Well, truth be told, those people in Washington are elected. Perhaps people should look in the mirror and if they've voted for President Bush or anyone, and I mean ANYONE, that has voted for the UN-Patriot Acts I & II, the DMCA, et al., seriously consider educating themselves before voting this time. Of course that won't happen.
What are the odds he/she used a default password to gain access? I mean this is the government we are talking about here.
Don't you mean this is a Bush appointee agency we're talking about? Valuing loyalty is understandable, even laudable in some ways. Putting people in agencies that they have no business running, or working in, is ridiculous and dangerous.
The only administration I know of that took cronyism to an even higher level was U.S. Grant's.
Naah. Society has lost it's mind when it comes to children, period. There's some sort of popular myth that started with the Baby Boomer generation that children need to be protected from everything. I'm not saying that sexual abuse of a child is ever right, but I'm saying that we have come to hold this purported "innocence" as sacrosanct, much to the detriment of society in general, as we have raised a generation of kids unable to deal with even getting a job on their own. The sooner we realize that kids don't need coddled, and need to be educated, this shit will go away by itself for a large part.
Being from a large family, and now having nieces, nephews, et al, all the way down to cousins that are still in diapers I can testify to the fact that "innocence" is mostly a myth. I've heard from parents and others in my family, in schools, et al, what kids start talking about by the time they're 10. Very graphic. At more than one high-cost religious or private academy I was installing networks at, the talk of the teachers would invariably turn to what the kids are talking about. Invariably sex is on the top of the list including what some teachers would overhear about what some kids were doing by accident (more than one teacher had walked in on kids in the bathroom performing sex acts, one walked in on a 13 yr girl giving a 12 yr old boy a blow, AT SCHOOL).
Innocence, what a farking myth. That being said, child molestors and anyone more than 5 years older than the minor they're jumping should be convicted without mercy.
I don't get this argument. DVD used a red laser, at a shorter wavelength than cd obviously, but still technology they had been making for some time (10+ years!). People didn't like the DVD prices (which were anywhere from 30-50 dollars per movie) but they didn't act like they were getting gouged for new tech. BD uses a blue laser, that's only been made for the last couple of years period. People act like 30-40 dollar movies are out of line for new tech.
Meh. Just makes me more discriminate when I buy, just as I did when DVD came out.
The advantages of DVD over VHS were pretty immediately apparent - alternate languages, subtitles, random access, improved picture and (perhaps more importantly) sound quality, etc.
People in the beginning didn't think DVD was that much better than VHS. The only affordable players at first ( less than 300$-400$ first 3-4 years) were those with 4 bit DAC's that resulted in horrible artifacts. Some transfers were just atrocious. For the first couple of years discs might come with a desync'd audio / video track that you had to beat the studios into submission to replace. Most people didn't give two craps about the alternate languages. Sound quality, especially in the low-end units during the first couple of years, was atrocious. TV's were smaller on average, (most people had less than a 32" TV) without composite inputs, so they had to run it through their VCR's if they didn't buy a new TV (lowering picture quality even further.) The movies were expensive (ironically enough, the same price as current BD) and you had a limited selection. You could order a larger selection at a cheaper price from Amazon for the first couple of years, and new releases were much cheaper there (just as now with BD). Most people couldn't tell about the audio quality because even less had surround sound systems than today. A good receiver then would set you back just as much as a high-end Onkyo does today, and you can get 7.1 Dolby TrueHD, decent speakers, et al, today for less than you could get 5.1 for then and it's easier to hook up. DVD was harder to hook up if you did have a widescreen because most players defaulted to 4:3 so if you had a 16:9 TV (i.e. you spent 2500+) the picture looked funny.
Wonk Wonk Wonk. I could go on, but every argument leveled against BD was leveled against DVD and then some. Heck since BD can play DVD, it'll end up the standard if for no other reason than manufacturer fiat.
DVD is just a bad idea. It is being forced upon a uncaring and unwanted public and is an inferior product that simply isn't needed or desired. DVD exists only for one reason. Greed. Motion picture studios are always looking for a way to sell the same stuff over and over again and they think DVD is the answer. Electronics giants are always looking for the hot new gadget that will make consumers junk their existing products and they feel that DVD is the answer. Its not. Actually, it is an answer to a non existent question. A question that has never been and never will be asked.
