She has no right to privacy while conducting business as Secretary of State. In fact all her "business" emails were suppose to be archived and theoretically available eventually under the FOIA. Also they are suppose to be available to give a history of how things were done and what was actually done for the purposes of history. We also could in theory learn from how we dealt with other foreign powers to know how to deal with them better in the future.
None or not much of any of this is true which is just sad and a travesty and a reason why she should never ever hold a public office again given how much she betrayed the public and her office.
I hate to break it to you but file compatibility is a garbage reason to continue to use Office. I have worked with many companies in my time and Office files are not even compatible with themselves. I can't tell you how many times I have heard people ask what version of Office are you running so I can try and save it in an Office format that will work for you. Office is barely compatible with itself over time.
I have not yet heard of an employer actually forcing people (and I would hear of things being in the benefits administration field). But, I have seen employers raise the price of health insurance, and then offer a "discount" for participation in healthy incentives.
So basically you are punishing an employee who chooses not to participate in healthy incentives or can't participate. I have scaring on my lungs due to multiple medical issues over the years so work outs are hard for me because I feel like I can't get enough air and so I tire out easy. So I guess someone like me is just screwed, sorry pay more employee because of your past health issues? That just seems so wrong to me.
Good luck with this. I doubt many are going to want to watch this live. The buzzing noise they make is really annoying and some of the videos I have seen have them flying so fast in small areas that it's hard to keep up with them. Maybe if you brought in better video/camera men and then edit it with live streams from the quad-copters it might be more interesting.
I also think it would be more interesting to see computer controller racers and see the interesting technology develop which would have a lot more applications than just racing. Sort of like car racing tends to feed ideas in to the cars we drive every day.
Says the guy posting anonymously. If you really believed you had nothing to hide you would sign your real name to this post at a minimum. If you have nothing to hide why not post your home address as well. I mean you have nothing to hide right?
You really should look at the police in large cities. There are so many large cities in the US that have massive amounts of CCTV cameras on so many lights and public areas these days. If you want to see it taken to an extreme just check out London. They are suppose to have some insane number of camera per person in London. I have heard number like 1 camera per every 10-11 people living in London. Supposedly you can't do crap in London in public without it being caught on some camera.
I know here in Missouri it the larger cities it seems like every intersection has a camera pointed in each direction. I'm not talking red light cameras but CCTV cameras. I know St. Louis has a huge monitoring department for the police to watch all the cameras and they have microphones hooked up as well to detect and triangulate gun shots. Welcome to Big Brother.
If you think government workers actually work 8 hours per day then I think you need to actually visit a government office or visit a judge and watch how much they actually work per day. At a bare minimum they take a 1 hour lunch and two 15 minute breaks. So you are talking about more like 6.5 hours max of work. You can then throw in time to get setup to work each morning and time to organize for the end of day, bathroom breaks, general discussions and other time wasting. You are probably looking at more like 5 to 5.5 per day. You also didn't remove any vacation time or federal holidays either. There are 10 official federal holidays per year.
So in reality you are looking at more like a maximum of 250 work days in the year not counting vacations. So you are looking at 1250 to 1370 and a max of 1625 with no extra vacation time. Given a lot of people take a week or two off at the end of the year and possible other vacation days and you have a serious lack of time. Which ends up being not nearly enough time to properly investigate each warrant and discover all the nuances of each case and each warrant, at least in my mind.
Actually the funny part about breaking the German "Enigma" was the fact that they couldn't just stop everything they knew was going to happen or the German's would know and change things to stop them from knowing what they were up to. So a large number of attacks and such they had to let happen and watch people die so as not to give too much away. So actually breaking "Engima" didn't prevent a lot of the attacks just probably some of the bigger ones. Engima was used, from what I have read, more to setup D-Day and to know if the Germans were on to them about it.
I talked with and signed up for Uber as a driver and they are on purpose breaking the law in Missouri. In Missouri you are required to have a "Class E" license to drive for pay. It even says in the state driving handbook that taxis, couriers and even pizza delivery drivers are suppose to have "Class E" license. I met Uber staff here in St. Louis at one of their events and point blank asked them about this and was told by the staff that I didn't need a "Class E" license to drive for them. I asked specifically about it saying the state requires it for this type of driving and was told "well we don't require our drivers to have it."
