I agree the summary is badly written. Her medical condition is relevant because this was a default decision. She was not represented and did not represent herself because she failed to respond. If the reason she failed to respond is because she could not do so for medical reasons then basic fairness is that the decision should be vacated in light of that fact and she should get a civil trial. Since the matter is more then $20 she is even entitled to a jury if she wants one.
A judge needs to examine the information that is available and decide if she could have responded to the court, if the answer is no then the decision case should be reopened if she could reasonably responded then the decision should stand.
Certain exceptions must be made; If she was infringing their copyrights then yes she should ultimately make good on her liabilities. She should not be found liable without the opportunity to defend herself in the civil preceding because a medical condition prevented he from responding. The decision should be vacated at the trial held off until she fairly defend herself. Suppose you were in the hospital to sick to read you mail and I sue you. You get served but are physically and mentally unable to respond. A court unaware of your condition says you get 30 days to file or I win be default. You think it fair that I should just win? I don't.
It matters because she "did not get her day in court" but a default judgement was made against her. If a judge feels that its likely she failed to respond only because of her condition then that summary decision can be vacated and should.
From the limited information available it sounds like they are going to argue that the default judgment is unfair because responding by the stated time placed undue hardship on her since she was hospitalized. My mother suffered from pancreatic troubles. Those illnesses can be extremely painful and debilitating even with treatment. If she was having an attack it could very well have made it impossible for her to respond to mail for days or even weeks.
My grandmother was a judge so I know a little of how courts work and how much authority they really have from her stories. They pretty much made the rules in the court room and are plenty empowered to grant exceptions when they think its fair, so I would guess this is all at the judges discretion who probably set the respond by date in the first place.
The problem is they can't likely renegotiate those peering agreements. Cogent will is strong and getting stronger. They also are unafraid to "go nuke someone". We have seen these guys cut peers off without warning, muck with BGP, and generally terrorize the other backbone providers. You know what though, the are providing better service to their customers at lower cost! The truth about most of those peering fights has been that the other companies just don't like them competing!
Cogent and its child "retail / b2b" operations are great to work with as a customer. The neutrality crowd can't raise rates because they are already loosing customers left and right. This is about them wanting the force of law to give them more metering opportunities so they have something to negotiate for to get better terms in peering agreements.
I don't have much of a biology background but what you say makes sense. If the chemical bonds are stronger in PNA then you have to have other higher energy state free radicals floating about to break them apart which would likely be ractive with other chemical structures in cells that are not reactive chemically with the enzymes that unzip DNA. You might have a more stable "code of life" with PNA but It might not lend itself to the complexities of a eukarotic cell.
People adapt yes, but I think if you bring someone form too remote a life style or too far in the past you would have issues. They might adapt to a point were you could control them and they could function in terms of day to day stuff, but could they support themselves?
Could someone who has been on ICE since 1909 participate much on 2009 society? Would they be able to frame the social issues of day comprehend our entertainment and humor which I think would be required to "enjoy life". Would they be able to have a career above fry-cook or field-hand, even if they had been an "educated" person in their day?
No C is a great teaching language if what you want is to teach the science of computing and how the machines do their work. You have to do some work with students in at the very least C and some Assembly if you want them to get an understanding of computer design and architecture. You don't have to do these things if you want to teach software engineering. They are different fields or at least different disciplines within a larger field, like an Oncologist is a type of medical doctor and so is an Endocrinologist but they have very different educational backgrounds after some shared fundamentals.
Nothing is wrong with it at all. In a traditional compiled language its often the most efficent way to write something and it often gets you the most efficent compiled code and when it does not most compilers will be smart enough to build a loop construct when the go to the assembler stage.
If you are using an interpreted langague like python or my favoirte Dialect( needs more respect ) then you have to be a little careful with it because these have a "soft stack" that can only get so deep. They have to keep track of how deep they are and where that have been, rather then just a beq and jmp on some register value, so they know what to do next. Mosty interpreters have a fixed stack depth although some manage to abstact this to linked list like structures internally and can keep going until the heap is exhasted. In any case you can't search to big a space recusively or it will fail.
I agree I don't see anything of than this statistical correlation between fastfood sugar and Alzheimers that makes it obvious they should be linked. I think the parent poster was makeing the more general statement that our bodies like any other machine if not properly maintained are more likely to fail and sooner. Those failures are also more likely to defy repair as well.