That guy referenced Selecta too. The differences for DVD weren't clear either. The big sets weren't selling to the yet, just as HD doesn't really hasn't sold many now. The connections, av equipment, et al, were all behind the curve of DVD. People thought DVD looked worse, as a point of fact, especially if they bought a 4-bit DAC player.
Add in the fact that BR can play / upscale DVD's and prices are falling a hair faster than the original DVD players did, and the format will take over by manufacturer fiat.
That, and the fact that many Blu-Ray discs take 90+ seconds to go from insertion to movie watching is just stupid. If I buy a copy of a movie I want to watch it, not play with it.
I remember this at the beginning DVD as well. Previews you couldn't skip, desync'd audio/video, horrible transfers, players with 4-bit DAC's artifacting, ridiculous prices, et al.
I take it all in stride, and that's why the current doom / gloom has little effect on me. I remember when people were predicting that DVD was dead.
I don't know about that. After watching some cult classics (Bladerunner, the Road Warrior) and animations, plus some action flicks, the Blu-Ray version rocks the socks off up-converted DVD (with a REON chip).
Detectors can be set to register titanium, but titanium does not register like surgical steel does.
Wow, I guess that would matter if I had more titanium in me. Considering that my doc said stainless (minus the arm pin, which is titanium and actually said Ti on the bill) for both the plate and cancellous (sp?) screws, I should light up the detector.
On a side note, GREAT! So a terrorist can make a TI64AV2 knife (not an easy proposition, granted) and smuggle it onto the plane! Well, unless we're talking about volume of metal again, which is determined by a preset amount of PI reflectivity.
I've got 9 screws and a plate. I have never set off a detector. I asked my doctor about this, and he said that the alloy they have been using for the last decade or so does not set off detectors like the old surgical steel does.
Nope, try again. They aren't testing whether it's magnetic (it may seem that way, but no), et al, they're checking reflective metallic density. My leg alone has more metal in it than some of lighter model concealable handguns (minus ammo) and my my other plate / screws could account for two maybe three rounds of small caliber ammo. Now on a multi-zone detector, my leg and shoulder should stand out like a hotspot.
They can't distinguish between different types of metal, otherwise I could just make a weapon of a non-registering type of metal and walk through. That's even less secure than what they currently have!
Many people make the mistake you have so don't feel bad.
I have 22 screws, couple of plates, and pins. I should light up a metal detector like a christmas tree. Yet when I fly, I often get waved right through without any apparent reaction. This has happened at multiple busy airports in larger cities. Yet when I go through my local airport (where, oddly enough, they know me) I get the beep and separate pat down.
People meekly accept this BS (along with the liquids ban, et al) as "security" when it's really BS.
Poor, false security is worse than none at all. The only explanation is that when it is busy, they turn down the sensitivity to a ridiculously low level.
Draveed: Why should workers be allowed to collude to fix wages?
Other than skipping 90% of the argument, fine. Ok, then why should management be able to talk to each other to collude and fix wage prices they will pay the employees? Logical absurdity is the point you've hit with your statement. There are more workers available. You might have to train them, but they're out there. Conversely when you're talking about companies, there might be (in a bad area) only one or two airlines that service your airport. The government should also be neutral in these affairs, acting only as the arbiter of one thing: the law.
FYI, in the corporation still has ultimate power, it can fire them. There may be unpleasant consequences, but strikes have unpleasant consequences for the employees as well. That whole not getting paid thing tends to impact one's ability to pay the bills. The loss of a job really limit's one's ability to pay the bills.
I love the so-called free-marketeer responses to unions: "Blackmail!" "Were I to have a company do this, it'd be price fixing!" "mutter mutter, GOVERNMENT INTERFEARENCE!" (unless, of course, it's helping the corporation then it's "responsible government"
Never mind that you can replace anyone, at anytime, including the (usually) soft-headed CEO.
Reapman: You can't just say "no flying" and expect the world to move on even remotely close to normal.
Seems like a good chunk of leverage for the employee to use. Market forces at work and all that. Oh wait, unless it's a corporation generating it, it's not a market force. Nope when it's a union it's "blackmail."
jfp51:"You must be too young to rememember when Reagan fired all the striking ATC's in the late 80's. Too bad no one doesn't have the balls to stick it to the unions like he did these days..."
