But that doesn't mean it can't speak from authority when it says that a culture dependent on cheap gas and personal transportation is a really *bad* idea.
Actually, it does mean American can't speak with authority. Firstly because it seems to have done just fine doing exactly that, and secondly because it hasn't put any real effort into practicing what you want to preach.
To use your own drug metaphor: How seriously should a child take a parents instructions not to do drugs if that parent is still hitting up a couple of times a day while working as a CEO in the worlds largest company?
Your points not that informative, and simply referring to mail admins who are trying to minimise spam mail to there users as assholes a dozen times won't change that.
Firstly, who says these people were talking about a corporate environment anyway? Secondly, when they blacklist emails there are other options than simply destroying all mail that reaches your domain. I have seen a number of setups which simply respond to 'spam' email with an email explaining the reason for the rejection and a phone number to contact to get your domain cleared.
A quick look at the California law shows plenty of ambiguity.
With all due respect FatdogHaiku there is no ambiguity at all. Every one of those requires the act to be without permission. There is no way in hell they could argue that following a link publicly distributed as an advertisement could be seen as acting without permission.
Screensaver operation was impaired by changing the picture.
You may be right, I am not a lawyer and so can't offer anything more than my own limited opinion. I do however have my doubts that the CPS would take impairing a screensaver as reason enough to attempt prosecution, and that any Jury would convict the BBC over the changing of a screensaver image. I would however love to hear the opinion of someone with some real experience of cases involving these laws.
They disabled the botnet and told the computer owners afterward
They also bought the botnet (or so it seems). I would like to keep Heroin off the streets, it doesn't mean I want the BBC to start buying it off dealers and throwing it away.
Accessing and modifying data on other peoples computers is illegal.
It's not that simple, accessing someones computer itself is a crime under the Computer Misuse Act. Modifying data is another crime but I think the BBC can safely argue that they didn't have 'requisite intent':
For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above the requisite intent is an intent to cause a modification of the contents of any computer and by so doing--
(a) to impair the operation of any computer;
(b) to prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer; or
(c) to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data.
I wrote about this story on my site and submitted it to The Reg at 10:20 this morning when I read the story on their website. Now its been aired on TV it seems to be getting a lot of coverage. I added an update a few minutes ago covering the two areas of the Computer Misuse Act that are likely to be quoted quite a bit in the debate about the legality.
I find it amazing that something this dubious was allowed to get all the way to airing without someone at the BBC having a hissy fit. Perhaps they have received legal advice that said it was legit?
As an aside, if I had wanted to submit my page to Slashdot is there a way I could of done it that (assuming it got published) wouldn't result in my host wishing a painful death upon me? I didn't change it partly because it's a short write up and partly for that reason.
Exterminate the dependent elderly until they only represent a small portion of the population.
I fear the way we are pushing burden onto the future generations, eventually when we are in our 70s, they might do just that.
And the idea that they might do something similar isn't even that far fetched. In the UK we have very good pension arrangements government employees, and a lot of government employees. Money hasn't been accrued to cover these costs, which means that either more money will be taken in tax once they need to start paying it, or the pensions will not be honoured.
I will be very surprised if the value of public pensions isn't revised down (retrospectively) in the coming 20 years due. Either way I am not at all adverse to the idea of leaving the UK and going to work (and pay tax) in a country that doesn't require me to fund those who did not fund themselves (as a generation).
It can't be a British difference, because then somebody would've told us by now and defended it.
If my told you meant verbally abused you for daring to deviate from God's own language, then yes you're right. Sadly, in this case, were just as bad as everyone else so we'll hold our tongues *mumble*bloody americans*mumble*.
You are exactly right that tight 'game balance' tends to lead to blander options.
I have seen this in miniature wargaming as well as in computer gaming. But what is really interesting is that even when races aren't perfectly balanced they can still balance well in a competitive environment. In StarCraft the Terrans were seen as being the weakest race, Lim Yo-Hwan then built a reputation as arguably the best SC player while playing as Terrans.
