Though I think in his case, the contempt charge was partially punitive,
And any system under which someone is kept in prison without any criminal charges for 14 years is a Judge Dredd system, indicative of an abusive government.
I have a hard time believing someone would volunteer to be in prison for 2.3 million dollars. That equals ~$450 a day, which any decent laywer will make in an hour.
So, to the court's satisfaction, he had committed fraud, and the contempt charge was to compel a confession.
You are proving my exact point.
If someone is suspected of committing fraud, he should be tried for fraud according to criminal law. That means he should be given a proper trial where a jury decides, and when found guilty, a sentence with an end. What happened in the above case, is a single judge on a non-criminal trial suffering from the Judge Dredd syndrom: judge, jury and executioner.
I agree, but they're not as shameless as I thought. My first reaction was: they are not going to have a pilot's license much longer. But when I took a look at the aeronautical charts for that area, I was surprised to find out that it's not a prohibited area to fly over.
In my humble opinion, this means that apparently the Government doesn't think this datacenter is such a big deal, otherwise it would have been a no-fly zone (like the plant a couple of miles to the left of the lake).
The judge ruled that fanciful, so he was held for 14 years in contempt.
This. Exactly this. This is what makes the Government evil. We have all these rules saying that you can't be put in jail without law enforcement providing evidence that you committed a crime. Yet, fact of the matter is, even on the Soviet States of America, you are at the mercy of a single Government employee.
So if he had not admitted anything already and had refused to decrypt, the ruling may have been different.
That is irrelevant. The question at hand is whether or not the Government can force you to provide evidence against yourself in a criminal case. Now I'm just a stupid immigrant, but my understanding from the 5th Amendment is that nobody "hall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself". I don't care how much the police think they know. If they need his harddrive, their case is not solid and the suspect should not be required to provide incriminating evidence.
Being forced to provide evidence against yourself pretty makes it the Soviet Republic of Massachusetts.
No, the net neutrality "commies" would have the taxi which takes you to the restaurant drive at the best speed, and not slow to a crawl if your restaurant of choice hasn't paid off the taxi company.
You, are exactly right. You hit it on the spot. You could not have aimed better.
The real problem with Net Neutrality is not that the restaurant hasn't paid the taxi, but that you are not able to choose a taxi which gives you what you pay for.
Lawmakers should not prohibit restaurants from paying the taxi company, lawmakers should not make it so difficult for new players to enter the market (Uber, anyone?).
Likewise, small ISPs should have an easier time entering the market so we could have a more competitive ISP market, rather than lawmakers creating monopolies everywhere and have consumers whining about them (ab)using their positions.
I figure Juniper will likely rethink their VAR relationship with Cisco's front company, though.
Why? Juniper knows this might to happen. So why not make sure that Cisco pays top price rather than getting it from Ebay?
QFX has been with customers for a long time now so I don't see a problem with that either. If a VAR can resell it to Cisco, it has been with early adopter customers for a while
And what I don't understand is the part about reverse engineering. Yes, that may take place. But there is a very good other reason why every large vendor of routing equipment has competitive products in their engineering lab: interoperability. I have worked for two large vendors and have been in the labs of a few others and I have seen many interoperability labs. In fact, at one point in my career I was assigned to literally drag some equipment across the street to our direct competitor, install it in their lab and help them get some interoperability working (this was obviously to satisfy some issues we had with a large mutual customer). And for those interested, I crossed Holger Way and didn't stay in the parking lot:)
Not to mention the fact that vendors ship a shitload of beta products every six months to the EANTC interoperability tests and other marketing events.
It never was really a science project, it was a diplomatic venture. Precisely because of the cold relations between the USA and Russia, the ISS was to showcase how antagonistic nations could set aside their differences to work together for the good of humanity. The ideal was that such a display would encourage other nations and tribes to see their personal conflicts as a little less important in the grand scheme of life. As an observation of wars since the launch of the ISS can show you, it didn't have much of an effect outside the nations that were already getting sick of open warfare.
And this is why the Vulcans haven't contacted us yet. It's not about warp drive, it's about a society being civil and evolved beyond internal disputes.
You're paying for a connection to the internet, and a certain amount of bandwidth from your home to the edges of your provider's network.
