And on Slashdot you can't say anything bad about liberals, Barak Hussein Obama, etc, that it's considered a BAD thing for the son of a Democrat congressman to go to prison for hacking Sarah Palin's email, while every commentator on this site would howl for the death penalty if the son of a Republican congressman had done the same to Dear Leader?
Violating people's privacy is wrong regardless of party affiliation.
Exactly. The 1st Amendment applies to the government. Not to private relations, one of which is employment.
"Obama sucks ass" is protected speech, in that Obama can't send me to the gulag for saying it. However, if my boss is a stinky hippie from San Francisco who still things Dear Leader walks on water, he can certainly hold that against me and there's not a damn thing I can do about it.
Sony owns RCA Records, the record label that published a song by Rick Astley [wikipedia.org]. Sony also makes movies, including the Spider-Man movies [wikipedia.org]. (And before you object that these are separate divisions, the division that makes TV sets is likewise separate from the Computer Entertainment division that makes PlayStation products.)
I've never seen the Spiderman movies (superhero turned into love story doesn't appeal to me at all), and I don't own very much music made after 1993, as pretty much everything that's been coming out the last 15+ years (and especially recently) is creatively bankrupt crap.
So, no, Sony doesn't get much, if any of my money.
Behind every sleazy lawyer is a sleazier client. Blame Sony, and vote with your money. That's one reason why I have a Philips TV, stereo, and DVD recorder in the room where I'm typing this.
I've been boycotting Sony since SOE (their MMO publisher) destroyed Star Wars Galaxies in a sleazy bait and switch (announced the day after they charged us for an expansion half of which was being rendered useless two weeks later). I am speaking of course about the NGE.
I am in a position of influence in electronics purchasing in my company. Guess who got crossed off the bid list as "does not meet spec" when we spent a quarter of a million on videoconferencing? Sony. I go out of my way to make sure that I cost them as much money as possible. The only reason why I'd not do this hack is that I would never own a PS3 in the FIRST place...
This rash of crazy lawyer stories leads me to believe we are in a law suit Bubble. Eventually garbage law suits, Cease and Desists, threats, extra will come to an end bursting the bubble lawyers have grown so accustom to.
Lawyers who practice this sort of "law" are not productive members of society but are parasites. There will be tort reform eventually. Or the lawyer class (which dominates Congress, btw) will come face to face with the pitchfork and torch class. There are so many opportunities that have been lost or are never tried for fear of the broken legal system and parasite lawyers.
Really? After so many years of producing shit that they can't even sell TV's (something Sony used to be famous for making the best) under their own name anymore, why do people still buy ANYTHING Sony?
The premise of threatening OWNERS of a piece of hardware for doing with that hardware whatever they please, which they have the absolute right to do (including burning it or running over it with the car) is ridiculous. And if someone is finally going to be stupid enough to sue a customer over violating a shrinkwrap, unilateral, "we reserve the right to change anything at any time at our SOLE discretion" EULA, please, PLEASE for the love of God let it be a company as stupid, corrupt and intellectually bankrupt as Sony.
Threatening end users who make modifications to the console that they PURCHASED is as ridiculous as Ford suing me for buying one of their cars then changing the rims so I can put a different size of tire on them...
That is not how Castle Doctrine works, and you do a great disservice to all responsible gun owners by spreading such FUD, not to mention being a poor example of character. There would be insufficient evidence from somebody just walking up to your vehicle, stooping down, and then walking away for you to 'reasonably believe' that they were committing an act sufficient enough to warrant a response of deadly force. You would not *ever* get that to stand up in court.
To get to my vehicle means breaking into my garage, which means invading my home.
If you break into my home, how am I to know the difference between a FBI person taking advantage of a horrible judicial opinion that will be overturned by the Supreme Court and a rapist breaking into my home to rape my wife/daughters?
Answer: There isn't any way. That's why the Castle Doctrine was passed into law. There are lawful ways for law enforcement to bug me, or even to gain entrance into my home and it involves showing sufficient probable cause to a judge. Not breaking and entering on a whim.
