How does isuppli know the exact amounts that both Apple and Amazon pay for their parts? If I were law enforcement I'd certainly be wondering how they came by that confidential information legally. I highly doubt either company would give away such information freely.
What do you mean "our"? Do you mean to imply that you yourself are not rich? I'm willing to bet that you are. Compared to lots of people in the world. And since you are in control may I ask if you could please simply summarily execute every cop in North America even accused of police brutality? I would certainly appreciate it.
I don't know about Canada, but in the US you do have that right. It has explicitly been uphold by, I think, every state now including the state of Massachusetts which was a bit late for the party. Police are not just random citizens. They are given huge power, the power to kill. With that power comes hightened scrutiny of their actions. In the modern world, smartphones are the greatest and perhaps only weapon against police brutality and murder.
Well, in the U.S. you could always draw your handgun at the two security guards and then just step away calmly. Concealed carry is a must for any budding photojournalist.
Those security guards had no authority except to ask you to leave. They had no authority to force you to delete any photos and if they try to physically detain you that would be assault and battery in the U.S. at least. You would certainly be justified in using force to defend yourself against the assailants. Cops are given special status to at least some extent, but security guards are not cops.
If you can keep your cool, when you've snapped a great takedown pick and a mall-cop demands something of you, politely decline, and start dialling 911 as you explain why they have no right to it.
What's that expression? From the frying pan into the fire? I don't know about Canada, but in the US doing that would be very stupid. U.S. police will always, always side with however seems to have the most authority. To them might makes right and the mall cops are clearly in a relative position of power/authority.
I don't have any experience with the RCMP, but these guys sounded plenty thuggish to me. The only difference would have been that American cops would have slammed the kid's head/face into the ground hard enough to break his nose and ribs and give him a concussion, put him in a chokehold until he turned blue or stopped breathing, and maybe kicked him in the face a few times and torture tazed him for "resisting".
And then he wouldn't have been just arrested. He would have been charged with all kinds of trumped up felonies, possibly including assault and battery with a deadly weapon and drug distribution or carrying an illegal weapon (which they would thoughfully add to your bag).
Haha. That's funny. I do that too. After I was severely beaten by a cop-thug killing cops in GTA4 gave me at least a small satisfaction. I just wish I could kill some of those vermin in real life.
I do sometimes fantasize about walking into a busy police station with a bomb strapped to my chest. Then, boom! Make the world at least a slightly better place.
What would be even cooler would be 100 remotely piloted drones with bombs in their noses blowing up 100 police stations simultaneously. That would rock! Or just send up drones that find police stations via GPS coordinates. No need to stay within radio range that way.
I don't know about Canada, but in the US pigs are supposed to have a reason to arrest someone for something other than "resisting arrest".
That's why U.S. cops always have certain charges they use against innocent people that have nothing to do with the actual events. Disturbing the peace, resisting arrest and sometimes even assault and battery against the officers in question. Arresting someone under false pretenses is false arrest and a violation of the person's civil rights. If they are imprisoned even for an hour it becomes false imprisonment as well. This sort of thing often happens when a cop feels disrespected in some way. From their twisted, thuggish POV, standing up for your rights is indistinguishable from giving them the finger or saying, "fuck you".
Actually I think the best thing to do in that situation would be to just run. As fast as you can. Period. As has already been mentioned cops are authoritarians. They are not going to be on your side. As they clearly were not in this case. By calling them you've just made your situation even worse. It's sad that taking photographs is treated like a crime nowadays, but that is the sad state of affairs here in north america.
How are rich people responsible for thuggish, authoritarian cops and security guards? It sounds to me like governments ultimately have to be held responsible for it. The War Against Photography has little to do with any sort of rich vs poor class warfare.