You know that, and I know that. But I'll bet you that my mother in law won't. And if you have one as well, chances are that your's won't know that either.
And the only reason we know that is because we happen to know a bit about networking. The average Joe has no clue. All he sees is a "20 megabit connection" to the internet.
did you lie when you told us you were selling us X amount of bandwidth?
Well, to be fair, that's not really the case. I did a quick check on their website to see whether or not they were making any solid promises on bandwidth, but they're not. You're paying for a traffic allowance per month. Their highest plan is 50GB per month, which translates to ~150kbps... Barely enough for a decent Pandora stream.
BUT, I do agree that this is scumbag marketing. I could not find any promises of speed other than their general terms "Best LTE, Best coverage". Kind of deceptive. Legal perhaps, but deceptive.
I can see CSI: Nosy Neighbors TV show, questioning a guy, "According to your school info, you have trouble making friends and once pulled up a girl's skirt. You murdered Mr. Body, didn't you?"
Exactly that.
If.
No, when.
Somewhere 5-10 years downstream, some politician/NYPD-chief will use the next Sandy Hook event to say "We had the troubling information in the school's database, but we couldn't use it. Let's change the law".
And we all know it's going to happen at some point.
The point is that, in both cases, the sender/content provider has already paid. If there's an additional cost to transmitting the content across a boundary (different country or different peering service), then in both cases that has already been factored into the cost of sending it, and paid to the local provider (post office or ISP).
Excellent point. I totally understand how you can feel this way. However, in reality, things are a bit different:
In the case of the mail, the USPS has contracts with carriers all over the world, where either someone pays the other, or they both agree to forward each others mail without charging. The equivalent of this on the internet is called "peering". With two networks peer with each other (i.e. Netflix and Comcast), they mutually agree to provide access to each other's network. (In this case it is slightly more complicated, but that's irrelevant at this point).
The problem that is occurring between Netflix and Comcast is that Netflix is sending so much mail to Comcast, that Comcast would need to upgrade its infrastructure to handle all that mail. In your analogy, that would be the USPS sending 10 times as much mail to the Canadian Post than vice versa, forcing Canadian Post to hire more personnel, expand distribution centers and get more people on the road.
Is it really that unfair? And don't get me wrong, in other threads I've been called a "corporate apologist" for defending Comcast in this matter. I'm not, I don't like Comcast. They're an overpriced underperforming service with horrible customer service. However, from a technical point of view, I can totally understand their point of view.
The reason is that no one pays the full price of a phone in the US. In most other countries you'd upfront (or per month in a payment plan) the phone, and pay $20-30 in network charges. Americans have an expectation of $100/m in phone bills, and a *free phone*.
You mean "free phone". I recently (December) bought a new phone at AT&T. My contract was month-to-month as I used a phone that I already had. The choice that I had was:
- pay $99 for my phone (HTC one mini) and sign a 2 year contract;
or
- pay the full $399 for the phone and get a $15 discount on my bill
Obviously I paid the $399. Not only did I get it unlocked with one phone call to customer service, but it is also cheaper in the long run...But even of the phone would be "free", I'd still prefer to pay the full price. I like having the flexibility to say bye-bye to any carrier...
while high wispy clouds reflect little sunlight but will trap the infrared heat beneath them.
No no no no you are mistaken my friend. These high wispy clouds are the result of the Chemtrails! This is being used by the government to make us obey. Look around, some people are now even wearing apparel that brings this message.
*folds another aluminum hat*
It does give me the right to call bullshit on anyone who claims that this incident targeted primarily females.
I think you should watch the shooter's Youtube movie. After that, you're more than welcome to come back here and apologize.
Spoiler: he clearly states he seeks revenge on the girls for making him feel lonely, unwanted, and being a virgin well in his twenties. He had never even kissed a girl. Obligatory.
Zuck could afford to hire a private army to follow him around if he wanted.
Of course he could. But (and I don't know the man personally) he probably doesn't want that. If you need protection, you are not a happy man, even if you can afford it or get it from the government.
I'm quite sure that even Mark Zuckerberg would be happy to enjoy walking in the streets with his wife without a bunch of ironpushers around him.
ts somehow ok that we help other nationals; but what about our OWN??
look, they have a shithole of a country, granted. but leaving the country and coming here is not going to fix india. what it does is help ruin the workforce here for those who are invested HERE and want to stay HERE.
