What if your keylogger happened to log what an intruder was doing on your system?...would that still not be allowed in court?
But in that case you are not recording electronic communications but rather the intruders actions on your computer.
I would be interested in what constitutes communications though. If someone were to log his or her spouse visting a porn site, singles site, or booking hotel reservations for a "business trip", would that be allowed?
If I sold you a bottle of water in the middle of the desert for a thousand bucks would you feel like you're paying a fair price?
With Blizzard's game it's the same... people know it's one of a kind and paying an excess of 10 or 20 bucks is not going to stop them.
I have never heard of anyone dying from a lack of gaming (or from music or movie withdrawal either for that matter). It's not at all like price gouging on food and water during some kind of natural disaster. If the market will bear the price and it isn't something that people need then although the price may be too high for some people there is nothing "unfair" about it.
Nah mate he's here all the time...He's trying to overclock his pace-maker.
I think you got Clinton confused with Cheney. Anyway, he's going to be mad that his post suggesting that China's move was a step in the right direction got modded -1,Troll.
Perhaps Google could make it part of the terms of service for buying adwords. If your company buys the name of a competitor and google is sued, you pay the damages. Surely the people buying the adwords know if they are buying the name of a competitor. Of course, I am sure that there are reasons why this wouldn't work or be allowed.
I must have missed the part where it said that you (as a parent) were no longer allowed to buy that M-rated game for your child. That would be the government taking over parenting. Unless having no f***ing clue what your kids are doing is considered a form of parenting. In that case, this would definitely be infringing.
I can't speak for the other poster but it's obviously the fault of the American people, who have not risen up in outrage at our ridiculous legal system to smite the lawyers... because we're a bunch of greedy fuckers.
That's right. It's hard to blame just the lawyers. The lawyers bring the cases to the court but ultimately it's the jury that ends up awarding the money. It blows my mind when you hear about a jury awarding millions to someone suing their town because he/she slipped on a sidewalk. Where do they think the money is coming from?
My father got excused from a jury pool once because he told the plaintiff's attorney that he didn't really believe in pain and suffering awards. The lawyer was incredulous and asked him several questions about why he would feel that way. After he was excused, the woman next to him, who had already been questioned, said that she had reconsidered based on what my father had said and she was subsequently excused too. Not sure if he won a convert or if she just wanted to get out of jury duty.
In a democracy, laws (should) reflect what everyone wants, which is appearantly free music.
You sure that everyone wants free music? Or just a majority? I am dubious even that is true.
Nonetheless, in a democracy the laws should not necessarily reflect what the majority wants. Foremost they should in fact make sure that the majority does not infringe on the rights of the minority. If "everyone" wants a free Porsche, to kick the Jews out of the country, prevent black men from marrying white women, and lock up the gays, should we make it so? I know these are extreme examples, but they make the point that laws should not always reflect the majority view.
Re:Mirror image of the environmental religion
on
State of the Union
·
· Score: 1
As with the religious nuts, the environmental nuts make for the best story. Who do you think the evening news is going to run, the scientist who thinks that GM foods look promising but must be used with care or the guy who says that GM corn will cause your children to be born with three arms? I agree that the Chicken Little types do a disservice to environmental causes because then people like you tend to paint a broad brush over all environmentalists.
By the way, I think you meant CO2 emissions. For a definitive demonstration on the effects of CO emissions run your car in your closed garage for a bit (please don't actually do this).
I watch some of those shows on occasion and wonder why with all the intelligent, reasonable people out there, some of them even already in government, do we always seem to end up having to choose between a handful of numbskulls to lead our country?
I wasn't looking for justification of the space program, but rather curious to see what examples of how the scientific discoveries involved have benefited mankind in a tangible way. The spinoffs are great but they don't require one to go into space to develop them (excluding satellites of course). I can appreciate the pursuit of scientific knowledge for its own sake, but I guess the engineer side of me likes to know what the practical applications are as well. Seeing as the other big motivator for technological development has been war, spending money on interesting but not practically useful scientific missions is not so bad if in the course of the effort some practical new technologies are developed.