People have commented on here that Uber also inspects the drivers car to make sure they are ok. Nope that is false. I am approved to drive for Uber and they have never seen my car. In fact I didn't even drive the car I listed with them to this meeting. So there was no possible way for them to see it or inspect it.
Now Uber isn't licensed to operate here yet and I suspect they may never be given they don't want to agree to the same type of license requirements here in St. Louis that Taxi companies are required to do. But the funny thing is that Uber agreed to the same type of terms in Dallas to operate. So Uber claiming they can't make money if they agree to the terms the city wants is complete crap.
There is nothing special about Uber and in fact they are in many ways a substandard version of taxi service that just happens to have a phone app instead of calling the taxi company for a ride. Given the process I went through to drive for Uber I am not at all impressed and given news reports of problems with Uber drivers in other cities assaulting people I am not surprised at all.
I find that interesting given that your assertation of library incompatibility on Desura doesn't seem to line up with forum posts other than when they were in beta testing.
The biggest problem that Loki Game had was mismanagement. If you mismanage a company it doesn't matter how big or small it is it will eventually crater.
I would bet most indie games take a week max to port to Linux. Loki Game on average took only 2 months to port a Windows AAA title to Linux. The cost of porting a game to Linux compared with the total amount of revenue generated by Linux sales makes it a no brainer for indie developers.
You do realize that HiB is doing a large percentage of the Linux and Mac ports themselves. They have 4 full time programmers on staff to port Windows games to Mac and Linux. It can't take them too long given the span of time between HiB releases these days.
I would bet that she would have normally lost this case on every count if it were not for the issue of the police lied about having a warrant for her arrest. I believe the police can lie about a lot of things to catch a criminal but I do not believe that they can lie about a warrant to gain access to a home to search it for stolen material. That is the part of this case that is going to be the problem. Not that they had nuddie pictures of her. Sounds like the police jumped the gun and should have gotten a warrant from the prosecuting attorney to search the residence but didn't bother to wait for one and just tried to pressure her in to letting them in, which may have been illegal. That is going to be the main issue here and I would bet money that is why the judge didn't just simply throw out her case. She is probably going to loose on the privacy grounds but how the police searched her place and ended up arresting her, is probably going to be the big problem for the police.
The security firm has absolutely nothing to fear from her. They were acting in good faith on behalf of the actual owner of the laptop. They had no idea that she wasn't the one who stole the laptop. So them collecting documents and pictures of her, the user of the laptop, is all within the scope of finding out who is using the stolen laptop that is probably the thief and where the laptop is. Why isn't she suing her ISP for telling the police that she was the one with that IP at that time so that is where the police needed to go look? Unless the laptop had built in GPS the ISP had to tell the police exactly where the laptop was being using . There isn't some magic thing that automatically tells you the exact GPS location of every assigned IP address.
I don't see how there is going to be a Constitutional violation here at all. Exactly which amendment of the Constitution was violated and by whom? Unlawful search and seizure? Well the police didn't do the search and seizure of the laptop, the security company did. The laptop wasn't her's so it wasn't unlawful. So exactly where is the unlawful part? Was her privacy violated? Maybe, but I don't think so since everything was done in an attempt to find out who was using the laptop, to make sure they got the right person, and where the laptop was. Only the security company's people (maybe 1-2 people), maybe the owner (1 person), and the police and prosecuting attorney who got the warrant and the judge (maybe) saw the pictures. Doesn't seem like a lot of people to me, and all of them but the owner are professionals so I don't see the problem here.
I absolutely do not think that any kind of ruling should be done that removes rights from the rightful owner to trackdown and recover their stolen property. Why didn't she register the laptop with the manufacturer in case the laptop was recalled for product defects and safety issues? The fact that she didn't, I suspect is because she knew it was sold to her cheaper than the market is for it. I always register my used equipment with the manufacturer to make sure I know about product recalls or whatever. If I get a stolen used item then I will know instantly when I register it with the manufacturer.
It would have to be a pretty old laptop to be realistically worth only $60. Why the kid couldn't just reinstall the OS to fix the problem himself should tell you a lot about the fact it was probably a stolen laptop. I don't feel sorry for her one bit.