So Unions are ebil and corporations are good blah blah blah, fill_in_the_right_wing_bullsh*t_reference.
In truth Reagan should have let the ATC's go on strike. All that bullsh*t about the economy was just that, bullsh*t. The same goes for police and firefighters and teachers and anything else. Everyone can go on strike, yippee! Of course there is the danger of being replaced...
For being a "free-marketeer" Reagan interfered in the market quite a bit. I mean, what's the market worth if employer and employee cannot each use the leverage they have to bargain against each other? Reagan replacing all of the ATC's due to the threatened strike took away the one BIG card they had to bargain with: "We don't think this is fair and we'd rather not work, and not be paid, than work for what you're offering."
All the free-marketeers I've ever met, aren't very free market when it's the workers using their power against the corporation. They bemoan the ebil gubbermint interFEARence, unless it's benefiting them. When it benefits them, all of a sudden government is "being responsible", et al.
This guy was fired right? Perchance was the city have been dumb enough to fire him BEFORE getting the passwords? Should that be the case, he should be under no LEGAL obligation to turn them over. THEY fired him. His job ended when they terminated him, and all responsibilities to it ended as well.
Of course he's still a nut, but I won't condemn him without the whole story. I seriously doubt we're getting the whole story.
ATI has had a bad history of buggy drivers, so it's my fervent hope that under AMD's helm this frustration becomes a thing of the past.
Too true. I won't be the first person to try them out. I remember the old catalyst drivers as being the impetus for my initial switch to Nvidia. I'll wait until the dust settles around the holiday season and see how the other geeks at work do using ATI cards. 2 guys plan on switching to 48xx something. One guy for sure won't, even if Nvidia is slower, because he can't stand ATI drivers.
Yeah, I agree. I think they were trying to do something similar to consoles, but with a monthly fee. Remember you could buy stuff for Oblivion? separately online for the X360.
Personally, at that point, I'd rather pay Blizzard for a persistent world if I was going to do an MMO. At least they release a product that WORKS.
Another problem was that they had crap drop that ONLY a subscriber could use to any player. They probably saw it as an incentive to get an account, and really it was just an irritant according to one of my friends. They also lacked a way to sell stuff AFK (i.e. a market or auction house) unless you sold it to NPC's.
According to my friend, a LOT of problems with Hellgate. I didn't play it myself though.
1) Release the demo before the game's release, preferably by two weeks. Let the game generate the buzz. Game makers used to do this.
2) Quit releasing tech demos. Yeah, Crysis is pretty, if you have a rig to run it at other than slideshow speeds (especially when it first came out).
Some people pirate to be "cool." Some people pirate because they don't have the money but want it "right now". Some people pirate because they're sick of paying US$50 to beta test a game they don't like anyway. The guy at Ironclad said it best, if you build a good game that will run on many computers, you'll make money.
It's a line that should be very clear and sometimes isn't.
Very true.
Keith Olbermann and Bill O'Reilly don't really hide the fact that they're commentators and not reporters. Anyone thinking either of those two are reporters, well, they should get their heads examined. Nancy Grace / Glenn Beck aren't reporters anymore than Lou Dobbs.
Then again, most networks want the controversy to sell ads to a particular demographic. Fox, right-wing. MSNBC, left-wing. CNN, kinda mushy middle depending on the commentator (whether the commentator is left or right). We also have more commentary and less news nowadays.
Which is one thing I don't get. The "Right" is always complaining that the "Mainstream Media is Liberal!!11!1!11!elevetyone!!" is it not? So, in holding with that theory, if they're not lying the fairness doctrine would help them. Look at it this way, if the media were truly liberal, then they'd have to have more conservative guests to meet fairness doctrine rules.
Then again, since the mainstream media is corporate (i.e. what sells ads) and not liberal, would it really matter?
And legally, wouldn't fall under something similar to "willful blindness"?
i.e. deliberate failure to make a reasonable inquiry of wrongdoing (as drug dealing in one's house) despite suspicion or an awareness of the high probability of its existence Willful blindness involves conscious avoidance of the truth and gives rise to an inference of knowledge of the crime in question.
Slashdot Mirror
About 90GB per month. I'm on a business line for a reason. Part of it is the SLA, since my work is often time-sensitive.
