Very true. But what portion of that $222,000 fine do you think will actually go to compensating the public for the waste of time? Not a red cent. If you want to punish people for wasting the court's time, put them on community service duty or something else that both deprives them of personal time AND gives some form of recompense to the community. Don't completely destroy their livelihood by leveling a fine that they wouldn't be able to pay off with ten years gross salary. Your idea has merit. I don't believe I said that some ridiculous amount should be given to the plaintiff in this case (and if I did, it certainly wasn't the intention). Damages awarded need to be within a reasonable level, but the fact is that she needs to take a hit (whether it be financial, or just depriving her of considerable amounts of time) for standing up in front of a judge and jury and outright lying out of the knowledge that she did do it, and doesn't want to pay, is undeniable. The difference between what happened and what should have happened is who got all that money.
I got a headache trying to find it (the page says to go to LogoPoint to read the unabridged policies, LogoPoint has nothing that even remotely resembles a policy, and the submission process, FAQ, help pages, and any other document under the sun with the sole exception of that one frigging page you found does not mention any cost) but apparently some fee or other does exist. Oh well, it's not like a WHQL signature is compulsory.
Actually, there was more evidence against this lady in this case than ANY RIAA case ever brought so far (and by damn it, that's just sad).
How does it equate to wasting the judge's, jury, plaintiff's and so on, time? Simple, she KNEW she was in the wrong. She then decided to push it to a jury decision anyway, hoping to play on the negative sentiment against the recording industry to get off scot free. That's just bullshit (I suppose to reply in kind to you, I'd need to call you a fucking moron or something, but I wont. Not sinking to your pitiful level).
Liar? Hardly. People who take cases to court knowing that they're in the wrong (as opposed to a good faith belief that they really didn't actually do it) do need to pay. Court cases cost entirely too much. And if there were less court cases, less people would be forced into that utter bullshit system we call "Jury Service".
I have no idea what your last paragraph is meant to mean, but I'll happily carry on my way being in a country ranked First equal for non-corrupted government and know that we don't actually have tasers, cops aren't allowed to shoot people that pose no threat, and "resisting arrest" actually requires proof, unlike your country. The law is the law, whether you like it or not. If you don't like it, then stand for a government position yourself and get into a position where you can change it.
Well, actually, it's more like $200,000 for illegally downloading and distributing copyrighted material, and wasting a court's time with lies and deception to try and get off it.
She would have paid far less if she hadn't wasted the court's time and insulted the intelligence of the Jury.
I support more excessive remedies for people who bring lawsuits or escalate civil action to court under fraudulent circumstances (yes, on both sides of the battlefield).
(What, you think Microsoft doesn't charge the hardware manufacturers???) What, you think they do? Microsoft's WHQL process is the most bloody stupid idea ever. WHQL don't TEST equipment (well, they charge you if they do) but for free they'll just blindly stamp the WHQL stamp on it based on whatever shonky test results you can give them.
The exact design of the coin, maybe, but not even the mint really owns that because they're just government owned company and the people are supposed to own/be the government in a democracy (the politicians are elected to represent the people because not everyone would fit in the government house). By default the people own the copyrights on any government generated work and can choose to do as they see fit with them.
Go figure? Not... entirely... true. The government owns the copyrights and uses them as a defensive measure against anyone misusing them. For example, in the absense of anti-counterfeiting legislation, the government could whack counterfeiters with copyright violation. People aren't allowed to "do as they see fit" with government marks and copyrights, because the potential for misuse is too high. As a result, the government usually has the most liberal "terms of use" seen anywhere. As an example, I work at a government entity and the copyright on our website is "Material featured on this site is subject to copyright. All material may however be reproduced free of charge in any format or media without requiring specific permission. This is subject to the material being reproduced accurately and not being used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. Where the material is being published or issued to others, the source and copyright status must be acknowledged.".
Granted, I live in NZ, but that's surely not the point... right?
You keep saying this, but you are incorrect. They most certainly do NOT "loose" [sic] the right to the patents, they are merely prevented from claiming damages or other legal remedies from the other party. It doesn't stop them suing other people over it though.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, but obviously neither are you.