Try this on my property, you WILL get shot. No warrant, not invited, attempting to tamper with something of mine means risking lawful execution by Castle Doctrine law.
Ignore the Constitution by taking some judge's opinion over the written law at your own risk.
"If someone is shooting at me, I must then have the right to defend myself. Bye bye you go."
You have no right to be on someone else's property uninvited. Besides, after getting hit with a 12-gauge,.45ACP or.30-06 I doubt you'd be in any condition to shoot back.
As I said, I don't care if the intruder is from the government or not, if they are on my property illegally (which means uninvited and no warrant) they WILL be shot. Maybe after a couple cops or FBI types get killed in Castle Doctrine states for wanting to pretend they are James Bond they'll think better of this practice of trying to plant non warrant sanctioned monitoring devices on private property.
I have no sympathy for them. Indeed, I have more contempt for such people than I do common criminals, people who work for the government are supposed to uphold the law, not circumvent it.
The state I live in has the "Castle Doctrine" law. This means it is legal for me to shoot intruders on my property. Be forewarned: ANYONE who sneaks onto my property, uninvited, unidentified, with no warrant will be shot on sight.
I don't give a fuck if you are FBI, CIA, or a common criminal, YOU WILL BE SHOT.
If you want to come on my property and you aren't expected you better come to the front door and knock politely.
One whacked out court of appeals (the 9th circuit), which is the most reversed court in the United States does not and cannot trump the 4th and 5th Amendments by fiat. I do not recognize their authority to do so because they DO NOT HAVE IT.
Americans need to lose this notion that our government, any part of it, including the judiciary, is above our Constitution, because they are not.
We also need to start insisting that our state governments step up and do their job, one of which is protecting us from overreaching Federal authority.
IMHO, suddenly admitting that they were off, not by a tad, but by FIFTY PERCENT, does sort of throw a LOT of doubt into what the Algore worshippers call "settled science" doesn't it?
Or is man made global warming the new religion of the 21st century, and the Goreacle and his prophets are right even when wrong?
Everything about this guy is creepy. I also find him a hypocrite in that he insists on Wikileaks privacy and lack of transparency while granting none to others.
And if his leaks (which were hardly bombshell material) cause the death of ONE American soldier, I hope he rots in hell and is forced to be satan's bitch.
There is a big difference between exposing government corruption (which would be admirable) and in pursuing an anti war agenda in an attempt to sabotage our war effort and put soldiers lives in danger.
I am all for India making itself as business unfriendly as possible, so cheapass companies quit outsourcing there. It really was amazing when I called tech support and got an actual AMERICAN person speaking English, because it had been years since this happened, another reason to buy Apple...
And that the Earth's flatness was also "undeniable". Fact of the matter is there exists NO credible evidence that C02 has anything at all to do with warming, and any climate study that includes ZERO research on solar output data (after all, ALL heat comes from the Sun) could not possibly be "undeniable" as it is at best incomplete.
Furthermore, archaeological evidence proves that our planet has been both much warmer AND much cooler than it is now. How could man be the cause of that when they didn't have SUV's in Roman times?
mohammed does file them, in a manner of speaking. A group of so-called "descendants" of the pedophile (married a 9 year old girl) "prophet" and founder of the Religion of Peace (my ass) often sue in British and other libel weak courts to harass people who write anything bad about islam.
It's a huge fallacy (but something the left loves to sell to people who are susceptible to anti-business propaganda) that corporations pay taxes. They really do not, every tax they pay is passed down to their customers, or borne by their employees in salary and benefits they do not get. In the end, everyone except corporations pay corporate taxes, it's really a HIDDEN tax on everyone.
That said, you could use taxes to incentive companies (foreign and domestic) to employ American workers. And it's very simple, allow companies a 200% tax DEDUCTION for the salaries they pay non executive employees who work at locations in the US.
This way companies could would pay no additional taxes but there would be incentive (and a competitive advantage in our markets) if the product is produced with American labor.
