Yes, I get this is not upstanding behavior. Is it a 'dealing in stolen property' felony? What the heck is an 'offenses against computer users' felony? Misdemeanor theft, yes. But 'handling lewd materials'? That's a crime?
It feels like most of the laws are on the books just so the police can hit you with a zillion for anything then drop most of them to appear like the good guys.
It is a problem with the legal system. It is often difficult to convict based on the exact charge filed. So if they really want to get you convicted on something, they slap you with everything vaguely related and hope something sticks. Unfortunately, with all the millions of laws on the books, everybody is guilty of something. How many people can honestly say they have never went outside on Sunday without a hat on? So basically, anybody can be thrown in jail at any time.
If you've only seen free porn, you haven't seen the good stuff yet.
How can they prove to me that "the good stuff" is worth the money. If I base it upon my opinion of the free stuff, then it is probably not worth the money. Same as with "free to try" software where they limit you from being able to test the functionality that proves that it can do what you want it to do and would thus be willing to buy the full version.
From what I've seen of porn, if it has a porn star in it, then I am probably not interested. Somehow, the actresses always seem like their...acting. I've never been turned on by a porn star. More like "ugh, she looks like a porn star".
You're right, how much do you have to pay for a TV you stole from walmart?
OH RIGHT. NOTHING.
That is right most of the time because the retailer doesn't bother to sue because they figure you have no money. However, it is within their right to sue you not just for the cost of the TV, but for punitive damages as well. I don't even know if any retailer has ever bothered, so I don't know what their odds of winning would be. Perhaps if people were punished with a $150,000 per TV fine as well, then we would see fewer stolen TVs.
what's the real cost of his actions?
Irrelevant. Vendors don't charge based on cost. They charge based on what the market will bear. In this case, the market advertises that sharing a file costs $150,000 and he presumably thought this was a decent price and so shared 10 times. Every retailer knows if you give away free samples or even free products you're encouraging people to come back. To buy your new offerings. People are creatures of habit and once we like something we want more of it. This massive giveaway probably did wonders for their signup rates.
But no retailer lets an unauthorized person give away their stuff in order to generate that interest.
If they have to create an "artificial" misting system?
When humans go away, the toads will die, so I would say that still counts as "in captivity". If they want them to survive in the wild, they should find another similar environment and release them there. Of course, transporting species has historically led to bad consequences, so maybe it is best that we let nature take its course and let the species die out or adapt to its new dry surroundings (or move upstream).
They became nonviable because we destroyed their habitat. It seems strange that you consider undoing damage we have caused as somehow playing God
All errors are cumulative, all interference is absolute value. Two wrongs don't make a right, although three lefts do.
Within minutes the kids were opening the boxes and figuring out how to use the Motorola Zoom tablets, within days they were playing alphabet songs and withing a few months how to hack the user interface to enable blocked camera functionality.
Just imagine what they could do if they had electricity.
Yes, I've seen that - the agency charged the corporation $120/hour for services, while only paying the H1-B visa graduates $35/hour. The difference was kept by himself.
I have been in this exact situation and I cannot understand how it is allowed to go on. Basically, full time employees of a company are let go, and replaced by consultants. Every single, solitary one of which is on an H1-b. The company sponsoring them is an Indian owned company which has exactly 100% of their employees on H1-b. Of course, none of the displaced workers from America would be able to hire on at this company. Indian companies tend to be fiercely nationalistic and won't hire anybody that is not on an H1-b from India.
I don't understand why these people are allowed to so blatantly replace American workers with people who are only supposed to be here because we couldn't find someone in America with the skillset of the person they just fired.
So, the H1-B worker, by your calculation, lives of donuts he steals in the break room and sleeps on a park bench?
Far from it! The H1-Bs I knew lived in the lap of luxury with only 6 of them sharing a single 2 bedroom apartment and one car. I don't know if they saved their money up and lived like kings when they went back to India. Unfortunately, after I trained them how to do my job and was then let go, I had to move out-of-state to find a job and didn't ever hear how they worked out. we graduate some 5,000,000 people a year from US colleges. Compare that to the 85,000 total H1B visa given out annually, less than 2% of the total job market entries.