Well, truth be told, those people in Washington are elected. Perhaps people should look in the mirror and if they've voted for President Bush or anyone, and I mean ANYONE, that has voted for the UN-Patriot Acts I & II, the DMCA, et al., seriously consider educating themselves before voting this time. Of course that won't happen.
What are the odds he/she used a default password to gain access? I mean this is the government we are talking about here.
Don't you mean this is a Bush appointee agency we're talking about? Valuing loyalty is understandable, even laudable in some ways. Putting people in agencies that they have no business running, or working in, is ridiculous and dangerous.
The only administration I know of that took cronyism to an even higher level was U.S. Grant's.
We didn't make it first, but that won't stop us from trying to patent it!
Naah. Society has lost it's mind when it comes to children, period. There's some sort of popular myth that started with the Baby Boomer generation that children need to be protected from everything. I'm not saying that sexual abuse of a child is ever right, but I'm saying that we have come to hold this purported "innocence" as sacrosanct, much to the detriment of society in general, as we have raised a generation of kids unable to deal with even getting a job on their own. The sooner we realize that kids don't need coddled, and need to be educated, this shit will go away by itself for a large part. Being from a large family, and now having nieces, nephews, et al, all the way down to cousins that are still in diapers I can testify to the fact that "innocence" is mostly a myth. I've heard from parents and others in my family, in schools, et al, what kids start talking about by the time they're 10. Very graphic. At more than one high-cost religious or private academy I was installing networks at, the talk of the teachers would invariably turn to what the kids are talking about. Invariably sex is on the top of the list including what some teachers would overhear about what some kids were doing by accident (more than one teacher had walked in on kids in the bathroom performing sex acts, one walked in on a 13 yr girl giving a 12 yr old boy a blow, AT SCHOOL). Innocence, what a farking myth. That being said, child molestors and anyone more than 5 years older than the minor they're jumping should be convicted without mercy.
I don't get this argument. DVD used a red laser, at a shorter wavelength than cd obviously, but still technology they had been making for some time (10+ years!). People didn't like the DVD prices (which were anywhere from 30-50 dollars per movie) but they didn't act like they were getting gouged for new tech. BD uses a blue laser, that's only been made for the last couple of years period. People act like 30-40 dollar movies are out of line for new tech.
Meh. Just makes me more discriminate when I buy, just as I did when DVD came out.
The advantages of DVD over VHS were pretty immediately apparent - alternate languages, subtitles, random access, improved picture and (perhaps more importantly) sound quality, etc.
People in the beginning didn't think DVD was that much better than VHS. The only affordable players at first ( less than 300$-400$ first 3-4 years) were those with 4 bit DAC's that resulted in horrible artifacts. Some transfers were just atrocious. For the first couple of years discs might come with a desync'd audio / video track that you had to beat the studios into submission to replace. Most people didn't give two craps about the alternate languages. Sound quality, especially in the low-end units during the first couple of years, was atrocious. TV's were smaller on average, (most people had less than a 32" TV) without composite inputs, so they had to run it through their VCR's if they didn't buy a new TV (lowering picture quality even further.) The movies were expensive (ironically enough, the same price as current BD) and you had a limited selection. You could order a larger selection at a cheaper price from Amazon for the first couple of years, and new releases were much cheaper there (just as now with BD). Most people couldn't tell about the audio quality because even less had surround sound systems than today. A good receiver then would set you back just as much as a high-end Onkyo does today, and you can get 7.1 Dolby TrueHD, decent speakers, et al, today for less than you could get 5.1 for then and it's easier to hook up. DVD was harder to hook up if you did have a widescreen because most players defaulted to 4:3 so if you had a 16:9 TV (i.e. you spent 2500+) the picture looked funny.
Wonk Wonk Wonk. I could go on, but every argument leveled against BD was leveled against DVD and then some. Heck since BD can play DVD, it'll end up the standard if for no other reason than manufacturer fiat.
Mhmmm, was this you?
DVD is just a bad idea. It is being forced upon a uncaring and unwanted public and is an inferior product that simply isn't needed or desired. DVD exists only for one reason. Greed. Motion picture studios are always looking for a way to sell the same stuff over and over again and they think DVD is the answer. Electronics giants are always looking for the hot new gadget that will make consumers junk their existing products and they feel that DVD is the answer. Its not. Actually, it is an answer to a non existent question. A question that has never been and never will be asked.
