I did a little more reading on the case, and first of all the article he posted is the worst article on the case I could find for arguing that this guy was unjustly sentenced.
I kind of threw that post together, based on my knowledge of the case, and just assumed that it read the same as the others.
The most interesting thing is how some of the jurors reacted upon finding out that he would get ten years with no parole. They all thought that he would get a slap on the wrist. They quite naturally assumed that the judge would have SOME discretion, and that since he basically admitted to the facts of the crime on the stand that they HAD to find him guilty.
Anyway, my point was that jury nullification is not the great check on the system that people may think.
If, as a lawyer, you argue to a jury that they should exercise jury nullification, you may be found in contempt.
You are not even allowed to tell the jury what the penalty will be for a conviction.
That's how a 17 year old in Georgia can be found guilty of "aggravated child molestation" after having consensual oral sex with a 15 year old... and get sentenced to a mandatory minimum 10 year sentence with no allowance for probation and no chance of parole.
That's kind of the whole point of this debate. Idiots like the EFF paint DRM as some kind of evil monster, when the truth is that it's just an effort on the part of the people who own things and want to be able to sell them without having them stolen to find a technological solution to what's clearly a societal problem.
The problem with DRM as a technical solution is that it uses my computer against me. My computer works for me. It doesn't work for anyone else without my permission... and that's why I don't use DRM.
DRM isn't "evil" until people no longer have the choice of refusing it.
That is why the EFF's campaign is important. It educates people about it, so that the market will make the right decision before DRM becomes an inescapable de facto standard.
This really gives an impression of Microsoft as being very weak compared to their usual position.
It's also an indication that they don't really know what they're up against. OSS is not a "religion", though I'm sure that they would like it to be something that they can address in a simple way. You cannot make a "truce" with OSS. It is not a company that they can make a deal with. It is a way of developing software and it is a value system.
They can tell that the Microsoft dream is in danger... but it appears they don't know how to address that danger.
UPDATE (supplemtary info): There's more information to the story. The deletion of the domain name was in full compliance of rules of the CIRA (just because it's a rule, doesn't make it right). Supposedly, if one registers a.ca domain name with anonymous details, the domain name can be removed under the CIRA's rules. However, one first needs to point it out (as Joe Volpe's campaign did).
This doesn't necessarily make it right, however. ..
Whatever. Everyone assumed that it was a huge abuse of power, when in reality it was just someone using a tactic that anyone can use. Complaining that someone isn't following the rules, and following an established procedure to remedy the situation.
As usual, people get all up in arms, bloggers go nuts, emails and phone calls are made... and then we find out nothing really wrong was done.
The big public relations screw up was bragging about it on a mailing list. But otherwise, he didn't do anything that ANY political campaign wouldn't have done in the same situation.
However, the article does imply that noone is willing to admit to setting up the site.
Maybe the site's operator didn't provide accurate information when registering it. If that is the grounds for deregistering it, then it's not quite the free speech issue it's made out to be.
Although the head of the state Gambling Commission says it is unlikely that individual online gamblers will be targeted for arrest, the new law carries stiff penalties: as much as five years in prison and a $10,000 fine.
Every time a government passes an absurd and overbearing law that gives it way too much power, the first thing you hear is some beureucratic nimrod saying, "Oh, but you don't have to worry... we won't actually ABUSE that power... You can TRUST us!"
Any legislator who voted for this should be receiving telephone calls every day from their constituents telling them that they will be voted out unless they succeed in changing the law to something reasonable.
For now they are just talking. They can't take any enforcement actions, because those countries would simply switch to open source.
For example, they could threaten these countries with ejection from the WTO or other treaty-based organizations, but they won't... until those countries are economically viable enough to pay the exorbitant licensing fees.
And then they will win, because they can lock people in to their proprietary formats. They call themselves the Business Software Alliance. But they are really the Proprietary Software Alliance.
It's kind of funny. The more I think about this, the more I feel like some arch-conservative, since most of my views fall on the liberal side. But maybe I'm just turning into a libertarian rather than a rightist...
