lol yeah I remember reading it. Revelation is one of the reasons there's 30k denominations or so. Most agree a good portion of it is symbolic, but endless discussion on what parts are representative of things etc...
All men and virgins... heh... well if there are any remaining today you came to the right place to look for em. I'm actually trying to remember the christian explanation for it. Or at least the denomination I was a part of. I believe the majority of evangelicals who actually study and pay attention to their works (Most christians don't even know what they believe at all), they are the ones who were saved after the rapture, but before the end of the world. I think jehova's witnesses believe them to be the only ones who do make it to true heaven, while the remainder are placed on a "heaven on earth", which is a comperable but not quite as good as heaven place.
More specifically, cherry-picked parts of the old and new testament as well. Jesus specifically spoke out against divorce (Mat 19:8), Eh minor thing there. Jesus specifically stated all of old testament law still applied (Mat 5:18). Somehow they consider all of irrelevant, except randomly pick the one verse on homosexuality in there as valid, yet ignore everything it is clumped in with (no shellfish, no touching the skin of a pig, no mixed fabrics, don't go near women on their periods etc...). I don't get the selection process that many Fundamentalist Christians use to determine what is supposed to be opposed.
Oh... and as far as a good scientific debate on the accuracy of Genesis, a pretty scientifically sound argument, that is 3 words long. "Snakes can't talk".
Depends where you live, where you go etc... pages it depends on, but there certainly are no shortage of religious people causing problems, Sometimes they are infringing on peoples rights, IE gay marriage etc... Sometimes it's the direct attacks, vandalism etc... on atheist groups non-attacking advertisements. Things like billboards saying "Don't believe in a god, you are not alone" gets publicly criticized as horribly offensive, meanwhile down the road is "Why do atheists hate america" is just par for the course. No shortage of preachers blaming natural disasters on gays.
Here's an interesting experiment to do, ask random preachers what their opinion is on cross religion marriages etc... You will find that a good portion of southern fundamentalist preachers will go out of their way to say "a relationship not based on god, is doomed to failure", of course ignoring the fact that the more fundamentalist christian churches, have the highest divorce rates of any religion currently.
I certainly agree with this, I am a deconverted christian, but I don't tell my parents this detail because I know the turmoil that goes through to them for it. Now admitted the fact that this situation is possible, is to me the nail in the coffin that severed my belief in their system. 1. There is no sadness in heaven, 2. My parents love me very much. 3. Per their beliefs, they will go to heaven, I will be tormented for eternity.
In the event that their belief system were true, either A. That wouldn't be my parents in heaven (whiping out the memories that shape a person, makes it no longer the same person per my definitions) or B. Christians really are heartless people putting on a guise... no rational caring being could calmly sit by while 2/3rds of the worlds population is tortured for all of eternity... if they can they are monsters.
I disagree, future events will not be free of this, they just have a more solid "uhh duh.. you are clearly breaking the rules" portion to it. I mean it was already implied in their code of conduct. They specifically stated "Disturbances should only be reported to our staff, who have a staff badge and tag, or you may send an e-mail to ___" in the code of conduct, but ignoring that... it is just common sense, shaming is a great tool in the event that you go to authorities, and they ignore you. So far there is no indication that she made any effort to solve the problem without twitter.
I don't applaud her for saying something... at least not the way she did. Within the channels of a convention... they have staff to deal with things if they are disruptive. They have numbers, places etc... Numerous ways she could have reported it. Instead she opted to public shaming via twitter. In that step, she selected her battlefield, and of course once you select the open internet as your battlefield... 4chan is going to pick a side and attack.
Absolutely will happen yes... But is the law such a good idea. Like all technologies there are good and bad ways it could be used. Now if we were to make the law just say "you cannot text, browse the internet etc... while driving" and rule that glasses are not an exception, that would cover things as far as the law should go. Are people going to do it anyway? of course, but that isn't a fair question
A fair question is, how many more people are going to do it anyway that aren't now, because there are certainly a good number of people who will do it no matter what, and the means will do it has different risks. Current means, Keep phone etc... below and out of sight of the window, which generally involves turning their head to the point where the windshield is barely in the corner of their eye as they look. While if they are cheating by using glass. The road is perfectly in their line of sight, if something or someone jumps in their field of view while they are texting, car slams on it's breaks etc... they have a drastically higher chance of responding compared to the person looking down.
