"It establishes a mandatory sentence of at least 25 years behind bars for people convicted of certain sex crimes against children 11 and younger, with lifetime tracking by global positioning satellite after they are freed."
"Saying that he called the people psychotic merely because of a disagreement is clearly misrepresenting his point of view. If you read what he said, he called those people psychotic for having what he saw as "megalomania, religious flagwaving egotism, and the 'membership' into the 'Big Fat Christian Gun-Toting Whiteman kicks the Worlds Ass' Society" as a source of pride. If you disagree, that's fine, argue away, but it's unethical to misrepresent his views."
He called the large portion of this country psychotic, not a large portion.
That means he feels the majority of this country, at least all those who voted for Bush, are psychotic.
There's no way you can sugarcoat that for the parent of this thread.
"Praising the morality of people who willingly elect such a jackass"
"A very large portion of this country is dangerously psychotic."
Calling the large portion of this country "psychotic" just because they idiologically and politically disagree with you does more damage than good to your obvious leftish agenda.
The only psychotic thing is modding this parent as insightful.
The "problem" with these lawsuits is that it will cost you more to defend them than to settle.
Additionally, both the **AA and DirecTV typically sue you civilly where your guilt or innocence is based on a "preponderance of the evidence", not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That is, if their heavy-handed attorneys can make some jury full of idiots think it's 51% likely you did it, then you lose. You get no court appointed attorney and you don't get to plead the 5th ammendment without any negative inference. These **AA attorneys have these cases cookie-cuttered/boiler-plated out and don't care whether you are guilty or innocent. They care about billable hours and whether they think there is enough evidence for them to win.
And when you lose under the DMCA, you lose big time. You not only risk hefty fines, but attorney fees that are often in the tens of thousands. Look at the PACER reports of those people who try and fight these corporations in court -- the defendent typically has one attorney while the plaintiff often has four to six attorneys on their side. Is it NO WONDER nearly everyone settles, even if they are innocent?
So learn from the mistakes of those poor slobs, many who were innocent, but settled anyways.
BE ANONYMOUS.
Because if you get sued by one of the above, you always lose.
If you are gonna do anything that even remotely has the risk of you getting targeted for a lawsuit by one of these big corporations that could care less if 10% of the people they sue are innocent, make sure there is NO WAY it can get tracked back to you.
"Web based forum software offer a lot more features than newsgroups."
Actually, a news reader is much easier to navigate, quicker, and easier to search and archive content than any webforum I've ever used. Most webforums want to to register before you can post (some even force you to register to even read), so you gotta sign up for each different one . Most have fascist moderators that have a serious control freak attitude.
I suppose the only benefit of the webforum is all you have to do to access it is typically know how to use a web browser, and not a news reader.
"This is why the RIAA can't just sit there sharing copies of all its songs on Kazaa and then prosecuting anyone who downloads them."
The **AA certainly could do this! In civil court, there is no law against entrapment. The **AA could put their stuff up for download, log the people downloading it, then sue them. And it would be totally legal. And the **AA would win. Ask any lawyer.
She will get the typical "screw the company up, get fired for horrible job performance, but still get the trillion dollar severance package."
What a job!
Carley certainly isn't the loser here. Let's not shed a tear as she gets the foot in her ass out the HP door. Wall Street realizes what a drag she was for the company and now HP's stock is soaring.
Feel sorry for the poor slob HP worker who finds his/her benefits slashed because Carley needed a different SL65 for each day of the week, and HP footed the bill. Carley needs to stay out of business and back to baking cookies and taking care of her home.
As others have mentioned XviD is a good choice. It's compression and quality is the same as, or slightly better than, WM9 according to Doom9 (codec comparison). It's open-source, but on the downside, it requries you to install a codec and PCs don't come installed with it "out of the box".
Another good option is VCD-compliant MPEG-1. Nearly every modern PC/OS with a GUI comes equipped to support/play it "out of the box", and you can burn it to a VCD and watch it with most DVD-players. On the downside, the compression and quality is not nearly as good as the more modern codecs such as RM10, WM9, XviD, MPEG-4, etc.
Carbon-dating, empirical observation, archaeology, and genetics all indicate that evolution has taken place from more primitive forms of life to those seen today.
No they don't.
Carbon dating works by the guess that decay rate of C-14 decay is known for things thousands of years ago. It isn't.
Expirical observation, archaeology and genetics show that the universe came into being via creationism. It's obvious. It's only the misinterpretation of the data and the steadfast stubborn refusal to accept that creation was possible that evolution becomes plausible.
If you have any idea that you could get sued for relasing this type of information, then release it to the Internet anonymously.
Posting to the Usenet via Mixmaster or Mixminion chained remailers (across multiple countries) ending at a mail2news gateway is one such way to preserve your God given right to free speech which many corporations try to stiffle through the use of illegal civil litigation.