But would putting a US tariff on Chinese rare earth minerals do anything? Most US companies manufacture offshore these days anyway. What is to stop such companies from just importing the minerals to their manufacturing facilities in Malaysia or Thailand or Mexico? And if you did find a way to close that loophole how would you prevent European or Asian companies from outcompeting US companies with the use of cheap Chinese minerals and magnets? What you really need is some kind of international treaty that boycotts Chinese rare earth minerals for their sleazy business practices.
Well it depends what you mean by "learn". It might take a child 7 years or more to learn their language properly. If you had 1 or 2 tutors who lived with you for 7 years and were constantly teaching you, well, it would depend on how intelligent you were I suppose, and how good your memory is. Those tones are tough though. Just distinguishing them let alone making them.
So are you arguing that all change is good or just change that comes from Microsoft? I'm so adaptable, so in love with change, that I welcome global warming. I say, "bring it on!". A new world order where giant geckos run things? No problem. OTOH, everything microsoft touches turns to shit and Windows 8 is proof of that. Windows 8 is a fine operating system for 3 year olds. Let them 'upgrade' to it.
Meanwhile rational, sensible adults can stick with XP if it serves their needs. Windows 7 is either slightly better or slightly worse depending on how you measure. Linux and OSX are better than either XP or 7 by most standards.
Windows 8 isn't even worth discussing. It may be easy enough for a 3 year old to use, but it's useless enough that no one else would want to. "Windows 8. The official operating system of the special olympics. Finally an OS for the mentally retarded as well as their 3 year old children
Who are you calling a simple mimic? Parrots have been shown to understand concepts. To have the ability to generalize from concrete instances. To create abstractions. Categories. And possibly to plan for the future as well.
Well the first problem is that there is no such thing as intellectual property. It simply does not exist and never will. Selling zeros and ones was always an overly optimistic exercise. Information wants to be free and the only way to prevent that freedom is not to release the information into the world. Once that is done you can't get it back. It is out there. It doesn't matter how many people go to prison. The nature of information will remain unchanged.
Somehow the content industry has convinced the ISPs to give up a large percentage of their customers. We'll just have to wait and see how effective this is.
This new measure will be effective within the borders of the United States if and only if: 1. The majority of the ISP's customers never torrent or infringe copyright online. It would be funny if some ISPs were willing to actually go out of business to help enforce copyright law. 2. The ISPs are willing to lose at least some amount of money. 3. No other ISPs are willing to cross the picket line by not being part of this. 4. The ISPs are willing to prevent known infringers from just signing up again. 5. People don't simply sign up for a VPN just before their ISP kicks them off.
It just so happens that one of my local choices for broadband ISPs (I have at least 3) is not a part of this agreement. I pay around $1400 per year for my internet service. If my ISP doesn't want me as a customer I'll just switch to the local ISP that is not a part of this ridiculous one sided agreement. It will be interesting to see if ISPs even try to enforce this in areas with competitors who are not part of the agreement.
How? By getting rid of their customers? By convincing their customers to only buy their lowest tier of service? By helping competitors who are not part of this silly agreement?
I don't agree. Talk is cheap. Let them actually kick you off the service first and only then go to a different ISP. Let them be the ones to make the decision that they do not want your dirty money.
I pay $120/month for my internet+landline service. if they kick just a tiny percentage, say 10,000 customers like me that would be 1.2 million dollars out of their pocket. I don't know how much the content industry is paying them for this, but it had better be a lot.
It's all fun and games until they choose you at random of which to make you an example.
IOW, for 99.999999999% of people it is all fun and games. That's called the safety of the herd. A principle that has worked for hundreds of thousands of years. It's true that some will be taken, but the likelyhood of any one person getting eaten by predators is actually pretty small. There are millions to hundreds of millions of people downloading files that infringe copyright right now. That's a pretty large herd.
Bzzt. Sorry. There actually is no such thing as "intellectual property". You can't own an idea. The can only own something tangible. Something physical. The whole concept of possession just doesn't work for abstractions like ideas. And there is no way to make it work either. Not even in a police state. Well, short of mind reading machines. If you want to prevent people from using your idea then keep it a secret. That is the only way.