Well accident and insurance records say yes. In general it is one of those categories where the extra motor skills, health etc... instead of being applied to driving are being applied to texting, hitting on the attractive person in the passenger seat, eating, applying makeup etc... It's like when a new piece of hardware comes out with faster and better processing power etc... but then the software manufacturers burn every ounce of extra processing power and then some on useless wigits, apps and animations, making it actually perform worse at the primary function. Think early vista in the days when many new computers were being sold with 1-2gb of ram.
Well when it comes to Newton, using him as a theologian is perfectly reasonable. He did that, and he did it as well as anyone else in his time. However christians toting his name should also keep in mind, he had many views in theology that contradict many parts of modern theology, for instance he thought the trinity concept was bunk. However where we get into issues is when we move towards the "Newton's brilliance in physics, means what he stated about anything else is true" viewpoint. That kind of view makes about as much sense as "because Hannah Gay successfully cured HIV, I'm going to ask her what kind of engine I should put in my car". Newton also did quite a bit of work in the field of alchemy. Long story short, no matter how brilliant someone is in X field, the true measure of the quality of every individual piece of work, is not who wrote it, but how well it stands up in peer review.
I don't believe any part of the post was about alcohol being objectionable material. Rather people working too hard for too little pay. (IE what is going on in a sweat shop). Now my opinion of the topic... it's pretty simple, apple hasn't been participating in the food service industry, so making their jobs look bad, isn't offensive to the ghost of Steve Jobs. Meanwhile Apple has indeed gotten media spotlight numerous times for the fact that they are part of the insanity that is the chinese manufacturing industry.
well I suppose the real question should be, what tool should be used to protect from the hundreds of weak vectors in a company's users. Requiring stronger passwords, or forcing regular changing etc... increases the likelyness of post it notes etc... and well phishing? we are pretty much SoL for, the only thing I can possibly think of for phishing, would be an IT organized internal phishing test. IE the IT officials intentionally permit an account they created, say "companyadmin@gmail.com" to send a mass e-mail to a random person a day. Everyone caught gets pooled into a very boring company meeting (whether they learn anything from the meeting is irrelevant, they will b*ch and moan about what happened to the entire office, creating a huge increase of skepticism throughout. A boring meeting that they have to go to no matter what, isn't going to accomplish much, but a boring meeting they could avoid if they don't screw up, that might actually be workable.
The malware writers use slightly more honest busyness practice. Oh and if it actually detects a virus other than tracking cookies, it's probably not really norton.
"DarkAngle: A fake antivirus that poses as Panda CloudAntivirus. It takes advantage of the renown of Panda Security's free cloud antivirus to infect as many computers as possible."
I hate to burst your bubble panda, but the average home user, IE the targets for these scams, haven't heard of your software. If I were to write a virus, with the goal of suckering the uneducated home user, my choices of mimicry would be: 1. Norton, 2. McAffee, 3. AVG, 4. webroot, 5. CCleaner, 6. Ad-Aware, 7. MSE/windows defender, 8. Malwarebytes, 9. Bitdefender, 10. Trend Micro.
This rating list has no impact on what is best, what AV's have the best or worse success rating, more what names I could imagine my less computer savy friends and family hearing, and thinking "I've heard of this product before, it's probably legitimate". Panda is a fairly decent product, but far from a household name among typical non-geeks.
Sure I do, historically speaking, road rage is still a much less of an issue than say getting your head cut off in a mad rush at the market 2000 years ago.
Humans are gradually getting less violent. Chimps and other relatives of ours are still more violent. You don't measure violence in how many kills one person had the potential and means to create, that is partly based on intelligence, and it also goes into proportions. Second is coverage, sure we see dozens of racial hate crimes in humans for every Chimpanzee lynching, but the odds of an individual chimpanzee taken at random being killed by his own race, is significantly higher than the odds of any one human being murdered. Statistically humans are dwindling down in violence per capita, we just are more aware of every instance, and individual instances are much larger.
well I can certainly agree the artistic state of the world has fallen terribly, and continues to plummet. But are they saying revenge of the sith is the peak of the last 30 years? The best done since 1982 to the present? I would agree, when you factor in most of the rest of the crap that comes out, revenge of the sith isn't that bad, it is more average.
"Oh and by running that experiment, MIT is destroying that tribe's culture and they plan to mess with more just to see what happens. Research/Trying to play god like that should be outlawed."