WRONG! Actually go and look at what the court said. It didn't say that anyone went to far. It said that the case wasn't cut and dry and thus would not be simply thrown out. The court did *NOT* decide any facts about the case one way or the other, other than to say there might be a case here, and it wasn't a situation where the case should definitely be thrown out right at the start. That is a huge difference from the court saying someone screwed up. This is just the court saying...ehhh maybe there is a case here, we don't know for sure so we are going to allow the case to go forward at this point.
The security company can *NOT* be an agent of the police. They are absolutely *NOT* acting on behalf of the police. They could care less about the police and what the police will or won't do. The security company is acting on behalf of the rightful owner of the laptop. If the owner of the laptop said send me the information and I'll take care of the issue from here, then that is exactly what the security company would have done. I would bet that in fact is exactly what the security company did. The owner said track it, they did and then sent the laptop owner the results for him to take to the police or whatever he wanted to do. The police can't activate the Lo-Jack on a car without the owner's permission or a warrant. So they are not acting on behalf of the police. The same thing here. The police can't just call up and say hey tell me where this laptop is.
So no the security company absolutely is *NOT* an agent of the police. An agent of police could be told hey go do this by the police and they would, without a court order. That is the nature and whole point of being an agent of the police, the person isn't acting under court order but simply the authority of the police. No security company is going to do anything simply because the police tell them to do it, not without a court order, and then they are not an agent of the police, but rather complying with a lawful court order.
It depends on the state. Most states have said you can record as long as at least 1 person knows they are being recorded. Given that the true owner of the laptop knew that the laptop was recording, I would find it hard to believe that the courts would say that the owner can not record pictures via the web cam to prove who actually stole or was using the stolen laptop at one point. That would have to be the most stupid legal ruling out there and would cause huge problems for other issues where people are trying to retrieve stolen items.
Sorry but the criminals or those dealing in stolen merchandise do not deserve more protections than the actual owner who is trying to retrieve their stolen property. If she has a problem then she should go after the kid and his family that sold her the stolen laptop. Why she didn't completely reformat and reinstall the OS if it was messed up I will never know. That is one of the first things you should do with a used computer or laptop. Is completely reformat the system and install the OS fresh. If she didn't get reinstall disks then she should have known something was not quite right. She could have also called the manufacturer and ordered the disks if she didn't get any and she would have known it was stolen then. So I don't feel for her one bit. Whenever I buy used computers and electronics the very first thing I do is register as the new owner with the manufacturer, so if there is a problem I will know right away and so I get any support available to me, or any offers they have for people who buy their device used.
IP address does not prove anything. It doesn't even prove where the laptop is/was. How do you know that the laptop wasn't connected to her neighbor's wifi? Do you know that for a fact? The IP address would not tell you that she was using her neighbor's wifi. It would make it seem like the neighbor was the one with the laptop, but the pictures of who is actually using the laptop tell a different story. This is exactly why all of these type of programs take a picture with the web cam when possible so they can see who exactly is using the computer.
There are only 2-3 states where that is an issue. All the other states say that only 1 person has to know about the recording for it to be legal. This goes right back to being able to film police and if it is legal or not. You might want to actually read up on this before you comment.
Does this mean we are finally going to eliminate some of the layers of X and go with a more sane and modern approach to video display or did we just throw in a few new bells and do some performance tweaks. We really need a better, more responsive/modern display system.
If Apple wants to claim that other people are stealing their ideas and their work, then I would love to know how they justify all the stealing that they have done. I would love to know how Apple can justify stealing other people's work and then patenting it.
I want to know how Apple thinks it is ok to steal the trade dress of legal tablets/paper and act like they invented it and that they can be protected from others using the exact same thing. Is Apple licensing the legal tablet/paper look from one of the paper companies? If not then Apple needs to be sued for stealing too. I also recall several programs that used this exact icon for their simple note editor program that wasn't a full blown word processor. I recall it being used on almost every OS, Apple IIgs, Windows (all versions), Linux, Mac, etc. Apple point blank stole this from earlier programs because people have already been trained that the picture of a notepad means a small note taking program, not full blown word processor. So Apple is not original or the first, so they never should have been given a patent, not to mention so obvious and not at all innovative.
The same goes for the envelope for email. I believe that either one of the early graphic computer BBSes or Prodigy might want a word with Apple for stealing their interface icons. I would look at Prodigy, Hawayii FYI, Minitel, Habitat (pre-AOL) or early NAPLPS BBS (TurBoard, Searchlight, TBBS, Renegade, etc) or the Excalibur BBS, the first windows BBS. They all used an envelope of somSo ae sort to represent email. Apple point blank stole this from earlier programs because people have already been trained that the picture of an envelope means email. So again not original or the first so they never should have been given a patent, not to mention so obvious and not at all innovative.