This is what players refer to when they talk of meta-gaming, which is players gaming the game. If I know that Snipers are the best weapon in Halo 3 and that players will go for them and practice with them more than other weapons then it makes sense for me to learn anti-sniper tactics. Very quickly Sniping will become balanced (or even disadvantaged) because you are playing a strat that everyone has trained to beat.
I think your confusing the use of a rhetorical remark to show the absurdity of a insubstantiated hypothesis with the preposition of a theory, or you thought you saw an opportunity to showboat on teh internetz. Either way your not looking too smart right now.
You think depriving people of access to the Internet == which is quickly becoming an essential resource to many -- is more fair than suing people left and right?
Yes, because taking someone through the legal process and bankrupting them (which is what happens when they are successfully sued atm) is likely to be far more damaging for them than losing home internet access for some period of time.
Now I do have a big issue with the fact that the three strike system implemented work massively in the content providers favour, and I think copyright lasts far too long. However I think that the majority of filesharing exists to avoid paying for content and that the myriad of excuses given are rarely the truth. Fight to fix the copyright system if you have an issue with it, but don't expect to get away with breaking the law.
The more countries have nukes, the more likely it is that they get used
Perhaps you would care to remind me, how many countries had Nuclear weapons back on the 6th and 9th of August 1945?
I happen to think that a nuclear deterrent is an important asset to a country, partly because I feel the risk to any one country of using them becomes higher when more people have the capability to respond in kind.
He started by accusing a guy he has never met of being a dick for wanting to control access to a resource he provides, I seriously doubt whether he read the article or not would have any affect on his inability to interact via the internet.
Wow, a color matching game. How incredibly groundbreaking. And it's only selling for five times the minimum application price. Sorry, but the value isn't there for a game of this simplicity. I've got two games under development, both immensely more complex than this, that I will sell for at most half the price.
Although I wish you good luck with your two games, I don't think so directly correlating complexity and success is wise. Plenty of junk applications sell very well, and I'd argue that was more about pricing and image than complexity and quality.
I think the authors blog entry is a useful reminder that the app store isn't a way to print money, and that spending large amounts of cash on developing for it should be considered very carefully.
It's not the videogames that make a people sedentary. It's the other way around: sedentary people like to play videogames.
And you accuse the advert of making a bold statement...
I know numerous members of the military, manual workers and exercise nuts who are massive gaming fans. I would be surprised if anyone who found evidence that predisposition towards physical activity affects peoples enjoyment of gaming. I expect it is more likely is that there might be some link between 'lazyness' and excessive gaming, which is perhaps more what you were trying to imply?
Steam seems to do a lot of things well, but peoples willingness to not only ignore for argue the absense of its flaws always dissapoints me. Often physical copies can be bought from online stores for less than the game is available for download, their is a thriving market for 2nd hand physical copies that helps control pricing and you are in no way reliant on the future behaviour of a company to enjoy your product. Nothing is inherently wrong with downloadable game retail, the problem is that companies are using the change to remove a lot of things that are beneficial to buyers which they wouldn't tolerate in a physical copy.
Do the employees have to authorise the business to make these checks? Someone else responded saying that was pretty common in the US which sounds quite bad to me. I would have a big issue with allowing an employer to see my credit history (which is fine) but I've never heard of someone doing that in the UK.
It's ok stewbaca, my ego be it inflated or not will survive his cutting retort. Thank you for clarifying the benefits of quoting though, some people make a habit of responding to other responses with replies nested at the same level for reasons that elude me.
I wish I could say that Slashdot users weren't getting as bad as you make out, but the first thing that came to mind was that getting only a couple of bad posts per 10 good ones would be a fantastic improvement.
I was going to argue the counter case to the parent, but having done some more research it does seem like electricity deregulation in the USA has actually made things worse: http://assembly.state.ny.us/member_files/044/20070913/ (note: I don't know enough to say it's fact).
I would however like to say that regulation or de-regulation can be beneficial in different circumstances. In the case of Electricity in the US states perhaps a model based on maintaining a state owned supplier, but allowing new private competitors into the market could be beneficial? Perhaps artificial competition formed by splitting the public electricity firm into two providers would work.
What you mean like taking out a loan to pay for your US college education ?
