no, someone jumping in front of you is not a crime and you probably would not be prosecuted at all.
the law says you are not allowed to drive without paying attention. he went out of the way to break the law in a persistent way.
if you intend to drive responsibly, that is not a problem. this is worse than drunk driving because at least then you're not thinking straight. this is like intending to go get drunk so you can drink-drive. a deliberate plan to not watch the road, a deliberate plan to break the law, a deliberate plan to put lives at risk. this is not negligent, it is deliberate.
if a message is not sent that this behaviour is unacceptable, cold-blooded murderers will just install DVD players and automatically get off with a much lighter sentence?
and he intended to watch the DVD didn't he? he intended to not watch the road.
if you went to a firing range and DECIDED not to watch where you fired and shot someone, wouldn't that be murder?
you are DECIDING to put yourself in a situation where you can easily kill people***, and DECIDING to SYSTEMATICALLY not pay attention, therefore as far as I'm concerned your INTEND (unless you can prove insanity or severe learning problems) to put lives at risk.
This may be indiscriminate murder, but that's still murder isn't it?
The law should recognise the danger of careless driving more. Driving without due care and attention/drunk/using mobile etc. should have very harsh penalties. Driving is a priviledge, not a right.
***the law should recognise the danger of cars. Like with guns etc. death comes naturally from them unless you act responsibly. To not recognise this is like saying "I intended to push him off the cliff and for him to fall 1000ft but not to die". Death comes naturally from falling 1000ft, just like it comes from wreckless driving so IMO this is not an excuse.
really? the US government was the first ever government? people couldn't possibly imagine a situation where a government could regulate their actions? and yet they could predict the future so well that they knew it would always be a good idea to have armed civilians? wow. impressive.
maybe if Longhorn was due out in a reasonable amount of time.
given its release is so far away and I expect linux etc. to support whatever is popular anyway, I read this as saying "our support will be limited to this", rather than "our support will include this". sounds like bad news.
The new Microstar 180 Mega SFF are amazingly sexy and can be used as a Hifi when turned off, shame they're a little noisy or I'd have one in a second.
Anyone know what's the best SFF for quiet computing? It seems to me that if you buy a SFF PC it's because you want it to be quiet and convenient. Performance is not a priority.
yes this kind of thing makes me happy their music is being pirated and without any sympathy at all. they've completely removed the moral argument from piracy.
when you're as big as the RIAA, anything you do in public is an advertisement.
I hope the RIAA is monitoring all this:
IF YOU WANT A PICTURE OF THE FUTURE, IMAGINE SOMEONE GIVING YOU THE FINGER. FOREVER.
Microsoft has so much money that you're probably helping them more by using pirated version than paying. You give them all the satisfaction of a monopoly, plus the ability to use piracy as an argument for their DRM becoming required under law which will complete their plan for a 3000 year reich.
as opposed to beowulfs built with non-commodity hardware?
beowulfs does seem like one of the best uses, either 10 gigabit or at least push the cost of 1 gigabit LANs right down.
Re:Youwant dual mode transportation?
on
By Road and Rail?
·
· Score: 1
Youwant dual mode transportation? Use your left leg, then your right. Its simpler, cheaper, and the system is already in place.
Interesting and good ideas, but...
on
By Road and Rail?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
...looking through their website, everything is cartoons and toy models. The colour scheme doesn't help make this look anything more than playtime-fantasy-imagination-happy-fun-hour either.
...that MS has all this money and yet such poor quality software. I'm not just trying to bash them, but billions of cash in reserve and yet their software is repeatedly delayed and then still buggy and full of security holes.
The Guardian article has an interesting idea of giving some of the money back to customers as compensation for their illegal activities and general crapiness.
I think MS needs to think about what their point is any more. Apart from making money, they're mostly just fucking up the industry for everyone.
why the fuck would I bother lying to people on the internet?
the film is Shaun of the Dead and I would buy it just to show my support for Simon Pegg/Edgar Wright, let alone for the commentary/extras that will no doubt be great given how good the commentary on Spaced (best sitcom ever imo) was.
ooh, a joke about meeting women... how funny and original.
if it's a rough cut, then it won't be as good as the one you can buy.
if it's a practically perfect copy, then why haven't they released it already? (hint: outdated distributed method defended by useless middlemen unwilling to die gracefully)
maybe they're scared that p2p will allow people to "try before you buy", and just want people to be able to pay for it before they've heard it, cf MPAA wanting mobiles banned because people can talk to friends about crap movies as soon as they've seen it.
I'm not judging the book. I'm judging it's title, which I have read. I'm saying it's a bad title, what's wrong with that? If it were called "if you don't agree with me about copyrights you're a fucktard and I hope you die (p.s. your mum is a cunt)" and was 3000 pages long, would I need to read those 3000 pages before I was allowed to say I thought the title was inappropriate?
Slashdot Mirror
a week?
n g*
I get everything with just:
*doubleclick*
*ads*
*/google/box?*
*maxservi
*advertising*
*gator*
*adtrix*
*vioclicks*
plus flashblock.