I also believe that the cartoon bubble was used by early graphic BBS to indicate chat with the SYSOP as well. I know it was in fact used in Habitat as well (pre-AOL). So all Apple did here was re-purpose the icon for SMS chat/msgs. So many Windows, Internet programs (chat, IRC, Palace chat, etc) and communication software packages have used the cartoon bubble as an icon over the years. Apple point blank stole this from earlier programs because people have already been trained that the picture of cartoon bubble means talk/chat/message. Again not original or the first, so they never should have been given a patent, not to mention so obvious and not at all innovative.
The patent on the dial icon is going to fall into the exact same problems. Apple point blank stole this from earlier programs because people have already been trained that the picture of a phone or a handset means to call or use phone functions. I am pretty sure some of the early BBS programs used the phone handset and the phone itself as icons in the graphic terminal programs they used. So once again Apple is not original or the first here. Apple may have even stolen from their own developers. Early Apple II BBS programs used the mouse characters to make a full blown graphic interface for a BBS. I remember GBBS and a couple of others did this. I might even still have the floppies around here for those BBS programs and the dialers. You should also look at any of the contact managers that would dial a number for you as well. Apple point blank stole this from earlier programs because people have already been trained that the picture of a phone or handset means to call or use telephone functions. Again not original or the first, so they never should have been given a patent, not to mention so obvious and not at all innovative.
The settings icon of gears, once again Apple is not the first to use this. In fact they point blank stole this from earlier programs that used the gears icon for settings. The gears icon with gears interlocking and without gears interlocking have been used long before the iPhone, which is exactly why they used this icon because people had already been trained as to what it meant. Again not original or the first so
I called it as soon as I heard the deal was closed and it wasn't Google who won the patents. There is no way that Google or the government was going to let that go unchallenged.
Slashdot Mirror
She has no right to privacy while conducting business as Secretary of State. In fact all her "business" emails were suppose to be archived and theoretically available eventually under the FOIA. Also they are suppose to be available to give a history of how things were done and what was actually done for the purposes of history. We also could in theory learn from how we dealt with other foreign powers to know how to deal with them better in the future.
None or not much of any of this is true which is just sad and a travesty and a reason why she should never ever hold a public office again given how much she betrayed the public and her office.
What if her server is how the Russians hacked in to the White House? Something to think about.
Yes her server was in her home. Specifically Chapiqaw, New York. (or however you spell it)
I hate to break it to you but file compatibility is a garbage reason to continue to use Office. I have worked with many companies in my time and Office files are not even compatible with themselves. I can't tell you how many times I have heard people ask what version of Office are you running so I can try and save it in an Office format that will work for you. Office is barely compatible with itself over time.
I have not yet heard of an employer actually forcing people (and I would hear of things being in the benefits administration field). But, I have seen employers raise the price of health insurance, and then offer a "discount" for participation in healthy incentives.
So basically you are punishing an employee who chooses not to participate in healthy incentives or can't participate. I have scaring on my lungs due to multiple medical issues over the years so work outs are hard for me because I feel like I can't get enough air and so I tire out easy. So I guess someone like me is just screwed, sorry pay more employee because of your past health issues? That just seems so wrong to me.
Good luck with this. I doubt many are going to want to watch this live. The buzzing noise they make is really annoying and some of the videos I have seen have them flying so fast in small areas that it's hard to keep up with them. Maybe if you brought in better video/camera men and then edit it with live streams from the quad-copters it might be more interesting.
I also think it would be more interesting to see computer controller racers and see the interesting technology develop which would have a lot more applications than just racing. Sort of like car racing tends to feed ideas in to the cars we drive every day.
Says the guy posting anonymously. If you really believed you had nothing to hide you would sign your real name to this post at a minimum. If you have nothing to hide why not post your home address as well. I mean you have nothing to hide right?
You really should look at the police in large cities. There are so many large cities in the US that have massive amounts of CCTV cameras on so many lights and public areas these days. If you want to see it taken to an extreme just check out London. They are suppose to have some insane number of camera per person in London. I have heard number like 1 camera per every 10-11 people living in London. Supposedly you can't do crap in London in public without it being caught on some camera.
