Hell, we're already dealing with this in Florida in regards to Hulk Hogan's waste-of-space-and-oxygen son, who is in jail in connection with a little bit of spectacularly bad drunken driving that turned his best friend into a vegetable.
On a more abstract level, it also showed that he felt there was no problem flouting the rules under which society operates under for his own benefit. It's one thing to take a principled stand against those rules you disagree with, but it's quite another to exhibit behavior more associated with the common criminal element just so you can get something for yourself.
The kid won't get any time behind bars, but he *does* need some. Not because the actual crime he committed was of great import, but because letting him get away with it without any substantial penalty will encourage him on to bigger and better things. This is the kind of guy that becomes Ken Lay or Bernie Ebbers.
He hasn't even been convicted of anything yet. It's just a sensationalist headline that should read "Student could face up to 38 years...". He almost certainly will not be convicted of all the charges pending against him, and I will be surprised if he receives any prison time at all.
Unless there is a law against it and the penalties outweigh the profits to be gained by breaking said law, companies will do anything to prevent you from getting something for free they could sell to you.
If nothing else, building DRM that understands fair use exceptions is going to have to wait for the introduction of AI competent enough to interpret case law on the fly.
Again, the way for them to get people to pay for their products isn't for them to create these draconian tech stops that do nothing but make everything more complicated, but content makers do deserve to be paid.
And in the US, at least, content makers have an obligation to provide their content into the public domain in order to enrich society, for which they're granted the limited privilege of copyright. For many, many years, those same content makers have shown absolutely no indication that they intend to honor that bargain, and have even shown that they will take any necessary steps to avoid fulfilling their end of the agreement. *THAT* is stealing (per the actual meaning of the word) on a grand scale, far more so than any case of copyright infringement that's shown up in any courthouse.
Perhaps when the content providers show a bit more respect to the society that gives them the money and freedom to create, and some degree of respect for the fact that the exclusive opportunity to make money from their creations for a limited time is a *gift* from that same society, I'll be a bit more concerned about their financial well-being.
explain that spamming 1000 people may get him 1 extra sale, but it will piss off the other 999 to the extent that some of them will go out of their way to avoid trading with you
Also explain that it probably wouldn't be a good thing if one or more of those 999 are existing customers that just became former customers as a result.
But, because I am not blinded by the sheeple mentality I do actually see that there is a benefit to DRM if used properly, implemented properly...
Not to the purchaser, unless you want to say "without DRM, the content would not have been made available at all". Any digital file without DRM is inherently more flexible and useful than after it's applied, and to say that it's beneficial to the purchaser is twisting words around - DRM exists solely to benefit the content provider at the expense of the purchaser.
As regards the "sheeple" comment - just because someone doesn't agree with your opinion doesn't automatically make them incapable of critical thought. I read your opinion, I understand it, but I still disagree with it from the perspective of the buying public - that doesn't make me or anyone else deserving of that kind of ad hom.
I've fired quite a few weapons, and a good weapon will have an effortless trigger.
Define "effortless" in some kind of meaningful units. Five pounds is a fairly light trigger, and no safe trigger is just "a few grams" unless it's on a competition weapon that will never see action outside of a tournament.
Here's an experiment - go find a friend, give him a paintbrush with a healthy dollop of red paint, then have him stand at arm's length. At the word "go", see if you can hit him three times in the head with a water pistol before he marks you all up with the paint.
This of course assumes that you'd already drawn the weapon at the start of the fight, which would add another half-second or so. Maybe I didn't make myself clear, but I've actually *done* this drill quite a few times, and I can reliably do what you say and make three head shots at that range while shooting from a retention position at my side. From a holstered ready stance it takes me a little less than two seconds to get those three shots off (disregarding the effects of adrenaline that would be present in a real altercation). I've yet to be able to pull off three shots without avoiding contact with the (blunted) knife, and I've yet to see anyone else do it either. One of the things you get drilled into your head in CQ classes is that if you've let the assailant get that close, you're almost certainly going to get hurt, so you need to be ready for it and not be surprised when it happens, so you'll keep focus to continue fighting on.
however we are not in an ideal world yet, and we need FDRs.
Oh, you mean people that will just hand the future of the nation over to the banking industry?
they exclusively craft favorable conditions for their masters. this in the end makes judiciary just a tool under their hands, willingly or unwillingly
Yeah, whatever. You'd instead rather put *total* discretion in the hands of one man that, in the process of being elected President, accepted millions of dollars in special-interest money to get elected, and likely accepted millions before that in being elected to lower office, and then you think that somehow he won't be beholden to those interests, right? I appreciate the youthful idealism, but this is the real world we're dealing with.
