Except that it IS a bill of attainder. It's specifically targeting one individual a senator disagrees with.
Except that it isn't. It targets the self-selected class of people who choose to renounce their citizenship.
No person should EVER have to fear that a choice they are making will be illegal in the future
Except that it does not make the renuncation illegal. The proposal makes only future acts illegal (attempting to enter the USA when the person does not have permission to enter the country).
, but choosing to punish a choice after its made is wrong. It's absolutely wrong, regardless of whether it's the revocation of a privilege or assigning of a punishment, it falls into the category of judging via law
All kinds of decisions have consequences because of laws that changed after their decision. Caltrans has changed the carpool hours on my daily commute -- my decision to buy a house with that commute is now being "punished" by a later change? Using your logic, almost no laws could be changed, and no new laws introduced, since every new or changed law will have a negative consequense for someone somewhere.
Expatriates from every country have family, friends, and historical ties to the country they came from. Denying visitation for that reason is morally wrong.
When you sever ties in order to save a tiny fraction of your total wealth, you don't deserve consideration on moral grounds. He can pay for those people to travel to another country if he wishes to meet them.
As for ex-post facto, no, this is not an ex-post-facto law. No non-citizen/non-permanent resident has the right to enter the USA -- it is a privilege that can be revoked.
That is, if you were in charge of IT at some company, and you had to standardize on a browser in January 2006, what would you have chosen? Chrome wasn't out.Firefox (1.0) had just been released a bit over a year before that. So a bunch of goverment departments haven't changed browsers in the last 5 years. So what. It's not that surprising.
There is a huge difference between specifying the default browser for the desktop and specifying a web app should only work with that browser. One is a reasonable decision, the other shows a lack of vision.
I never saw what Psystar did that was actually wrong. They bought copies of software, installed them on machines, then sold those machines.
But they did not. They created an image from one install and then copied it to other machines. They may have bought a copy of OSX for each machine that they sold, but they did not install that specific copy of OSX on the machine that they re-sold it with.
I should clarify, by "it" (in "how do the changes from GPLv2 to GPLv3 make it impossible for Apple to use it?"), I mean specifically GCC, not the GPL or other GPL-licensed code.
Apple couldn't integrate GCC with their IDE like they wanted, nor could FreeBSD's commercial clients work with it. Flexibility and pragmatism usually wins out over rigidness and ideology.
Seriously? I can understand the desire to move to a BSD license from GPLvX, but how do the changes from GPLv2 to GPLv3 make it impossible for Apple to use it? Frankly, it looks like the rigidness and ideology was at 1 Infinite loop, not elsewhere.
The advertising department is at fault for boasting of local support that doesn't exist but it's hard to say how intentional it was for the parent company.
The advertising department doesn't design the product packaging. The advertising dropped the inaccurate "4G" label weeks ago. This news refers to a change to the product name. That's clearly a decision from the parent.
Because, of course, he hasn't been found corrupt. Even if the summary were taken at face value it still wouldn't be corruption.
The summary is not clear, but the critical part of the article is that the judge and the plaintiff were running a commercial enterprise together, one that had a direct bearing on the subject matter of the case. I don't know about the Netherlands, but I think that the legal systems of most western nations would require a judge with such a close tie to the plaintiff to recuse himself.
This many not be corrupt behavior, but it would normally be improper.
and hit the reset button on your router every now and then.
How does that help?
Before you reply that it causes your IP address to change, that may depend on your ISP. I once moved house (about 1 mile), got a new Internet service account and a new cable modem and yet after all that, I still got the same DHCP-assigned IP address that I had at my old house/account/cable modem.
Turn off your cable modem, then change the MAC address of your router and then you will probably get a new IP address.
That's the real issue. The US is so conservative, our labels don't sync up well with the rest of the world, especially in the last 25 years.
I think it is worse than that. I think the divsions between US parties are in a different dimension to the divisions between parties in different countries.
What are some of the big issues dividing the Dems and Repubs: Abortion rights, gay marriage, etc. They are social issues, not economic issues. In other countries these things are not discussed in the context of political affiliation. .
Apparently, you either failed to read or failed to comprehend the article. In this case, Microsoft has deployed 10,000 Linux servers essentially to replace a larger number of Windows machines (the supernodes that ran on individual desktops). This is a new deployment of a new type of server (a dedicated supernode).
So this is not case of Microsoft just delaying a switchover from Linux to Windows, it represents Microsoft choosing to use Linux for a new task.
The best value ($/GB) for hard drives at the moment is 2GB. 3TB hard drives are still relatively expensive and if you go for 3TB WD hard drives, you have to deal with the "Advanced Format" issues.