Now I'm not an expert on geography, but I'm pretty certain most Ethiopians aren't ileterate due to choice or even religious reasons, it's because Ethiopia is a poor country where success is often just living to 20 without starving to death. As far as I know MIT didn't force the laptops into the villiage, or teach the kids to hide them from their parents (which IMO I still wouldn't oppose, hiding information from children to me for fear of compromised "Culture" or "Religion", is no different than binding a childs legs and throwing him in a wheelchair, which would be considered child abuse in most countries). Were all the scientists of america and europe's past destroying our culture. Did the work of Franklin, Telsa and Eddison ruin the culture of the world by making us more civilized. I mean it could be said that our old culture gathered around fires and candles, and those guys ruined it for us!
I believe the constant is a factor in this. While I'm no expert on solar based tablets, I have a feeling that their off time is larger then their on time, as well we are talking 1. systems loaded with pretty much all educational software, no wifi etc... in a location in which there are absolutely no teachers or other means tech > nothing, while systems with non-educational software, endless instant gratification games etc... doing so can cause your attention span to be shorter, when dealing with teachers and methods of learning that may be superior to a system with educational games. I see no conflict in the 2 articles at all, the tablets were never claimed to be superior to a real teacher, and in the first world the biggest factor is they distract from teachers (Of which the Etheopian's in the experience didn't have access to anyway).
I still am far from convinced that netbooks were killed by tablets. IMO they were dying out before the ipad was released, due to manufacturers not realizing why most of them sold. Note this is my limited experience of working in retail showed a different story (admittedly an unscientific very small sample size). In general 95% of the time I saw a netbook sell, it was as a cheap equivelant of a laptop. IE people wanting a nice $150-$200 device to take notes in class to do basic notetaking etc... If someone wanted to spend over $400 on something good, they went with a laptop. The added portability of the netbook was a nice perk, but not the selling point. Each generation went on, netbooks went from super cheap basic devices, to full blown laptops, with a laptop price. Not many people bought them because, well if they wanted to do anything that took advantage of processing power, they generally wanted something bigger than a 10" screen to do it on. I never saw a time when the $350 and up netbooks sold well, the 200 and under ones sold like hotcakes however. About 6 months before the ipad came out, it seems the netbook manufacturers attempted to sell the higher end ones, by canceling the cheap ones. Resulting in a more or less complete halt of the sales, 6 months after the ipad came out, and people assumed that was the cause of the netbook demise, while from my perspective at least, they were after 2 completely separate markets, IMO the only thing that could permit the sale of a laptop priced "almost" laptop, is apples marketing. The netbook fad would have either died out, or returned focus to the cheap ones with or without the ipad releasing. Personally I think the profit margains on the cheap ones were too slim, the popularity of the high end ones was always low and the ipad was a convenient excuse to get out of the market altogether for the manufacturers that didn't require them to admit to making a huge mistake from the start.
Agreed, though I suppose it is also worth noting, marine mammals are believed to possibly have comparably complex language system to humans. Of course similar could be said of parrots etc... while they don't have a complex language of their own, one can certainly teach parrots to identify and name hundreds of items etc... Of course teaching syntax etc... that may be more difficult, as far as I know only apes have that capability.
I would differ on opinion that such is not sustainable. That partly depends on the software, and who controls it. In an open infrastructure, in which say you sell a PC, the software industry is entirely open this is absolutely the case IE you sell a PC, hope to make up the losses via norton antivirus and HP printers, you could lose out, your customers might pick a different AV or may have a different one, they may find another printer at a compeating store they like better etc... Now lets say you are Nintendo, you hold a deal that any game, regardless of what store etc... if it runs on an unrooted or unjailbroken system you are getting royalties.
The difference in sustainability is entirely based off how you control your market, If you are attempting to gain your profits, via sales of add-ons, and you do not have a monopoly on the add-ons, yes you have a problem. People will buy extra things, but odds are they will buy the cheapest or the best depending on their budget. the model is unsustainable in an open market, however open is not the most common model used in tablets
Umm... Bill Nye actually has a job as executive director of the planetary society, has a degree in mechanical engineering and he's worked as an engineer at boeing. The man knows his physics, just because his acting is why he is well known, does not effect his actual qualifications.
it isn't uncommon of a tactic in crime from what I hear, people will intentionally report their car stolen, before loaning it to a friend to do something that they expect the car to be tracked to.