I know this is going to start a huge flame war, but seriously - what good has the space program done for mankind? Anything other than cure our lust for knowledge of the unknown?
A lot of the responses that I am seeing to this question are things developed by the space program in order to pursue space exploration. Anyone got any examples of things developed as a result of knowledge gained in space, i.e. from zero-g experiments, etc., besides how to operate in it?
Right, because we all look SO much like the pictures on our drivers' licenses
Well, it may not be extremely difficult to pass yourself off as the owner of the fingerprint, but you would have to at least know what that person looked like and be able to resemble them somewhat. If a 25 year old white guy gets his hands on the fingerprint of a 65 old black guy, even the worst picture will probably reveal a difference in appearance.
I don't grasp what you are trying to say. Do you mean that the average driver has better than average driving skills? Saying more than half is plausible, but nearly all is false.
What he is saying is that when asked something like 90% of drivers (ok, I am making that number up but it is definitely >50%) will say that they are better than average drivers.
I think this is partly due to overconfidence on the part of many drivers as well as differing definitions of what makes one a good driver. A speed freak might say a good driver is one that can snake down the highway past all the turtles and not hit anyone, regardless of whether those other drivers have to hit their brake or whatever to avoid getting hit. A more concervative type might consider good driving to be always using one's turn signal (can you imagine?) and obeying the speed limit even if it means getting in the way of the speed freak. Skill vs care. You can't be a good driver without at least a little bit of each, but which is more important is probably debatable and situation dependent.
No, he is saying that if the kids were the only ones who didn't understand the first amendment, then we (presumably not kids) would not need to be reminded that it is legal to burn the flag.
And if someone paid money to sit above my cubicle to actually watch me click keys all day?
Ha, so true. For the all the engineering and such behind the cars, watching the event entails nothing more than watching the cars go in a circle. And of course waiting for the inevitable crash, "Hoooeee! Look at dem cars crash 'gether, Ma!"
If this gas is SO important and we already use it to purify water. Why can't we make a shit load of it and send it up to the stratosphere?
How do you propose to get it up there? It is not very healthy at ground level so a ground level release won't work. It is so reactive that I doubt releasing it at even a few thousand feet would end up in enough reaching the stratosphere to make a difference anyway. I don't think we will be seeing any 100,000 ft high smokestacks in the near future either. Even if there was an easy way to get it up there I suspect it would take a prohibitively large amount to really make a difference.
Slashdot Mirror
But in that case you are not recording electronic communications but rather the intruders actions on your computer.
I would be interested in what constitutes communications though. If someone were to log his or her spouse visting a porn site, singles site, or booking hotel reservations for a "business trip", would that be allowed?
I prefer to wait for the open source inflatable space station.
I don't know, but just imagine what a Beowulf cluster of them could steal!
With Blizzard's game it's the same... people know it's one of a kind and paying an excess of 10 or 20 bucks is not going to stop them.
I have never heard of anyone dying from a lack of gaming (or from music or movie withdrawal either for that matter). It's not at all like price gouging on food and water during some kind of natural disaster. If the market will bear the price and it isn't something that people need then although the price may be too high for some people there is nothing "unfair" about it.
This is slashdot so naturally
O = overlords
The GP has a 5 digit UID. Seeing as he ain't exactly "new here" I don't think you should take his post at face value, i.e. he's joking.
What about those drunk Alaskan oil tanker captains though?
I think you got Clinton confused with Cheney. Anyway, he's going to be mad that his post suggesting that China's move was a step in the right direction got modded -1,Troll.
I was going to say ship her a Barnes&Noble gift card as a cruel joke.
Perhaps Google could make it part of the terms of service for buying adwords. If your company buys the name of a competitor and google is sued, you pay the damages. Surely the people buying the adwords know if they are buying the name of a competitor. Of course, I am sure that there are reasons why this wouldn't work or be allowed.
I must have missed the part where it said that you (as a parent) were no longer allowed to buy that M-rated game for your child. That would be the government taking over parenting. Unless having no f***ing clue what your kids are doing is considered a form of parenting. In that case, this would definitely be infringing.
