Well, if your read the patent, it's for triply-linked lists,
Reading the patent, hmm.... that might be a good idea: let's look at claim 1:
1. A computerized list that may be traversed in at least two sequences comprising:
a plurality of items that are contained in said computerized list; and
a primary pointer and an auxiliary pointer for each of said items of said computerized list such that each of said items has an associated primary pointer and an associated auxiliary pointer, said primary pointer functioning as a primary linked list to direct a computer program to a first following item and defining a first sequence to traverse said computerized list, said auxiliary pointer functioning as an auxiliary linked list to direct said computer program to a second following item and defining a second sequence to traverse said computerized list.
Looks like a doubly-linked list to me.
The patent may claim triply-linked lists (see claim 2), but it also makes a claim on doubly linked lists.
"Evidence of innocence" is pure idiocy, and contrary to the tenets of the judicial system. It is NOT this man's burden to prove his innocence, it is the RIAA's burden to prove him guilty.
This is not a criminal case and the RIAA are not prosecuting him: they are suing him and the standard is "the balance of probabilities (BOP) also known as the "preponderance of evidence." So, it is up to him to prove his "innocence".
Why don't you just take that story, expand it a little and then turn it into a screenplay called "I Robot"? What that you say, it's already been done? Oh well, never mind.
You were asked what your hardware setup was -- including motherboard. I did not see any answer to this question.
I don't know if this was related to the problem, but I would certainly suspect it could be. You have a 1250MHz Athlon -- that's about a 1400+ or 1500+, correct? The sort of motherboard that would accept such a processor might not have BIOS support for >137GB disks
And you had your installation on a 200GB disk, correct?
So, I don't know if I have hit on the solution. You have not revealed it (why not unless you are just a troll?), but YOU FAILED TO ANSWER A CRITICAL question.
You were also rude, which is hardly a way to get help. In fact, I don't think you really wanted a solution -- you just wanted an excuse to complain about Ubuntu. That's why you have not revealed what the eventual solution was.
You can also use the "+" notation that many mail systems (including gmail) support. What you do is put "+" between the user and @ parts of your email address, for example, if my email address is:
blah@gmail.com
I can also use:
blah+BestBuySucks@gmail.com
This works automatically. No setup is needed for gmail and many other email systems. Unfortunately, a lot of website developers think that "+" is invalid wherever it is used in an email address and will not allow such email addresses in registrations.
I'm tired of all this. Bloggers seem like the little naive children of the media; chiefly, they seem shocked and amazed that you can't ignore centuries of common law: you say something and it damages another party, you could be held liable in a civil suit for said damages.
You are reading something into the original article that is not there. Or rather, you are not reading almost half of the headline: "...Immunity of Bloggers from Suits Brought Against Commenters". The article is not saying that bloggers are immune for anything they say, merely that they cannot be held responsible for comments made by others on their blogs. There may be an additional assumption here: that bloggers take down comments upon request.
LED bulbs are super cool, but also well outside of affordability envelope at the moment.
As a replacement lamp, certainly. But what if the lamp/housing package are considered together? Also, as you mention, LEDs are super-cool, which may allow for cheaper installation in new buildings?
Also, there must be lots of artistic possiblities for LED-based lights that are not possible with incandescent or CFL.
IANAA, but I believe any revenue generated by selling items via online auction would simply be added to your gross income for the year.
Only if whatever you sell on eBay costs you nothing to acquire, list and ship. In other words, you subtract your cost of goods, eBay fees, actual shipping costs, home office costs, mileage to/from the shipping center, etc. from your income.
Netsol: isn't that the company that allowed sex.com to be taken from its rightful owner and would not give it back?
I have also had personal experience where Netsol allowed another entity to change the DNS servers for my domain (without permission), and then I had to wait until the next day before NetSol did their regular update. I got no reply to my complaint aobut that incident.
You had better prepare to replace that 5 year old drive soon -- the non-zero reallocated sector count is a good predictor of failure according to Google.
You're wrong.
I can sell you anything I want--be it a book, a movie, a car, a menorah, you name it. And if you agree to abide by terms and conditions, then that is a legally binding contract.