If we are going to "right" discrimination, with respect to tax inequality, then why won't Google pay UNMARRIED employees more money to make up for the fact that tax law unfairly discriminates against them in favor of married people who have children?
I mean, it's wrong to discriminate, right?
Of course, the whole reason why this exists is to encourage HAVING CHILDREN. Last time I checked, homosexuals lack both types of plumbing to pull this off. So why should they get the tax benefits of married people, if I, as an unmarried single person without kids cannot?
Frankly, cases and rulings like this illustrate just how out of control the judiciary is. We seriously should consider bringing back the practice of tar and feathering as a means to punish judges, especially unelected and unfirable for life Federal judges, offer them the choice: Resign or tar and feathers.
There's a lot of reasons why you can't point a gun at a cop.
Yes there is. If an unidentified individual bursts in my door or sneaks onto my property, they are going to get more than a gun pointed at them, they are going to get a round pumped IN them, I don't care if they are a cop or not.
And in my state, you have every right to shoot a home invader on sight.
Which is why it is important for police to behave professionally and within the law.
[quote] You forgot one thing: there's always an "imminent cyberattack", for the same reasons we still have spam.
Basically this gives the president the power to declare computing martial law whenever he feels like it. [/quote]
Anyone who doesn't see this as a HUGE potential for abuse and carte blanche to go after POLITICAL opponents is either incredibly naive or a "mainstream" journalist. Of course, if a Republican proposed this the "mainstream" media would be accusing the President of trying to be Adolph Hitler.
Remember when the Democrat party opposed the PATRIOT Act? Well, they've had Congress since 2006, and have had the Presidency for almost 2 years now, what have they done to repeal it? Did they oppose it on principle, or did they oppose it only because they were out of power and thus unable to USE it?
The government is never going to be allowed to put ANYTHING inside my border firewall. Period. I will not allow them to do so, they do not have the right to do so no matter what law Congress passes, because they are prohibited by one of those "Congress shall make no law..." parts of the Constitution from doing so.
Slashdot Mirror
And on Slashdot you can't say anything bad about liberals, Barak Hussein Obama, etc, that it's considered a BAD thing for the son of a Democrat congressman to go to prison for hacking Sarah Palin's email, while every commentator on this site would howl for the death penalty if the son of a Republican congressman had done the same to Dear Leader?
Violating people's privacy is wrong regardless of party affiliation.
Exactly. The 1st Amendment applies to the government. Not to private relations, one of which is employment.
"Obama sucks ass" is protected speech, in that Obama can't send me to the gulag for saying it. However, if my boss is a stinky hippie from San Francisco who still things Dear Leader walks on water, he can certainly hold that against me and there's not a damn thing I can do about it.
I've never seen the Spiderman movies (superhero turned into love story doesn't appeal to me at all), and I don't own very much music made after 1993, as pretty much everything that's been coming out the last 15+ years (and especially recently) is creatively bankrupt crap.
So, no, Sony doesn't get much, if any of my money.
I've been boycotting Sony since SOE (their MMO publisher) destroyed Star Wars Galaxies in a sleazy bait and switch (announced the day after they charged us for an expansion half of which was being rendered useless two weeks later). I am speaking of course about the NGE.
I am in a position of influence in electronics purchasing in my company. Guess who got crossed off the bid list as "does not meet spec" when we spent a quarter of a million on videoconferencing? Sony. I go out of my way to make sure that I cost them as much money as possible. The only reason why I'd not do this hack is that I would never own a PS3 in the FIRST place...
Lawyers who practice this sort of "law" are not productive members of society but are parasites. There will be tort reform eventually. Or the lawyer class (which dominates Congress, btw) will come face to face with the pitchfork and torch class. There are so many opportunities that have been lost or are never tried for fear of the broken legal system and parasite lawyers.
Really? After so many years of producing shit that they can't even sell TV's (something Sony used to be famous for making the best) under their own name anymore, why do people still buy ANYTHING Sony?