I know here in Missouri it the larger cities it seems like every intersection has a camera pointed in each direction. I'm not talking red light cameras but CCTV cameras. I know St. Louis has a huge monitoring department for the police to watch all the cameras and they have microphones hooked up as well to detect and triangulate gun shots. Welcome to Big Brother.
If you think government workers actually work 8 hours per day then I think you need to actually visit a government office or visit a judge and watch how much they actually work per day. At a bare minimum they take a 1 hour lunch and two 15 minute breaks. So you are talking about more like 6.5 hours max of work. You can then throw in time to get setup to work each morning and time to organize for the end of day, bathroom breaks, general discussions and other time wasting. You are probably looking at more like 5 to 5.5 per day. You also didn't remove any vacation time or federal holidays either. There are 10 official federal holidays per year.
So in reality you are looking at more like a maximum of 250 work days in the year not counting vacations. So you are looking at 1250 to 1370 and a max of 1625 with no extra vacation time. Given a lot of people take a week or two off at the end of the year and possible other vacation days and you have a serious lack of time. Which ends up being not nearly enough time to properly investigate each warrant and discover all the nuances of each case and each warrant, at least in my mind.
Actually the funny part about breaking the German "Enigma" was the fact that they couldn't just stop everything they knew was going to happen or the German's would know and change things to stop them from knowing what they were up to. So a large number of attacks and such they had to let happen and watch people die so as not to give too much away. So actually breaking "Engima" didn't prevent a lot of the attacks just probably some of the bigger ones. Engima was used, from what I have read, more to setup D-Day and to know if the Germans were on to them about it.
I talked with and signed up for Uber as a driver and they are on purpose breaking the law in Missouri. In Missouri you are required to have a "Class E" license to drive for pay. It even says in the state driving handbook that taxis, couriers and even pizza delivery drivers are suppose to have "Class E" license. I met Uber staff here in St. Louis at one of their events and point blank asked them about this and was told by the staff that I didn't need a "Class E" license to drive for them. I asked specifically about it saying the state requires it for this type of driving and was told "well we don't require our drivers to have it."
People have commented on here that Uber also inspects the drivers car to make sure they are ok. Nope that is false. I am approved to drive for Uber and they have never seen my car. In fact I didn't even drive the car I listed with them to this meeting. So there was no possible way for them to see it or inspect it.
Now Uber isn't licensed to operate here yet and I suspect they may never be given they don't want to agree to the same type of license requirements here in St. Louis that Taxi companies are required to do. But the funny thing is that Uber agreed to the same type of terms in Dallas to operate. So Uber claiming they can't make money if they agree to the terms the city wants is complete crap.
There is nothing special about Uber and in fact they are in many ways a substandard version of taxi service that just happens to have a phone app instead of calling the taxi company for a ride. Given the process I went through to drive for Uber I am not at all impressed and given news reports of problems with Uber drivers in other cities assaulting people I am not surprised at all.
I find that interesting given that your assertation of library incompatibility on Desura doesn't seem to line up with forum posts other than when they were in beta testing.
The biggest problem that Loki Game had was mismanagement. If you mismanage a company it doesn't matter how big or small it is it will eventually crater.
I would bet most indie games take a week max to port to Linux. Loki Game on average took only 2 months to port a Windows AAA title to Linux. The cost of porting a game to Linux compared with the total amount of revenue generated by Linux sales makes it a no brainer for indie developers.
You do realize that HiB is doing a large percentage of the Linux and Mac ports themselves. They have 4 full time programmers on staff to port Windows games to Mac and Linux. It can't take them too long given the span of time between HiB releases these days.
I would bet that she would have normally lost this case on every count if it were not for the issue of the police lied about having a warrant for her arrest. I believe the police can lie about a lot of things to catch a criminal but I do not believe that they can lie about a warrant to gain access to a home to search it for stolen material. That is the part of this case that is going to be the problem. Not that they had nuddie pictures of her. Sounds like the police jumped the gun and should have gotten a warrant from the prosecuting attorney to search the residence but didn't bother to wait for one and just tried to pressure her in to letting them in, which may have been illegal. That is going to be the main issue here and I would bet money that is why the judge didn't just simply throw out her case. She is probably going to loose on the privacy grounds but how the police searched her place and ended up arresting her, is probably going to be the big problem for the police.