I have no problem with criminal laws regarding piracy and IP as long as those are only for people who are doing it FOR PROFIT AND (not or) ON A MASS SCALE.
So factories in China silkscreening counterfeit DVDs that are being stamped out and sold apply.
BUT, the law needs to be very clear and unambiguous that it can't be used against someone uploading for free on BitTorrent or just selling a couple copies to his buddies. Those violations need to remain solely in the realm of civil litigation. The government should not be in the business of enforcing IP rights.
And what's this about piracy is only for the elite?
It's a great concept. What is your problem with it?
That has to be the most half-cooked concept I've heard on piracy to date. I'm just as frustrated as the next nerd by 12 year old 1337 h@>0®5 and soccer moms downloading with abandon, but I don't think one can justify taking a stance against someone's "right" to piracy based on their level of computer literacy.
I don't think he is saying that. What I think he is stating is it was BETTER FOR PIRACY when only the elite could do it or would take the time to do it. It was much better when it was too complex for the non-elite to do.
It's the same with copying DVDs or when it came to pirating DSS. Once it became so easy that you can just point and click (think DVD-XCOPY), too many people do it, and TPTB cannot ignore it, and THEY SUE.
it is perfectly legal because the law of nevada say they can. the courts will side with the house in nevada also.
they can do what ever they want without fear of breaking the law (because the law says they can)
Just try to leave the casino with your winnings. They'll keep you in a back room and review the tapes until they can figure out what you were doing.
Sorry, that is illegal. They have to either let you go or call law enforcement immediately. They cannot "hold" someone. Well, they can, but then they will get their asses sued off.
that John Sutton (the US attorney) isn't full of shit when he writes:
"...3. "As further grounds for the denial of the Motion to Unseal, without waving the forgoing, the U.S. would show that the sealed documents pertain to an ongoing criminal terrorism investigation. The unsealing of the documents on file in the matter would seriously jeopardize the investigation. The non-disclosure is necessitated by a compelling government interest..."
unless we get a little more details that the vagueity that is the above?
There are two examples real quick. I'm sure there are a lot more, but with the Patriot Act's NSL effectively being a "gag order", a lot of those impacted haven't even been able to come forward!
Is that the government uses it against NON-TERRORISTS.
Not only that, the government has used it against non-terrorists MORE THAN it has been used against terrorists.
It's a bad law, just like the DMCA, that gives the executive branch too much power without the benefit of the checks and balances of which our government is based.
Slashdot Mirror
As is telnetting to port 80 and interpreting the HTML in your head.
Quit trolling: that webpage renders the same in MSIE v6.0 and FF v1.04.
RTFA.
From the article:
He called the large portion of this country psychotic, not a large portion.
That means he feels the majority of this country, at least all those who voted for Bush, are psychotic.
There's no way you can sugarcoat that for the parent of this thread.
Calling the large portion of this country "psychotic" just because they idiologically and politically disagree with you does more damage than good to your obvious leftish agenda.
The only psychotic thing is modding this parent as insightful.
The **AA suing people is no different than what DirecTV has been doing for a few years.
The "problem" with these lawsuits is that it will cost you more to defend them than to settle.
Additionally, both the **AA and DirecTV typically sue you civilly where your guilt or innocence is based on a "preponderance of the evidence", not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That is, if their heavy-handed attorneys can make some jury full of idiots think it's 51% likely you did it, then you lose. You get no court appointed attorney and you don't get to plead the 5th ammendment without any negative inference. These **AA attorneys have these cases cookie-cuttered/boiler-plated out and don't care whether you are guilty or innocent. They care about billable hours and whether they think there is enough evidence for them to win.
And when you lose under the DMCA, you lose big time. You not only risk hefty fines, but attorney fees that are often in the tens of thousands. Look at the PACER reports of those people who try and fight these corporations in court -- the defendent typically has one attorney while the plaintiff often has four to six attorneys on their side. Is it NO WONDER nearly everyone settles, even if they are innocent?
So learn from the mistakes of those poor slobs, many who were innocent, but settled anyways.
BE ANONYMOUS.
Because if you get sued by one of the above, you always lose.
If you are gonna do anything that even remotely has the risk of you getting targeted for a lawsuit by one of these big corporations that could care less if 10% of the people they sue are innocent, make sure there is NO WAY it can get tracked back to you.
Who is the idiot who moderated this as a TROLL??
It's INFORMATIVE.
Actually, a news reader is much easier to navigate, quicker, and easier to search and archive content than any webforum I've ever used. Most webforums want to to register before you can post (some even force you to register to even read), so you gotta sign up for each different one . Most have fascist moderators that have a serious control freak attitude.