I agree, I also don't think that the police will be likely to jump up and down at the request unless the IAAs start pouring money into the police departments. I'm just trying to come up with a minimum possible to actually give a chance for enforcement that actually fairly captures infringers. I honestly don't imagine even imagine the RIAA actually bothering to jump through those steps, the number of infringers out there, if they actually have to take the time to investigate rather than take a spray and pray approach of collecting thousands of IPs and sending out a mass mailed court invite, it wouldn't even come close to being worth theirs or the police departments time. Catching say 500 of the millions upon millions of infringers a year, does not seem likely that they will follow through.
Slashdot Mirror
lol yeah I remember reading it. Revelation is one of the reasons there's 30k denominations or so. Most agree a good portion of it is symbolic, but endless discussion on what parts are representative of things etc...
All men and virgins... heh... well if there are any remaining today you came to the right place to look for em. I'm actually trying to remember the christian explanation for it. Or at least the denomination I was a part of. I believe the majority of evangelicals who actually study and pay attention to their works (Most christians don't even know what they believe at all), they are the ones who were saved after the rapture, but before the end of the world. I think jehova's witnesses believe them to be the only ones who do make it to true heaven, while the remainder are placed on a "heaven on earth", which is a comperable but not quite as good as heaven place.
More specifically, cherry-picked parts of the old and new testament as well. Jesus specifically spoke out against divorce (Mat 19:8), Eh minor thing there. Jesus specifically stated all of old testament law still applied (Mat 5:18). Somehow they consider all of irrelevant, except randomly pick the one verse on homosexuality in there as valid, yet ignore everything it is clumped in with (no shellfish, no touching the skin of a pig, no mixed fabrics, don't go near women on their periods etc...). I don't get the selection process that many Fundamentalist Christians use to determine what is supposed to be opposed.
Oh... and as far as a good scientific debate on the accuracy of Genesis, a pretty scientifically sound argument, that is 3 words long. "Snakes can't talk".
Here's an interesting experiment to do, ask random preachers what their opinion is on cross religion marriages etc... You will find that a good portion of southern fundamentalist preachers will go out of their way to say "a relationship not based on god, is doomed to failure", of course ignoring the fact that the more fundamentalist christian churches, have the highest divorce rates of any religion currently.
In the event that their belief system were true, either A. That wouldn't be my parents in heaven (whiping out the memories that shape a person, makes it no longer the same person per my definitions) or B. Christians really are heartless people putting on a guise... no rational caring being could calmly sit by while 2/3rds of the worlds population is tortured for all of eternity... if they can they are monsters.
I disagree, future events will not be free of this, they just have a more solid "uhh duh.. you are clearly breaking the rules" portion to it. I mean it was already implied in their code of conduct. They specifically stated "Disturbances should only be reported to our staff, who have a staff badge and tag, or you may send an e-mail to ___" in the code of conduct, but ignoring that... it is just common sense, shaming is a great tool in the event that you go to authorities, and they ignore you. So far there is no indication that she made any effort to solve the problem without twitter.
I don't applaud her for saying something... at least not the way she did. Within the channels of a convention... they have staff to deal with things if they are disruptive. They have numbers, places etc... Numerous ways she could have reported it. Instead she opted to public shaming via twitter. In that step, she selected her battlefield, and of course once you select the open internet as your battlefield... 4chan is going to pick a side and attack.
Absolutely will happen yes... But is the law such a good idea. Like all technologies there are good and bad ways it could be used. Now if we were to make the law just say "you cannot text, browse the internet etc... while driving" and rule that glasses are not an exception, that would cover things as far as the law should go. Are people going to do it anyway? of course, but that isn't a fair question A fair question is, how many more people are going to do it anyway that aren't now, because there are certainly a good number of people who will do it no matter what, and the means will do it has different risks. Current means, Keep phone etc... below and out of sight of the window, which generally involves turning their head to the point where the windshield is barely in the corner of their eye as they look. While if they are cheating by using glass. The road is perfectly in their line of sight, if something or someone jumps in their field of view while they are texting, car slams on it's breaks etc... they have a drastically higher chance of responding compared to the person looking down.
Well accident and insurance records say yes. In general it is one of those categories where the extra motor skills, health etc... instead of being applied to driving are being applied to texting, hitting on the attractive person in the passenger seat, eating, applying makeup etc... It's like when a new piece of hardware comes out with faster and better processing power etc... but then the software manufacturers burn every ounce of extra processing power and then some on useless wigits, apps and animations, making it actually perform worse at the primary function. Think early vista in the days when many new computers were being sold with 1-2gb of ram.