Very fair comment, and I totally understand where you're coming from. There is a big but. Being an immigrant myself, I'll explain a bit myself, but first:
this is how EVERY OTHER COUNTRY WORKS. find me another country that favors immigrants over its own nationals. go ahead - I'll wait.
The Netherlands. A tiny little country in Europe, with approx 17 million people. In The Netherlands, there is a big problem with primarily North-African (read: Morocco) immigrant workers who migrated in the seventies and eighties. Exceptions aside, most of them did not adopt it as their home country and raised their children accordingly. This has ultimately lead to the Dutch government favoring these immigrants in jobs, social security (sometime the government pays for trips to their home country and send healthcare workers provide care abroad).
When I left The Netherlands for the U.S., I too came on a temporary visa (L1A, for those who care). I had no intentions of migrating, but merely upgrading my resume with U.S. work experience. However, when I saw how things were different here, and my wife became pregnant, we made the decision to apply for permanent residence as well.
Sure, that does not make The Netherlands a better place. But, in the grand scheme of things, most people will chose a better life for themselves and their children over being a tiny drop of water on a wildfire the size of Poinsettia. Me being here or me being in The Netherlands will make little difference on either country, so I opted for the country which I loved the most. Someone once said in one of those famous/.-H1B threads: support the country you live in, or live in the country you support. I am definitely in the country that I support, and that so far has been very good to me as well.
However, unlimited immigration is a bad thing for any country, and I totally don't understand why people here are so ambiguous when it comes to immigration and immigration enforcement. By itself, the current rules are quite limiting: no more than 265000 permanent residence permit each year, and no more than 80.000 H1B workers. Yet, once people find a way to come to the U.S. without border inspection, all of a sudden it is politically incorrect to talk about "illegal immigrants", but mainstream media is full of discussions an how to provide a path to citizenship for "undocumented people". And don't get me wrong, I totally understand every single individual who crosses the border that way. I'm just saying that if you want to start somewhere, either fix the hole in that fence or find a way to make those folks pay taxes on their income. I'm sure that this will improve the economy more than deporting a bunch of Indians.
I don't need to go to CES. I bought that monitor three weeks ago when Fry's had it for a little under $1k. It is huge, I did not really like it. Much of the monitor is in my peripheral view, and moving the mouse from far-left to far-right is a pain. I decided to use my "old" 1920x1200 again and use my 34UM95 for my flight simulator.
The idea of having a gazillion xterm's next to each other is great, but it didn't work for me.
Looking at your post history, you seem to be some sort of corporate apologist, for everyone from Facebook to Comcast. You also seem to be something of an expert on US immigration law. From this, we can infer that when you say "culturally diverse," what you really mean is "mostly Indians." Does the shilling pay well?
I'm not an apologist, I'm merely explaining how stuff works. If you don't like Facebook, don't create an account. If you don't like Comcast, don't get it. Everywhere in the US you have alternative options for internet access.
When I say "culturally diverse", I don't mean mostly Indians. Even if it were, the way you formulate your comment is as if people from India are some sort of plague. You may not agree with the US immigration policy, but you should take that up with your congressman, not with the individuals who take the opportunity to get out of that rape-infested shithole. The legal way, using a visa and employment based permanent resident permits.
how many minorities Facebook hired between when the request was made and when they finally complied. Would be interesting to see before and after data.
I don't work for Facebook, but I have been on their MPK campus as a contractor many times. I can tell you from first hand experience that Facebook is a very culturally diverse environment where everyone, regardless of race, sexual orientation or gender, is welcomed. It looks like a mini San Francisco.
Slashdot Mirror
Though I think in his case, the contempt charge was partially punitive,
And any system under which someone is kept in prison without any criminal charges for 14 years is a Judge Dredd system, indicative of an abusive government.
I have a hard time believing someone would volunteer to be in prison for 2.3 million dollars. That equals ~$450 a day, which any decent laywer will make in an hour.
So, to the court's satisfaction, he had committed fraud, and the contempt charge was to compel a confession.
You are proving my exact point.