Anyway, it seems like government control over education has gone way too far. We have the Federal government regulating, the state governments regulating, the local school boards regulating, and so it's no wonder that teachers teach memorization of topics... they're just following the regulations to help kids meet the criteria of "Every Child Left Behind" or some other BS education regulation that one of the three levels of regulators wants them to follow.
I seriously think we should just give families a voucher to go to whatever school that (A) they want to go to, and (B) that will let them in. If that school sticks its nose into what the kids do outside of school, fine. They and their parents chose that school, so they follow those rules.
One: It's very true, and a good lesson for the students, that what the identifying information they put online could come back to haunt them. And it's certainly a lesson better learned early in life, rather than later.
Two: How is it that we've reached a point where the schools are raising our kids for us? What happens outside of school is none of their business unless it indicates a threat to the other students. Violent crime, sure.
But more likely, this is going to be used to ferret out the pot smokers and the beer drinkers, who need to learn these lessons from their parents... not the government.
I'd have no problem with a school informing parents of what their kids are doing... but to discipline them for something completely outside of school is not their place.
As a lawyer building a class action lawsuit, all you need is one lead plaintiff to represent the class. It can be anybody who bought an ipod nano. It could be a 16 year old kid who dropped out of high school. It doesn't have to be someone who knows anything.
They would have no reason to use his name without his permission when there are thousands of people they could have used WITH permission.
If Windows is the host, coLinux is a worthy solution. It runs almost as fast as a native install. And you can download a preconfigured Debian or Gentoo root image from the website.
Basically, it is a Linux kernel patched to run under Windows.
What if I also include a helper script that automatically installs the modules when the user runs it?
Yeah, that's basically what gentoo does, which Kororaa is based on.
Gentoo can incorporate whatever proprietary drivers it wants without worries, because it doesn't really distribute them... it just provides ebuilds that tell your computer to download them. But because Kororaa distributes this stuff already put together, they have to be a little more careful.
Those who blame the GPL are missing the point. The GPL was precisely intended to create this "problem" by making proprietary licenses less favorable.
Which is more likely, people quit using Linux or people quit using Nvidia? 10 years ago, maybe it was obviously "people quit using Linux". But as time goes on and more people use Linux, Nvidia may be forced to open source their drivers.
There is strength in numbers, and good things come to those who wait.
And its not 1984 if the government can't see into your private space.
Of course it's not 1984... yet. That sort of change happens in increments with people accepting a loss in freedom one tiny bite at a time. It doesn't happen all of a sudden or else there would be a revolts and people would realize what was happening.
And yes, it is a loss of freedom and an invasion of privacy. When you walk down the street, you do not expect that an entire nation of couch potatoes is watching... only the police on the surveillance cameras (another tiny bite already taken). Once this happens, you will expect that at any given moment, the entire nation could be watching you. Will you scratch your ass thinking noone is looking? Will you feel comfortable letting out a roaring belch because noone is around? Will you kiss your girlfriend or boyfriend in public?
Or will your actions and the way you carry yourself change subtly with the knowledge that at any given moment you could be on national television?
Slashdot Mirror
I did a little more reading on the case, and first of all the article he posted is the worst article on the case I could find for arguing that this guy was unjustly sentenced.
I kind of threw that post together, based on my knowledge of the case, and just assumed that it read the same as the others.
The most interesting thing is how some of the jurors reacted upon finding out that he would get ten years with no parole. They all thought that he would get a slap on the wrist. They quite naturally assumed that the judge would have SOME discretion, and that since he basically admitted to the facts of the crime on the stand that they HAD to find him guilty.
Anyway, my point was that jury nullification is not the great check on the system that people may think.
I'll do better next time... promise.
If, as a lawyer, you argue to a jury that they should exercise jury nullification, you may be found in contempt.
You are not even allowed to tell the jury what the penalty will be for a conviction.
That's how a 17 year old in Georgia can be found guilty of "aggravated child molestation" after having consensual oral sex with a 15 year old... and get sentenced to a mandatory minimum 10 year sentence with no allowance for probation and no chance of parole.