Maybe the major ISPs cutting off Usenet access will help improve that situation. Dunno how many spammers will go to the trouble of going to Giganews, Supernews, etc., and I'd hope that the NNTP providers would be a bit more proactive in killing spammy accounts.
.45 still isn't bad though.:-) The right equipment makes all the difference - I've got a Knoxx Spec-Ops stock on my Mossberg shotty, and it brings the kick down to less than what I get from a.30-06 even when using high-velocity slugs. I did one class last year and went through more than 400 rounds of 00 buckshot without the least bit of soreness afterwards.
And then you have the folks like me, who'd probably stop you to compare holsters and whatnot.:-) I love my Serpa, BTW - too bad I live in a state where open carry isn't legal.
So the proper analogy for somebody on your property would be somebody in my front yard.
In these kinds of places though, finding someone in your front yard means they've already walked quite a ways off the nearest road. If I've got 100 acres and my driveway is a quarter-mile long, I'm not going to just ignore someone in my front yard without my permission. They had to make an effort to arrive there, and I have a right to know why.
it only takes a few grams of pressure to pull a trigger, my point stands.
Your point is still not valid. The lightest trigger pull on any gun I own is about 4 pounds, or roughly 2000 grams. The lightest that I've ever fired was about half that, which still in no way could be construed as being "a few" grams, and in my opinion is way too light to be safe for a self-defense gun. The heaviest pull on one of my guns is just shy of 10 pounds. Three pounds of force applied with a sharp knife will produce a rather nasty wound, and won't do anything at all when applied to the trigger of any of my guns. Hell, I've had blood drawn by a falling piece of paper.
let me know when a blade produces a fist sized exit wound and has the concussive force of a bullet.
Concussive force doesn't mean jack in the context of firearm injuries (it's less than being punched even when talking about something like a.50 BMG), and there aren't many handgun rounds that are designed to produce exit wounds at all - an exit wound means some of the bullet's energy has been wasted. It's also quite easy to hit a non-vital area with a bullet and thus not produce a lot of bleeding. The same is true when stabbing someone, but a good slash with a knife is going to result in a substantial loss of blood *wherever* it's applied.
You're trying to argue a generalization that being shot is always worse than being slashed or stabbed, and that's just not true. Either can be fatal, both suck quite a lot for the recipient, and both would be best avoided where possible. However, if the fight has gotten to arm's reach, there's simply no guarantee whatsoever that the guy with the gun will come out on top, nor any reason to think he has more of a chance than the other guy.
I can shoot someone 3 times or more with a handgun at point blank range before they even reach me. The force necessary to pull the trigger is minimal.
I seriously doubt you can, and I've got quite a few hours and thousands of rounds of close quarters tactical handgun training to give me that impression. "Point blank" when talking about handguns is about arm's length. At that range, someone with a knife can have you bleeding fatally before you get the second shot off if they have any degree of skill. At 7 yards, you should be able to do it fairly easily if you're practiced, but at one yard? No, there's not much you're going to be able to do to avoid getting cut at that range.
Unlike Cringley, said "experts" often had a lot of consulting fees riding on the perception of a global Y2K crisis. At least it made the COBOL folks feel important for a little while.
if supreme court acts to protect corporate interests at the expense of the people, and 'interprets' law to that effect, i dont see any issues with a president trying to bypass supreme court.
No offense, but you really have no business voting then.
We have a Justice Department that is absolutely unwilling to prosecute any big corporations for anti-trust. It's been like this for the last 2 decades...
I agree that the current DoJ is very averse to anti-trust actions, but the "2 decades" part is provably false - Clinton's DoJ successfully pursued an anti-trust action, and the only reason MS got off scot-free was because of an idiot judge that couldn't keep his mouth closed, resulting in an appeal that spilled over into Dubya's term, at which time the new Bush DoJ decided to let MS off with a hand slap even though the appeals court upheld the original finding of MS's guilt.
Slashdot Mirror
Hell, we're already dealing with this in Florida in regards to Hulk Hogan's waste-of-space-and-oxygen son, who is in jail in connection with a little bit of spectacularly bad drunken driving that turned his best friend into a vegetable.
Meh, just save yourself a sleeper ship and park his ass on Ceti Alpha V right off the bat.
Yeah, he doeas deserve an ass kicking, but punishment should be fitting.