And by that definition quoting someone on slashdot is also theft. Reductio ad absurdum. Also the use of the term intellectual property is pretty recent. I would say it wasn't used much before 1990. Besides, how certain biased people choose to use language has little to do with the law. Legally speaking copyright infringement is quite distinct from thievery.
Cyber war is like the war on drugs. Like the war on terror. Like all of the other 'wars' that are not wars at all. If this is Iran's idea of war then I say bring it on. It was idiotic of us to start this shit in the first place. When someone in Iran wants to buy something they go to a store. Disabling their internets would just slightly invonvenience them. For us it would be more than just a slight inconvenience. It would be a serious inconvenience.
If the new idea of "war" is not to kill anyone, but instead to just disable some web sites well that's a new world order that I can back enthusiastically. Maybe the world will be civilized enough some day to fight wars completely in cyber-space through special video games approved by both sides.
The idea of a cyber Pearl Harbor is one of the most idiotic things I've heard in a while. What these idiots don't seem to understand is that 'information super highway' is just a figure of speech. There is no actual highway or anything.
"We won't succeed in preventing a cyber attack through improved defenses alone," Mr. Panetta said. "If we detect an imminent threat of attack that will cause significant, physical destruction in the United States or kill American citizens, we need to have the option to take action against those who would attack us to defend this nation when directed by the president. For these kinds of scenarios, the department has developed that capability to conduct effective operations to counter threats to our national interests in cyberspace."
This statement is so clearly insane that I don't even know what to say in response except it's not the Iranians that scare me. It's my own fucking idiotic shit-for-brains government. I can just imagine these violent idiots starting a war based on some random Iranian dude taking down some e-commerce sites. Ooh, Americans are not able to complete their Amazon orders for a few hours. Boohoo. Let's go to war.
Slashdot Mirror
How does isuppli know the exact amounts that both Apple and Amazon pay for their parts? If I were law enforcement I'd certainly be wondering how they came by that confidential information legally. I highly doubt either company would give away such information freely.
How is this "accounting for his actions" supposed to work again?
What do you mean "our"? Do you mean to imply that you yourself are not rich? I'm willing to bet that you are. Compared to lots of people in the world. And since you are in control may I ask if you could please simply summarily execute every cop in North America even accused of police brutality? I would certainly appreciate it.
I don't know about Canada, but in the US you do have that right. It has explicitly been uphold by, I think, every state now including the state of Massachusetts which was a bit late for the party. Police are not just random citizens. They are given huge power, the power to kill. With that power comes hightened scrutiny of their actions. In the modern world, smartphones are the greatest and perhaps only weapon against police brutality and murder.
Well, in the U.S. you could always draw your handgun at the two security guards and then just step away calmly. Concealed carry is a must for any budding photojournalist.
Those security guards had no authority except to ask you to leave. They had no authority to force you to delete any photos and if they try to physically detain you that would be assault and battery in the U.S. at least. You would certainly be justified in using force to defend yourself against the assailants. Cops are given special status to at least some extent, but security guards are not cops.
If you can keep your cool, when you've snapped a great takedown pick and a mall-cop demands something of you, politely decline, and start dialling 911 as you explain why they have no right to it.
What's that expression? From the frying pan into the fire? I don't know about Canada, but in the US doing that would be very stupid. U.S. police will always, always side with however seems to have the most authority. To them might makes right and the mall cops are clearly in a relative position of power/authority.
I don't have any experience with the RCMP, but these guys sounded plenty thuggish to me. The only difference would have been that American cops would have slammed the kid's head/face into the ground hard enough to break his nose and ribs and give him a concussion, put him in a chokehold until he turned blue or stopped breathing, and maybe kicked him in the face a few times and torture tazed him for "resisting".
And then he wouldn't have been just arrested. He would have been charged with all kinds of trumped up felonies, possibly including assault and battery with a deadly weapon and drug distribution or carrying an illegal weapon (which they would thoughfully add to your bag).