Well when it comes to Newton, using him as a theologian is perfectly reasonable. He did that, and he did it as well as anyone else in his time. However christians toting his name should also keep in mind, he had many views in theology that contradict many parts of modern theology, for instance he thought the trinity concept was bunk. However where we get into issues is when we move towards the "Newton's brilliance in physics, means what he stated about anything else is true" viewpoint. That kind of view makes about as much sense as "because Hannah Gay successfully cured HIV, I'm going to ask her what kind of engine I should put in my car". Newton also did quite a bit of work in the field of alchemy. Long story short, no matter how brilliant someone is in X field, the true measure of the quality of every individual piece of work, is not who wrote it, but how well it stands up in peer review.
I don't believe any part of the post was about alcohol being objectionable material. Rather people working too hard for too little pay. (IE what is going on in a sweat shop). Now my opinion of the topic... it's pretty simple, apple hasn't been participating in the food service industry, so making their jobs look bad, isn't offensive to the ghost of Steve Jobs. Meanwhile Apple has indeed gotten media spotlight numerous times for the fact that they are part of the insanity that is the chinese manufacturing industry.
well I suppose the real question should be, what tool should be used to protect from the hundreds of weak vectors in a company's users. Requiring stronger passwords, or forcing regular changing etc... increases the likelyness of post it notes etc... and well phishing? we are pretty much SoL for, the only thing I can possibly think of for phishing, would be an IT organized internal phishing test. IE the IT officials intentionally permit an account they created, say "companyadmin@gmail.com" to send a mass e-mail to a random person a day. Everyone caught gets pooled into a very boring company meeting (whether they learn anything from the meeting is irrelevant, they will b*ch and moan about what happened to the entire office, creating a huge increase of skepticism throughout. A boring meeting that they have to go to no matter what, isn't going to accomplish much, but a boring meeting they could avoid if they don't screw up, that might actually be workable.
The malware writers use slightly more honest busyness practice. Oh and if it actually detects a virus other than tracking cookies, it's probably not really norton.
"DarkAngle: A fake antivirus that poses as Panda CloudAntivirus. It takes advantage of the renown of Panda Security's free cloud antivirus to infect as many computers as possible."
I hate to burst your bubble panda, but the average home user, IE the targets for these scams, haven't heard of your software. If I were to write a virus, with the goal of suckering the uneducated home user, my choices of mimicry would be: 1. Norton, 2. McAffee, 3. AVG, 4. webroot, 5. CCleaner, 6. Ad-Aware, 7. MSE/windows defender, 8. Malwarebytes, 9. Bitdefender, 10. Trend Micro.
This rating list has no impact on what is best, what AV's have the best or worse success rating, more what names I could imagine my less computer savy friends and family hearing, and thinking "I've heard of this product before, it's probably legitimate". Panda is a fairly decent product, but far from a household name among typical non-geeks.
Sure I do, historically speaking, road rage is still a much less of an issue than say getting your head cut off in a mad rush at the market 2000 years ago.
Humans are gradually getting less violent. Chimps and other relatives of ours are still more violent. You don't measure violence in how many kills one person had the potential and means to create, that is partly based on intelligence, and it also goes into proportions. Second is coverage, sure we see dozens of racial hate crimes in humans for every Chimpanzee lynching, but the odds of an individual chimpanzee taken at random being killed by his own race, is significantly higher than the odds of any one human being murdered. Statistically humans are dwindling down in violence per capita, we just are more aware of every instance, and individual instances are much larger.
well I can certainly agree the artistic state of the world has fallen terribly, and continues to plummet. But are they saying revenge of the sith is the peak of the last 30 years? The best done since 1982 to the present? I would agree, when you factor in most of the rest of the crap that comes out, revenge of the sith isn't that bad, it is more average.
"Oh and by running that experiment, MIT is destroying that tribe's culture and they plan to mess with more just to see what happens. Research/Trying to play god like that should be outlawed."
Now I'm not an expert on geography, but I'm pretty certain most Ethiopians aren't ileterate due to choice or even religious reasons, it's because Ethiopia is a poor country where success is often just living to 20 without starving to death. As far as I know MIT didn't force the laptops into the villiage, or teach the kids to hide them from their parents (which IMO I still wouldn't oppose, hiding information from children to me for fear of compromised "Culture" or "Religion", is no different than binding a childs legs and throwing him in a wheelchair, which would be considered child abuse in most countries). Were all the scientists of america and europe's past destroying our culture. Did the work of Franklin, Telsa and Eddison ruin the culture of the world by making us more civilized. I mean it could be said that our old culture gathered around fires and candles, and those guys ruined it for us!