I'm sure it will be, and it won't be anything even within sight of 38 years in prison. There's not even been a trial yet.
Beyond punitive retribution for wrongs committed, there needs to be some kind of constructive correction.
But first there needs to actually be a trial. This kid will almost certainly only get probation when all is said and done.
On a more abstract level, it also showed that he felt there was no problem flouting the rules under which society operates under for his own benefit. It's one thing to take a principled stand against those rules you disagree with, but it's quite another to exhibit behavior more associated with the common criminal element just so you can get something for yourself.
The kid won't get any time behind bars, but he *does* need some. Not because the actual crime he committed was of great import, but because letting him get away with it without any substantial penalty will encourage him on to bigger and better things. This is the kind of guy that becomes Ken Lay or Bernie Ebbers.
He hasn't even been convicted of anything yet. It's just a sensationalist headline that should read "Student could face up to 38 years...". He almost certainly will not be convicted of all the charges pending against him, and I will be surprised if he receives any prison time at all.
Unless there is a law against it and the penalties outweigh the profits to be gained by breaking said law, companies will do anything to prevent you from getting something for free they could sell to you.
:-)
Fixed it for you.
If nothing else, building DRM that understands fair use exceptions is going to have to wait for the introduction of AI competent enough to interpret case law on the fly.
:-)
Would that be the "NYCL" module?
Again, the way for them to get people to pay for their products isn't for them to create these draconian tech stops that do nothing but make everything more complicated, but content makers do deserve to be paid.
And in the US, at least, content makers have an obligation to provide their content into the public domain in order to enrich society, for which they're granted the limited privilege of copyright. For many, many years, those same content makers have shown absolutely no indication that they intend to honor that bargain, and have even shown that they will take any necessary steps to avoid fulfilling their end of the agreement. *THAT* is stealing (per the actual meaning of the word) on a grand scale, far more so than any case of copyright infringement that's shown up in any courthouse.
Perhaps when the content providers show a bit more respect to the society that gives them the money and freedom to create, and some degree of respect for the fact that the exclusive opportunity to make money from their creations for a limited time is a *gift* from that same society, I'll be a bit more concerned about their financial well-being.
Not as effective as the dialect of that language known as "writing a check".
explain that spamming 1000 people may get him 1 extra sale, but it will piss off the other 999 to the extent that some of them will go out of their way to avoid trading with you
Also explain that it probably wouldn't be a good thing if one or more of those 999 are existing customers that just became former customers as a result.
But, because I am not blinded by the sheeple mentality I do actually see that there is a benefit to DRM if used properly, implemented properly...
Not to the purchaser, unless you want to say "without DRM, the content would not have been made available at all". Any digital file without DRM is inherently more flexible and useful than after it's applied, and to say that it's beneficial to the purchaser is twisting words around - DRM exists solely to benefit the content provider at the expense of the purchaser.
As regards the "sheeple" comment - just because someone doesn't agree with your opinion doesn't automatically make them incapable of critical thought. I read your opinion, I understand it, but I still disagree with it from the perspective of the buying public - that doesn't make me or anyone else deserving of that kind of ad hom.
I've fired quite a few weapons, and a good weapon will have an effortless trigger.
Define "effortless" in some kind of meaningful units. Five pounds is a fairly light trigger, and no safe trigger is just "a few grams" unless it's on a competition weapon that will never see action outside of a tournament. Here's an experiment - go find a friend, give him a paintbrush with a healthy dollop of red paint, then have him stand at arm's length. At the word "go", see if you can hit him three times in the head with a water pistol before he marks you all up with the paint.
This of course assumes that you'd already drawn the weapon at the start of the fight, which would add another half-second or so. Maybe I didn't make myself clear, but I've actually *done* this drill quite a few times, and I can reliably do what you say and make three head shots at that range while shooting from a retention position at my side. From a holstered ready stance it takes me a little less than two seconds to get those three shots off (disregarding the effects of adrenaline that would be present in a real altercation). I've yet to be able to pull off three shots without avoiding contact with the (blunted) knife, and I've yet to see anyone else do it either. One of the things you get drilled into your head in CQ classes is that if you've let the assailant get that close, you're almost certainly going to get hurt, so you need to be ready for it and not be surprised when it happens, so you'll keep focus to continue fighting on.
however we are not in an ideal world yet, and we need FDRs.