That guy referenced Selecta too. The differences for DVD weren't clear either. The big sets weren't selling to the yet, just as HD doesn't really hasn't sold many now. The connections, av equipment, et al, were all behind the curve of DVD. People thought DVD looked worse, as a point of fact, especially if they bought a 4-bit DAC player.
Add in the fact that BR can play / upscale DVD's and prices are falling a hair faster than the original DVD players did, and the format will take over by manufacturer fiat.
That, and the fact that many Blu-Ray discs take 90+ seconds to go from insertion to movie watching is just stupid. If I buy a copy of a movie I want to watch it, not play with it.
I remember this at the beginning DVD as well. Previews you couldn't skip, desync'd audio/video, horrible transfers, players with 4-bit DAC's artifacting, ridiculous prices, et al.
I take it all in stride, and that's why the current doom / gloom has little effect on me. I remember when people were predicting that DVD was dead.
I don't know about that. After watching some cult classics (Bladerunner, the Road Warrior) and animations, plus some action flicks, the Blu-Ray version rocks the socks off up-converted DVD (with a REON chip).
People thought the same at the beginning of DVD, or worse.
DVD Will Fail
Detectors can be set to register titanium, but titanium does not register like surgical steel does.
Wow, I guess that would matter if I had more titanium in me. Considering that my doc said stainless (minus the arm pin, which is titanium and actually said Ti on the bill) for both the plate and cancellous (sp?) screws, I should light up the detector.
On a side note, GREAT! So a terrorist can make a TI64AV2 knife (not an easy proposition, granted) and smuggle it onto the plane! Well, unless we're talking about volume of metal again, which is determined by a preset amount of PI reflectivity.
Yep, the illusion of safety.
I've got 9 screws and a plate. I have never set off a detector. I asked my doctor about this, and he said that the alloy they have been using for the last decade or so does not set off detectors like the old surgical steel does.
Nope, try again. They aren't testing whether it's magnetic (it may seem that way, but no), et al, they're checking reflective metallic density. My leg alone has more metal in it than some of lighter model concealable handguns (minus ammo) and my my other plate / screws could account for two maybe three rounds of small caliber ammo. Now on a multi-zone detector, my leg and shoulder should stand out like a hotspot.
They can't distinguish between different types of metal, otherwise I could just make a weapon of a non-registering type of metal and walk through. That's even less secure than what they currently have!
Many people make the mistake you have so don't feel bad.
Yes I said worthless.
I have 22 screws, couple of plates, and pins. I should light up a metal detector like a christmas tree. Yet when I fly, I often get waved right through without any apparent reaction. This has happened at multiple busy airports in larger cities. Yet when I go through my local airport (where, oddly enough, they know me) I get the beep and separate pat down.
People meekly accept this BS (along with the liquids ban, et al) as "security" when it's really BS.
Poor, false security is worse than none at all. The only explanation is that when it is busy, they turn down the sensitivity to a ridiculously low level.
Draveed: Why should workers be allowed to collude to fix wages?
Other than skipping 90% of the argument, fine. Ok, then why should management be able to talk to each other to collude and fix wage prices they will pay the employees? Logical absurdity is the point you've hit with your statement. There are more workers available. You might have to train them, but they're out there. Conversely when you're talking about companies, there might be (in a bad area) only one or two airlines that service your airport. The government should also be neutral in these affairs, acting only as the arbiter of one thing: the law.
FYI, in the corporation still has ultimate power, it can fire them. There may be unpleasant consequences, but strikes have unpleasant consequences for the employees as well. That whole not getting paid thing tends to impact one's ability to pay the bills. The loss of a job really limit's one's ability to pay the bills.
I love the so-called free-marketeer responses to unions: "Blackmail!" "Were I to have a company do this, it'd be price fixing!" "mutter mutter, GOVERNMENT INTERFEARENCE!" (unless, of course, it's helping the corporation then it's "responsible government"
Never mind that you can replace anyone, at anytime, including the (usually) soft-headed CEO.
Reapman: You can't just say "no flying" and expect the world to move on even remotely close to normal.
Seems like a good chunk of leverage for the employee to use. Market forces at work and all that. Oh wait, unless it's a corporation generating it, it's not a market force. Nope when it's a union it's "blackmail."
jfp51: "You must be too young to rememember when Reagan fired all the striking ATC's in the late 80's. Too bad no one doesn't have the balls to stick it to the unions like he did these days..."
