You know I wonder sometimes why they don't just sell you the hex wrench for the $50 if they're too busy to look at something? I gladly pay $10 to have a professional make an adjustment, but when he breaks something that was already working fine without fixing what was wrong in the first place, and his cow-orker tells you "you got a bonus, free second adjustment" "This is why I tell him, don't do anything you're not being paid for"
If I do need to buy the wrench, I can tell you after that noise I'll be buying it at Walmart.
This all makes sense, but doesn't change the fact that I can probably buy and return three $200 bikes in a week and eventually find one I like, having still spent only $200 plus my time and gas taking trips to and from Walmart.
The $695 bikes at the bike shop are the low end of what they offer. I am sure that as a fat person who needs a bike and suffers from chronic bike theft/hit by car syndrome, I am almost as likely to just sit down wrong on a $700 item from a heap of one of those quality parts at the Real Bike Shop and break it due to my own overweight, or see my investment go down the toilet because it's stolen or destroyed and un-insured (I don't have to pay for theft or breakage insurance on a $200 bike either).
Or maybe I see it driving away on the front of an RTS bus as I step onto the curb and walk away with my bike still on the front of it.
I've lost four bikes or more in ten years. There are all kinds of ways this can happen, and if any of them cost $695 or $1295, I would have been pissed. Some were used/hand-me-down, some were won in contests, all were much cheaper than $695, and I am fairly sure that given all that, I still haven't spent $695 on bikes in ten years. I'm not going cross-country.
So if I come into your bike shop for an adjustment, please do spare me the "you're gonna spend $600 on that piece of crap before you're done with it." There are other bike shops, unfortunately there are not any in my town so they can probably afford to have this attitude, as I'm either here paying you $10 per adjustment, or I'm back in Walmart, and I gladly pay some money not to have to go back to Walmart.
It doesn't really work that way. There are implied warranties of merchant-ability and fitness for a particular purpose that cannot be disclaimed in some jurisdictions. (So just don't sell to those jurisdictions... ehh, doesn't really work either.)
I bought a bike at Walmart for $200 yesterday. Middle of the road price for a Walmart bike. I had someone take it down and look at it for me before I left, he acknowledged that whoever put it together must have been a total idiot because the seat was loose. He adjusted it...
Next thing I know, I'm in the local bike shop looking at $600-1300 bikes while I wait and paying $10 for an adjustment because the seat is still loose, the front brake is rubbing, and the rear brake doesn't stop, dealing with some guy who doesn't want to deal with me because I paid 1) not enough, to 2) someone else, for 3) probably a decent bike if it wasn't put together by total idiots.
It's easier for Apple if they just don't sell macs at Walmart, then. Right... should have gone with a car analogy.
> Apple's first tablet was such a colossal failure that many, including me, predicted the same for their second attempt. I was definitely wrong.
The first tablet was the Newton, and that failed, then years later iPad. I definitely heard of the Newton and I think so did everyone else who was a Simpsons fan at the time:
So, all I have to do to avoid being recorded while I beat the crap out of you, is to put some uninvolved innocents in the room with us and make sure they have a loud, unrelated conversation that you can't avoid recording at the same time I do it?
Just what do you think is the definition of Accessory? If those people are paid not to consent to the recording, would you consider them accessories or conspirators, then? Are you saying the kid should have gone around the room and obtained consent forms from everyone who wasn't actively helping the bully commit his assaults, then done his recording?
One has to wonder then, whose idea it was to charge him in New Jersey at all...
If there's a precedent already in the state court that it's not unauthorized access if there's no code or password stolen... and there's a pretty clear argument that the case doesn't even belong in New Jersey, how did we get here? Some three years of incarceration later!
(Obviously, the answer is that it's not a crime if a cop does it.)
Which is just what he didn't do, according to the opinion. I agree, this fact wouldn't be helpful to his case if he was tried in probably any other possible state, other than New Jersey.