I believe the constant is a factor in this. While I'm no expert on solar based tablets, I have a feeling that their off time is larger then their on time, as well we are talking 1. systems loaded with pretty much all educational software, no wifi etc... in a location in which there are absolutely no teachers or other means tech > nothing, while systems with non-educational software, endless instant gratification games etc... doing so can cause your attention span to be shorter, when dealing with teachers and methods of learning that may be superior to a system with educational games. I see no conflict in the 2 articles at all, the tablets were never claimed to be superior to a real teacher, and in the first world the biggest factor is they distract from teachers (Of which the Etheopian's in the experience didn't have access to anyway).
I still am far from convinced that netbooks were killed by tablets. IMO they were dying out before the ipad was released, due to manufacturers not realizing why most of them sold. Note this is my limited experience of working in retail showed a different story (admittedly an unscientific very small sample size). In general 95% of the time I saw a netbook sell, it was as a cheap equivelant of a laptop. IE people wanting a nice $150-$200 device to take notes in class to do basic notetaking etc... If someone wanted to spend over $400 on something good, they went with a laptop. The added portability of the netbook was a nice perk, but not the selling point. Each generation went on, netbooks went from super cheap basic devices, to full blown laptops, with a laptop price. Not many people bought them because, well if they wanted to do anything that took advantage of processing power, they generally wanted something bigger than a 10" screen to do it on. I never saw a time when the $350 and up netbooks sold well, the 200 and under ones sold like hotcakes however. About 6 months before the ipad came out, it seems the netbook manufacturers attempted to sell the higher end ones, by canceling the cheap ones. Resulting in a more or less complete halt of the sales, 6 months after the ipad came out, and people assumed that was the cause of the netbook demise, while from my perspective at least, they were after 2 completely separate markets, IMO the only thing that could permit the sale of a laptop priced "almost" laptop, is apples marketing. The netbook fad would have either died out, or returned focus to the cheap ones with or without the ipad releasing. Personally I think the profit margains on the cheap ones were too slim, the popularity of the high end ones was always low and the ipad was a convenient excuse to get out of the market altogether for the manufacturers that didn't require them to admit to making a huge mistake from the start.
Agreed, though I suppose it is also worth noting, marine mammals are believed to possibly have comparably complex language system to humans. Of course similar could be said of parrots etc... while they don't have a complex language of their own, one can certainly teach parrots to identify and name hundreds of items etc... Of course teaching syntax etc... that may be more difficult, as far as I know only apes have that capability.
I would differ on opinion that such is not sustainable. That partly depends on the software, and who controls it. In an open infrastructure, in which say you sell a PC, the software industry is entirely open this is absolutely the case IE you sell a PC, hope to make up the losses via norton antivirus and HP printers, you could lose out, your customers might pick a different AV or may have a different one, they may find another printer at a compeating store they like better etc... Now lets say you are Nintendo, you hold a deal that any game, regardless of what store etc... if it runs on an unrooted or unjailbroken system you are getting royalties.
The difference in sustainability is entirely based off how you control your market, If you are attempting to gain your profits, via sales of add-ons, and you do not have a monopoly on the add-ons, yes you have a problem. People will buy extra things, but odds are they will buy the cheapest or the best depending on their budget. the model is unsustainable in an open market, however open is not the most common model used in tablets
Umm... Bill Nye actually has a job as executive director of the planetary society, has a degree in mechanical engineering and he's worked as an engineer at boeing. The man knows his physics, just because his acting is why he is well known, does not effect his actual qualifications.
it isn't uncommon of a tactic in crime from what I hear, people will intentionally report their car stolen, before loaning it to a friend to do something that they expect the car to be tracked to.
I agree, I also don't think that the police will be likely to jump up and down at the request unless the IAAs start pouring money into the police departments. I'm just trying to come up with a minimum possible to actually give a chance for enforcement that actually fairly captures infringers. I honestly don't imagine even imagine the RIAA actually bothering to jump through those steps, the number of infringers out there, if they actually have to take the time to investigate rather than take a spray and pray approach of collecting thousands of IPs and sending out a mass mailed court invite, it wouldn't even come close to being worth theirs or the police departments time. Catching say 500 of the millions upon millions of infringers a year, does not seem likely that they will follow through.