This is NOT some private client. This is the government and the lawyers themselves exist not to assert any defense they can to win but to represent their clients. Anything done by a government attorney on behalf of the government is by definition policy. If policy says the government was wrong, rolling over is exactly what the government should do.
Even in a private case this is not okay. The lawyer is representative of the defendant and should never present a case on the defendants behalf that is not the position of the defendant!
It isn't win by any means necessary, its win if you have a position and that position is right not merely legally but ethically.
Presenting a defense that isn't at least believed to be true should be grounds to disbar the attorney in question and should bring something akin to perjury on the defendant. That may sound extreme but the consequences of these actions are extreme. First they thwart actual justice. Second in a case like this such action could result in a legal precedent that could haunt our nation for hundreds of years.
This is worse than an all powerful presidency, this is an all powerful government. That would mean that congress and the courts aren't accountable either.
According to cornell, limitations on copyright holders are as follows. Note that research and teaching are both explicitly stated cases of fair use exemption.
107 Permits the âoefair useâ of an ownerâ(TM)s work without permission â" for the purpose of âoecriticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research.â This exemption outlines four factors that must be met in order to argue a fair use.
108 Permits a library or archives to reproduce works for archiving purposes, to make copies for patrons and to participate in interlibrary loan â" all without permission
109 Permits individuals to lend, give or sell copies of works they own without seeking permission of the copyright holder. This is also referred to as the First Sale Doctrine.
110 Permits displays of work and educational performances in face-to-face teaching and distance education. The TEACH Act expands upon the limitations in section 110.
121 Permits reproduction of works without permission of the copyright holder for the blind and other people with disabilities
The copyright act section 107. This section lists many cases of fair use but gives 4 primary criteria for courts to consider. The first is the purpose of the work and makes it clear that non-profit educational use is protected. I am unable to find any reference to a classroom in section 107 (not that there is reason to think the professor doesn't teach his students by having them perform or assist with research in the classroom).
That depends, if all he needs the OCR for is to build a searchable keyword index then the error rate can be quite high and still get good results. The results of a query should point to the original PDF, not the result of the OCR.
OCR is pretty nasty stuff and it doesn't work very well at all. It's probably worth saying that the OCR results should probably only be used to generate your index and keywords.
Actually accessing the document should show the original PDF, not the error riddled OCR scan of it.
Copying excerpts for educational use is actually an explicitly protected fair use case. The copyright act actually uses it as an example if I remember correctly.
The parent said he is copying parts of texts, not entire books.
'The downside of waiting until the user uses a floppy for the first time is that you have the it sometimes works and sometimes doesn't problem. Dad buys a new computer and a copy of the Happy Fun Ball game for his son. Dad turns on the computer, and then follows the instructions that come with the Happy Fun Ball package: "Just insert the floppy and follow the instructions on the screen." Dad inserts the floppy and... nothing happens because this is the first time Dad used the floppy, and he was expecting autodetection to work.'
Yeah, because that sure stopped them from using auto-detection on CD's... oh wait...
'But the main reason for not bothering is that the benefit was minuscule compared to the cost. Nobody wants floppy drives to spin up as soon as a disk is inserted.'
The whole point of the routine is that it detects the disk WITHOUT spinning up the drive.
Sorry, this point of yours that is so blatantly clear to you that you think you don't actually need to say what you are getting at... well, its actually not clear at all, or its very clear but easily invalidated by a slightly deeper look.
Which part of the statement you quoted involved doing something outside the intellect? By definition conceptualization is purely intellectual.
'On the other hand, if you really think grasping complexity of IT systems is such a hard intelectual work you have a big problem to start with.'
Spoken like someone who doesn't grasp the complexity of IT systems. There is a reason you can go all the way to the PhD level without ever leaving the study of the complexity of IT systems.
'No: you were (and are) failing at supporting that age is a legitimate factor.'
I made the premise and supported it. You haven't come up with anything to counter either the support or the premise.
No, the term 'deniers' was first applied to anyone who denies something.
For god sake, move on from the damn holocaust already.
'And you should go to a Holocaust museum and reflect on the insensitivity of your juvenile prank.'