YMMV
no, someone jumping in front of you is not a crime and you probably would not be prosecuted at all.
the law says you are not allowed to drive without paying attention. he went out of the way to break the law in a persistent way.
if you intend to drive responsibly, that is not a problem. this is worse than drunk driving because at least then you're not thinking straight. this is like intending to go get drunk so you can drink-drive. a deliberate plan to not watch the road, a deliberate plan to break the law, a deliberate plan to put lives at risk. this is not negligent, it is deliberate.
if a message is not sent that this behaviour is unacceptable, cold-blooded murderers will just install DVD players and automatically get off with a much lighter sentence?
and he intended to watch the DVD didn't he? he intended to not watch the road.
if you went to a firing range and DECIDED not to watch where you fired and shot someone, wouldn't that be murder?
you are DECIDING to put yourself in a situation where you can easily kill people***, and DECIDING to SYSTEMATICALLY not pay attention, therefore as far as I'm concerned your INTEND (unless you can prove insanity or severe learning problems) to put lives at risk.
This may be indiscriminate murder, but that's still murder isn't it?
The law should recognise the danger of careless driving more. Driving without due care and attention/drunk/using mobile etc. should have very harsh penalties. Driving is a priviledge, not a right.
***the law should recognise the danger of cars. Like with guns etc. death comes naturally from them unless you act responsibly. To not recognise this is like saying "I intended to push him off the cliff and for him to fall 1000ft but not to die". Death comes naturally from falling 1000ft, just like it comes from wreckless driving so IMO this is not an excuse.
really? the US government was the first ever government? people couldn't possibly imagine a situation where a government could regulate their actions? and yet they could predict the future so well that they knew it would always be a good idea to have armed civilians? wow. impressive.
...take loads of photos at each one to make a 360 degree photo. would be a nice way of seeing what the world is like.
maybe if Longhorn was due out in a reasonable amount of time.
given its release is so far away and I expect linux etc. to support whatever is popular anyway, I read this as saying "our support will be limited to this", rather than "our support will include this". sounds like bad news.
The new Microstar 180 Mega SFF are amazingly sexy and can be used as a Hifi when turned off, shame they're a little noisy or I'd have one in a second.
Anyone know what's the best SFF for quiet computing? It seems to me that if you buy a SFF PC it's because you want it to be quiet and convenient. Performance is not a priority.
how can capitalism solve hunger in Africa when it hasn't even solved it in America?
maybe you meant some of the luckier Africans' situation will improve?
yes this kind of thing makes me happy their music is being pirated and without any sympathy at all. they've completely removed the moral argument from piracy.
when you're as big as the RIAA, anything you do in public is an advertisement.
I hope the RIAA is monitoring all this:
IF YOU WANT A PICTURE OF THE FUTURE, IMAGINE SOMEONE GIVING YOU THE FINGER. FOREVER.
what a strange definition of indie.
is this like when people said "bad" to mean "good"?
you kids these days...
Microsoft has so much money that you're probably helping them more by using pirated version than paying. You give them all the satisfaction of a monopoly, plus the ability to use piracy as an argument for their DRM becoming required under law which will complete their plan for a 3000 year reich.
>...will Microsoft see this as an opportunity to release new, extra-inefficient network protocols?
yes, every packet will contain an easter egg flight simulator.
if you're going to have a network like this of course you aren't going to use Windows.
unless you're the kind of wanker^H^H^H^H^H^H person that likes to buy a $300 car and put $3000 rims on it.
It had to be said.
It was.
as opposed to beowulfs built with non-commodity hardware?
beowulfs does seem like one of the best uses, either 10 gigabit or at least push the cost of 1 gigabit LANs right down.
Youwant dual mode transportation?
Use your left leg, then your right. Its simpler, cheaper, and the system is already in place.
...looking through their website, everything is cartoons and toy models. The colour scheme doesn't help make this look anything more than playtime-fantasy-imagination-happy-fun-hour either.
...that MS has all this money and yet such poor quality software. I'm not just trying to bash them, but billions of cash in reserve and yet their software is repeatedly delayed and then still buggy and full of security holes.
The Guardian article has an interesting idea of giving some of the money back to customers as compensation for their illegal activities and general crapiness.
I think MS needs to think about what their point is any more. Apart from making money, they're mostly just fucking up the industry for everyone.
>sort of like preferring Java over Perl
no it's not, they are very different. maybe it's like Perl with or without "use strict;"
why the fuck would I bother lying to people on the internet?
the film is Shaun of the Dead and I would buy it just to show my support for Simon Pegg/Edgar Wright, let alone for the commentary/extras that will no doubt be great given how good the commentary on Spaced (best sitcom ever imo) was.
ooh, a joke about meeting women... how funny and original.
>BTW, is Trent Reznor on Doom3?
AFAIK he quit/was fired either way not involved any more.
that's because most people (or me at least, YMMV) are willing to pay for things they like a lot.
I only have one illegal film on my hard drive. I saw it at the cinema, I have the soundtrack and I will buy the DVD when it's out.
shovelling shit down peoples' mouths can only work for so long, but if you make genuinely good stuff everyone wins.
if it's a rough cut, then it won't be as good as the one you can buy.
if it's a practically perfect copy, then why haven't they released it already? (hint: outdated distributed method defended by useless middlemen unwilling to die gracefully)
maybe they're scared that p2p will allow people to "try before you buy", and just want people to be able to pay for it before they've heard it, cf MPAA wanting mobiles banned because people can talk to friends about crap movies as soon as they've seen it.
this has no chance of making it to the desktop. the US government will declare it a threat to national security and ban its domestic use or export.
I'm not judging the book. I'm judging it's title, which I have read. I'm saying it's a bad title, what's wrong with that? If it were called "if you don't agree with me about copyrights you're a fucktard and I hope you die (p.s. your mum is a cunt)" and was 3000 pages long, would I need to read those 3000 pages before I was allowed to say I thought the title was inappropriate?