Ah, the cycle of PC hardware. Starts out with nothing but the bear minimum generalized equipment where the cpu itself is timing the scan rate for the display. Then slowly explodes to the Amigia point where there is a separate chip for everything under the sun. After that everything gets pulled back in again. PCs have been on their balloon out for a while, it started with sound cards, then fancy video cards, then all kinds of expansion buses. Now we are headed back for just one big honkin CPU in charge of everything again.
WRONG>.. The nation debt exists because the government foolishly allowed the creation of a central bank! If such a bank did not exist the government would have take in enough revenue at tax time to pay for its expenses for the comming year. In troubled times some short term bonds might get bought an sold but no way would investors or the public allow trillions in debt to be racked up.
God help us if Uncle Sam could not spend more then we produce...Our children might have a future or something...
Excahnge's underlaying database and storage engines support pointers to single copy attachments and even the message bodyies themsevles but if you don't have some third party product that does that then Exchange stores multiple copies.
I think the parent is correct. I don't think Google cares one way or the other if they become a mainstream browser vendor or not. Its not ever going to be a big part of their revenue. What they do care about is not allowing one company to dominate the client side software stack for the WWW. An open standards based WWW leaves Google free to inovate in the form of its web offerings. They can offer any new technology or services they can develop and market to consumers and or advertizers.
If they allow Microsoft or anyone else total control of the software stack such that rest of the commercial ecosytem of the WWW can just ignore the also rans then the vendor of that software stack has a great deal of control when it comes to what the WWW looks like and what you can with it. It also means they can bias the directon of continued development just to harm other organizations they don't like that year. Google does not want Microsoft empowered in that way any more than they already are.
right because your typical business users would never say want to change the extention of some think like report.txt they get mailed to them from a host system to something like report.csv so they can open it in Excel. Stuff like the never happens....
Do you remember just a few years ago the "MS Blaster" fiasco?
Do you remember "Welchia" I think it was called. It was just that it removed Blaster and then tried to spread itself the same way. In the end Welchia was a troublesome for network operators as "MS Blaster" itself. It was terrible.
I must agree while it seems more difficult this is a problem that must be fought both at the source and the target. Its one thing to go after bot net operators but someone should be going after negligent individuals who allow devices they are responsible for to become bots. I think the network must be managed. I think internet access SHOULD BE LICENSED, we don't let you drive a car on our public road without one because the hazard it would pose to others persons and property. We should not let you on our public network where your improperly operated equipment might threaten the use of mine and others.
There should be an exam that all individuals with access must pass that is demonstrative of some learning about how tcp/ip works, what firewalling is, why maintaining your systems is important. I don't think you should be liable for something a cracker does with your system after you have been 0wn3d because that would pose to much risk but you should get cut off. If you can't demonstrait that you attempted to maintain your systems they you should not be let back on.
I would argue that protecting ones trademarks and copyrights would include taking the time to file specific and correct DMCA requests even if that meant enumeration what items you were interested in for the requestee. It would be like me knocking on my neighbors door and saying
Dude I know some of the stuff in your yard can't possibly be allowed by our community bylaws. Can you please go research them and get back to me, then naturally you will have to get compliant.
It seems to me if I have an problem with something someone else is doing it falls to me to at least identify what that is in a specific an actionable way and determine if its at least reasonably possible I have the force of law on my side before I bother them or a court with my complaint.
Use a small shell script with dd to add a byte from/dev/random to the the end of each file, you could get the file size with ls and cut and use the skip, count, and bs prams on dd, put the entire thing in a for loop and get some coffee. I don't think an extra byte at the end is going to cause you any problems displaying the JPG file but it will defeat anyone trying to ID the files by md5 hash.
Now someone could get wise to what you did and fix it, by skipping the last byte themselves, but they likely would not figure that out before determining you possessed those files some other way any way. To really protect yourself you would have to change the data in the file, imagemagic could do that again in the for loop.
Actually, You can mix gpl2 and gpl3 code period. Linus specifically struck the "or any later version" clause out of the copy of the gpl2 he used to license Linux. You could argue that Linux is not truly licensed under the gpl2 at all because he changed the license.
You might want to look into NIS+/YP, DNS and LDAP. 90% of what AD does is covered their an UNIX has been doing it longer then Windows. The other 10% or so you might have to roll your own but chances are pretty good you would have had to install some software which would have extened your AD schema anyway in a Windows domain.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree the summary is badly written. Her medical condition is relevant because this was a default decision. She was not represented and did not represent herself because she failed to respond. If the reason she failed to respond is because she could not do so for medical reasons then basic fairness is that the decision should be vacated in light of that fact and she should get a civil trial. Since the matter is more then $20 she is even entitled to a jury if she wants one.