No. You are wrong. Firstly, any contract that is deemed not in the public interest is not enforceable --or at least, those terms are not. Secondly, there are rights that trump contracts -- for example, first sale rights. One has to recognize that copyright is a government granted limited monopoly.
Let's take your examples and make them fit this case
Consider the scenario where a store detective suggests to someone that they steal an item from the store and then detains the person... Very similar, and clearly entrapment
The same goes for all your other examples -- you miss out the point where the agent of the state actually suggests that the illegal act should be committed and then say that it is not entrapment (which they would not be) but now your examples are not relevent to this case, since there is the additional factor that there is an allegation that the RIAA suggested and/or colluded with the defendent to commit the acts.
Again, with the drug testing -- it's not entrapment because the employer never suggested that the tested employee should take drugs.
I wish that I had not blown my ability to moderate in this discussion by posting, but.. here goes.
Your definition of entrapment is wrong. See here for a definition from a reputable source. On that page, you will find a number of things that contradict statements you made in the parent and other posts, including:
On the issue of entrapment the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entrapped by government agents.
You claimed that the defendent must prove entrapment. The reputable source shows that the reverse is true.
- And third, the person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before the government agents spoke with him.
This refutes your point that "You must be "convinced" to do something that you normally would _never_ do. " -- using the definition to which I referred, it would be sufficient to prove that the defendent was not ready at that time to commit the offense.
However, the policeman didn't ask the RIAA to join them. The RIAA notified the police that a law was being broken.
Legal definitions are rarely clear -- that's why we have judges and juries to make such decisions.
In this case, the RIAA possibly did much more than "notify the police" -- it is alleged that they encouraged the DJ to make the CDs and then were involved (not just present) in the raid. There is probably a pattern of the RIAA and law enforcement agencies working together like that that could be used to make a claim that the RIAA was acting as an agent of the state.
Well, if we're going to drill the fact that copyright infringement isn't theft, then we might as well also drill the fact that entrapment can only be done by members of the State (e.g. if a policeman is selling drugs undercover and approaches you with an offer and you buy).
If we are going to drill down to the facts, then lets get thing right, shall we? Entrapment can also take place if done by an agent of the state. In other words, a policeman cannot avoid a claim of entrapment by asking someone else to go and sell the drugs. In this case, the RIAA were involved in collecting evidence for the police and were involved in the raid, so a claim that the RIAA were acting as agents of the state would seem to have a lot of merit.
When I first tried to read the comments, I got/.'s familiar "nothing to see here..." message, which also describes the site that hosted the documents from the Iowa case. Going to the site hosting the documents now results in a login request.
I don't think there is anything inherent in the RPM system that requires root access. Root access is normally required because the rpm file modifies files and directories that are owned by root during the installation. However, if the rpm were to be installed using a path that the user had rights over, no files were required to be installed as owned by root (or other priviledged user) and the rpm command was used in such a way that the system rpm database was not modified, then the rpm could be installed by a regular user.
You have asked a question that can only be answered by a lawyer. While reading the answers to your question, you should be aware that:
[x] It is likely that many/. readers have been in this situation [ ] That question is not applicable to geeks. [ ] Wow. Who would ever wonder about that.
The consequences of following/. advice could be:
[ ] Incarceration in a Federal Supermax Prison [ ] Incarceration in a regular prison [ ] Incarceration in "country-club" for white-collar criminals. [ ] Large fines [ ] Small fines [X] Deportation.
Further consequences could be: [ ] You may have to register your address for the rest of your life. [X] You may never be able to [legally] enter the United States again. [ ] You may be subject to the ridicule of your peers. [ ] You may become an international pariah. [ ] Find a new career. Toxic waste disposal sounds good.
Doing this is going to require a serious economic hit to pretty much every country around the world. IF Co2 is only responsible for 10% of global warming, then it's probably not worth the economic hit it will take to reduce our emissions of it.
What about Methane? Should we not all stop eating beef and milk also to reduce methane emissions? While the present emissions of methane are far low than that of CO2, methane is a much more powerful warming agent than CO2.