I am not sure if this was a response to my post, but on the assumption it is I'll try and answer. Is the fact that you have a student loan something that employers can find from publicly available information online? In the UK you'd have to authorise a credit check for someone to find out about that.
On the assumption that companies would want to check this in order to cut out poorer candidates, surely if they have that intention they can already make assumptions based on accent, place of birth, family home and a myriad of other metrics? Or they market the job with an extremely low wage for the first couple of years to cut those who can't afford it? If that is an issue then surely it would make more sense to make discrimination on the grounds of wealth illegal.
The problem is that you might do some really stupid stuff when 18 in College and end up paying for it at 35.
Absolutely, but if you put a blanket ban on companies looking into what you do they also couldn't find out any of the really stupid stuff you did last week. I'm just old enough to have dodged this issue, social networking became flavour of the month at the end of my time at university, and I fortunately had the common sense at the time to ensure I am careful about the distribution and presentation of information relating to me. I feel very sorry for people 2-10 years younger than me that are growing up in a world with so much data sharing and no way to remove things. Their is a real issue here, but the solution is to try and think about how we as society judge people unreasonably, not simply ban recruiters from doing web searches.
Also, if I am hiring a chief beancounter and there are pictures of them doing something 'really stupid' online, do you think the papers won't use those pictures if our company became news worthy? The media already loves to hunt out stupid/poor/big mouthed relatives of anyone remotely famous in order to dig dirt and create controversy.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, it does mean American can't speak with authority. Firstly because it seems to have done just fine doing exactly that, and secondly because it hasn't put any real effort into practicing what you want to preach.
To use your own drug metaphor: How seriously should a child take a parents instructions not to do drugs if that parent is still hitting up a couple of times a day while working as a CEO in the worlds largest company?
Your points not that informative, and simply referring to mail admins who are trying to minimise spam mail to there users as assholes a dozen times won't change that.
Firstly, who says these people were talking about a corporate environment anyway? Secondly, when they blacklist emails there are other options than simply destroying all mail that reaches your domain. I have seen a number of setups which simply respond to 'spam' email with an email explaining the reason for the rejection and a phone number to contact to get your domain cleared.
With all due respect FatdogHaiku there is no ambiguity at all. Every one of those requires the act to be without permission. There is no way in hell they could argue that following a link publicly distributed as an advertisement could be seen as acting without permission.
You may be right, I am not a lawyer and so can't offer anything more than my own limited opinion. I do however have my doubts that the CPS would take impairing a screensaver as reason enough to attempt prosecution, and that any Jury would convict the BBC over the changing of a screensaver image. I would however love to hear the opinion of someone with some real experience of cases involving these laws.
If they weren't you have to think they're probably next! If they aren't lined up against the rule and shot first.
They also bought the botnet (or so it seems). I would like to keep Heroin off the streets, it doesn't mean I want the BBC to start buying it off dealers and throwing it away.
My view and some analysis of the Computer Misuse Act
It's not that simple, accessing someones computer itself is a crime under the Computer Misuse Act. Modifying data is another crime but I think the BBC can safely argue that they didn't have 'requisite intent':
I have written a longer analysis of the Computer Misuse Act and how it relates to the BBC Click Botnet if you are interested. Please note IANAL and I don't mean in the kinkeh sex sense either.
I wrote about this story on my site and submitted it to The Reg at 10:20 this morning when I read the story on their website. Now its been aired on TV it seems to be getting a lot of coverage. I added an update a few minutes ago covering the two areas of the Computer Misuse Act that are likely to be quoted quite a bit in the debate about the legality.
I find it amazing that something this dubious was allowed to get all the way to airing without someone at the BBC having a hissy fit. Perhaps they have received legal advice that said it was legit?
As an aside, if I had wanted to submit my page to Slashdot is there a way I could of done it that (assuming it got published) wouldn't result in my host wishing a painful death upon me? I didn't change it partly because it's a short write up and partly for that reason.
And the idea that they might do something similar isn't even that far fetched. In the UK we have very good pension arrangements government employees, and a lot of government employees. Money hasn't been accrued to cover these costs, which means that either more money will be taken in tax once they need to start paying it, or the pensions will not be honoured.