A judge needs to examine the information that is available and decide if she could have responded to the court, if the answer is no then the decision case should be reopened if she could reasonably responded then the decision should stand.
This is not about guilt or innocents! This is civil matter she is liable or not liable for infringing copyrights.
Yep you can say anything you want about anyone at any time if its true, first amendment and all that.
Certain exceptions must be made; If she was infringing their copyrights then yes she should ultimately make good on her liabilities. She should not be found liable without the opportunity to defend herself in the civil preceding because a medical condition prevented he from responding. The decision should be vacated at the trial held off until she fairly defend herself. Suppose you were in the hospital to sick to read you mail and I sue you. You get served but are physically and mentally unable to respond. A court unaware of your condition says you get 30 days to file or I win be default. You think it fair that I should just win? I don't.
It matters because she "did not get her day in court" but a default judgement was made against her. If a judge feels that its likely she failed to respond only because of her condition then that summary decision can be vacated and should.
From the limited information available it sounds like they are going to argue that the default judgment is unfair because responding by the stated time placed undue hardship on her since she was hospitalized. My mother suffered from pancreatic troubles. Those illnesses can be extremely painful and debilitating even with treatment. If she was having an attack it could very well have made it impossible for her to respond to mail for days or even weeks.
My grandmother was a judge so I know a little of how courts work and how much authority they really have from her stories. They pretty much made the rules in the court room and are plenty empowered to grant exceptions when they think its fair, so I would guess this is all at the judges discretion who probably set the respond by date in the first place.
The problem is they can't likely renegotiate those peering agreements. Cogent will is strong and getting stronger. They also are unafraid to "go nuke someone". We have seen these guys cut peers off without warning, muck with BGP, and generally terrorize the other backbone providers. You know what though, the are providing better service to their customers at lower cost! The truth about most of those peering fights has been that the other companies just don't like them competing!
Cogent and its child "retail / b2b" operations are great to work with as a customer. The neutrality crowd can't raise rates because they are already loosing customers left and right. This is about them wanting the force of law to give them more metering opportunities so they have something to negotiate for to get better terms in peering agreements.
I don't have much of a biology background but what you say makes sense. If the chemical bonds are stronger in PNA then you have to have other higher energy state free radicals floating about to break them apart which would likely be ractive with other chemical structures in cells that are not reactive chemically with the enzymes that unzip DNA. You might have a more stable "code of life" with PNA but It might not lend itself to the complexities of a eukarotic cell.
People adapt yes, but I think if you bring someone form too remote a life style or too far in the past you would have issues. They might adapt to a point were you could control them and they could function in terms of day to day stuff, but could they support themselves?
Could someone who has been on ICE since 1909 participate much on 2009 society? Would they be able to frame the social issues of day comprehend our entertainment and humor which I think would be required to "enjoy life". Would they be able to have a career above fry-cook or field-hand, even if they had been an "educated" person in their day?
No C is a great teaching language if what you want is to teach the science of computing and how the machines do their work. You have to do some work with students in at the very least C and some Assembly if you want them to get an understanding of computer design and architecture. You don't have to do these things if you want to teach software engineering. They are different fields or at least different disciplines within a larger field, like an Oncologist is a type of medical doctor and so is an Endocrinologist but they have very different educational backgrounds after some shared fundamentals.
Nothing is wrong with it at all. In a traditional compiled language its often the most efficent way to write something and it often gets you the most efficent compiled code and when it does not most compilers will be smart enough to build a loop construct when the go to the assembler stage.
If you are using an interpreted langague like python or my favoirte Dialect( needs more respect ) then you have to be a little careful with it because these have a "soft stack" that can only get so deep. They have to keep track of how deep they are and where that have been, rather then just a beq and jmp on some register value, so they know what to do next. Mosty interpreters have a fixed stack depth although some manage to abstact this to linked list like structures internally and can keep going until the heap is exhasted. In any case you can't search to big a space recusively or it will fail.
I agree I don't see anything of than this statistical correlation between fastfood sugar and Alzheimers that makes it obvious they should be linked. I think the parent poster was makeing the more general statement that our bodies like any other machine if not properly maintained are more likely to fail and sooner. Those failures are also more likely to defy repair as well.