I'll try a car analogy. If you're trying to drive to New Jersey and you're starting your trip in Ireland, it's not important that you don't have EZPass or any American money to pay the tolls. There's too much water in your engine by the time you reach the shore, assuming you didn't just run out of gas on the bottom of the ocean. You didn't fail to pay the roadway tolls in Jersey, since you never were in the state of New Jersey. So you don't go to jail for that.
It suggests (by way that no evidence was offered) that he is not guilty of unauthorized use of a code or password, which means he's not guilty of violating the precedent for the statute in NJ. It gives no opinion on whether or not this has any bearing on the federal charge under CFAA. The precedent cited is another NJ case, where the person on trial was a police officer who had a password and used it for reasons against internal policy. There was no password, but I believe the standards of the federal CFAA are actually much lower.
I haven't read the judgement (I am a good armchair lawyer though, have read lots of opinions and regurgitation of other peoples interpretation of the facts) but I am pretty sure that was a part of the New Jersey law, so in any retrial it would be irrelevant, since the standard is lower.
It would have probably been better for Weev if AT&T's servers actually were in New Jersey, since then this judges would be forced to say what they think about the NJ law as it applies to this case, which is pretty clearly what you said. The password or code - there was no such barrier to access, so no illegal access through forged authorization occurred.
This barrier requirement is part of the New Jersey law, and the threshold for abuse in the federal statutes is lower. Ah. Here, found it: See State v. Riley, 988 A.2d 1252, 1267 (N.J. Super. Ct. Law Div. 2009) (p12 of the ruling)
...except that the situation you just described is the opposite of what happened.
The judges declined to give an opinion on whether or not any law was violated, they vacated the verdict in NJ because of a procedural violation that had taken place -- the venue the case was tried in was NJ, even though the events and parties (AT&T was not a plaintiff, so technically not a party... but the servers in question) were not any of them in NJ.
Not just that... even renters whose leases do not forbid sublet, or actual property owners, are not allowed to rent for terms less than 30 days because they likely have not obtained the permit. It's said that this permit is onerous or expensive to obtain and so "is usually ignored."
If you can go to the store and buy one, and put it on your network, and your network monitoring software can show you what it's doing, and it's unambiguously doing something that's easy for you to do, and makes it easy to get something that arguably ought to be a secret without your having performed any heavy duty rocket surgery...
It's public! Any of your customers can gain this knowledge without anything you didn't just plain give over to them! If responsibly disclosed and the company won't do anything about it, then they ought to be exposed. Now what is it that was exposed again? "Private" e-mail addresses?
Try using it for a while. You can't link directly to comments, you can't click a username to visit somebody's profile, it seems to delete whole posts (for me at least) whenever that person tries to thoroughly exercise Unicode, instead of just deleting the Unicode characters like Classic. It has really got nothing at all positive over Slashdot Classic in my opinion. It should be clear what the users want, since every single article is crapflooded with comments about "FUCK BETA" and they are actually getting modded up.
I have two rooted tablets, one running CyanogenMod and the other running KATKiss (both on 4.4/KitKat), and there are sometimes problems running Netflix, but by and large I'd say it works. The problems I've had most often were that videos would start playing, then the audio would continue but the video would freeze frame.
I have a TV/BluRay player that does Netflix, so I don't really care. But last time I tried to watch a show on the tablet, it worked. (And I'm definitely still rooted.)
Then if you lived in Norway, at least, from what I've read you'd be a tax cheat. A lot of countries in Europe are declaring BTC as asset which means that buyers and sellers are required to participate in VAT collection on every transaction.
Slashdot Mirror
You know I wonder sometimes why they don't just sell you the hex wrench for the $50 if they're too busy to look at something? I gladly pay $10 to have a professional make an adjustment, but when he breaks something that was already working fine without fixing what was wrong in the first place, and his cow-orker tells you "you got a bonus, free second adjustment" "This is why I tell him, don't do anything you're not being paid for"
If I do need to buy the wrench, I can tell you after that noise I'll be buying it at Walmart.
This all makes sense, but doesn't change the fact that I can probably buy and return three $200 bikes in a week and eventually find one I like, having still spent only $200 plus my time and gas taking trips to and from Walmart.