The premise of threatening OWNERS of a piece of hardware for doing with that hardware whatever they please, which they have the absolute right to do (including burning it or running over it with the car) is ridiculous. And if someone is finally going to be stupid enough to sue a customer over violating a shrinkwrap, unilateral, "we reserve the right to change anything at any time at our SOLE discretion" EULA, please, PLEASE for the love of God let it be a company as stupid, corrupt and intellectually bankrupt as Sony.
Threatening end users who make modifications to the console that they PURCHASED is as ridiculous as Ford suing me for buying one of their cars then changing the rims so I can put a different size of tire on them...
To get to my vehicle means breaking into my garage, which means invading my home.
If you break into my home, how am I to know the difference between a FBI person taking advantage of a horrible judicial opinion that will be overturned by the Supreme Court and a rapist breaking into my home to rape my wife/daughters?
Answer: There isn't any way. That's why the Castle Doctrine was passed into law. There are lawful ways for law enforcement to bug me, or even to gain entrance into my home and it involves showing sufficient probable cause to a judge. Not breaking and entering on a whim.
That's why we have a Constitution.
Try this on my property, you WILL get shot. No warrant, not invited, attempting to tamper with something of mine means risking lawful execution by Castle Doctrine law.
Ignore the Constitution by taking some judge's opinion over the written law at your own risk.
"If someone is shooting at me, I must then have the right to defend myself. Bye bye you go."
You have no right to be on someone else's property uninvited. Besides, after getting hit with a 12-gauge, .45ACP or .30-06 I doubt you'd be in any condition to shoot back.
As I said, I don't care if the intruder is from the government or not, if they are on my property illegally (which means uninvited and no warrant) they WILL be shot. Maybe after a couple cops or FBI types get killed in Castle Doctrine states for wanting to pretend they are James Bond they'll think better of this practice of trying to plant non warrant sanctioned monitoring devices on private property.
I have no sympathy for them. Indeed, I have more contempt for such people than I do common criminals, people who work for the government are supposed to uphold the law, not circumvent it.
The state I live in has the "Castle Doctrine" law. This means it is legal for me to shoot intruders on my property.
Be forewarned: ANYONE who sneaks onto my property, uninvited, unidentified, with no warrant will be shot on sight.
I don't give a fuck if you are FBI, CIA, or a common criminal, YOU WILL BE SHOT.
If you want to come on my property and you aren't expected you better come to the front door and knock politely.
One whacked out court of appeals (the 9th circuit), which is the most reversed court in the United States does not and cannot trump the 4th and 5th Amendments by fiat. I do not recognize their authority to do so because they DO NOT HAVE IT.
Americans need to lose this notion that our government, any part of it, including the judiciary, is above our Constitution, because they are not.
We also need to start insisting that our state governments step up and do their job, one of which is protecting us from overreaching Federal authority.
I wonder if Rackspace is this high and mighty about kicking pro terrorist and islamic jihad websites off their servers?
Somehow I doubt it. Youtube is equally hypocritical.
Actually they are increasing, in the south pole.
IMHO, suddenly admitting that they were off, not by a tad, but by FIFTY PERCENT, does sort of throw a LOT of doubt into what the Algore worshippers call "settled science" doesn't it?
Or is man made global warming the new religion of the 21st century, and the Goreacle and his prophets are right even when wrong?
Everything about this guy is creepy. I also find him a hypocrite in that he insists on Wikileaks privacy and lack of transparency while granting none to others.
And if his leaks (which were hardly bombshell material) cause the death of ONE American soldier, I hope he rots in hell and is forced to be satan's bitch.
There is a big difference between exposing government corruption (which would be admirable) and in pursuing an anti war agenda in an attempt to sabotage our war effort and put soldiers lives in danger.
I am all for India making itself as business unfriendly as possible, so cheapass companies quit outsourcing there. It really was amazing when I called tech support and got an actual AMERICAN person speaking English, because it had been years since this happened, another reason to buy Apple...
