The point of evidence, though, is to show that it hasn't been tampered with from the gathering until used in court, that's true for any kind of evidence.
That's a lot more important if you're a photographer for the police or something, involved in a criminal case.
In the case of the woman documenting local contruction, we are talking about using photos to document claims which aren't necessarily going to be used in a court case at all. If they are it'll probably be in a civil case. Chain of custody for evidence doesn't necessarily apply.
I certainly think a bunch of digital photos would be sufficient to protect the woman in a libel case, which is what sparked my initial observation.
If you're going to photograph something to be used in court, you're probably better off using 35mm. Granted, digital is certainly ten times better than nothing, but unless you have film photographs and/or eyewitnesses, you might be SOL. But, again, the sheer volume of photographs on the site should be enough evidence for the courts.
I don't disagree, I just think a useful volume of photographic evidence is a lot easier to achieve if you don't have to buy all that film. Digital photos can go up on the web nice and quick, too, which is useful if you're making a site meant to sway public opinion.
There are courts in the US which consider digital photographs not to be valid evidence due to the ease of photographic manipulation through photoshop.
That sounds like more of an issue for a criminal case, right? Anyhow, links to more info on the topic would be appreciated, it's kind of an interesting one. Thanks.
now call me cynical, but im not exactly sure i trust chinese state news for accurate reports on just how widespread a problem there might be.
Yes, China has received a certain amount of criticism from the WHO about not being open enough with their information, the same way they did during the SARS thing. The WHO doesn't have much actual power so the criticism is muted. Supposedly China is getting a little better.
I can't imagine Indonesia is great in this regard either.
Let this be a lesson. In the days of cheap digital cameras, if you're going to take on a task like this woman did, you might as well photograph every last thing and notate when the pictures were taken, and under what circumstances.
If that became a common practice, it's easy to imagine the bigger engineering companies collaborating with our elected officials to create laws and ordinances against "photographing at a construction site" or some shit. Something unconstitutional but meant to up the ante a litle bit for anyone who wants to take this task on.
I wish the lady luck, take down those bastards... even though they will simply shut down, start up under a new name, and carry on with their crap.
Construction companies are shady in the same way here in the U.S. They get away with as much as they can and when they overstep, time to disappear. And then reappear, same owner new name.
How many corporate executives would acuse people of slander or insult them in public if they had to face the defendant or his champion at the wrong end of a sharp and pointy object?
How many corporate executives could not afford a really, really good champion?
Sounds like a bloodier version of the power imbalance we have with our current legal system, in which expensive lawyers have all the advantages, but without the benefit of a law created (nominally) by and for the people.
One thing that is fairly certain is that the healthier you are in general, the less vulnerable you are likely to be.
Not really. Children and old people had a much better survival rate during the Spanish Flu pandemic. What you're saying might be a nice general rule, but it's not "fairly certain" by any stretch of the imagination.
Re:Human Death Fetish
on
A Flu Pandemic?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Many of those people were old and poor, and didn't have regular access to modern medical treatment.
Uh... no. Ones with access to modern medical treatment are the only ones accounted for in the WHO statistics. If they never made it to a hospital they won't be accounted for at all.
Re:Yes twice as deadly... but... perspective
on
A Flu Pandemic?
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
Before people jump on my back saying I'm an evil heartless person
Linux has been around for a long time, but only recently has it started to truly take fire. In particular in the last few years it's started to supplant traditional embedded operating systems; in the future, the increasing sophistication of its end-user support will lead further adoption on the desk top and in other more mainstream systems.
This could have been written five years ago. People were saying the same stuff.
It's these latter two categories which will force it to be noticed by hardware manufacturer -- they can easily ignore a few nerds, but it's much harder to ignore giant mega-corporations and zillions of consumers.
Hardware vendors do cater to business users. Look at it this way: hardware and software vendors have learned that catering to Linux in the server room can make them some money. Hardware and software vendors have also learned that catering to Linux outside the server room is unlikely to make them much money.
Admittedly this was 4 or so years ago, and it hasn't happened since.
Windows update had some problems there for a few months. Drivers that would lock up a system, occasional mishaps. What people on Slashdot tend to lose sight of is that Microsoft software invariably gets better, and in some cases gets pretty good.
I don't think WU will update a driver automatically in any case, although maybe it does and I just haven't seen it yet. Most of the time the driver updates are optional. You can usually read release notes to see if you need the update. The system works fairly well.
Why does linux need to make an explicit effort to be for "normal users"? Why can't it just strive to be the most reliable and functional operating system and let "normal" adjust itself to suit?
If that's the tradeoff you want to make, fine. The problem is that people often take that attitude and then wander around blindly, amazed that it isn't "the year of Linux on the desktop" yet.
Look at nvidias drivers on linux! Always well behind other drivers, and filled with bugs because we have to wait for nvidia to get off thier asses and fix the damn thing.
Come on. This is largely because of the hoops they have to jump through to get their binary driver to work in Linux at all.
(IOW: it doesn't guarantee stability or quality at all. It's just a false sense of "stability")
FFS. Not everyone is cheating their testing system. There's a whole world of drivers where the optimizing for speed/optimizing for stability tradeoff does not even come into play and optimizing for stability is the obvious top priority.
It's not perfect, perhaps not even that good, but windows drivers got a lot better thanks to WHQL. Or perhaps just coincidentally, around the same time WHQL came online, but that seems like a stretch.
Driver certification means just that Microsoft received the driver, and agreed to confirm that the driver comes from one of its business partners, and not from a suspicious open-source hacker. You don't even have a guarantee that the driver is free from rootkits.
You're obviously not much of a Windows user. Driver quality has improved markedly since WHQL came online, and there haven't been any rootkits in the drivers.