Your ideas are stupid, and I would like to unsubscribe from your newsletter.
Seriously though, the paying for certificates is the only thing that prevents any old idiot from getting one and diluting the one tiny remaining speck of trust in them. Next, you'll want Extended Verification Certificates free too (which cost for a reason).
I'd just like to add that on Windows, you can actually play multiplayer even with the FREE membership to GfW Live. For example, with Halo 2 PC, the Silver features are: Achievements, Game Server Browser/Multiplayer, Voice Chat, Text Chat, Friends List (and the associated matchmaking with your friends). With the Gold subscription, that adds... well, Matchmaking. Specifically the system which goes to behemoth efforts to pit you against opponents that suck/rock as much as you do at the game. [reference: http://www.microsoft.com/games/halo2%5D
As for COI, nice try, but no cigar.:-) My interest in Wikipedia doesn't invalidate my comments. Try reading my comments from the perspective of one who doesn't like or need Wikipedia. Unless you can point out where I'm factually wrong, I don't see the problem. You missed the joke.
Hold on, you're saying that forcing a cellphone provider to sell their phones so that they can choose any provider they want restricts consumer choice?
Well, then it's obviously not meant to be treated like any other encyclopaedia, since encyclopaedias are meant to be used for research and cited in studies.
Also note, that Wikipedia often violates its own rules. For an obscure topic, it could take days, weeks, even months for someone with sufficient knowledge to tag an article as having complete crap content. And even then the content probably wont be removed, but a generic "This article contains complete bullshit. We're not saying what part is crap, just that it exists" boilerplate.
The GP is half right. He/she did confuse the "notability" with "verifiability" but it doesn't matter when people interpret the rules however they like (mostly incorrectly) anyway. And things do still turn out pretty much how they said.
Besides, I'm going to invoke WP:COI here. Clearly you have too much interest in Wikipedia [citation needed] and so your opinion here cannot be allowed.
You should be aware that Windows is quite capable of blocking the use of removable storage (CDs, USB, SD Card, Floppy, anything) and most certainly can also be configured to block someone attaching a modem to the PC.
I work in a hospital in the ICT department. I'm well aware of exactly what we can do with the Windows PCs to prevent people misusing the data.
Ironically, around here we use something like HealthVault for people's medical records. They're held securely by central government and we use a secure VPN link (over dedicated lines, not the internet) to retrieve any info we need.
Riight. You know that C#, MSIL, VB and (hell, even C) are not Whitespace sensitive right? Hell, if they put it in Visual Studio, it'll even fix the whitespace.
You can already buy the hard drive separately. The Core, Premium, and Elite editions are all the same machine. The difference is the the drive bay is empty on a Core, has a 20GB drive in a Premium, and a 120GB drive in an Elite. Well, that and what controllers you get with it (Wired for Core, Wireless for the other two).
Typical Sony flametard. You see, you can output 1080p over VGA without an issue! That's like... a $15 cable! Alternatively, all Xbox 360 consoles released after July 2007 apparently have an HDMI port. Got that off Wikipedia, can anyone actually confirm?
So, you admitted that you ignored the Micro$oft luvvies, decided to join the $ony 'tards, and buy a ridiculously overpriced console. Good for you.
Noone said the Xbox 360 was cheap. But, fuck man! If you're going to "fight the evil" of a $400 (or whatever it is) console just to get HDTV output, you might want to rethink buying a $600 one to "stick it to the man".
I'd just like to point out that, unlike as even I previously thought, there are differences between the implementation of Live on Xbox 360 and Windows. I'll use Halo 2 as an example here.
Halo 2 on the Xbox 360 requires an Xbox Live Gold subscription for any and all online (internet) play. Period. On the PC, however, Halo 2 requires only a Silver membership (which is free). The Gold subscription is required if you want to use the Matchmaking/Ranking system, but the Silver will suffice if all you want is a games browser (like Gamespy or Steam). With the Silver, you also get Friends Lists, Voice Chat, Text Chat, and all that stuff.