That's kind of the whole point of this debate. Idiots like the EFF paint DRM as some kind of evil monster, when the truth is that it's just an effort on the part of the people who own things and want to be able to sell them without having them stolen to find a technological solution to what's clearly a societal problem.
The problem with DRM as a technical solution is that it uses my computer against me. My computer works for me. It doesn't work for anyone else without my permission... and that's why I don't use DRM.
DRM isn't "evil" until people no longer have the choice of refusing it.
That is why the EFF's campaign is important. It educates people about it, so that the market will make the right decision before DRM becomes an inescapable de facto standard.
The bad guys can make cartoons too.
The sooner they start getting heavyhanded with foreign pirates, the sooner we will see other countries pushing open source for economic reasons...
Never mind the benefit of not having a gigantic US-based software company running your computers for you.
As for the music and movies... who cares. Commercialized popular culture is a disease, so why would anyone want to steal a disease?
This really gives an impression of Microsoft as being very weak compared to their usual position.
It's also an indication that they don't really know what they're up against. OSS is not a "religion", though I'm sure that they would like it to be something that they can address in a simple way. You cannot make a "truce" with OSS. It is not a company that they can make a deal with. It is a way of developing software and it is a value system.
They can tell that the Microsoft dream is in danger... but it appears they don't know how to address that danger.
Thank you Republicans! (and half of the Democrats)
Your allegiance to big business is now transparently displayed. Will it matter? No.
Will it get worse? Yes.
Goodbye freedom, hello corporate oligarchy.
from one of the blogs:
.ca domain name with anonymous details, the domain name can be removed under the CIRA's rules. However, one first needs to point it out (as Joe Volpe's campaign did).
.
UPDATE (supplemtary info): There's more information to the story. The deletion of the domain name was in full compliance of rules of the CIRA (just because it's a rule, doesn't make it right). Supposedly, if one registers a
This doesn't necessarily make it right, however. .
Whatever. Everyone assumed that it was a huge abuse of power, when in reality it was just someone using a tactic that anyone can use. Complaining that someone isn't following the rules, and following an established procedure to remedy the situation.
As usual, people get all up in arms, bloggers go nuts, emails and phone calls are made... and then we find out nothing really wrong was done.
The big public relations screw up was bragging about it on a mailing list. But otherwise, he didn't do anything that ANY political campaign wouldn't have done in the same situation.
how he was able to accomplish this.
However, the article does imply that noone is willing to admit to setting up the site.
Maybe the site's operator didn't provide accurate information when registering it. If that is the grounds for deregistering it, then it's not quite the free speech issue it's made out to be.
It can also be used as a deterrent for non-touch-typists, particularly technologically illiterate relatives, who might want to use your computer.
This is EXACTLY what I need to keep co-workers from borrowing my desk while I am out of the office!
Every time you go to a website and don't read the 10 pages of fine print, you would risk committing a federal offense.
People, this is not a contract issue. If it were, he would probably have won.
He was trying to use the biggest weapon available and he screwed up, because he does not use anything to keep people out.
The court made the only interpretation of the statute that would be reasonable.
Although the head of the state Gambling Commission says it is unlikely that individual online gamblers will be targeted for arrest, the new law carries stiff penalties: as much as five years in prison and a $10,000 fine.
Every time a government passes an absurd and overbearing law that gives it way too much power, the first thing you hear is some beureucratic nimrod saying, "Oh, but you don't have to worry... we won't actually ABUSE that power... You can TRUST us!"
Any legislator who voted for this should be receiving telephone calls every day from their constituents telling them that they will be voted out unless they succeed in changing the law to something reasonable.
For now they are just talking. They can't take any enforcement actions, because those countries would simply switch to open source.
For example, they could threaten these countries with ejection from the WTO or other treaty-based organizations, but they won't... until those countries are economically viable enough to pay the exorbitant licensing fees.
And then they will win, because they can lock people in to their proprietary formats. They call themselves the Business Software Alliance. But they are really the Proprietary Software Alliance.
It's kind of funny. The more I think about this, the more I feel like some arch-conservative, since most of my views fall on the liberal side. But maybe I'm just turning into a libertarian rather than a rightist...