If someone is suspected of committing fraud, he should be tried for fraud according to criminal law. That means he should be given a proper trial where a jury decides, and when found guilty, a sentence with an end. What happened in the above case, is a single judge on a non-criminal trial suffering from the Judge Dredd syndrom: judge, jury and executioner.
Are in reality a bunch of shameless cowards.
I agree, but they're not as shameless as I thought. My first reaction was: they are not going to have a pilot's license much longer. But when I took a look at the aeronautical charts for that area, I was surprised to find out that it's not a prohibited area to fly over.
In my humble opinion, this means that apparently the Government doesn't think this datacenter is such a big deal, otherwise it would have been a no-fly zone (like the plant a couple of miles to the left of the lake).
The judge ruled that fanciful, so he was held for 14 years in contempt.
This. Exactly this. This is what makes the Government evil. We have all these rules saying that you can't be put in jail without law enforcement providing evidence that you committed a crime. Yet, fact of the matter is, even on the Soviet States of America, you are at the mercy of a single Government employee.
So if he had not admitted anything already and had refused to decrypt, the ruling may have been different.
That is irrelevant. The question at hand is whether or not the Government can force you to provide evidence against yourself in a criminal case. Now I'm just a stupid immigrant, but my understanding from the 5th Amendment is that nobody "hall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself". I don't care how much the police think they know. If they need his harddrive, their case is not solid and the suspect should not be required to provide incriminating evidence.
Being forced to provide evidence against yourself pretty makes it the Soviet Republic of Massachusetts.
No, the net neutrality "commies" would have the taxi which takes you to the restaurant drive at the best speed, and not slow to a crawl if your restaurant of choice hasn't paid off the taxi company.
You, are exactly right. You hit it on the spot. You could not have aimed better.
The real problem with Net Neutrality is not that the restaurant hasn't paid the taxi, but that you are not able to choose a taxi which gives you what you pay for.
Lawmakers should not prohibit restaurants from paying the taxi company, lawmakers should not make it so difficult for new players to enter the market (Uber, anyone?).
Likewise, small ISPs should have an easier time entering the market so we could have a more competitive ISP market, rather than lawmakers creating monopolies everywhere and have consumers whining about them (ab)using their positions.
A 504 kg Cessna 150 is an "airplane" and a 402,000 kg Airbus A380 is an "airplane".
An apple is fruit, but fruit is not an apple.
An Airbus is a jetliner, a Cessna 150 is not.
They dress is up as "safety rules" but the real motives are financial.
Hammer, nail.
Their next argument will probably use child pornography or terrorism as well.
I figure Juniper will likely rethink their VAR relationship with Cisco's front company, though.
Why? Juniper knows this might to happen. So why not make sure that Cisco pays top price rather than getting it from Ebay?
:)
QFX has been with customers for a long time now so I don't see a problem with that either. If a VAR can resell it to Cisco, it has been with early adopter customers for a while
And what I don't understand is the part about reverse engineering. Yes, that may take place. But there is a very good other reason why every large vendor of routing equipment has competitive products in their engineering lab: interoperability. I have worked for two large vendors and have been in the labs of a few others and I have seen many interoperability labs. In fact, at one point in my career I was assigned to literally drag some equipment across the street to our direct competitor, install it in their lab and help them get some interoperability working (this was obviously to satisfy some issues we had with a large mutual customer). And for those interested, I crossed Holger Way and didn't stay in the parking lot
Not to mention the fact that vendors ship a shitload of beta products every six months to the EANTC interoperability tests and other marketing events.
It never was really a science project, it was a diplomatic venture. Precisely because of the cold relations between the USA and Russia, the ISS was to showcase how antagonistic nations could set aside their differences to work together for the good of humanity. The ideal was that such a display would encourage other nations and tribes to see their personal conflicts as a little less important in the grand scheme of life. As an observation of wars since the launch of the ISS can show you, it didn't have much of an effect outside the nations that were already getting sick of open warfare.
And this is why the Vulcans haven't contacted us yet. It's not about warp drive, it's about a society being civil and evolved beyond internal disputes.
You're paying for a connection to the internet, and a certain amount of bandwidth from your home to the edges of your provider's network.