I suppose the only benefit of the webforum is all you have to do to access it is typically know how to use a web browser, and not a news reader.
The **AA certainly could do this! In civil court, there is no law against entrapment. The **AA could put their stuff up for download, log the people downloading it, then sue them. And it would be totally legal. And the **AA would win. Ask any lawyer.
She will get the typical "screw the company up, get fired for horrible job performance, but still get the trillion dollar severance package."
What a job!
Carley certainly isn't the loser here. Let's not shed a tear as she gets the foot in her ass out the HP door. Wall Street realizes what a drag she was for the company and now HP's stock is soaring.
Feel sorry for the poor slob HP worker who finds his/her benefits slashed because Carley needed a different SL65 for each day of the week, and HP footed the bill. Carley needs to stay out of business and back to baking cookies and taking care of her home.
Why do you even care if those type of users (what's the politically correct term for "lame and lazy"?) can't view your videos?
As others have mentioned XviD is a good choice. It's compression and quality is the same as, or slightly better than, WM9 according to Doom9 (codec comparison). It's open-source, but on the downside, it requries you to install a codec and PCs don't come installed with it "out of the box".
Another good option is VCD-compliant MPEG-1. Nearly every modern PC/OS with a GUI comes equipped to support/play it "out of the box", and you can burn it to a VCD and watch it with most DVD-players. On the downside, the compression and quality is not nearly as good as the more modern codecs such as RM10, WM9, XviD, MPEG-4, etc.
Slashdot renders just fine for me in FireFox v1.0.
Perhaps you could give an example of how/where it doesn't render properly for you (you know evidence) rather than just dropping a troll?
The smart ones do. The smart ones are also the ones that usually don't get caught in the first place, so you don't hear a lot about them.
No they don't.
Carbon dating works by the guess that decay rate of C-14 decay is known for things thousands of years ago. It isn't.
Expirical observation, archaeology and genetics show that the universe came into being via creationism. It's obvious. It's only the misinterpretation of the data and the steadfast stubborn refusal to accept that creation was possible that evolution becomes plausible.
Sorry, you've been brainwashed to think otherwise
If you have any idea that you could get sued for relasing this type of information, then release it to the Internet anonymously.
Posting to the Usenet via Mixmaster or Mixminion chained remailers (across multiple countries) ending at a mail2news gateway is one such way to preserve your God given right to free speech which many corporations try to stiffle through the use of illegal civil litigation.
I have no problem with criminal laws regarding piracy and IP as long as those are only for people who are doing it FOR PROFIT AND (not or) ON A MASS SCALE.
So factories in China silkscreening counterfeit DVDs that are being stamped out and sold apply.BUT, the law needs to be very clear and unambiguous that it can't be used against someone uploading for free on BitTorrent or just selling a couple copies to his buddies. Those violations need to remain solely in the realm of civil litigation. The government should not be in the business of enforcing IP rights.
Amen!
It's a great concept. What is your problem with it?
I don't think he is saying that. What I think he is stating is it was BETTER FOR PIRACY when only the elite could do it or would take the time to do it. It was much better when it was too complex for the non-elite to do.
It's the same with copying DVDs or when it came to pirating DSS. Once it became so easy that you can just point and click (think DVD-XCOPY), too many people do it, and TPTB cannot ignore it, and THEY SUE.
it is perfectly legal because the law of nevada say they can. the courts will side with the house in nevada also. they can do what ever they want without fear of breaking the law (because the law says they can)
STUPID TROLL
Just try to leave the casino with your winnings. They'll keep you in a back room and review the tapes until they can figure out what you were doing.
Sorry, that is illegal. They have to either let you go or call law enforcement immediately. They cannot "hold" someone. Well, they can, but then they will get their asses sued off.
that John Sutton (the US attorney) isn't full of shit when he writes:
"...3. "As further grounds for the denial of the Motion to Unseal, without waving the forgoing, the U.S. would show that the sealed documents pertain to an ongoing criminal terrorism investigation. The unsealing of the documents on file in the matter would seriously jeopardize the investigation. The non-disclosure is necessitated by a compelling government interest..."
unless we get a little more details that the vagueity that is the above?
Don't GAG orders violate the 1st Ammendment to the US Consititution, and are, therefore illegal?
"...Bullshit - give me ONE example of it being used to against "non-terrorists"..."
There are two examples real quick. I'm sure there are a lot more, but with the Patriot Act's NSL effectively being a "gag order", a lot of those impacted haven't even been able to come forward!
Is that the government uses it against NON-TERRORISTS.
Not only that, the government has used it against non-terrorists MORE THAN it has been used against terrorists.
It's a bad law, just like the DMCA, that gives the executive branch too much power without the benefit of the checks and balances of which our government is based.