Precisely whom was he insensitive to even if it had been a reference to the holocaust? Were you a jew in nazi germany? No? Guess it wasn't you then.
The holocaust happened, it was terrible. Was it the most tragic event of the 20th century? One of them but there are a dozen others to go along with it and even lesser scale events that are probably more tragic because of the impact they had on the world. The war itself was tragic, the holocaust impacted a large number of a single isolated group of people who just happen to control large amounts of wealth and have a loud voice.
Stop leaning on the identity of a group and start owning your own identity, things that have happened to you, and things you have accomplished or not accomplishments.
'Its all about control and taxation. Taking from the haves and giving it to HAVE NOTS by force.'
Yes, they call that society. Societies also have these law things where the collective force is used to make individuals behave the way others think they should. And if they don't act and think like they are told then we starve their children, beat them, throw them in a cages and rape them (by proxy because they know the rapists are there and take no actions to prevent it), and then declare that they have no rights and aren't entitled to ever make a real living again for the rest of their lives.
If you are opposed to all of that, well, that'd make you an anarchist. Isn't it grand?
1: a dissenter from established religious dogma ; especially : a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church who disavows a revealed truth 2: one who dissents from an accepted belief or doctrine : nonconformist
You are confusing the definition of heretic with a description that fits popularized groups that were historically called heretics.
Dyson is a scientist who dissents on the subject of global warming.
'However, the church has managed to change the public perception'
Public perception defines the word. If they change the public perception then they have changed the definition.
'It's much easier to defend yourself with copyright law than with patents. On that note, file a provisional patent - just write up how it works in your own words, and get a lawyer to file it for you.'
Yeah, minus the lawyer. We are talking $80 vs a few grand here. You can e-file these things nowdays for god sake.
'You've got to be kidding me if you think people over the age of 30 are obsolete in technology fields.'
I didn't say anything of the sort. You (and a number of the other over 30's who have posted similar replies) have however aptly demonstrated that decline in cognitive ability soundly.
I said the decline is cognitive ability is offset by other skills, abilities, etc. At most this means that employees should be promoted up the ranks faster in IT to positions requiring more responsibility.
The reason for jury nullification is that the decision for whether or not applying the law brings justice is not supposed to be entirely up to the prosecutor but to a jury as well.
Unfortunately a few racist pricks gave 'the man' the excuse it needed to have all jurors castrated by ruling judges didn't have to advise juries of their nullification rights. Since judges have twisted that to mean that they should lie to juries and tell them they aren't allowed to nullify and even declare mistrials if they think the jury might be exercising their rights.
'unless you are working on something hard an purely intelectual'
like conceptualizing the inner working of a computer and the interaction of a dozen disparate software processes to determine the source of the subtle expression of the system not performing as desired?
Not all IT is cookie cutter fortune 500 work with only two or three people thinking and the rest just being droids who ghost drives, swap towers, and 'replace it with a bigger one if its overloaded' mentality.
Yes there are also those guys who carry a collection of symptoms and likely causes and a collection of 'fixes' for various problems in their head as a catalog.
But in my experience the most versatile IT people are the ones who fix the problem by understanding the system and the problem and applying that understanding to determine the fix.
'Do you want a keen and fast youngster that will wreak havoc on those hard cash servers or will you prefer a mature, experienced worker although maybe not so sharp?'
That's a different question entirely. I was just pointing out that age IS a legitimate factor. I didn't say I would recommend hiring fresh out of school kids for everything.
Where I come from people who bash their heads against things repeatedly and need a helmet ride the short bus, lick windows, and are informed they are 'special'.
Parents are overprotective and that is the source of many of their problems but also always tend to see no wrong when it comes to their children.
'I disagree - ability is simply the capacity accomplish something; performance is how well you apply your ability. High ability does not necessarily translate into superior performance.'
Almost right. Performance is how you perform relative to maximum performance possible, not relative to your own ability or lack thereof. Therefore while you are correct that high ability does not necessarily translate into superior performance it is also correct that low ability DOES always translate into poor performance. You can't perform if you lack the ability to perform.
'You did say:...there is a basis for IT discrimination based on age; which is the point I disagree with since ability does not correlate with performance.'