Oh, you mean people that will just hand the future of the nation over to the banking industry?
they exclusively craft favorable conditions for their masters. this in the end makes judiciary just a tool under their hands, willingly or unwillingly
Yeah, whatever. You'd instead rather put *total* discretion in the hands of one man that, in the process of being elected President, accepted millions of dollars in special-interest money to get elected, and likely accepted millions before that in being elected to lower office, and then you think that somehow he won't be beholden to those interests, right? I appreciate the youthful idealism, but this is the real world we're dealing with.
Maybe the major ISPs cutting off Usenet access will help improve that situation. Dunno how many spammers will go to the trouble of going to Giganews, Supernews, etc., and I'd hope that the NNTP providers would be a bit more proactive in killing spammy accounts.
And Qwest was the only one to tell Bush to take a hike re: the warrantless wiretapping, and probably got reamed for doing what was right.
.45 still isn't bad though. :-) The right equipment makes all the difference - I've got a Knoxx Spec-Ops stock on my Mossberg shotty, and it brings the kick down to less than what I get from a .30-06 even when using high-velocity slugs. I did one class last year and went through more than 400 rounds of 00 buckshot without the least bit of soreness afterwards.
And then you have the folks like me, who'd probably stop you to compare holsters and whatnot. :-) I love my Serpa, BTW - too bad I live in a state where open carry isn't legal.
So the proper analogy for somebody on your property would be somebody in my front yard.
In these kinds of places though, finding someone in your front yard means they've already walked quite a ways off the nearest road. If I've got 100 acres and my driveway is a quarter-mile long, I'm not going to just ignore someone in my front yard without my permission. They had to make an effort to arrive there, and I have a right to know why.
it only takes a few grams of pressure to pull a trigger, my point stands.
.50 BMG), and there aren't many handgun rounds that are designed to produce exit wounds at all - an exit wound means some of the bullet's energy has been wasted. It's also quite easy to hit a non-vital area with a bullet and thus not produce a lot of bleeding. The same is true when stabbing someone, but a good slash with a knife is going to result in a substantial loss of blood *wherever* it's applied.
Your point is still not valid. The lightest trigger pull on any gun I own is about 4 pounds, or roughly 2000 grams. The lightest that I've ever fired was about half that, which still in no way could be construed as being "a few" grams, and in my opinion is way too light to be safe for a self-defense gun. The heaviest pull on one of my guns is just shy of 10 pounds. Three pounds of force applied with a sharp knife will produce a rather nasty wound, and won't do anything at all when applied to the trigger of any of my guns. Hell, I've had blood drawn by a falling piece of paper.
let me know when a blade produces a fist sized exit wound and has the concussive force of a bullet.
Concussive force doesn't mean jack in the context of firearm injuries (it's less than being punched even when talking about something like a
You're trying to argue a generalization that being shot is always worse than being slashed or stabbed, and that's just not true. Either can be fatal, both suck quite a lot for the recipient, and both would be best avoided where possible. However, if the fight has gotten to arm's reach, there's simply no guarantee whatsoever that the guy with the gun will come out on top, nor any reason to think he has more of a chance than the other guy.
I can shoot someone 3 times or more with a handgun at point blank range before they even reach me. The force necessary to pull the trigger is minimal.
I seriously doubt you can, and I've got quite a few hours and thousands of rounds of close quarters tactical handgun training to give me that impression. "Point blank" when talking about handguns is about arm's length. At that range, someone with a knife can have you bleeding fatally before you get the second shot off if they have any degree of skill. At 7 yards, you should be able to do it fairly easily if you're practiced, but at one yard? No, there's not much you're going to be able to do to avoid getting cut at that range.
Unlike Cringley, said "experts" often had a lot of consulting fees riding on the perception of a global Y2K crisis. At least it made the COBOL folks feel important for a little while.
I'll be happy to when you show how it's the least bit relevant to the "separation of powers" doctrine under discussion.
if supreme court acts to protect corporate interests at the expense of the people, and 'interprets' law to that effect, i dont see any issues with a president trying to bypass supreme court.
No offense, but you really have no business voting then.
We have a Justice Department that is absolutely unwilling to prosecute any big corporations for anti-trust. It's been like this for the last 2 decades...
I agree that the current DoJ is very averse to anti-trust actions, but the "2 decades" part is provably false - Clinton's DoJ successfully pursued an anti-trust action, and the only reason MS got off scot-free was because of an idiot judge that couldn't keep his mouth closed, resulting in an appeal that spilled over into Dubya's term, at which time the new Bush DoJ decided to let MS off with a hand slap even though the appeals court upheld the original finding of MS's guilt.