So, I assume there must be a need for 5,085,000 new people in the economy every year , and with our 0% unemployment, we had no choice but to look outside our borders.
Rosa Parks: She went to the front of the bus. What did she think would happen if she refused to go to the back of the bus?
Are you saying that this instance was a purposefully planned protest with a person specially picked and groomed for the task, as was the case with Rosa Parks? If so, was the child also allowed to choose whether to participate?
it is fair to put it under the umbrella of "internet" and internet is essential.
I don't think the internet is essential. Even in a first world country, you don't need access to the internet to survive, and you certainly don't need access to the internet of your own. Your job, the library, Starbucks, Home Depot, all provide public wifi. No need to spend $40 a month for your own connection.
As far as internet on the phone, that is only essential for people who have chosen to make it essential for themselves. For everyone else, internet on the phone is a toy.
Maybe with the savings they can upgrade buildings to be more earthquake resistant.
Why do that? With no scientists around, they could just sacrifice a virgin to the volcano gods and that would prevent the earthquakes. And if there is STILL an earthquake, it is because the volcano god wanted TWO virgins that day, or this being Italy, maybe the one wasn't really a virgin. Or was a virgin of the slashdot variety, which would hardly befit a volcano god.
As a professional engineer, accountability starts the moment you have a license number in your state.
Which engineer designed the tectonic plate? An engineer is responsible because he designed the building or structure with known materials with known properties. A scientist did not design the Earth. They merely attempt to understand and explain it. Because they were not the inventor, they don't know how or why it works they way it does. They are attempting to reverse engineer. All they can do is say that based on the their understanding, there does not appear to be any reason for extraordinary concern, but that building codes do need to be improved and some buildings are unsafe.
Even an engineer would not be held at fault if the basic understandings of material science failed. An engineer is held at fault only if they do not abide by the knowns, not when they failed to design for an unknown.
Or, the moral is, vote out the idiots running the show, and vote in people with sense.
The fact that people actually DESIRE to be in charge of an entire country automatically disqualifies them on the basis of nobody with any kind of sense would want to do that. A president should be dragged into office kicking and screaming.
I'll go one better, POLITICIANS! They make a promise on the campaign trail and break it, right to prison.
That depends. If the conservatives break their promise, they should go to prison. If the liberals keep their promise, they should go to prison.
If there's a hurricane right off the coast and you tell people there's NO CHANCE it's coming ashore, and it does, then yes.
What if you tell people that the series of small squalls that have happened in recent years does not necessarily mean we will have a large hurricane come ashore this season, despite what the guy driving up and down the beach with a megaphone is saying, but you should still be sure to properly build your houses and the building codes do need improvement. So, if a large hurricane comes ashore the next year, 150 miles away from where the monster-shouter was voicing his concern, should we throw the weatherman in jail?
So it really looks like the builders of the buildings should also be gone after. They should have built things to last.
Probably need to go after the preservation society, which insists that these valuable landmarks must be left standing and absolutely unmodified in any way.
We should start somewhere a little more predictable, like economists.
Economists are scientists taken to the logical extreme. Economists are just dead wrong every single time, but they are always able to explain WHY they were wrong because of a new piece of evidence that was not known needed to be included in the equation. The problem with economics being that every new piece of data can apparently have a 100% effect on the outcome.
But they were seismologists serving on a government-appointed risk assessment panel.
Please don't elevate scientists to godlike status. All they can do is look at the evidence. Earthquakes are rare. Because of this, statistical data can be misleading. If the scientist discovers that a previous theory was flawed (and they all are, to various degrees), then they use the new data to make the theory better, or find a better theory to fit the data. The only reason we should blame the scientists is if they lied about the danger. They can't be held liable for espousing an opinion based on their best understanding of the data at the time. they were discrediting an area resident who had been claiming that a large earthquake was going to hit soon.
Just because a broken clock is right twice a day, should we set our watches by it?
Slashdot Mirror
Is there really an expectation of privacy?
Yes. Yes there is. Corporate policy and apparently at least Florida State Law says so.
Not only is it not illegal to be stupid, but stupid is actually a protected class these days.