Ability does relate to performance. Someone with ability can be trained to perform or may already be able to perform. Someone with lesser abilities can only try to compensate but could never match someone who is already at their peak in both areas.
Simply because there is a legitimate basis doesn't mean I agree with it. There is a legitimate basis for using a drug test, or a personality test for hiring purposes as well and I disagree with both practices.
'That's half your 30's right there, and the difference between getting a CS degree or spending four years getting high in your friend's apartment is that one of them is guaranteed to piss away the time, while the other just has a chance of doing it if you don't go about it right.'
I suppose that depends on your definition of 'piss away'. There is a balance to be found in life. Some people never grow up, some grow up and lose sight of what matters in life.
If you spend 12+hrs a day at work, come home, eat, shit, and sleep and then get up and repeat you are pissing your life away in a way that is far more dramatic than the guy spending his life getting stoned in his friends apartment (not that you can't be a responsible grown up and get stoned in your off time).
At some point the cycle ends, theres no repeat, there's nothing more. Your power switch is turned off and you can't be booted back up. Personally, laying in my death bed I'd rather know I enjoyed every second of life that I could rather than building and saving my entire life for a future that will never happen or for the period in life when I'm too old to enjoy it.
There is a balance to be found though. It's possible to be responsible with a good job and to go home when the day ends to enjoy life. But one should never lose sight of the fact that work is merely a way to pay for the enjoyment.
This isn't flamebait at all, its an example of why parent's should be excluded from votes that impact children.
A parent sees his child exploring the results and impact of hitting his head. A sane person sees a child clearly smashing his head repeatedly into the table and determines its time for a helmet.
*Note I didn't actually see the incident and the parent could have been entirely correct about what was going on. It doesn't invalidate my point though, parents have biological imperatives that guarantee they can not rationally consider policies with regard to children.
Slashdot Mirror
This is NOT some private client. This is the government and the lawyers themselves exist not to assert any defense they can to win but to represent their clients. Anything done by a government attorney on behalf of the government is by definition policy. If policy says the government was wrong, rolling over is exactly what the government should do.
Even in a private case this is not okay. The lawyer is representative of the defendant and should never present a case on the defendants behalf that is not the position of the defendant!
It isn't win by any means necessary, its win if you have a position and that position is right not merely legally but ethically.
Presenting a defense that isn't at least believed to be true should be grounds to disbar the attorney in question and should bring something akin to perjury on the defendant. That may sound extreme but the consequences of these actions are extreme. First they thwart actual justice. Second in a case like this such action could result in a legal precedent that could haunt our nation for hundreds of years.
This is worse than an all powerful presidency, this is an all powerful government. That would mean that congress and the courts aren't accountable either.
According to cornell, limitations on copyright holders are as follows. Note that research and teaching are both explicitly stated cases of fair use exemption.
107
Permits the âoefair useâ of an ownerâ(TM)s work without permission â" for the purpose of âoecriticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research.â This exemption outlines four factors that must be met in order to argue a fair use.
108
Permits a library or archives to reproduce works for archiving purposes, to make copies for patrons and to participate in interlibrary loan â" all without permission
109
Permits individuals to lend, give or sell copies of works they own without seeking permission of the copyright holder. This is also referred to as the First Sale Doctrine.
110
Permits displays of work and educational performances in face-to-face teaching and distance education. The TEACH Act expands upon the limitations in section 110.
121
Permits reproduction of works without permission of the copyright holder for the blind and other people with disabilities
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107
The copyright act section 107. This section lists many cases of fair use but gives 4 primary criteria for courts to consider. The first is the purpose of the work and makes it clear that non-profit educational use is protected. I am unable to find any reference to a classroom in section 107 (not that there is reason to think the professor doesn't teach his students by having them perform or assist with research in the classroom).
That depends, if all he needs the OCR for is to build a searchable keyword index then the error rate can be quite high and still get good results. The results of a query should point to the original PDF, not the result of the OCR.
OCR is pretty nasty stuff and it doesn't work very well at all. It's probably worth saying that the OCR results should probably only be used to generate your index and keywords.
Actually accessing the document should show the original PDF, not the error riddled OCR scan of it.