You know that, and I know that. But I'll bet you that my mother in law won't. And if you have one as well, chances are that your's won't know that either.
And the only reason we know that is because we happen to know a bit about networking. The average Joe has no clue. All he sees is a "20 megabit connection" to the internet.
Sabri
JNCIE #261
ECE-IPN #2
We're talking about Verizon Fios home internet here, not wireless...
Thank you, random internet person! I stand corrected. JWW was right.
did you lie when you told us you were selling us X amount of bandwidth?
Well, to be fair, that's not really the case. I did a quick check on their website to see whether or not they were making any solid promises on bandwidth, but they're not. You're paying for a traffic allowance per month. Their highest plan is 50GB per month, which translates to ~150kbps... Barely enough for a decent Pandora stream.
BUT, I do agree that this is scumbag marketing. I could not find any promises of speed other than their general terms "Best LTE, Best coverage". Kind of deceptive. Legal perhaps, but deceptive.
I can see CSI: Nosy Neighbors TV show, questioning a guy, "According to your school info, you have trouble making friends and once pulled up a girl's skirt. You murdered Mr. Body, didn't you?"
Exactly that.
If.
No, when.
Somewhere 5-10 years downstream, some politician/NYPD-chief will use the next Sandy Hook event to say "We had the troubling information in the school's database, but we couldn't use it. Let's change the law".
And we all know it's going to happen at some point.
The point is that, in both cases, the sender/content provider has already paid. If there's an additional cost to transmitting the content across a boundary (different country or different peering service), then in both cases that has already been factored into the cost of sending it, and paid to the local provider (post office or ISP).
Excellent point. I totally understand how you can feel this way. However, in reality, things are a bit different:
In the case of the mail, the USPS has contracts with carriers all over the world, where either someone pays the other, or they both agree to forward each others mail without charging. The equivalent of this on the internet is called "peering". With two networks peer with each other (i.e. Netflix and Comcast), they mutually agree to provide access to each other's network. (In this case it is slightly more complicated, but that's irrelevant at this point).
The problem that is occurring between Netflix and Comcast is that Netflix is sending so much mail to Comcast, that Comcast would need to upgrade its infrastructure to handle all that mail. In your analogy, that would be the USPS sending 10 times as much mail to the Canadian Post than vice versa, forcing Canadian Post to hire more personnel, expand distribution centers and get more people on the road.
Is it really that unfair? And don't get me wrong, in other threads I've been called a "corporate apologist" for defending Comcast in this matter. I'm not, I don't like Comcast. They're an overpriced underperforming service with horrible customer service. However, from a technical point of view, I can totally understand their point of view.
The reason is that no one pays the full price of a phone in the US. In most other countries you'd upfront (or per month in a payment plan) the phone, and pay $20-30 in network charges. Americans have an expectation of $100/m in phone bills, and a *free phone*.
You mean "free phone". I recently (December) bought a new phone at AT&T. My contract was month-to-month as I used a phone that I already had. The choice that I had was:
- pay $99 for my phone (HTC one mini) and sign a 2 year contract;
or
- pay the full $399 for the phone and get a $15 discount on my bill
Obviously I paid the $399. Not only did I get it unlocked with one phone call to customer service, but it is also cheaper in the long run...But even of the phone would be "free", I'd still prefer to pay the full price. I like having the flexibility to say bye-bye to any carrier...
while high wispy clouds reflect little sunlight but will trap the infrared heat beneath them.
No no no no you are mistaken my friend. These high wispy clouds are the result of the Chemtrails! This is being used by the government to make us obey. Look around, some people are now even wearing apparel that brings this message. *folds another aluminum hat*
It does give me the right to call bullshit on anyone who claims that this incident targeted primarily females.
I think you should watch the shooter's Youtube movie. After that, you're more than welcome to come back here and apologize.
Spoiler: he clearly states he seeks revenge on the girls for making him feel lonely, unwanted, and being a virgin well in his twenties. He had never even kissed a girl. Obligatory.
women are also bitches.
So what? You're an asshole. That does not give me the right to take your life.
Zuck could afford to hire a private army to follow him around if he wanted.
Of course he could. But (and I don't know the man personally) he probably doesn't want that. If you need protection, you are not a happy man, even if you can afford it or get it from the government.