I honestly don't know why it's not advertised anywhere other than as a footnote on the Halo 2 for PC multiplayer page (http://www.microsoft.com/games/halo2 - damn Flash based sites).
The address bar is already patented. I think it was even reported on Slashdot. Can't remember who owns it, but thankfully I don't think they've gone suing yet.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not a bug, he was just spell checking using the Gollum dictionary. The English ones don't include "perhapses".
My Precccccciooooouuuuuuusssss?
This is Slashdot. I'm personally surprised I wasn't modded Flamebait or Troll.
WHERE'S MY DOWNMOD BITCHES?
Oh, Overrated. There it is!
I got a headache trying to find it (the page says to go to LogoPoint to read the unabridged policies, LogoPoint has nothing that even remotely resembles a policy, and the submission process, FAQ, help pages, and any other document under the sun with the sole exception of that one frigging page you found does not mention any cost) but apparently some fee or other does exist. Oh well, it's not like a WHQL signature is compulsory.
Actually, there was more evidence against this lady in this case than ANY RIAA case ever brought so far (and by damn it, that's just sad).
How does it equate to wasting the judge's, jury, plaintiff's and so on, time? Simple, she KNEW she was in the wrong. She then decided to push it to a jury decision anyway, hoping to play on the negative sentiment against the recording industry to get off scot free. That's just bullshit (I suppose to reply in kind to you, I'd need to call you a fucking moron or something, but I wont. Not sinking to your pitiful level).
Liar? Hardly. People who take cases to court knowing that they're in the wrong (as opposed to a good faith belief that they really didn't actually do it) do need to pay. Court cases cost entirely too much. And if there were less court cases, less people would be forced into that utter bullshit system we call "Jury Service".
I have no idea what your last paragraph is meant to mean, but I'll happily carry on my way being in a country ranked First equal for non-corrupted government and know that we don't actually have tasers, cops aren't allowed to shoot people that pose no threat, and "resisting arrest" actually requires proof, unlike your country. The law is the law, whether you like it or not. If you don't like it, then stand for a government position yourself and get into a position where you can change it.
A quick check by signing into WinQual confirms... there is no fee whatsoever involved in WHQL certification of self-tested products.
Well, actually, it's more like $200,000 for illegally downloading and distributing copyrighted material, and wasting a court's time with lies and deception to try and get off it.
She would have paid far less if she hadn't wasted the court's time and insulted the intelligence of the Jury.
I support more excessive remedies for people who bring lawsuits or escalate civil action to court under fraudulent circumstances (yes, on both sides of the battlefield).
Still, free.
Go figure? Not... entirely... true. The government owns the copyrights and uses them as a defensive measure against anyone misusing them. For example, in the absense of anti-counterfeiting legislation, the government could whack counterfeiters with copyright violation. People aren't allowed to "do as they see fit" with government marks and copyrights, because the potential for misuse is too high. As a result, the government usually has the most liberal "terms of use" seen anywhere. As an example, I work at a government entity and the copyright on our website is "Material featured on this site is subject to copyright. All material may however be reproduced free of charge in any format or media without requiring specific permission. This is subject to the material being reproduced accurately and not being used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. Where the material is being published or issued to others, the source and copyright status must be acknowledged.".
Granted, I live in NZ, but that's surely not the point... right?
You keep saying this, but you are incorrect. They most certainly do NOT "loose" [sic] the right to the patents, they are merely prevented from claiming damages or other legal remedies from the other party. It doesn't stop them suing other people over it though.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, but obviously neither are you.
Your ideas are stupid, and I would like to unsubscribe from your newsletter.
Seriously though, the paying for certificates is the only thing that prevents any old idiot from getting one and diluting the one tiny remaining speck of trust in them. Next, you'll want Extended Verification Certificates free too (which cost for a reason).
Not in use? There are over 5,000 hits on Google for entities with .aq addresses: http://www.google.co.nz/search?q=site%3A.aq&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a
That doesn't look like "not in use" to me.