As to the validity of the concern: Investigators are not usually allowed to mount storage media in read/write mode. If they do so, any evidence obtained from that media will no longer be admissible in court. While many labs do have non-forensic connectors for storage media, they are usually not used for fear of accidentally tampering with the evidence.
Do the owners of the equipment have a record of the serial numbers of the hard drives? It is posible that the original hard drive has been cloned to an identical model drive and that has been modified to include the logging and then installed in the returned machine. Even if they have a record of the drives' serial numbers, I expect that the FBI could persuade the drive manufacturer to provide a drive or drives with a duplicate serial numbers?
The real question is why would the FBI bother? Surely they have to realize that the machine won't be put back into service without being thoroughly scrubbed.
If it were my machine, though, I would be wondering if it is really possible for me to scrub the BIOS and whether my best approach would not be to eBay this machine and buy a new one.
(claims to be a "constitutional scholar" while bending-over backwards to strike-out the Bill of Rights)
In this context, you mis-understand the word "scholar". This usage of "scholar" means someone who studies something in detail to reveal its weaknesses.
And with that, the internet fell, and mankind returned to the stone age.
Except that it did not, at least not yet.
The article's author fails to understand what is going on here. The judge has said that he will decide if API's are copyrightable, but he has punted the decision. Only if the jury finds that there was copyright infringement relating to the APIs will the judge actually decide that issue.
Since the judge has not made the decision about APIs and that it is his decision, not the jury's, the only sensible approach is to have the jury assume that API's are copyrightable.
... is that the market will bear it. All the claims about increased cost are bogus: the non-US sales are delta sales of software.
Software has a fixed developement cost (plus the localization), so if cost were the issue, customers in non-US locations should ONLY pay for the delta cost to develop the local version.
- I have never been to a restaurant where my credit card (or debit card) leaves my possession. And I always pay by either one of them. You actually give someone else your credit card and they then leave your sight with it?
Point still remains: even 343k per year is not exactly "fuck you" money, where you light your illegal cuban cigars with $100 bills while hookers serve you cocaine from solid gold spoons. The majority of that 1% is still largely educated professionals - engineers, doctors, lawyers, and the like, and small business owners. Not fat cat ceo's drinking the blood of underage sweatshop workers imported fresh daily from China while they dine on Bald Eagle buffalo wings and Endangered Species shish kebabs.
I seem to recall reading that, in fact, the majority of the 1% were neither CEOs nor doctors, but instead in the financial sector. Clearly, some of the financial sector benefits society as a whole, whole other parts (HFT) are just parasites on the markets.
As for your comments the 1% paying 37% of the taxes, I don't support a flat tax system. I do believe that high earners should pay a higher proportion of their income in taxes. Finally, let's not forget that income taxes are not the only form of taxation. It is well known that the poor pay a higher proportion of their income in sales taxes than the wealthy do.
I don't claim to have all the answers, but I do find it abhorrent that people like Warren Buffet pay a lower proportion of their income in taxes than anyone else in their offices. Don't you?
"The 1%" includes most *households* in the US with an income somewhere between $200-250k, which is easily achieved these days by a 2-professional household with a few years of industry experience in their respective fields.
Try again. To be in the 1%, you must have an adjusted gross income of $343,927 which would probably equate to an unadjusted family income of over $400,000. Not easily achievable.
Slashdot Mirror
What evidence that he gave it away more than once (or even once) was presented to the court?
Except that it isn't. It targets the self-selected class of people who choose to renounce their citizenship.
Except that it does not make the renuncation illegal. The proposal makes only future acts illegal (attempting to enter the USA when the person does not have permission to enter the country).
All kinds of decisions have consequences because of laws that changed after their decision. Caltrans has changed the carpool hours on my daily commute -- my decision to buy a house with that commute is now being "punished" by a later change? Using your logic, almost no laws could be changed, and no new laws introduced, since every new or changed law will have a negative consequense for someone somewhere.
When you sever ties in order to save a tiny fraction of your total wealth, you don't deserve consideration on moral grounds. He can pay for those people to travel to another country if he wishes to meet them.
As for ex-post facto, no, this is not an ex-post-facto law. No non-citizen/non-permanent resident has the right to enter the USA -- it is a privilege that can be revoked.
There is a huge difference between specifying the default browser for the desktop and specifying a web app should only work with that browser. One is a reasonable decision, the other shows a lack of vision.
But they did not. They created an image from one install and then copied it to other machines. They may have bought a copy of OSX for each machine that they sold, but they did not install that specific copy of OSX on the machine that they re-sold it with.
I should clarify, by "it" (in "how do the changes from GPLv2 to GPLv3 make it impossible for Apple to use it?"), I mean specifically GCC, not the GPL or other GPL-licensed code.