The company isn't really interested in fixing any issues with the drivers
Oh, they're quite invested in making sure that drivers are decent. It's no fun for anyone concerned for Microsoft to provide a driver via windows update and for that driver to make a system unbootable or otherwise hosed.
All a vendor needs to do is to make good, solid interface documentation, and make it available without NDAs and other childish restrictions, and the drivers will not only be written, but they'll probably be shipped with the operating systems, and for the most part, just work.
The mindset of viewing a company's effort to maintain their secrets as being "childish restrictions" kind of shows why so many hardware vendors avoid Linux like the plague.
But, the kernel code vetting process is what is a strong benefit of using Linux, from a user perspective, as I know that the code is well tested by an army of users and developers.
As opposed to a focused team of professional QA people, like WHQL. We know that they aren't good for anything, they use Windows! LOLOLOLL!!!11!!!!!1
Slashdot Mirror
That kind of wait isn't exactly unprecedented here in the U.S.
Plenty of hackers already have that.
That means all their financials from their entire history became public? If the OP was referring to that I'm sure they can provide a link.
I tend to think the OP was just talking out of his ass.
How do you know that? I mean, Cygnus was never publicly traded, so you must have some kind of source for the information?
1. Autorun is not an "advanced feature". It's also not particularly difficult to turn off.
2. These aren't music CDs. They are hybric music/data CDs.
You can already turn off autorun. They could put a big toggle switch on the start menu but that would be stupid.
That's a lot more important if you're a photographer for the police or something, involved in a criminal case.
In the case of the woman documenting local contruction, we are talking about using photos to document claims which aren't necessarily going to be used in a court case at all. If they are it'll probably be in a civil case. Chain of custody for evidence doesn't necessarily apply.
I certainly think a bunch of digital photos would be sufficient to protect the woman in a libel case, which is what sparked my initial observation.
I don't disagree, I just think a useful volume of photographic evidence is a lot easier to achieve if you don't have to buy all that film. Digital photos can go up on the web nice and quick, too, which is useful if you're making a site meant to sway public opinion.
That sounds like more of an issue for a criminal case, right? Anyhow, links to more info on the topic would be appreciated, it's kind of an interesting one. Thanks.
Yes, China has received a certain amount of criticism from the WHO about not being open enough with their information, the same way they did during the SARS thing. The WHO doesn't have much actual power so the criticism is muted. Supposedly China is getting a little better.
I can't imagine Indonesia is great in this regard either.
Let this be a lesson. In the days of cheap digital cameras, if you're going to take on a task like this woman did, you might as well photograph every last thing and notate when the pictures were taken, and under what circumstances.
If that became a common practice, it's easy to imagine the bigger engineering companies collaborating with our elected officials to create laws and ordinances against "photographing at a construction site" or some shit. Something unconstitutional but meant to up the ante a litle bit for anyone who wants to take this task on.
In the mean time, give 'em hell.
Construction companies are shady in the same way here in the U.S. They get away with as much as they can and when they overstep, time to disappear. And then reappear, same owner new name.
Before she can do that, someone will have to invent the word "percentually".
How many corporate executives could not afford a really, really good champion?
Sounds like a bloodier version of the power imbalance we have with our current legal system, in which expensive lawyers have all the advantages, but without the benefit of a law created (nominally) by and for the people.
Not really. Children and old people had a much better survival rate during the Spanish Flu pandemic. What you're saying might be a nice general rule, but it's not "fairly certain" by any stretch of the imagination.
Uh... no. Ones with access to modern medical treatment are the only ones accounted for in the WHO statistics. If they never made it to a hospital they won't be accounted for at all.
Not evil, just stupid and sheltered.
They could finance the whole thing by selling newer and better walkmans. Which is pretty much how they are making all their money today.
Can you please provide pics of yourself stroking your black turtleneck when you say such things? Thanks!
This could have been written five years ago. People were saying the same stuff.
Hardware vendors do cater to business users. Look at it this way: hardware and software vendors have learned that catering to Linux in the server room can make them some money. Hardware and software vendors have also learned that catering to Linux outside the server room is unlikely to make them much money.
Windows update had some problems there for a few months. Drivers that would lock up a system, occasional mishaps. What people on Slashdot tend to lose sight of is that Microsoft software invariably gets better, and in some cases gets pretty good.
I don't think WU will update a driver automatically in any case, although maybe it does and I just haven't seen it yet. Most of the time the driver updates are optional. You can usually read release notes to see if you need the update. The system works fairly well.
If that's the tradeoff you want to make, fine. The problem is that people often take that attitude and then wander around blindly, amazed that it isn't "the year of Linux on the desktop" yet.
Come on. This is largely because of the hoops they have to jump through to get their binary driver to work in Linux at all.
FFS. Not everyone is cheating their testing system. There's a whole world of drivers where the optimizing for speed/optimizing for stability tradeoff does not even come into play and optimizing for stability is the obvious top priority.
It's not perfect, perhaps not even that good, but windows drivers got a lot better thanks to WHQL. Or perhaps just coincidentally, around the same time WHQL came online, but that seems like a stretch.
You're obviously not much of a Windows user. Driver quality has improved markedly since WHQL came online, and there haven't been any rootkits in the drivers.
Oh, they're quite invested in making sure that drivers are decent. It's no fun for anyone concerned for Microsoft to provide a driver via windows update and for that driver to make a system unbootable or otherwise hosed.
The mindset of viewing a company's effort to maintain their secrets as being "childish restrictions" kind of shows why so many hardware vendors avoid Linux like the plague.
As opposed to a focused team of professional QA people, like WHQL. We know that they aren't good for anything, they use Windows! LOLOLOLL!!!11!!!!!1