I'd just like to add that on Windows, you can actually play multiplayer even with the FREE membership to GfW Live. For example, with Halo 2 PC, the Silver features are: Achievements, Game Server Browser/Multiplayer, Voice Chat, Text Chat, Friends List (and the associated matchmaking with your friends). With the Gold subscription, that adds... well, Matchmaking. Specifically the system which goes to behemoth efforts to pit you against opponents that suck/rock as much as you do at the game. [reference: http://www.microsoft.com/games/halo2%5D
I don't see what's so evil about Live on Windows.
Wow. A $0.99 gift.
Guys get cheaper with gifts every year.
Hold on, you're saying that forcing a cellphone provider to sell their phones so that they can choose any provider they want restricts consumer choice?
Man, your Kool-Aid is particularly strong today.
SourceForge, Inc. $2.71/share.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=LNUX&t=5d
Try again.
Well, then it's obviously not meant to be treated like any other encyclopaedia, since encyclopaedias are meant to be used for research and cited in studies.
Also note, that Wikipedia often violates its own rules. For an obscure topic, it could take days, weeks, even months for someone with sufficient knowledge to tag an article as having complete crap content. And even then the content probably wont be removed, but a generic "This article contains complete bullshit. We're not saying what part is crap, just that it exists" boilerplate.
The GP is half right. He/she did confuse the "notability" with "verifiability" but it doesn't matter when people interpret the rules however they like (mostly incorrectly) anyway. And things do still turn out pretty much how they said.
Besides, I'm going to invoke WP:COI here. Clearly you have too much interest in Wikipedia [citation needed] and so your opinion here cannot be allowed.
You should be aware that Windows is quite capable of blocking the use of removable storage (CDs, USB, SD Card, Floppy, anything) and most certainly can also be configured to block someone attaching a modem to the PC.
I work in a hospital in the ICT department. I'm well aware of exactly what we can do with the Windows PCs to prevent people misusing the data.
Ironically, around here we use something like HealthVault for people's medical records. They're held securely by central government and we use a secure VPN link (over dedicated lines, not the internet) to retrieve any info we need.
How exactly do you achieve that? Underrated and Overrated aren't Meta Moderated. And THAT is why everyone uses them!
Riight. You know that C#, MSIL, VB and (hell, even C) are not Whitespace sensitive right? Hell, if they put it in Visual Studio, it'll even fix the whitespace.
You can already buy the hard drive separately. The Core, Premium, and Elite editions are all the same machine. The difference is the the drive bay is empty on a Core, has a 20GB drive in a Premium, and a 120GB drive in an Elite. Well, that and what controllers you get with it (Wired for Core, Wireless for the other two).
Typical Sony flametard. You see, you can output 1080p over VGA without an issue! That's like... a $15 cable! Alternatively, all Xbox 360 consoles released after July 2007 apparently have an HDMI port. Got that off Wikipedia, can anyone actually confirm?
So, you admitted that you ignored the Micro$oft luvvies, decided to join the $ony 'tards, and buy a ridiculously overpriced console. Good for you.
Noone said the Xbox 360 was cheap. But, fuck man! If you're going to "fight the evil" of a $400 (or whatever it is) console just to get HDTV output, you might want to rethink buying a $600 one to "stick it to the man".
Yeah. Real smart.
I'd just like to point out that, unlike as even I previously thought, there are differences between the implementation of Live on Xbox 360 and Windows. I'll use Halo 2 as an example here.
Halo 2 on the Xbox 360 requires an Xbox Live Gold subscription for any and all online (internet) play. Period. On the PC, however, Halo 2 requires only a Silver membership (which is free). The Gold subscription is required if you want to use the Matchmaking/Ranking system, but the Silver will suffice if all you want is a games browser (like Gamespy or Steam). With the Silver, you also get Friends Lists, Voice Chat, Text Chat, and all that stuff.
I honestly don't know why it's not advertised anywhere other than as a footnote on the Halo 2 for PC multiplayer page (http://www.microsoft.com/games/halo2 - damn Flash based sites).
The address bar is already patented. I think it was even reported on Slashdot. Can't remember who owns it, but thankfully I don't think they've gone suing yet.