So Unions are ebil and corporations are good blah blah blah, fill_in_the_right_wing_bullsh*t_reference.
In truth Reagan should have let the ATC's go on strike. All that bullsh*t about the economy was just that, bullsh*t. The same goes for police and firefighters and teachers and anything else. Everyone can go on strike, yippee! Of course there is the danger of being replaced...
For being a "free-marketeer" Reagan interfered in the market quite a bit. I mean, what's the market worth if employer and employee cannot each use the leverage they have to bargain against each other? Reagan replacing all of the ATC's due to the threatened strike took away the one BIG card they had to bargain with: "We don't think this is fair and we'd rather not work, and not be paid, than work for what you're offering."
All the free-marketeers I've ever met, aren't very free market when it's the workers using their power against the corporation. They bemoan the ebil gubbermint interFEARence, unless it's benefiting them. When it benefits them, all of a sudden government is "being responsible", et al.
This guy was fired right? Perchance was the city have been dumb enough to fire him BEFORE getting the passwords? Should that be the case, he should be under no LEGAL obligation to turn them over. THEY fired him. His job ended when they terminated him, and all responsibilities to it ended as well.
Of course he's still a nut, but I won't condemn him without the whole story. I seriously doubt we're getting the whole story.
Anything above this line will be Triple Dog Dare Sued!
nyah nyah nyah!
ATI has had a bad history of buggy drivers, so it's my fervent hope that under AMD's helm this frustration becomes a thing of the past.
Too true. I won't be the first person to try them out. I remember the old catalyst drivers as being the impetus for my initial switch to Nvidia. I'll wait until the dust settles around the holiday season and see how the other geeks at work do using ATI cards. 2 guys plan on switching to 48xx something. One guy for sure won't, even if Nvidia is slower, because he can't stand ATI drivers.
Yeah, I agree. I think they were trying to do something similar to consoles, but with a monthly fee. Remember you could buy stuff for Oblivion? separately online for the X360.
Personally, at that point, I'd rather pay Blizzard for a persistent world if I was going to do an MMO. At least they release a product that WORKS.
Another problem was that they had crap drop that ONLY a subscriber could use to any player. They probably saw it as an incentive to get an account, and really it was just an irritant according to one of my friends. They also lacked a way to sell stuff AFK (i.e. a market or auction house) unless you sold it to NPC's.
According to my friend, a LOT of problems with Hellgate. I didn't play it myself though.
1) Release the demo before the game's release, preferably by two weeks. Let the game generate the buzz. Game makers used to do this. 2) Quit releasing tech demos. Yeah, Crysis is pretty, if you have a rig to run it at other than slideshow speeds (especially when it first came out). Some people pirate to be "cool." Some people pirate because they don't have the money but want it "right now". Some people pirate because they're sick of paying US$50 to beta test a game they don't like anyway. The guy at Ironclad said it best, if you build a good game that will run on many computers, you'll make money.
It's a line that should be very clear and sometimes isn't.
Very true.
Keith Olbermann and Bill O'Reilly don't really hide the fact that they're commentators and not reporters. Anyone thinking either of those two are reporters, well, they should get their heads examined. Nancy Grace / Glenn Beck aren't reporters anymore than Lou Dobbs.
Then again, most networks want the controversy to sell ads to a particular demographic. Fox, right-wing. MSNBC, left-wing. CNN, kinda mushy middle depending on the commentator (whether the commentator is left or right). We also have more commentary and less news nowadays.
Which is one thing I don't get. The "Right" is always complaining that the "Mainstream Media is Liberal!!11!1!11!elevetyone!!" is it not? So, in holding with that theory, if they're not lying the fairness doctrine would help them. Look at it this way, if the media were truly liberal, then they'd have to have more conservative guests to meet fairness doctrine rules.
Then again, since the mainstream media is corporate (i.e. what sells ads) and not liberal, would it really matter?
And legally, wouldn't fall under something similar to "willful blindness"?
/not sure
i.e. deliberate failure to make a reasonable inquiry of wrongdoing (as drug dealing in one's house) despite suspicion or an awareness of the high probability of its existence Willful blindness involves conscious avoidance of the truth and gives rise to an inference of knowledge of the crime in question.
chalk another one up to greed. This doesn't surprise me in the least.