A lot of this seems to come down too Atari never sending him an authorized copy so therefor they assume he reviewed a pirated game. So what? Why this would even be actionable is beside my point. The reviewer says he established a trusted relationship at a POS who sells him retail versions of games prior to release dates. K, fine.
I'm not a game(er) but I went to their activation web page. The US version won't activate until at least tomorrow. Where's the discussion about activation? If he bought a shrink wrap retail version how did he get it activated prior to the release date? If it was activated, how can Atari claim it was unauthorized? It was either activated and therefor authorized by Atari or the reviewer really did pirate his copy. With that said, why it would even matter is still beyond me.
Maybe German law is different than US (IANAL) but I figure he can review any version of the game he wants too. It's just an opinion of what he saw. Besides, this close to the release date even if it wasn't the "final" version they're not going to make substantial changes anyway. The reviewer has either established trust that his opinion matters or he hasn't. That comes from reading his reviews and matching them to personal experience over time.
So I called back and told them I was running Windows.
So what do you do when tech support asks to to click on Control Panel | System Hardware and look for little exclamation icons? I've had to do the same thing many times. Mostly from Comcast and other ISPs who won't trouble shoot connection problems because I use Linux. Like modems that won't train up or a POP account stops working. If I tell them I'm using Linux they'll stop the call saying they only support Windows.
It's the same 'ol circle. I need you to ship me a replacement Ethernet card that went out... We don't support Linux, only Windows... I'm not asking you to support Linux I'm asking you to support your Ethernet card...
I don't even try any more. By the time I call support I've already determined the problem is not on my end. I know enough (I use Windows at work) to remember what the Windows dialog boxes look like and when support tells me to go to Start, Control Panel, I say, Okay done, what next... until I can say yup it doesn't have an IP or it says can't connect... And it's not just ISPs, I've done it with Gateway and I've had to do it with Linksys and my router. It's life on the edge:)
World over the same tactic is being repeated: Governments conspire to become more Big Brother... Do they really have a choice? 50 years ago the population was 2.5 billion. In less than the average lifespan the population has grown to 6.6 billion. Like that wonderful teaching tale from India of doubling a grain of rice for 30 days, we are in for a world of hurt when it doubles again.
It takes time and they need to start now building the infrastructure. My point is, how are the governments who see what's coming, plan to maintain order when the population grows beyond their capacity to police it if they don't use automation?
Considering the population limit that the Earth can reasonably support is around seven billion using artificial energy like hydrocarbon. Take away artificial energy (peak oil) and the Earth can only support about three billion. Add to that changing climate, changing growing patterns, water shortages... Smart government leaders are anticipating and planning for the eventual chaos.
When the Earth eventually reverts back to being able to support (only) two billion and there's 12 billion to feed how will governments control the populace unless the steps are taken today to build the infrastructure to control the population? No legislation will solve the problem. They can only plan for it.
The White House uses it's substantial independent authority to declare that it does not have enough substantial independent authority to be subject to FOIA?! Brilliant!
I could not resist... Using the average size of a Wal-Mart Supercenter and just for simplicity... Thank you for not resisting.
Double the size of a typical Walmart and we need 4 times as many to completely get off oil? That's close enough for my definition of 'about' and still very doable.
If they are right then they are instant Billionaires, if the process really worked they would be commercializing it and completely destabilizing OPEC. I'll believe it when I see it and the world will be rejoicing. Oh they're right and they will be billionaires but not instant. They've been working on this for years, invested 10's of millions of dollars and took huge risks. The American way (and dream). They're planning their first production sites within 2 years.
This technology has been around for awhile although biofuels usually produce ethanol. Just a molecular side chain away from what these guys came up with. They get 1 barrel from 40sq feet of space. At our current rate of 143 million barrels a week it would take 205 sq miles of manufacturing plants to satisfy our current needs. About the size of Chicago. Probably about the same square footage it you total up all the Walmarts. Very doable.
They got us here in spite of all the government roadblocks. IMHO we would have got here a lot sooner if we hadn't laughed Gore off the stage and I suspect progress will increase exponentially when Obama takes over.
I get the same thing. Capping P2P upload/download doesn't matter. By just having it running Comcast shuts me down. They just don't throttle P2P. Once their throttling kicks in my entire connection becomes useless.