I'm quite sure that even Mark Zuckerberg would be happy to enjoy walking in the streets with his wife without a bunch of ironpushers around him.
Somewhere, Mark Zuckerberg is *still* laughing.
No, somewhere, Facebook is consulting attorneys on how to avoid a Fatwa so he won't end up like Salman Rushdie, or worse, Theo van Gogh.
ts somehow ok that we help other nationals; but what about our OWN?? look, they have a shithole of a country, granted. but leaving the country and coming here is not going to fix india. what it does is help ruin the workforce here for those who are invested HERE and want to stay HERE.
Very fair comment, and I totally understand where you're coming from. There is a big but. Being an immigrant myself, I'll explain a bit myself, but first:
this is how EVERY OTHER COUNTRY WORKS. find me another country that favors immigrants over its own nationals. go ahead - I'll wait.
The Netherlands. A tiny little country in Europe, with approx 17 million people. In The Netherlands, there is a big problem with primarily North-African (read: Morocco) immigrant workers who migrated in the seventies and eighties. Exceptions aside, most of them did not adopt it as their home country and raised their children accordingly. This has ultimately lead to the Dutch government favoring these immigrants in jobs, social security (sometime the government pays for trips to their home country and send healthcare workers provide care abroad).
/.-H1B threads: support the country you live in, or live in the country you support. I am definitely in the country that I support, and that so far has been very good to me as well.
When I left The Netherlands for the U.S., I too came on a temporary visa (L1A, for those who care). I had no intentions of migrating, but merely upgrading my resume with U.S. work experience. However, when I saw how things were different here, and my wife became pregnant, we made the decision to apply for permanent residence as well.
Sure, that does not make The Netherlands a better place. But, in the grand scheme of things, most people will chose a better life for themselves and their children over being a tiny drop of water on a wildfire the size of Poinsettia. Me being here or me being in The Netherlands will make little difference on either country, so I opted for the country which I loved the most. Someone once said in one of those famous
However, unlimited immigration is a bad thing for any country, and I totally don't understand why people here are so ambiguous when it comes to immigration and immigration enforcement. By itself, the current rules are quite limiting: no more than 265000 permanent residence permit each year, and no more than 80.000 H1B workers. Yet, once people find a way to come to the U.S. without border inspection, all of a sudden it is politically incorrect to talk about "illegal immigrants", but mainstream media is full of discussions an how to provide a path to citizenship for "undocumented people". And don't get me wrong, I totally understand every single individual who crosses the border that way. I'm just saying that if you want to start somewhere, either fix the hole in that fence or find a way to make those folks pay taxes on their income. I'm sure that this will improve the economy more than deporting a bunch of Indians.
You should go to CES sometime
I don't need to go to CES. I bought that monitor three weeks ago when Fry's had it for a little under $1k. It is huge, I did not really like it. Much of the monitor is in my peripheral view, and moving the mouse from far-left to far-right is a pain. I decided to use my "old" 1920x1200 again and use my 34UM95 for my flight simulator.
The idea of having a gazillion xterm's next to each other is great, but it didn't work for me.
Looking at your post history, you seem to be some sort of corporate apologist, for everyone from Facebook to Comcast. You also seem to be something of an expert on US immigration law. From this, we can infer that when you say "culturally diverse," what you really mean is "mostly Indians." Does the shilling pay well?
I'm not an apologist, I'm merely explaining how stuff works. If you don't like Facebook, don't create an account. If you don't like Comcast, don't get it. Everywhere in the US you have alternative options for internet access.
When I say "culturally diverse", I don't mean mostly Indians. Even if it were, the way you formulate your comment is as if people from India are some sort of plague. You may not agree with the US immigration policy, but you should take that up with your congressman, not with the individuals who take the opportunity to get out of that rape-infested shithole. The legal way, using a visa and employment based permanent resident permits.
how many minorities Facebook hired between when the request was made and when they finally complied. Would be interesting to see before and after data.
I don't work for Facebook, but I have been on their MPK campus as a contractor many times. I can tell you from first hand experience that Facebook is a very culturally diverse environment where everyone, regardless of race, sexual orientation or gender, is welcomed. It looks like a mini San Francisco.