Ah, the cycle of PC hardware. Starts out with nothing but the bear minimum generalized equipment where the cpu itself is timing the scan rate for the display. Then slowly explodes to the Amigia point where there is a separate chip for everything under the sun. After that everything gets pulled back in again. PCs have been on their balloon out for a while, it started with sound cards, then fancy video cards, then all kinds of expansion buses. Now we are headed back for just one big honkin CPU in charge of everything again.
WRONG>.. The nation debt exists because the government foolishly allowed the creation of a central bank! If such a bank did not exist the government would have take in enough revenue at tax time to pay for its expenses for the comming year. In troubled times some short term bonds might get bought an sold but no way would investors or the public allow trillions in debt to be racked up.
God help us if Uncle Sam could not spend more then we produce...Our children might have a future or something...
Excahnge's underlaying database and storage engines support pointers to single copy attachments and even the message bodyies themsevles but if you don't have some third party product that does that then Exchange stores multiple copies.
I think the parent is correct. I don't think Google cares one way or the other if they become a mainstream browser vendor or not. Its not ever going to be a big part of their revenue. What they do care about is not allowing one company to dominate the client side software stack for the WWW. An open standards based WWW leaves Google free to inovate in the form of its web offerings. They can offer any new technology or services they can develop and market to consumers and or advertizers.
If they allow Microsoft or anyone else total control of the software stack such that rest of the commercial ecosytem of the WWW can just ignore the also rans then the vendor of that software stack has a great deal of control when it comes to what the WWW looks like and what you can with it. It also means they can bias the directon of continued development just to harm other organizations they don't like that year. Google does not want Microsoft empowered in that way any more than they already are.
Yes you sex partner can in fact do just that if you have had enough to drink and its a really strange party.
right because your typical business users would never say want to change the extention of some think like report.txt they get mailed to them from a host system to something like report.csv so they can open it in Excel. Stuff like the never happens....
Do you remember just a few years ago the "MS Blaster" fiasco?
Do you remember "Welchia" I think it was called. It was just that it removed Blaster and then tried to spread itself the same way. In the end Welchia was a troublesome for network operators as "MS Blaster" itself. It was terrible.
I must agree while it seems more difficult this is a problem that must be fought both at the source and the target. Its one thing to go after bot net operators but someone should be going after negligent individuals who allow devices they are responsible for to become bots. I think the network must be managed. I think internet access SHOULD BE LICENSED, we don't let you drive a car on our public road without one because the hazard it would pose to others persons and property. We should not let you on our public network where your improperly operated equipment might threaten the use of mine and others.
There should be an exam that all individuals with access must pass that is demonstrative of some learning about how tcp/ip works, what firewalling is, why maintaining your systems is important. I don't think you should be liable for something a cracker does with your system after you have been 0wn3d because that would pose to much risk but you should get cut off. If you can't demonstrait that you attempted to maintain your systems they you should not be let back on.
I would argue that protecting ones trademarks and copyrights would include taking the time to file specific and correct DMCA requests even if that meant enumeration what items you were interested in for the requestee. It would be like me knocking on my neighbors door and saying
Dude I know some of the stuff in your yard can't possibly be allowed by our community bylaws. Can you please go research them and get back to me, then naturally you will have to get compliant.
It seems to me if I have an problem with something someone else is doing it falls to me to at least identify what that is in a specific an actionable way and determine if its at least reasonably possible I have the force of law on my side before I bother them or a court with my complaint.
Use a small shell script with dd to add a byte from /dev/random to the the end of each file, you could get the file size with ls and cut and use the skip, count, and bs prams on dd, put the entire thing in a for loop and get some coffee. I don't think an extra byte at the end is going to cause you any problems displaying the JPG file but it will defeat anyone trying to ID the files by md5 hash.
Now someone could get wise to what you did and fix it, by skipping the last byte themselves, but they likely would not figure that out before determining you possessed those files some other way any way. To really protect yourself you would have to change the data in the file, imagemagic could do that again in the for loop.
Actually, You can mix gpl2 and gpl3 code period. Linus specifically struck the "or any later version" clause out of the copy of the gpl2 he used to license Linux. You could argue that Linux is not truly licensed under the gpl2 at all because he changed the license.
Wow, I though I was strange because I sometimes have dreams in TSQL
You might want to look into NIS+/YP, DNS and LDAP. 90% of what AD does is covered their an UNIX has been doing it longer then Windows. The other 10% or so you might have to roll your own but chances are pretty good you would have had to install some software which would have extened your AD schema anyway in a Windows domain.