It's night and day. If I'm running a speed test and getting a full 6mbit down and it I turn on a P2P client within a few minutes their throttling kicks in. My speed tests drop from 6Meg to 32K. HTTP traffic, PING, VPN, everything. A few minutes after shutting down BitTorrent my connection resets. It's like turning on/off a light switch. I'm effectively ban from using BitTorrent.
I'm too far away from the CO for any other option. SpeekEasy quoted me a 144K line for $99 a month so it's not like I can switch. I'm pretty much at the mercy of QOS Comcast provides. I have to be careful because I use VOIP and their throttling shuts down my phones. About once a month I shoot off a complaint to the FCC for my inability to dial 911 when Comcast decides not to provide me the bandwidth I paid for.
I was watching _HomeTime_ a generic DYI TV show and they were doing a home theater. When it came to the cables the host is shown choosing Monster cables from the shelf pretty much saying it's best to go with the higher quality just to be sure. Less expensive options were available but his explanation and tone was one of better safe than sorry.
Monster is probably a paid advertiser but no other explanation was given for the high price other than better safe than sorry. I cringed but not everybody understands this magic called technology like most/. users do. They're confused and most expensive is generally related to better.
And Monster cables are better quality. It's not like they're lying. It just doesn't matter. If they'd compare it to something they understand something like the light bulb doesn't care about the quality of the light switch.
This is not news for nerds It is for me. I learned how to build a MythTV PVR for the sole purpose of recording _Meet The Press_. That and _The Daily Show_. Some of my Linux expertise can be directly linked to Tim Russert.
He had good days and bad. Some interviews were harder some softer. One interview that still pisses me off was the interview with Dick Cheney and he's helping to hold up drawings of elaborate underground bunkers. It appeared, at least to me, he was swallowing it hook line and sinker. He gave Cheney a voice that I passionately disagreed with. I suppose that comes with balanced reporting. By definition I should have trouble with 50% of his interviews.
The 2008 election of Obama will be bitter sweet without him.
Should a judge also recuse himself from presiding over auto theft cases if he should happen like cars? Cars and porn are two different things completely. So let's try and level the playing field.
1. Owning a sports car is illegal. What constitutes "sporty" is left to individual interpretation however.
2. Buying, owning or selling certain sporty cars is illegal.
3. Displaying or allowing any one to gaze upon sports cars is illegal. For the definition of sporty see above.
That's just a start...
The judge collects cars, some of them surprisingly "sporty" (see above). His son is into cars too and shares his passion with his father. It's apparently a family activity. And this judge has made these possible sports cars available by displaying, and trading in cars. It's also likely he did this least sometimes at work using government equipment and networks.
Now, this judge is to determine if another car enthusiast is guilty for making and selling sports cars. Any conflict?
If a law is so stupid that we can't find anyone that's "innocent" the law needs to be nullified by the jury. But that a different topic. But there is a conflict as far as I can tell.
A proprietary closed club wants help with FOSS. Almost like Microsoft asking Linus for suggestions.
I wouldn't personally help them until they move more toward the center and loose all their political stuff and the homo bigotry.
I understand the private club rules argument that private parties can do anything they want. And I support that. But then they also want access to schools and want to use government lands with special privileges at the same time. That I don't agree with. One or the other but not both. And as far as helping them with FOSS, nope. Not until they loose JMHO.
I was just thinking, but couldn't something like this be stretched out to include games and virtual worlds... Yes it could. In fact it will. Property forfeiture laws for drug dealers has morphed into cops stealing cash from motorists on the highway. Search laws have morphed into listening in on every telephone call made and every email written.
It's a given laws like this will morph into things never intended. Cyber Bullying is a social issue not a legal problem. This 13 year old was inadequately prepared to live long enough to reproduce. As far as I'm concerned the parents should be blaming Darwin not the rest of the world. How would a law like this force parents to spend time with their children preparing them for this life? The answer is it won't. It won't fix the problem. So the only thing this law is good for is to do other things like take away more of my freedoms.
Does Comcast really have much of a choice? If it costs 100 million to deliver service but only 10 million to pay fines and settle lawsuits for not doing so, Comcast has a legally binding fiduciary responsibility to their share holders to not deliver service.
The only way to fix this is to make it more expensive or illegal to deny us what we paid for than to actually give it to us. One way may be to pass a law that forces the Charter of Incorporation to be primary over profits and sue to revoke their Incorporation when they do not live up to their charter. It could be easier to argue that blocking content goes against a charter of providing data services. Include in the law an assumption that all Incorporation Charters must be to provide the best possible of what ever the carter covers and do not allow charters specifically written to provide substandard service or products....It's an idea. Attack it from the Incorporation side of the law.