And that the Earth's flatness was also "undeniable". Fact of the matter is there exists NO credible evidence that C02 has anything at all to do with warming, and any climate study that includes ZERO research on solar output data (after all, ALL heat comes from the Sun) could not possibly be "undeniable" as it is at best incomplete.
Furthermore, archaeological evidence proves that our planet has been both much warmer AND much cooler than it is now. How could man be the cause of that when they didn't have SUV's in Roman times?
mohammed does file them, in a manner of speaking. A group of so-called "descendants" of the pedophile (married a 9 year old girl) "prophet" and founder of the Religion of Peace (my ass) often sue in British and other libel weak courts to harass people who write anything bad about islam.
It's a huge fallacy (but something the left loves to sell to people who are susceptible to anti-business propaganda) that corporations pay taxes. They really do not, every tax they pay is passed down to their customers, or borne by their employees in salary and benefits they do not get. In the end, everyone except corporations pay corporate taxes, it's really a HIDDEN tax on everyone.
That said, you could use taxes to incentive companies (foreign and domestic) to employ American workers. And it's very simple, allow companies a 200% tax DEDUCTION for the salaries they pay non executive employees who work at locations in the US.
This way companies could would pay no additional taxes but there would be incentive (and a competitive advantage in our markets) if the product is produced with American labor.
If we are going to "right" discrimination, with respect to tax inequality, then why won't Google pay UNMARRIED employees more money to make up for the fact that tax law unfairly discriminates against them in favor of married people who have children?
I mean, it's wrong to discriminate, right?
Of course, the whole reason why this exists is to encourage HAVING CHILDREN. Last time I checked, homosexuals lack both types of plumbing to pull this off. So why should they get the tax benefits of married people, if I, as an unmarried single person without kids cannot?
"NUTS"
Frankly, cases and rulings like this illustrate just how out of control the judiciary is. We seriously should consider bringing back the practice of tar and feathering as a means to punish judges, especially unelected and unfirable for life Federal judges, offer them the choice: Resign or tar and feathers.
I'd rate the odds of navigating an asteroid field as much better than seeing an Adblock app in the Apple app store.
As for actually navigating an asteroid field, Pioneer 10, 11, Voyager 1 & 2, Galileo, Cassini, and New Horizons had no problems :)
What would be interesting is Adblock Plus for the iPhone.
Heh! Odds of that being approved for the App Store are approximately 3,720 to 1.
I love it. The Slashdot tradition of "mention Obama in a negative context is a troll" continues. Political disagreement is not trolling.
Put the Obama Kool-Aid down and step away!
I remember all the Bush bashing here over the PATRIOT Act. In which I joined in on, I always have opposed that law.
There's a lot of reasons why you can't point a gun at a cop.
Yes there is. If an unidentified individual bursts in my door or sneaks onto my property, they are going to get more than a gun pointed at them, they are going to get a round pumped IN them, I don't care if they are a cop or not.
And in my state, you have every right to shoot a home invader on sight.
Which is why it is important for police to behave professionally and within the law.
[quote] You forgot one thing: there's always an "imminent cyberattack", for the same reasons we still have spam.
Basically this gives the president the power to declare computing martial law whenever he feels like it. [/quote]
Anyone who doesn't see this as a HUGE potential for abuse and carte blanche to go after POLITICAL opponents is either incredibly naive or a "mainstream" journalist. Of course, if a Republican proposed this the "mainstream" media would be accusing the President of trying to be Adolph Hitler.
Remember when the Democrat party opposed the PATRIOT Act? Well, they've had Congress since 2006, and have had the Presidency for almost 2 years now, what have they done to repeal it? Did they oppose it on principle, or did they oppose it only because they were out of power and thus unable to USE it?
The government is never going to be allowed to put ANYTHING inside my border firewall. Period. I will not allow them to do so, they do not have the right to do so no matter what law Congress passes, because they are prohibited by one of those "Congress shall make no law..." parts of the Constitution from doing so.