Copying excerpts for educational use is actually an explicitly protected fair use case. The copyright act actually uses it as an example if I remember correctly.
The parent said he is copying parts of texts, not entire books.
'The downside of waiting until the user uses a floppy for the first time is that you have the it sometimes works and sometimes doesn't problem. Dad buys a new computer and a copy of the Happy Fun Ball game for his son. Dad turns on the computer, and then follows the instructions that come with the Happy Fun Ball package: "Just insert the floppy and follow the instructions on the screen." Dad inserts the floppy and... nothing happens because this is the first time Dad used the floppy, and he was expecting autodetection to work.'
Yeah, because that sure stopped them from using auto-detection on CD's... oh wait...
'But the main reason for not bothering is that the benefit was minuscule compared to the cost. Nobody wants floppy drives to spin up as soon as a disk is inserted.'
The whole point of the routine is that it detects the disk WITHOUT spinning up the drive.
Sorry, this point of yours that is so blatantly clear to you that you think you don't actually need to say what you are getting at... well, its actually not clear at all, or its very clear but easily invalidated by a slightly deeper look.
Some are, some aren't. I think most ID people also believe in science.
'What part of "purely" didn't you understand?'
Which part of the statement you quoted involved doing something outside the intellect? By definition conceptualization is purely intellectual.
'On the other hand, if you really think grasping complexity of IT systems is such a hard intelectual work you have a big problem to start with.'
Spoken like someone who doesn't grasp the complexity of IT systems. There is a reason you can go all the way to the PhD level without ever leaving the study of the complexity of IT systems.
'No: you were (and are) failing at supporting that age is a legitimate factor.'
I made the premise and supported it. You haven't come up with anything to counter either the support or the premise.
No, the term 'deniers' was first applied to anyone who denies something.
For god sake, move on from the damn holocaust already.
'And you should go to a Holocaust museum and reflect on the insensitivity of your juvenile prank.'
Precisely whom was he insensitive to even if it had been a reference to the holocaust? Were you a jew in nazi germany? No? Guess it wasn't you then.
The holocaust happened, it was terrible. Was it the most tragic event of the 20th century? One of them but there are a dozen others to go along with it and even lesser scale events that are probably more tragic because of the impact they had on the world. The war itself was tragic, the holocaust impacted a large number of a single isolated group of people who just happen to control large amounts of wealth and have a loud voice.
Stop leaning on the identity of a group and start owning your own identity, things that have happened to you, and things you have accomplished or not accomplishments.
'Its all about control and taxation. Taking from the haves and giving it to HAVE NOTS by force.'
Yes, they call that society. Societies also have these law things where the collective force is used to make individuals behave the way others think they should. And if they don't act and think like they are told then we starve their children, beat them, throw them in a cages and rape them (by proxy because they know the rapists are there and take no actions to prevent it), and then declare that they have no rights and aren't entitled to ever make a real living again for the rest of their lives.
If you are opposed to all of that, well, that'd make you an anarchist. Isn't it grand?
ID isn't science, good or bad.
'"all Slashdotters are male virgins who live at home."'
You were on a roll with your righteous anger and then you go and blow it at the end.
From Merriam-Webster (definition of heretic):
1: a dissenter from established religious dogma ; especially : a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church who disavows a revealed truth
2: one who dissents from an accepted belief or doctrine : nonconformist
You are confusing the definition of heretic with a description that fits popularized groups that were historically called heretics.
Dyson is a scientist who dissents on the subject of global warming.
'However, the church has managed to change the public perception'
Public perception defines the word. If they change the public perception then they have changed the definition.
'And God knows there are a sh*tload of mediocre minds involved with gerbil wormening'
Sorry, you lost all credibility when you capitalized god.
'It's much easier to defend yourself with copyright law than with patents. On that note, file a provisional patent - just write up how it works in your own words, and get a lawyer to file it for you.'
Yeah, minus the lawyer. We are talking $80 vs a few grand here. You can e-file these things nowdays for god sake.
'You've got to be kidding me if you think people over the age of 30 are obsolete in technology fields.'
I didn't say anything of the sort. You (and a number of the other over 30's who have posted similar replies) have however aptly demonstrated that decline in cognitive ability soundly.