Haha. That's funny. I do that too. After I was severely beaten by a cop-thug killing cops in GTA4 gave me at least a small satisfaction. I just wish I could kill some of those vermin in real life.
I do sometimes fantasize about walking into a busy police station with a bomb strapped to my chest. Then, boom! Make the world at least a slightly better place.
What would be even cooler would be 100 remotely piloted drones with bombs in their noses blowing up 100 police stations simultaneously. That would rock! Or just send up drones that find police stations via GPS coordinates. No need to stay within radio range that way.
I don't know about Canada, but in the US pigs are supposed to have a reason to arrest someone for something other than "resisting arrest".
That's why U.S. cops always have certain charges they use against innocent people that have nothing to do with the actual events. Disturbing the peace, resisting arrest and sometimes even assault and battery against the officers in question. Arresting someone under false pretenses is false arrest and a violation of the person's civil rights. If they are imprisoned even for an hour it becomes false imprisonment as well. This sort of thing often happens when a cop feels disrespected in some way. From their twisted, thuggish POV, standing up for your rights is indistinguishable from giving them the finger or saying, "fuck you".
Actually I think the best thing to do in that situation would be to just run. As fast as you can. Period. As has already been mentioned cops are authoritarians. They are not going to be on your side. As they clearly were not in this case. By calling them you've just made your situation even worse. It's sad that taking photographs is treated like a crime nowadays, but that is the sad state of affairs here in north america.
How are rich people responsible for thuggish, authoritarian cops and security guards? It sounds to me like governments ultimately have to be held responsible for it. The War Against Photography has little to do with any sort of rich vs poor class warfare.
But would putting a US tariff on Chinese rare earth minerals do anything? Most US companies manufacture offshore these days anyway. What is to stop such companies from just importing the minerals to their manufacturing facilities in Malaysia or Thailand or Mexico? And if you did find a way to close that loophole how would you prevent European or Asian companies from outcompeting US companies with the use of cheap Chinese minerals and magnets? What you really need is some kind of international treaty that boycotts Chinese rare earth minerals for their sleazy business practices.
The U.S. is the only country I know of where violating TOS is a felony.
Well it depends what you mean by "learn". It might take a child 7 years or more to learn their language properly. If you had 1 or 2 tutors who lived with you for 7 years and were constantly teaching you, well, it would depend on how intelligent you were I suppose, and how good your memory is. Those tones are tough though. Just distinguishing them let alone making them.
So are you arguing that all change is good or just change that comes from Microsoft? I'm so adaptable, so in love with change, that I welcome global warming. I say, "bring it on!". A new world order where giant geckos run things? No problem. OTOH, everything microsoft touches turns to shit and Windows 8 is proof of that. Windows 8 is a fine operating system for 3 year olds. Let them 'upgrade' to it.
Meanwhile rational, sensible adults can stick with XP if it serves their needs. Windows 7 is either slightly better or slightly worse depending on how you measure. Linux and OSX are better than either XP or 7 by most standards.
Windows 8 isn't even worth discussing. It may be easy enough for a 3 year old to use, but it's useless enough that no one else would want to. "Windows 8. The official operating system of the special olympics. Finally an OS for the mentally retarded as well as their 3 year old children
Google Irene Pepperberg and Alex the African Grey. IIRC, Alex tested at about the same level as a 2 year old human.
Who are you calling a simple mimic? Parrots have been shown to understand concepts. To have the ability to generalize from concrete instances. To create abstractions. Categories. And possibly to plan for the future as well.
Well the first problem is that there is no such thing as intellectual property. It simply does not exist and never will. Selling zeros and ones was always an overly optimistic exercise. Information wants to be free and the only way to prevent that freedom is not to release the information into the world. Once that is done you can't get it back. It is out there. It doesn't matter how many people go to prison. The nature of information will remain unchanged.
Yet another example of how the U.S. is not a civilized country.