The security firm has absolutely nothing to fear from her. They were acting in good faith on behalf of the actual owner of the laptop. They had no idea that she wasn't the one who stole the laptop. So them collecting documents and pictures of her, the user of the laptop, is all within the scope of finding out who is using the stolen laptop that is probably the thief and where the laptop is. Why isn't she suing her ISP for telling the police that she was the one with that IP at that time so that is where the police needed to go look? Unless the laptop had built in GPS the ISP had to tell the police exactly where the laptop was being using . There isn't some magic thing that automatically tells you the exact GPS location of every assigned IP address.
I don't see how there is going to be a Constitutional violation here at all. Exactly which amendment of the Constitution was violated and by whom? Unlawful search and seizure? Well the police didn't do the search and seizure of the laptop, the security company did. The laptop wasn't her's so it wasn't unlawful. So exactly where is the unlawful part? Was her privacy violated? Maybe, but I don't think so since everything was done in an attempt to find out who was using the laptop, to make sure they got the right person, and where the laptop was. Only the security company's people (maybe 1-2 people), maybe the owner (1 person), and the police and prosecuting attorney who got the warrant and the judge (maybe) saw the pictures. Doesn't seem like a lot of people to me, and all of them but the owner are professionals so I don't see the problem here.
I absolutely do not think that any kind of ruling should be done that removes rights from the rightful owner to trackdown and recover their stolen property. Why didn't she register the laptop with the manufacturer in case the laptop was recalled for product defects and safety issues? The fact that she didn't, I suspect is because she knew it was sold to her cheaper than the market is for it. I always register my used equipment with the manufacturer to make sure I know about product recalls or whatever. If I get a stolen used item then I will know instantly when I register it with the manufacturer.
It would have to be a pretty old laptop to be realistically worth only $60. Why the kid couldn't just reinstall the OS to fix the problem himself should tell you a lot about the fact it was probably a stolen laptop. I don't feel sorry for her one bit.
WRONG! Actually go and look at what the court said. It didn't say that anyone went to far. It said that the case wasn't cut and dry and thus would not be simply thrown out. The court did *NOT* decide any facts about the case one way or the other, other than to say there might be a case here, and it wasn't a situation where the case should definitely be thrown out right at the start. That is a huge difference from the court saying someone screwed up. This is just the court saying...ehhh maybe there is a case here, we don't know for sure so we are going to allow the case to go forward at this point.
The security company can *NOT* be an agent of the police. They are absolutely *NOT* acting on behalf of the police. They could care less about the police and what the police will or won't do. The security company is acting on behalf of the rightful owner of the laptop. If the owner of the laptop said send me the information and I'll take care of the issue from here, then that is exactly what the security company would have done. I would bet that in fact is exactly what the security company did. The owner said track it, they did and then sent the laptop owner the results for him to take to the police or whatever he wanted to do. The police can't activate the Lo-Jack on a car without the owner's permission or a warrant. So they are not acting on behalf of the police. The same thing here. The police can't just call up and say hey tell me where this laptop is.
So no the security company absolutely is *NOT* an agent of the police. An agent of police could be told hey go do this by the police and they would, without a court order. That is the nature and whole point of being an agent of the police, the person isn't acting under court order but simply the authority of the police. No security company is going to do anything simply because the police tell them to do it, not without a court order, and then they are not an agent of the police, but rather complying with a lawful court order.
It depends on the state. Most states have said you can record as long as at least 1 person knows they are being recorded. Given that the true owner of the laptop knew that the laptop was recording, I would find it hard to believe that the courts would say that the owner can not record pictures via the web cam to prove who actually stole or was using the stolen laptop at one point. That would have to be the most stupid legal ruling out there and would cause huge problems for other issues where people are trying to retrieve stolen items.
Sorry but the criminals or those dealing in stolen merchandise do not deserve more protections than the actual owner who is trying to retrieve their stolen property. If she has a problem then she should go after the kid and his family that sold her the stolen laptop. Why she didn't completely reformat and reinstall the OS if it was messed up I will never know. That is one of the first things you should do with a used computer or laptop. Is completely reformat the system and install the OS fresh. If she didn't get reinstall disks then she should have known something was not quite right. She could have also called the manufacturer and ordered the disks if she didn't get any and she would have known it was stolen then. So I don't feel for her one bit. Whenever I buy used computers and electronics the very first thing I do is register as the new owner with the manufacturer, so if there is a problem I will know right away and so I get any support available to me, or any offers they have for people who buy their device used.