In one method of creation a crime against another has been committed. The other is a thought crime. Using another example: the result is someone dies. The next question would normally be how. Intentional, accident, natural... But if the how doesn't matter... all death is murder.
Action based crime or result based crime. As a juror I will not convict if there's no harm to another. That's just a decision I've made for myself. If they want a conviction they'll have to prove an action against another causing harm. Anything else is none of my business. But that's just me.
1) In a jury you follow the rule of law. According to the law, he was guilty. No. The fist job of a jury is to determine if the law is just (jury nullification). Then you find if the defendant did something wrong enough to be punished.
I don't get your reasoning. The two are unrelated. You're saying it should be illegal for the purchaser because he/she is creating a market for computer generated graphics? Computer dots, one's and zero's. Where's the victim? The justification for child porn laws are prudent however, in my mind, they do not transfer to victim-less activities.
TFA says these laws were only intended to be used in case of national security. Inferring the law had been used incorrectly. Therein lies the rub. Define national security. The same could be said for defining terrorist or sexual deviant. It seems to me no one crossed a line using these laws improperly. That's the problem. Once the {insert whomever here} lost his/her rights, so did I.
"I am one of the Republican Party Precinct Chairs... I want advice from those of you who are experts on what to watch for to make sure there is no fraudulant activity at my precinct during the election... Easy. The Republican wins. On another note, a person of your supposed stature would be best served with a spell checker.
There are actually serious laws against this. If you or I did this, we'd spend quite some time in jail, and have to pay quite a large amount in fines. The criminal and civil penalties are not small. Not to mention the probability of losing (the "right" to) Internet access for some period of time (by court order). It's happened before (and been covered here). You're right, if you or I did this but corporations dance on the edge of the law. If you RTA even the FBI is saying this is a gray area. Gray because it's a corporation conducting business and made a mistake sort of on purpose. MediaDefender will pay some chump change in a B2B transaction to Revision3 and that will be the end of it.
He fires up Bittorrent and his network connection turns to crap. Is his ISP Comcast by any chance? Kidding aside my first thought was he's viral for the telecoms to redirect and mis-direct the problem to the client.
How stupid can these people be?.... Good question. I don't know the answer to it. Each time I think they've reached the mountain top, they come up with something even better.
It's as tough as the other question I keep wondering about with these characters:
"How mean and how heartless can someone who was born of a human mother be?" Each time I think I've seen how low they can sink, they find some way to sink even lower.
These questions are simply unanswerable. Are your referring to the RIAA or the judges?
The judicial system takes on the appearance of a Benny Hill skit taking this long for judges to even begin rising to the competence level of the general public.
I had a contract at a high security government site. At one location an MP actually had a M16 pointed at me while I worked but that's a different story. At this location the computer room was raised and had a ramp leading to a secure door. Not having the proper card to get in I always needed an escort for access. The problem was no one was ever around when I needed in.
One day after waiting 45 minutes for my escort I had an idea. I lifted one of the tiles in front of the door, slipped under and came up the other side of the raised floor. Another 45 minutes and my escort finely arrived beside himself I was already in the room. He lectured me about Top Secret this and Top Secret that, the ramifications and had to know how I got in... So I told him. They installed a barrier under the floor.
The next time it happened I looked up and saw a tile ceiling. The lecture worked because I didn't go over but I was tempted.
Slashdot Mirror
A lot of this seems to come down too Atari never sending him an authorized copy so therefor they assume he reviewed a pirated game. So what? Why this would even be actionable is beside my point. The reviewer says he established a trusted relationship at a POS who sells him retail versions of games prior to release dates. K, fine.
I'm not a game(er) but I went to their activation web page. The US version won't activate until at least tomorrow. Where's the discussion about activation? If he bought a shrink wrap retail version how did he get it activated prior to the release date? If it was activated, how can Atari claim it was unauthorized? It was either activated and therefor authorized by Atari or the reviewer really did pirate his copy. With that said, why it would even matter is still beyond me.
Maybe German law is different than US (IANAL) but I figure he can review any version of the game he wants too. It's just an opinion of what he saw. Besides, this close to the release date even if it wasn't the "final" version they're not going to make substantial changes anyway. The reviewer has either established trust that his opinion matters or he hasn't. That comes from reading his reviews and matching them to personal experience over time.