The $695 bikes at the bike shop are the low end of what they offer. I am sure that as a fat person who needs a bike and suffers from chronic bike theft/hit by car syndrome, I am almost as likely to just sit down wrong on a $700 item from a heap of one of those quality parts at the Real Bike Shop and break it due to my own overweight, or see my investment go down the toilet because it's stolen or destroyed and un-insured (I don't have to pay for theft or breakage insurance on a $200 bike either).
Or maybe I see it driving away on the front of an RTS bus as I step onto the curb and walk away with my bike still on the front of it.
I've lost four bikes or more in ten years. There are all kinds of ways this can happen, and if any of them cost $695 or $1295, I would have been pissed. Some were used/hand-me-down, some were won in contests, all were much cheaper than $695, and I am fairly sure that given all that, I still haven't spent $695 on bikes in ten years. I'm not going cross-country.
So if I come into your bike shop for an adjustment, please do spare me the "you're gonna spend $600 on that piece of crap before you're done with it." There are other bike shops, unfortunately there are not any in my town so they can probably afford to have this attitude, as I'm either here paying you $10 per adjustment, or I'm back in Walmart, and I gladly pay some money not to have to go back to Walmart.
It doesn't really work that way. There are implied warranties of merchant-ability and fitness for a particular purpose that cannot be disclaimed in some jurisdictions. (So just don't sell to those jurisdictions... ehh, doesn't really work either.)
I bought a bike at Walmart for $200 yesterday. Middle of the road price for a Walmart bike. I had someone take it down and look at it for me before I left, he acknowledged that whoever put it together must have been a total idiot because the seat was loose. He adjusted it...
Next thing I know, I'm in the local bike shop looking at $600-1300 bikes while I wait and paying $10 for an adjustment because the seat is still loose, the front brake is rubbing, and the rear brake doesn't stop, dealing with some guy who doesn't want to deal with me because I paid 1) not enough, to 2) someone else, for 3) probably a decent bike if it wasn't put together by total idiots.
It's easier for Apple if they just don't sell macs at Walmart, then. Right... should have gone with a car analogy.
> Apple's first tablet was such a colossal failure that many, including me, predicted the same for their second attempt. I was definitely wrong.
The first tablet was the Newton, and that failed, then years later iPad. I definitely heard of the Newton and I think so did everyone else who was a Simpsons fan at the time:
http://i30.photobucket.com/alb...
Did anyone watch the video and notice that there's no way to actually see when you're wearing these?
This technology is obviously not ready for prime time...
I think you spent too long arguing against your own point, then. That was not what I took away from your first two posts, at all.
So, all I have to do to avoid being recorded while I beat the crap out of you, is to put some uninvolved innocents in the room with us and make sure they have a loud, unrelated conversation that you can't avoid recording at the same time I do it?
Just what do you think is the definition of Accessory? If those people are paid not to consent to the recording, would you consider them accessories or conspirators, then? Are you saying the kid should have gone around the room and obtained consent forms from everyone who wasn't actively helping the bully commit his assaults, then done his recording?
One has to wonder then, whose idea it was to charge him in New Jersey at all...
If there's a precedent already in the state court that it's not unauthorized access if there's no code or password stolen... and there's a pretty clear argument that the case doesn't even belong in New Jersey, how did we get here? Some three years of incarceration later!
(Obviously, the answer is that it's not a crime if a cop does it.)
But you could get $50 and a pizza party... with a chance to win an iPad!
Spin the wheel! Weeeeeewwwow!
Which is just what he didn't do, according to the opinion. I agree, this fact wouldn't be helpful to his case if he was tried in probably any other possible state, other than New Jersey.
I'll try a car analogy. If you're trying to drive to New Jersey and you're starting your trip in Ireland, it's not important that you don't have EZPass or any American money to pay the tolls. There's too much water in your engine by the time you reach the shore, assuming you didn't just run out of gas on the bottom of the ocean. You didn't fail to pay the roadway tolls in Jersey, since you never were in the state of New Jersey. So you don't go to jail for that.