IP address does not prove anything. It doesn't even prove where the laptop is/was. How do you know that the laptop wasn't connected to her neighbor's wifi? Do you know that for a fact? The IP address would not tell you that she was using her neighbor's wifi. It would make it seem like the neighbor was the one with the laptop, but the pictures of who is actually using the laptop tell a different story. This is exactly why all of these type of programs take a picture with the web cam when possible so they can see who exactly is using the computer.
There are only 2-3 states where that is an issue. All the other states say that only 1 person has to know about the recording for it to be legal. This goes right back to being able to film police and if it is legal or not. You might want to actually read up on this before you comment.
Does this mean we are finally going to eliminate some of the layers of X and go with a more sane and modern approach to video display or did we just throw in a few new bells and do some performance tweaks. We really need a better, more responsive/modern display system.
login problems (sigh) and double posts before edits. Some days you can't win for losing.
If Apple wants to claim that other people are stealing their ideas and their work, then I would love to know how they justify all the stealing that they have done. I would love to know how Apple can justify stealing other people's work and then patenting it.
I want to know how Apple thinks it is ok to steal the trade dress of legal tablets/paper and act like they invented it and that they can be protected from others using the exact same thing. Is Apple licensing the legal tablet/paper look from one of the paper companies? If not then Apple needs to be sued for stealing too. I also recall several programs that used this exact icon for their simple note editor program that wasn't a full blown word processor. I recall it being used on almost every OS, Apple IIgs, Windows (all versions), Linux, Mac, etc. Apple point blank stole this from earlier programs because people have already been trained that the picture of a notepad means a small note taking program, not full blown word processor. So Apple is not original or the first, so they never should have been given a patent, not to mention so obvious and not at all innovative.
The same goes for the envelope for email. I believe that either one of the early graphic computer BBSes or Prodigy might want a word with Apple for stealing their interface icons. I would look at Prodigy, Hawayii FYI, Minitel, Habitat (pre-AOL) or early NAPLPS BBS (TurBoard, Searchlight, TBBS, Renegade, etc) or the Excalibur BBS, the first windows BBS. They all used an envelope of somSo ae sort to represent email. Apple point blank stole this from earlier programs because people have already been trained that the picture of an envelope means email. So again not original or the first so they never should have been given a patent, not to mention so obvious and not at all innovative.
I also believe that the cartoon bubble was used by early graphic BBS to indicate chat with the SYSOP as well. I know it was in fact used in Habitat as well (pre-AOL). So all Apple did here was re-purpose the icon for SMS chat/msgs. So many Windows, Internet programs (chat, IRC, Palace chat, etc) and communication software packages have used the cartoon bubble as an icon over the years. Apple point blank stole this from earlier programs because people have already been trained that the picture of cartoon bubble means talk/chat/message. Again not original or the first, so they never should have been given a patent, not to mention so obvious and not at all innovative.
The patent on the dial icon is going to fall into the exact same problems. Apple point blank stole this from earlier programs because people have already been trained that the picture of a phone or a handset means to call or use phone functions. I am pretty sure some of the early BBS programs used the phone handset and the phone itself as icons in the graphic terminal programs they used. So once again Apple is not original or the first here. Apple may have even stolen from their own developers. Early Apple II BBS programs used the mouse characters to make a full blown graphic interface for a BBS. I remember GBBS and a couple of others did this. I might even still have the floppies around here for those BBS programs and the dialers. You should also look at any of the contact managers that would dial a number for you as well. Apple point blank stole this from earlier programs because people have already been trained that the picture of a phone or handset means to call or use telephone functions. Again not original or the first, so they never should have been given a patent, not to mention so obvious and not at all innovative.
The settings icon of gears, once again Apple is not the first to use this. In fact they point blank stole this from earlier programs that used the gears icon for settings. The gears icon with gears interlocking and without gears interlocking have been used long before the iPhone, which is exactly why they used this icon because people had already been trained as to what it meant. Again not original or the first so
I called it as soon as I heard the deal was closed and it wasn't Google who won the patents. There is no way that Google or the government was going to let that go unchallenged.