Yes, I get this is not upstanding behavior. Is it a 'dealing in stolen property' felony? What the heck is an 'offenses against computer users' felony? Misdemeanor theft, yes. But 'handling lewd materials'? That's a crime? It feels like most of the laws are on the books just so the police can hit you with a zillion for anything then drop most of them to appear like the good guys.
It is a problem with the legal system. It is often difficult to convict based on the exact charge filed. So if they really want to get you convicted on something, they slap you with everything vaguely related and hope something sticks. Unfortunately, with all the millions of laws on the books, everybody is guilty of something. How many people can honestly say they have never went outside on Sunday without a hat on? So basically, anybody can be thrown in jail at any time.
If you've only seen free porn, you haven't seen the good stuff yet.
How can they prove to me that "the good stuff" is worth the money. If I base it upon my opinion of the free stuff, then it is probably not worth the money. Same as with "free to try" software where they limit you from being able to test the functionality that proves that it can do what you want it to do and would thus be willing to buy the full version.
From what I've seen of porn, if it has a porn star in it, then I am probably not interested. Somehow, the actresses always seem like their...acting. I've never been turned on by a porn star. More like "ugh, she looks like a porn star".
You're right, how much do you have to pay for a TV you stole from walmart? OH RIGHT. NOTHING.
That is right most of the time because the retailer doesn't bother to sue because they figure you have no money. However, it is within their right to sue you not just for the cost of the TV, but for punitive damages as well. I don't even know if any retailer has ever bothered, so I don't know what their odds of winning would be. Perhaps if people were punished with a $150,000 per TV fine as well, then we would see fewer stolen TVs.
what's the real cost of his actions?
Irrelevant. Vendors don't charge based on cost. They charge based on what the market will bear. In this case, the market advertises that sharing a file costs $150,000 and he presumably thought this was a decent price and so shared 10 times.
Every retailer knows if you give away free samples or even free products you're encouraging people to come back. To buy your new offerings. People are creatures of habit and once we like something we want more of it. This massive giveaway probably did wonders for their signup rates.
But no retailer lets an unauthorized person give away their stuff in order to generate that interest.
So did the judge watch all of the evidence?
He sat through every filthy, disgusting minute of it...twice.
Cool story bro!
Could've used a vampire, though.
If they have to create an "artificial" misting system?
When humans go away, the toads will die, so I would say that still counts as "in captivity". If they want them to survive in the wild, they should find another similar environment and release them there. Of course, transporting species has historically led to bad consequences, so maybe it is best that we let nature take its course and let the species die out or adapt to its new dry surroundings (or move upstream).
They became nonviable because we destroyed their habitat. It seems strange that you consider undoing damage we have caused as somehow playing God
All errors are cumulative, all interference is absolute value. Two wrongs don't make a right, although three lefts do.
Within minutes the kids were opening the boxes and figuring out how to use the Motorola Zoom tablets, within days they were playing alphabet songs and withing a few months how to hack the user interface to enable blocked camera functionality.
Just imagine what they could do if they had electricity.
Yes, I've seen that - the agency charged the corporation $120/hour for services, while only paying the H1-B visa graduates $35/hour. The difference was kept by himself.
I have been in this exact situation and I cannot understand how it is allowed to go on. Basically, full time employees of a company are let go, and replaced by consultants. Every single, solitary one of which is on an H1-b. The company sponsoring them is an Indian owned company which has exactly 100% of their employees on H1-b. Of course, none of the displaced workers from America would be able to hire on at this company. Indian companies tend to be fiercely nationalistic and won't hire anybody that is not on an H1-b from India.
I don't understand why these people are allowed to so blatantly replace American workers with people who are only supposed to be here because we couldn't find someone in America with the skillset of the person they just fired.
So, the H1-B worker, by your calculation, lives of donuts he steals in the break room and sleeps on a park bench?
Far from it! The H1-Bs I knew lived in the lap of luxury with only 6 of them sharing a single 2 bedroom apartment and one car.
I don't know if they saved their money up and lived like kings when they went back to India. Unfortunately, after I trained them how to do my job and was then let go, I had to move out-of-state to find a job and didn't ever hear how they worked out.
we graduate some 5,000,000 people a year from US colleges. Compare that to the 85,000 total H1B visa given out annually, less than 2% of the total job market entries.