It suggests (by way that no evidence was offered) that he is not guilty of unauthorized use of a code or password, which means he's not guilty of violating the precedent for the statute in NJ. It gives no opinion on whether or not this has any bearing on the federal charge under CFAA. The precedent cited is another NJ case, where the person on trial was a police officer who had a password and used it for reasons against internal policy. There was no password, but I believe the standards of the federal CFAA are actually much lower.
I haven't read the judgement (I am a good armchair lawyer though, have read lots of opinions and regurgitation of other peoples interpretation of the facts) but I am pretty sure that was a part of the New Jersey law, so in any retrial it would be irrelevant, since the standard is lower.
It would have probably been better for Weev if AT&T's servers actually were in New Jersey, since then this judges would be forced to say what they think about the NJ law as it applies to this case, which is pretty clearly what you said. The password or code - there was no such barrier to access, so no illegal access through forged authorization occurred.
This barrier requirement is part of the New Jersey law, and the threshold for abuse in the federal statutes is lower. Ah. Here, found it:
See State v. Riley, 988 A.2d 1252,
1267 (N.J. Super. Ct. Law Div. 2009) (p12 of the ruling)
...except that the situation you just described is the opposite of what happened.
The judges declined to give an opinion on whether or not any law was violated, they vacated the verdict in NJ because of a procedural violation that had taken place -- the venue the case was tried in was NJ, even though the events and parties (AT&T was not a plaintiff, so technically not a party... but the servers in question) were not any of them in NJ.
Almost. You can quit, of course, but it's illegal for your company to let you put pressure on others to quit by threatening to quit. It would seem.
Not just that... even renters whose leases do not forbid sublet, or actual property owners, are not allowed to rent for terms less than 30 days because they likely have not obtained the permit. It's said that this permit is onerous or expensive to obtain and so "is usually ignored."
If you can go to the store and buy one, and put it on your network, and your network monitoring software can show you what it's doing, and it's unambiguously doing something that's easy for you to do, and makes it easy to get something that arguably ought to be a secret without your having performed any heavy duty rocket surgery...
It's public! Any of your customers can gain this knowledge without anything you didn't just plain give over to them! If responsibly disclosed and the company won't do anything about it, then they ought to be exposed. Now what is it that was exposed again? "Private" e-mail addresses?
Come on!
As if I don't already get enough spam on Facebook... no thanks!
(Actually, my facebook feed consists mostly of updates from The Onion, it's honestly a joy sometimes to visit the News Feed.)
Psst... you actually put ADA in the subject of your post.
That's odd. For me, I can click on Valdrax or (32670) to get to /~Valdrax
On Beta, clicking your username would just expand/fold your comment.
Holy shit it's back. I must be right on the threshold. The nexus of the universe. I can see my house from here!
Try using it for a while. You can't link directly to comments, you can't click a username to visit somebody's profile, it seems to delete whole posts (for me at least) whenever that person tries to thoroughly exercise Unicode, instead of just deleting the Unicode characters like Classic. It has really got nothing at all positive over Slashdot Classic in my opinion. It should be clear what the users want, since every single article is crapflooded with comments about "FUCK BETA" and they are actually getting modded up.
Hold on a second, you still have the disable ads checkbox?
My karma is still 'Excellent' but I don't have the checkbox anymore. What am I doing wrong?
Is that true?
I have two rooted tablets, one running CyanogenMod and the other running KATKiss (both on 4.4/KitKat), and there are sometimes problems running Netflix, but by and large I'd say it works. The problems I've had most often were that videos would start playing, then the audio would continue but the video would freeze frame.
I have a TV/BluRay player that does Netflix, so I don't really care. But last time I tried to watch a show on the tablet, it worked. (And I'm definitely still rooted.)
Then if you lived in Norway, at least, from what I've read you'd be a tax cheat. A lot of countries in Europe are declaring BTC as asset which means that buyers and sellers are required to participate in VAT collection on every transaction.