Seriously? I can understand the desire to move to a BSD license from GPLvX, but how do the changes from GPLv2 to GPLv3 make it impossible for Apple to use it? Frankly, it looks like the rigidness and ideology was at 1 Infinite loop, not elsewhere.
The advertising department doesn't design the product packaging. The advertising dropped the inaccurate "4G" label weeks ago. This news refers to a change to the product name. That's clearly a decision from the parent.
All of this information was available from TFA!
ReFS is the filesystem of the future -- and always will be?
ReFS will be coming in the next +1 version of Windows, and always will be?
The summary is not clear, but the critical part of the article is that the judge and the plaintiff were running a commercial enterprise together, one that had a direct bearing on the subject matter of the case. I don't know about the Netherlands, but I think that the legal systems of most western nations would require a judge with such a close tie to the plaintiff to recuse himself.
This many not be corrupt behavior, but it would normally be improper.
How does that help?
Before you reply that it causes your IP address to change, that may depend on your ISP. I once moved house (about 1 mile), got a new Internet service account and a new cable modem and yet after all that, I still got the same DHCP-assigned IP address that I had at my old house/account/cable modem.
Turn off your cable modem, then change the MAC address of your router and then you will probably get a new IP address.
I think it is worse than that. I think the divsions between US parties are in a different dimension to the divisions between parties in different countries.
What are some of the big issues dividing the Dems and Repubs: Abortion rights, gay marriage, etc. They are social issues, not economic issues. In other countries these things are not discussed in the context of political affiliation. .
Apparently, you either failed to read or failed to comprehend the article. In this case, Microsoft has deployed 10,000 Linux servers essentially to replace a larger number of Windows machines (the supernodes that ran on individual desktops). This is a new deployment of a new type of server (a dedicated supernode).
So this is not case of Microsoft just delaying a switchover from Linux to Windows, it represents Microsoft choosing to use Linux for a new task.
Whoops: s/2GB/2TB/
The best value ($/GB) for hard drives at the moment is 2GB. 3TB hard drives are still relatively expensive and if you go for 3TB WD hard drives, you have to deal with the "Advanced Format" issues.
Do the owners of the equipment have a record of the serial numbers of the hard drives? It is posible that the original hard drive has been cloned to an identical model drive and that has been modified to include the logging and then installed in the returned machine. Even if they have a record of the drives' serial numbers, I expect that the FBI could persuade the drive manufacturer to provide a drive or drives with a duplicate serial numbers?
The real question is why would the FBI bother? Surely they have to realize that the machine won't be put back into service without being thoroughly scrubbed.
If it were my machine, though, I would be wondering if it is really possible for me to scrub the BIOS and whether my best approach would not be to eBay this machine and buy a new one.
In this context, you mis-understand the word "scholar". This usage of "scholar" means someone who studies something in detail to reveal its weaknesses.
Except that it did not, at least not yet.
The article's author fails to understand what is going on here. The judge has said that he will decide if API's are copyrightable, but he has punted the decision. Only if the jury finds that there was copyright infringement relating to the APIs will the judge actually decide that issue.
Since the judge has not made the decision about APIs and that it is his decision, not the jury's, the only sensible approach is to have the jury assume that API's are copyrightable.
This deal is about preventing MS's patents being invalidated in court, thus freeing all future Android vendors from paying Microsoft a patent royalty.
Remeber Lindows? Microsoft paid $20M to make that lawsuit go away before it could have invalidated the "Windows" trademark.
... is that the market will bear it. All the claims about increased cost are bogus: the non-US sales are delta sales of software.
Software has a fixed developement cost (plus the localization), so if cost were the issue, customers in non-US locations should ONLY pay for the delta cost to develop the local version.
It could be worse, you could be the product manager for a product that has gone from almost 40% market share to 13% in about 4 years and looks like it will be the no. 3 player soon.
In the USA, yes. That's what normally happens.
What makes you think there was any failure? Stuxnet was a success. How do you know that Siemens were not complicit in the creation of Stuxnet?
I seem to recall reading that, in fact, the majority of the 1% were neither CEOs nor doctors, but instead in the financial sector. Clearly, some of the financial sector benefits society as a whole, whole other parts (HFT) are just parasites on the markets.
As for your comments the 1% paying 37% of the taxes, I don't support a flat tax system. I do believe that high earners should pay a higher proportion of their income in taxes. Finally, let's not forget that income taxes are not the only form of taxation. It is well known that the poor pay a higher proportion of their income in sales taxes than the wealthy do.
I don't claim to have all the answers, but I do find it abhorrent that people like Warren Buffet pay a lower proportion of their income in taxes than anyone else in their offices. Don't you?
Try again. To be in the 1%, you must have an adjusted gross income of $343,927 which would probably equate to an unadjusted family income of over $400,000. Not easily achievable.