YMMV
The Telco's also knew or should have known this administration's propensity to have others take the fall (CIA/Tenet).
It's the same 'ol circle. I need you to ship me a replacement Ethernet card that went out... We don't support Linux, only Windows... I'm not asking you to support Linux I'm asking you to support your Ethernet card...
I don't even try any more. By the time I call support I've already determined the problem is not on my end. I know enough (I use Windows at work) to remember what the Windows dialog boxes look like and when support tells me to go to Start, Control Panel, I say, Okay done, what next... until I can say yup it doesn't have an IP or it says can't connect... And it's not just ISPs, I've done it with Gateway and I've had to do it with Linksys and my router. It's life on the edge
-[d]-
It takes time and they need to start now building the infrastructure. My point is, how are the governments who see what's coming, plan to maintain order when the population grows beyond their capacity to police it if they don't use automation?
Considering the population limit that the Earth can reasonably support is around seven billion using artificial energy like hydrocarbon. Take away artificial energy (peak oil) and the Earth can only support about three billion. Add to that changing climate, changing growing patterns, water shortages... Smart government leaders are anticipating and planning for the eventual chaos.
When the Earth eventually reverts back to being able to support (only) two billion and there's 12 billion to feed how will governments control the populace unless the steps are taken today to build the infrastructure to control the population? No legislation will solve the problem. They can only plan for it.
-[d]-
The White House uses it's substantial independent authority to declare that it does not have enough substantial independent authority to be subject to FOIA?! Brilliant!
Double the size of a typical Walmart and we need 4 times as many to completely get off oil? That's close enough for my definition of 'about' and still very doable.
-[d]-
This technology has been around for awhile although biofuels usually produce ethanol. Just a molecular side chain away from what these guys came up with. They get 1 barrel from 40sq feet of space. At our current rate of 143 million barrels a week it would take 205 sq miles of manufacturing plants to satisfy our current needs. About the size of Chicago. Probably about the same square footage it you total up all the Walmarts. Very doable.
They got us here in spite of all the government roadblocks. IMHO we would have got here a lot sooner if we hadn't laughed Gore off the stage and I suspect progress will increase exponentially when Obama takes over.
-[d]-
I get the same thing. Capping P2P upload/download doesn't matter. By just having it running Comcast shuts me down. They just don't throttle P2P. Once their throttling kicks in my entire connection becomes useless.
It's night and day. If I'm running a speed test and getting a full 6mbit down and it I turn on a P2P client within a few minutes their throttling kicks in. My speed tests drop from 6Meg to 32K. HTTP traffic, PING, VPN, everything. A few minutes after shutting down BitTorrent my connection resets. It's like turning on/off a light switch. I'm effectively ban from using BitTorrent.
I'm too far away from the CO for any other option. SpeekEasy quoted me a 144K line for $99 a month so it's not like I can switch. I'm pretty much at the mercy of QOS Comcast provides. I have to be careful because I use VOIP and their throttling shuts down my phones. About once a month I shoot off a complaint to the FCC for my inability to dial 911 when Comcast decides not to provide me the bandwidth I paid for.
-[d]-
I was watching _HomeTime_ a generic DYI TV show and they were doing a home theater. When it came to the cables the host is shown choosing Monster cables from the shelf pretty much saying it's best to go with the higher quality just to be sure. Less expensive options were available but his explanation and tone was one of better safe than sorry.
/. users do. They're confused and most expensive is generally related to better.
On their show recap Monster is listed http://www.hometime.com/TV/pastshow/pastshows/1995/theater.htm as the cable supplier.
Monster is probably a paid advertiser but no other explanation was given for the high price other than better safe than sorry. I cringed but not everybody understands this magic called technology like most
And Monster cables are better quality. It's not like they're lying. It just doesn't matter. If they'd compare it to something they understand something like the light bulb doesn't care about the quality of the light switch.
-[d]-
He had good days and bad. Some interviews were harder some softer. One interview that still pisses me off was the interview with Dick Cheney and he's helping to hold up drawings of elaborate underground bunkers. It appeared, at least to me, he was swallowing it hook line and sinker. He gave Cheney a voice that I passionately disagreed with. I suppose that comes with balanced reporting. By definition I should have trouble with 50% of his interviews.
The 2008 election of Obama will be bitter sweet without him.
-[d]-
1. Owning a sports car is illegal. What constitutes "sporty" is left to individual interpretation however.
2. Buying, owning or selling certain sporty cars is illegal.
3. Displaying or allowing any one to gaze upon sports cars is illegal. For the definition of sporty see above.
That's just a start...