Anyway, it seems like government control over education has gone way too far. We have the Federal government regulating, the state governments regulating, the local school boards regulating, and so it's no wonder that teachers teach memorization of topics... they're just following the regulations to help kids meet the criteria of "Every Child Left Behind" or some other BS education regulation that one of the three levels of regulators wants them to follow.
I seriously think we should just give families a voucher to go to whatever school that (A) they want to go to, and (B) that will let them in. If that school sticks its nose into what the kids do outside of school, fine. They and their parents chose that school, so they follow those rules.
One: It's very true, and a good lesson for the students, that what the identifying information they put online could come back to haunt them. And it's certainly a lesson better learned early in life, rather than later.
Two: How is it that we've reached a point where the schools are raising our kids for us? What happens outside of school is none of their business unless it indicates a threat to the other students. Violent crime, sure.
But more likely, this is going to be used to ferret out the pot smokers and the beer drinkers, who need to learn these lessons from their parents... not the government.
I'd have no problem with a school informing parents of what their kids are doing... but to discipline them for something completely outside of school is not their place.
A lot of lawyers happen to be nerdy folk too.
How do you think we memorize the numbers for all those statutes and regulations?
Was hoping it would say they were editing Da Vinci Code to make it more entertaining.
As a lawyer building a class action lawsuit, all you need is one lead plaintiff to represent the class. It can be anybody who bought an ipod nano. It could be a 16 year old kid who dropped out of high school. It doesn't have to be someone who knows anything.
They would have no reason to use his name without his permission when there are thousands of people they could have used WITH permission.
I might be biased since I'm a lawyer (ducks).
Will they agree with you, or think you are a kook?
Maybe both. Effective protest requires audacity and boldness. It requires not worrying whether people think you are a kook. Inevitably some will.
But more importantly, you will get attention for the issue.
Terrorism and violence do tend to hurt a cause, but nothing of that sort is going on here.
The project is cool, but doesn't work very well and seems quite stale.
Worked great last time I used it, although the configuration involved editing text files.
The last release came out in February. That's recent enough to indicate that it's still being developed.
If Windows is the host, coLinux is a worthy solution. It runs almost as fast as a native install. And you can download a preconfigured Debian or Gentoo root image from the website.
Basically, it is a Linux kernel patched to run under Windows.
Yeah. All them server installations are just crying out for an open-source driven video card.
Server installations??? Dunno about that. All I got is a Linux PC.
What if I also include a helper script that automatically installs the modules when the user runs it?
Yeah, that's basically what gentoo does, which Kororaa is based on.
Gentoo can incorporate whatever proprietary drivers it wants without worries, because it doesn't really distribute them... it just provides ebuilds that tell your computer to download them. But because Kororaa distributes this stuff already put together, they have to be a little more careful.
Those who blame the GPL are missing the point. The GPL was precisely intended to create this "problem" by making proprietary licenses less favorable.
Which is more likely, people quit using Linux or people quit using Nvidia? 10 years ago, maybe it was obviously "people quit using Linux". But as time goes on and more people use Linux, Nvidia may be forced to open source their drivers.
There is strength in numbers, and good things come to those who wait.
And its not 1984 if the government can't see into your private space.
Of course it's not 1984... yet. That sort of change happens in increments with people accepting a loss in freedom one tiny bite at a time. It doesn't happen all of a sudden or else there would be a revolts and people would realize what was happening.
And yes, it is a loss of freedom and an invasion of privacy. When you walk down the street, you do not expect that an entire nation of couch potatoes is watching... only the police on the surveillance cameras (another tiny bite already taken). Once this happens, you will expect that at any given moment, the entire nation could be watching you. Will you scratch your ass thinking noone is looking? Will you feel comfortable letting out a roaring belch because noone is around? Will you kiss your girlfriend or boyfriend in public?
Or will your actions and the way you carry yourself change subtly with the knowledge that at any given moment you could be on national television?
Welcome to 1983.
"famous last words"
And I'm not sure who I dislike more at this point.
At least Microsoft hasn't been handing political prisoners over to the Chinese government.