Slashdot Mirror
The patent may claim triply-linked lists (see claim 2), but it also makes a claim on doubly linked lists.
Why don't you just take that story, expand it a little and then turn it into a screenplay called "I Robot"? What that you say, it's already been done? Oh well, never mind.
Well, Ubuntu Dupe, I read the thread.
You were asked what your hardware setup was -- including motherboard. I did not see any answer to this question.
I don't know if this was related to the problem, but I would certainly suspect it could be. You have a 1250MHz Athlon -- that's about a 1400+ or 1500+, correct? The sort of motherboard that would accept such a processor might not have BIOS support for >137GB disks
And you had your installation on a 200GB disk, correct?
So, I don't know if I have hit on the solution. You have not revealed it (why not unless you are just a troll?), but YOU FAILED TO ANSWER A CRITICAL question.
You were also rude, which is hardly a way to get help. In fact, I don't think you really wanted a solution -- you just wanted an excuse to complain about Ubuntu. That's why you have not revealed what the eventual solution was.
blah@gmail.com
I can also use:
blah+BestBuySucks@gmail.com
This works automatically. No setup is needed for gmail and many other email systems. Unfortunately, a lot of website developers think that "+" is invalid wherever it is used in an email address and will not allow such email addresses in registrations.
Also, there must be lots of artistic possiblities for LED-based lights that are not possible with incandescent or CFL.
Netsol: isn't that the company that allowed sex.com to be taken from its rightful owner and would not give it back?
I have also had personal experience where Netsol allowed another entity to change the DNS servers for my domain (without permission), and then I had to wait until the next day before NetSol did their regular update. I got no reply to my complaint aobut that incident.
You had better prepare to replace that 5 year old drive soon -- the non-zero reallocated sector count is a good predictor of failure according to Google.
Consider the scenario where a store detective suggests to someone that they steal an item from the store and then detains the person... Very similar, and clearly entrapment
The same goes for all your other examples -- you miss out the point where the agent of the state actually suggests that the illegal act should be committed and then say that it is not entrapment (which they would not be) but now your examples are not relevent to this case, since there is the additional factor that there is an allegation that the RIAA suggested and/or colluded with the defendent to commit the acts.
Again, with the drug testing -- it's not entrapment because the employer never suggested that the tested employee should take drugs.
Your definition of entrapment is wrong. See here for a definition from a reputable source. On that page, you will find a number of things that contradict statements you made in the parent and other posts, including:
On the issue of entrapment the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entrapped by government agents.
You claimed that the defendent must prove entrapment. The reputable source shows that the reverse is true.
- And third, the person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before the government agents spoke with him.
This refutes your point that "You must be "convinced" to do something that you normally would _never_ do. " -- using the definition to which I referred, it would be sufficient to prove that the defendent was not ready at that time to commit the offense.
In this case, the RIAA possibly did much more than "notify the police" -- it is alleged that they encouraged the DJ to make the CDs and then were involved (not just present) in the raid. There is probably a pattern of the RIAA and law enforcement agencies working together like that that could be used to make a claim that the RIAA was acting as an agent of the state.
When I first tried to read the comments, I got /.'s familiar "nothing to see here..." message, which also describes the site that hosted the documents from the Iowa case. Going to the site hosting the documents now results in a login request.
You have asked a question that can only be answered by a lawyer. While reading the answers to your question, you should be aware that:
/. readers have been in this situation
/. advice could be:
[x] It is likely that many
[ ] That question is not applicable to geeks.
[ ] Wow. Who would ever wonder about that.
The consequences of following
[ ] Incarceration in a Federal Supermax Prison
[ ] Incarceration in a regular prison
[ ] Incarceration in "country-club" for white-collar criminals.
[ ] Large fines
[ ] Small fines
[X] Deportation.
Further consequences could be:
[ ] You may have to register your address for the rest of your life.
[X] You may never be able to [legally] enter the United States again.
[ ] You may be subject to the ridicule of your peers.
[ ] You may become an international pariah.
[ ] Find a new career. Toxic waste disposal sounds good.
Best of luck in your future endeavors!