Somehow the content industry has convinced the ISPs to give up a large percentage of their customers. We'll just have to wait and see how effective this is.
This new measure will be effective within the borders of the United States if and only if:
1. The majority of the ISP's customers never torrent or infringe copyright online. It would be funny if some ISPs were willing to actually go out of business to help enforce copyright law.
2. The ISPs are willing to lose at least some amount of money.
3. No other ISPs are willing to cross the picket line by not being part of this.
4. The ISPs are willing to prevent known infringers from just signing up again.
5. People don't simply sign up for a VPN just before their ISP kicks them off.
It just so happens that one of my local choices for broadband ISPs (I have at least 3) is not a part of this agreement. I pay around $1400 per year for my internet service. If my ISP doesn't want me as a customer I'll just switch to the local ISP that is not a part of this ridiculous one sided agreement. It will be interesting to see if ISPs even try to enforce this in areas with competitors who are not part of the agreement.
How? By getting rid of their customers? By convincing their customers to only buy their lowest tier of service? By helping competitors who are not part of this silly agreement?
I don't agree. Talk is cheap. Let them actually kick you off the service first and only then go to a different ISP. Let them be the ones to make the decision that they do not want your dirty money.
I pay $120/month for my internet+landline service. if they kick just a tiny percentage, say 10,000 customers like me that would be 1.2 million dollars out of their pocket. I don't know how much the content industry is paying them for this, but it had better be a lot.
It's all fun and games until they choose you at random of which to make you an example.
IOW, for 99.999999999% of people it is all fun and games. That's called the safety of the herd. A principle that has worked for hundreds of thousands of years. It's true that some will be taken, but the likelyhood of any one person getting eaten by predators is actually pretty small. There are millions to hundreds of millions of people downloading files that infringe copyright right now. That's a pretty large herd.
Bzzt. Sorry. There actually is no such thing as "intellectual property". You can't own an idea. The can only own something tangible. Something physical. The whole concept of possession just doesn't work for abstractions like ideas. And there is no way to make it work either. Not even in a police state. Well, short of mind reading machines. If you want to prevent people from using your idea then keep it a secret. That is the only way.
And by that definition quoting someone on slashdot is also theft. Reductio ad absurdum. Also the use of the term intellectual property is pretty recent. I would say it wasn't used much before 1990. Besides, how certain biased people choose to use language has little to do with the law. Legally speaking copyright infringement is quite distinct from thievery.
Cyber war is like the war on drugs. Like the war on terror. Like all of the other 'wars' that are not wars at all. If this is Iran's idea of war then I say bring it on. It was idiotic of us to start this shit in the first place. When someone in Iran wants to buy something they go to a store. Disabling their internets would just slightly invonvenience them. For us it would be more than just a slight inconvenience. It would be a serious inconvenience.
If the new idea of "war" is not to kill anyone, but instead to just disable some web sites well that's a new world order that I can back enthusiastically. Maybe the world will be civilized enough some day to fight wars completely in cyber-space through special video games approved by both sides.
The idea of a cyber Pearl Harbor is one of the most idiotic things I've heard in a while. What these idiots don't seem to understand is that 'information super highway' is just a figure of speech. There is no actual highway or anything.
"We won't succeed in preventing a cyber attack through improved defenses alone," Mr. Panetta said. "If we detect an imminent threat of attack that will cause significant, physical destruction in the United States or kill American citizens, we need to have the option to take action against those who would attack us to defend this nation when directed by the president. For these kinds of scenarios, the department has developed that capability to conduct effective operations to counter threats to our national interests in cyberspace."
This statement is so clearly insane that I don't even know what to say in response except it's not the Iranians that scare me. It's my own fucking idiotic shit-for-brains government. I can just imagine these violent idiots starting a war based on some random Iranian dude taking down some e-commerce sites. Ooh, Americans are not able to complete their Amazon orders for a few hours. Boohoo. Let's go to war.