So, I assume there must be a need for 5,085,000 new people in the economy every year , and with our 0% unemployment, we had no choice but to look outside our borders.
Rosa Parks: She went to the front of the bus. What did she think would happen if she refused to go to the back of the bus?
Are you saying that this instance was a purposefully planned protest with a person specially picked and groomed for the task, as was the case with Rosa Parks? If so, was the child also allowed to choose whether to participate?
They have to pay at least minimum wage.
How come internships in radio and media don't have to pay minimum wage?
You've invented data compression.
Are you sure? It sounds like he invented striping.
it is fair to put it under the umbrella of "internet" and internet is essential.
I don't think the internet is essential. Even in a first world country, you don't need access to the internet to survive, and you certainly don't need access to the internet of your own. Your job, the library, Starbucks, Home Depot, all provide public wifi. No need to spend $40 a month for your own connection.
As far as internet on the phone, that is only essential for people who have chosen to make it essential for themselves. For everyone else, internet on the phone is a toy.
Maybe with the savings they can upgrade buildings to be more earthquake resistant.
Why do that? With no scientists around, they could just sacrifice a virgin to the volcano gods and that would prevent the earthquakes. And if there is STILL an earthquake, it is because the volcano god wanted TWO virgins that day, or this being Italy, maybe the one wasn't really a virgin. Or was a virgin of the slashdot variety, which would hardly befit a volcano god.
As a professional engineer, accountability starts the moment you have a license number in your state.
Which engineer designed the tectonic plate? An engineer is responsible because he designed the building or structure with known materials with known properties. A scientist did not design the Earth. They merely attempt to understand and explain it. Because they were not the inventor, they don't know how or why it works they way it does. They are attempting to reverse engineer. All they can do is say that based on the their understanding, there does not appear to be any reason for extraordinary concern, but that building codes do need to be improved and some buildings are unsafe.
Even an engineer would not be held at fault if the basic understandings of material science failed. An engineer is held at fault only if they do not abide by the knowns, not when they failed to design for an unknown.
Or, the moral is, vote out the idiots running the show, and vote in people with sense.
The fact that people actually DESIRE to be in charge of an entire country automatically disqualifies them on the basis of nobody with any kind of sense would want to do that. A president should be dragged into office kicking and screaming.
I'll go one better, POLITICIANS! They make a promise on the campaign trail and break it, right to prison.
That depends. If the conservatives break their promise, they should go to prison. If the liberals keep their promise, they should go to prison.
If there's a hurricane right off the coast and you tell people there's NO CHANCE it's coming ashore, and it does, then yes.
What if you tell people that the series of small squalls that have happened in recent years does not necessarily mean we will have a large hurricane come ashore this season, despite what the guy driving up and down the beach with a megaphone is saying, but you should still be sure to properly build your houses and the building codes do need improvement. So, if a large hurricane comes ashore the next year, 150 miles away from where the monster-shouter was voicing his concern, should we throw the weatherman in jail?
So it really looks like the builders of the buildings should also be gone after. They should have built things to last.
Probably need to go after the preservation society, which insists that these valuable landmarks must be left standing and absolutely unmodified in any way.
We should start somewhere a little more predictable, like economists.
Economists are scientists taken to the logical extreme. Economists are just dead wrong every single time, but they are always able to explain WHY they were wrong because of a new piece of evidence that was not known needed to be included in the equation. The problem with economics being that every new piece of data can apparently have a 100% effect on the outcome.
But they were seismologists serving on a government-appointed risk assessment panel.
Please don't elevate scientists to godlike status. All they can do is look at the evidence. Earthquakes are rare. Because of this, statistical data can be misleading. If the scientist discovers that a previous theory was flawed (and they all are, to various degrees), then they use the new data to make the theory better, or find a better theory to fit the data. The only reason we should blame the scientists is if they lied about the danger. They can't be held liable for espousing an opinion based on their best understanding of the data at the time.
they were discrediting an area resident who had been claiming that a large earthquake was going to hit soon.
Just because a broken clock is right twice a day, should we set our watches by it?