That's right. It's hard to blame just the lawyers. The lawyers bring the cases to the court but ultimately it's the jury that ends up awarding the money. It blows my mind when you hear about a jury awarding millions to someone suing their town because he/she slipped on a sidewalk. Where do they think the money is coming from?
My father got excused from a jury pool once because he told the plaintiff's attorney that he didn't really believe in pain and suffering awards. The lawyer was incredulous and asked him several questions about why he would feel that way. After he was excused, the woman next to him, who had already been questioned, said that she had reconsidered based on what my father had said and she was subsequently excused too. Not sure if he won a convert or if she just wanted to get out of jury duty.
You sure that everyone wants free music? Or just a majority? I am dubious even that is true.
Nonetheless, in a democracy the laws should not necessarily reflect what the majority wants. Foremost they should in fact make sure that the majority does not infringe on the rights of the minority. If "everyone" wants a free Porsche, to kick the Jews out of the country, prevent black men from marrying white women, and lock up the gays, should we make it so? I know these are extreme examples, but they make the point that laws should not always reflect the majority view.
By the way, I think you meant CO2 emissions. For a definitive demonstration on the effects of CO emissions run your car in your closed garage for a bit (please don't actually do this).
I watch some of those shows on occasion and wonder why with all the intelligent, reasonable people out there, some of them even already in government, do we always seem to end up having to choose between a handful of numbskulls to lead our country?
I wasn't looking for justification of the space program, but rather curious to see what examples of how the scientific discoveries involved have benefited mankind in a tangible way. The spinoffs are great but they don't require one to go into space to develop them (excluding satellites of course). I can appreciate the pursuit of scientific knowledge for its own sake, but I guess the engineer side of me likes to know what the practical applications are as well. Seeing as the other big motivator for technological development has been war, spending money on interesting but not practically useful scientific missions is not so bad if in the course of the effort some practical new technologies are developed.
Anyone making a statement that something is always true has just demonstrated the limits of their mind, usually.
The period following this sentence marks the end of this post.
A lot of the responses that I am seeing to this question are things developed by the space program in order to pursue space exploration. Anyone got any examples of things developed as a result of knowledge gained in space, i.e. from zero-g experiments, etc., besides how to operate in it?
and high in fiber!
Well, it may not be extremely difficult to pass yourself off as the owner of the fingerprint, but you would have to at least know what that person looked like and be able to resemble them somewhat. If a 25 year old white guy gets his hands on the fingerprint of a 65 old black guy, even the worst picture will probably reveal a difference in appearance.
What he is saying is that when asked something like 90% of drivers (ok, I am making that number up but it is definitely >50%) will say that they are better than average drivers.
I think this is partly due to overconfidence on the part of many drivers as well as differing definitions of what makes one a good driver. A speed freak might say a good driver is one that can snake down the highway past all the turtles and not hit anyone, regardless of whether those other drivers have to hit their brake or whatever to avoid getting hit. A more concervative type might consider good driving to be always using one's turn signal (can you imagine?) and obeying the speed limit even if it means getting in the way of the speed freak. Skill vs care. You can't be a good driver without at least a little bit of each, but which is more important is probably debatable and situation dependent.
As well as any windows or mirrors and likely the belt on the vacuum.
No, he is saying that if the kids were the only ones who didn't understand the first amendment, then we (presumably not kids) would not need to be reminded that it is legal to burn the flag.
Ha, so true. For the all the engineering and such behind the cars, watching the event entails nothing more than watching the cars go in a circle. And of course waiting for the inevitable crash, "Hoooeee! Look at dem cars crash 'gether, Ma!"
How do you propose to get it up there? It is not very healthy at ground level so a ground level release won't work. It is so reactive that I doubt releasing it at even a few thousand feet would end up in enough reaching the stratosphere to make a difference anyway. I don't think we will be seeing any 100,000 ft high smokestacks in the near future either. Even if there was an easy way to get it up there I suspect it would take a prohibitively large amount to really make a difference.