements while off private roads. It's a foot in the door for more intrusive searches in the private sphere.
That on top of the fact that they are interfering with the operation of my property without permission or a warrant. You can claim that a GPS logger is harmless, but that is really besides the point.
The last point I would make is that when in doubt the police should always ask for the warrant. It prevents the possible loss of trial evidence that could be crucial to a conviction. They generally don't do this as some sort of power trip, they generally have a reason to do this and there would have been little to no reason not to approve the warrant.
Yep, do you want "good" teachers or an education?
All it would take is one or two more "wins" for the little guy and their cookie-cutter cases will be taken down by cookie-cutter responses? Every piece of information released reduces how much they can take people for in their shakedown.
I can believe that, but I doubt the judge would buy it.
_LORAX_ aka Eric.
We here on Slashdot may have no love for the RIAA. But in general, defendants shouldn't be forced into exposing sensitive information, like trade secrets or business strategies, as a means to blackmail them into settling.
You mean like the RIAA does in every single one of their cases? Turning over all computer in the house probably with privilege information all over it as well as the only way these defendants have to contact and organize a defense.
2. Media Sentry not holding state investigative licenses is irrelevant because the information they gathered was publicly available.
The important word there is *was* available. The courts are being asked to take the word of a company for hire where they have the only record of what happened. The courts are being told that the process is a secret, but somehow the results are valid and should be used in court proceedings.
States require investigation licenses in order to protect the integrity of the information brought before the courts.
I would also add that the timing of these cases is suspect as it seems like the RIAA is "sitting" on the cases just long enough to prevent any reasonable person from being able to mount a reasonable defense. Come on, how many people have a record of what was on their computer ( or even have the computer ) over 2 years after an event takes place?
*Does not count if you have any other software, including MS Office installed. Does not count for Vista system that need to be upgraded to SP2 post-install.
I didn't have a problem with them retaining phone book information, wall posts, ... my beef was with creative works uploaded. Their land grab on rights in perpetuity was insanity. They could use any image I had uploaded for any purpose including commercial and advertising without any compensation whatsoever. They could sell rights to their image database to publishers, the AP, and others without regard for privacy or payment to me.
The heart of gold can't be far behind!
Like it or not the stock price is linked to Steves Health. This is for several reasons, none of which the SEC cares too much about.
If Steve or the board, knowingly, withheld information they knew would have a negative ( or positive ) impact on the stock price would be breaking SEC regs.
It's not specifically about his health, but the fact that his health has a material effect on the stock price and therefore investors have a right to know enough information to make informed investment decisions. It's one of the basic requirements for a free market.
Why not send it simultaneously to all locations using multicast?
What about uploading an encrypted version to S3 which can then be downloaded via torrent or the S3 API?
.ssh/config
Host hostname
Port yourport
then you can ssh to hostname and not have to type the port everytime.
As others have noted Sprint was routing Cogent traffic through XO, but Cogent was blackholing the return traffic. Had they updated their BGP the return traffic would have flowed and the end customers would have been unaffected.
The internet could have routed around this had cogent updated it's routing. Sprints customers are suffering because Cogent made this a problem for everyone intentionally.
Umm... RTFA, Cogent had over a YEAR's notice that they would be cut off.
Cogent could have, at any time during this depeering, allowed the sprint bound traffic to route through one of their other peering points. This would have allowed their customers, including yourself, to continue to reach the entire internet even though it may have been slightly slower. It's the beauty of the internet, they could have easily routed the traffic elsewhere but they CHOSE to route sprint to a blackhole route.