The judge collects cars, some of them surprisingly "sporty" (see above). His son is into cars too and shares his passion with his father. It's apparently a family activity. And this judge has made these possible sports cars available by displaying, and trading in cars. It's also likely he did this least sometimes at work using government equipment and networks.
Now, this judge is to determine if another car enthusiast is guilty for making and selling sports cars. Any conflict?
If a law is so stupid that we can't find anyone that's "innocent" the law needs to be nullified by the jury. But that a different topic. But there is a conflict as far as I can tell.
-[d]-
A proprietary closed club wants help with FOSS. Almost like Microsoft asking Linus for suggestions.
I wouldn't personally help them until they move more toward the center and loose all their political stuff and the homo bigotry.
I understand the private club rules argument that private parties can do anything they want. And I support that. But then they also want access to schools and want to use government lands with special privileges at the same time. That I don't agree with. One or the other but not both. And as far as helping them with FOSS, nope. Not until they loose JMHO.
-[d]-
It's a given laws like this will morph into things never intended. Cyber Bullying is a social issue not a legal problem. This 13 year old was inadequately prepared to live long enough to reproduce. As far as I'm concerned the parents should be blaming Darwin not the rest of the world. How would a law like this force parents to spend time with their children preparing them for this life? The answer is it won't. It won't fix the problem. So the only thing this law is good for is to do other things like take away more of my freedoms.
-[d]-
Does Comcast really have much of a choice? If it costs 100 million to deliver service but only 10 million to pay fines and settle lawsuits for not doing so, Comcast has a legally binding fiduciary responsibility to their share holders to not deliver service.
The only way to fix this is to make it more expensive or illegal to deny us what we paid for than to actually give it to us. One way may be to pass a law that forces the Charter of Incorporation to be primary over profits and sue to revoke their Incorporation when they do not live up to their charter. It could be easier to argue that blocking content goes against a charter of providing data services. Include in the law an assumption that all Incorporation Charters must be to provide the best possible of what ever the carter covers and do not allow charters specifically written to provide substandard service or products.
-[d]-
That is, until their own thoughts are exposed. Me thinks he doth protest too much.
In one method of creation a crime against another has been committed. The other is a thought crime. Using another example: the result is someone dies. The next question would normally be how. Intentional, accident, natural... But if the how doesn't matter... all death is murder.
Action based crime or result based crime. As a juror I will not convict if there's no harm to another. That's just a decision I've made for myself. If they want a conviction they'll have to prove an action against another causing harm. Anything else is none of my business. But that's just me.
-[d]-
-[d]-
11001001010011 is legal whereas 00110110101100 is not. Thought crimes.
-[d]-
I don't get your reasoning. The two are unrelated. You're saying it should be illegal for the purchaser because he/she is creating a market for computer generated graphics? Computer dots, one's and zero's. Where's the victim? The justification for child porn laws are prudent however, in my mind, they do not transfer to victim-less activities.
-[d]-
TFA says these laws were only intended to be used in case of national security. Inferring the law had been used incorrectly. Therein lies the rub. Define national security. The same could be said for defining terrorist or sexual deviant. It seems to me no one crossed a line using these laws improperly. That's the problem. Once the {insert whomever here} lost his/her rights, so did I.
-[d]-
-[d]-
-[d]-
He fires up Bittorrent and his network connection turns to crap. Is his ISP Comcast by any chance? Kidding aside my first thought was he's viral for the telecoms to redirect and mis-direct the problem to the client.
-[d]-
The judicial system takes on the appearance of a Benny Hill skit taking this long for judges to even begin rising to the competence level of the general public.
-[d]-
I had a contract at a high security government site. At one location an MP actually had a M16 pointed at me while I worked but that's a different story. At this location the computer room was raised and had a ramp leading to a secure door. Not having the proper card to get in I always needed an escort for access. The problem was no one was ever around when I needed in.
One day after waiting 45 minutes for my escort I had an idea. I lifted one of the tiles in front of the door, slipped under and came up the other side of the raised floor. Another 45 minutes and my escort finely arrived beside himself I was already in the room. He lectured me about Top Secret this and Top Secret that, the ramifications and had to know how I got in... So I told him. They installed a barrier under the floor.
The next time it happened I looked up and saw a tile ceiling. The lecture worked because I didn't go over but I was tempted.
-[d]-