I said the decline is cognitive ability is offset by other skills, abilities, etc. At most this means that employees should be promoted up the ranks faster in IT to positions requiring more responsibility.
The reason for jury nullification is that the decision for whether or not applying the law brings justice is not supposed to be entirely up to the prosecutor but to a jury as well.
Unfortunately a few racist pricks gave 'the man' the excuse it needed to have all jurors castrated by ruling judges didn't have to advise juries of their nullification rights. Since judges have twisted that to mean that they should lie to juries and tell them they aren't allowed to nullify and even declare mistrials if they think the jury might be exercising their rights.
Man charged with 1st degree murder after planning and successfully committing suicide.
'unless you are working on something hard an purely intelectual'
like conceptualizing the inner working of a computer and the interaction of a dozen disparate software processes to determine the source of the subtle expression of the system not performing as desired?
Not all IT is cookie cutter fortune 500 work with only two or three people thinking and the rest just being droids who ghost drives, swap towers, and 'replace it with a bigger one if its overloaded' mentality.
Yes there are also those guys who carry a collection of symptoms and likely causes and a collection of 'fixes' for various problems in their head as a catalog.
But in my experience the most versatile IT people are the ones who fix the problem by understanding the system and the problem and applying that understanding to determine the fix.
'Do you want a keen and fast youngster that will wreak havoc on those hard cash servers or will you prefer a mature, experienced worker although maybe not so sharp?'
That's a different question entirely. I was just pointing out that age IS a legitimate factor. I didn't say I would recommend hiring fresh out of school kids for everything.
Where I come from people who bash their heads against things repeatedly and need a helmet ride the short bus, lick windows, and are informed they are 'special'.
Parents are overprotective and that is the source of many of their problems but also always tend to see no wrong when it comes to their children.
'I disagree - ability is simply the capacity accomplish something; performance is how well you apply your ability. High ability does not necessarily translate into superior performance.'
Almost right. Performance is how you perform relative to maximum performance possible, not relative to your own ability or lack thereof. Therefore while you are correct that high ability does not necessarily translate into superior performance it is also correct that low ability DOES always translate into poor performance. You can't perform if you lack the ability to perform.
'You did say: ...there is a basis for IT discrimination based on age; which is the point I disagree with since ability does not correlate with performance.'
Ability does relate to performance. Someone with ability can be trained to perform or may already be able to perform. Someone with lesser abilities can only try to compensate but could never match someone who is already at their peak in both areas.
Simply because there is a legitimate basis doesn't mean I agree with it. There is a legitimate basis for using a drug test, or a personality test for hiring purposes as well and I disagree with both practices.
'That's half your 30's right there, and the difference between getting a CS degree or spending four years getting high in your friend's apartment is that one of them is guaranteed to piss away the time, while the other just has a chance of doing it if you don't go about it right.'
I suppose that depends on your definition of 'piss away'. There is a balance to be found in life. Some people never grow up, some grow up and lose sight of what matters in life.
If you spend 12+hrs a day at work, come home, eat, shit, and sleep and then get up and repeat you are pissing your life away in a way that is far more dramatic than the guy spending his life getting stoned in his friends apartment (not that you can't be a responsible grown up and get stoned in your off time).
At some point the cycle ends, theres no repeat, there's nothing more. Your power switch is turned off and you can't be booted back up. Personally, laying in my death bed I'd rather know I enjoyed every second of life that I could rather than building and saving my entire life for a future that will never happen or for the period in life when I'm too old to enjoy it.
There is a balance to be found though. It's possible to be responsible with a good job and to go home when the day ends to enjoy life. But one should never lose sight of the fact that work is merely a way to pay for the enjoyment.
ROFL
This isn't flamebait at all, its an example of why parent's should be excluded from votes that impact children.
A parent sees his child exploring the results and impact of hitting his head. A sane person sees a child clearly smashing his head repeatedly into the table and determines its time for a helmet.
*Note I didn't actually see the incident and the parent could have been entirely correct about what was going on. It doesn't invalidate my point though, parents have biological imperatives that guarantee they can not rationally consider policies with regard to children.