I will be very surprised if the value of public pensions isn't revised down (retrospectively) in the coming 20 years due. Either way I am not at all adverse to the idea of leaving the UK and going to work (and pay tax) in a country that doesn't require me to fund those who did not fund themselves (as a generation).
If my told you meant verbally abused you for daring to deviate from God's own language, then yes you're right. Sadly, in this case, were just as bad as everyone else so we'll hold our tongues *mumble*bloody americans*mumble*.
You are exactly right that tight 'game balance' tends to lead to blander options.
I have seen this in miniature wargaming as well as in computer gaming. But what is really interesting is that even when races aren't perfectly balanced they can still balance well in a competitive environment. In StarCraft the Terrans were seen as being the weakest race, Lim Yo-Hwan then built a reputation as arguably the best SC player while playing as Terrans.
This is what players refer to when they talk of meta-gaming, which is players gaming the game. If I know that Snipers are the best weapon in Halo 3 and that players will go for them and practice with them more than other weapons then it makes sense for me to learn anti-sniper tactics. Very quickly Sniping will become balanced (or even disadvantaged) because you are playing a strat that everyone has trained to beat.
I think your confusing the use of a rhetorical remark to show the absurdity of a insubstantiated hypothesis with the preposition of a theory, or you thought you saw an opportunity to showboat on teh internetz. Either way your not looking too smart right now.
Yes, because taking someone through the legal process and bankrupting them (which is what happens when they are successfully sued atm) is likely to be far more damaging for them than losing home internet access for some period of time.
Now I do have a big issue with the fact that the three strike system implemented work massively in the content providers favour, and I think copyright lasts far too long. However I think that the majority of filesharing exists to avoid paying for content and that the myriad of excuses given are rarely the truth. Fight to fix the copyright system if you have an issue with it, but don't expect to get away with breaking the law.
Perhaps you would care to remind me, how many countries had Nuclear weapons back on the 6th and 9th of August 1945?
I happen to think that a nuclear deterrent is an important asset to a country, partly because I feel the risk to any one country of using them becomes higher when more people have the capability to respond in kind.
He started by accusing a guy he has never met of being a dick for wanting to control access to a resource he provides, I seriously doubt whether he read the article or not would have any affect on his inability to interact via the internet.
Although I wish you good luck with your two games, I don't think so directly correlating complexity and success is wise. Plenty of junk applications sell very well, and I'd argue that was more about pricing and image than complexity and quality.
I think the authors blog entry is a useful reminder that the app store isn't a way to print money, and that spending large amounts of cash on developing for it should be considered very carefully.
And you accuse the advert of making a bold statement...
I know numerous members of the military, manual workers and exercise nuts who are massive gaming fans. I would be surprised if anyone who found evidence that predisposition towards physical activity affects peoples enjoyment of gaming. I expect it is more likely is that there might be some link between 'lazyness' and excessive gaming, which is perhaps more what you were trying to imply?
No, but I'm not worried about someone seeing them when they Google search for me.
No need, I think you're doing just fine down there on your own.
Steam is not DRMless, so no I don't think it is.
Steam seems to do a lot of things well, but peoples willingness to not only ignore for argue the absense of its flaws always dissapoints me. Often physical copies can be bought from online stores for less than the game is available for download, their is a thriving market for 2nd hand physical copies that helps control pricing and you are in no way reliant on the future behaviour of a company to enjoy your product. Nothing is inherently wrong with downloadable game retail, the problem is that companies are using the change to remove a lot of things that are beneficial to buyers which they wouldn't tolerate in a physical copy.
Do the employees have to authorise the business to make these checks? Someone else responded saying that was pretty common in the US which sounds quite bad to me. I would have a big issue with allowing an employer to see my credit history (which is fine) but I've never heard of someone doing that in the UK.
It's ok stewbaca, my ego be it inflated or not will survive his cutting retort. Thank you for clarifying the benefits of quoting though, some people make a habit of responding to other responses with replies nested at the same level for reasons that elude me.
I wish I could say that Slashdot users weren't getting as bad as you make out, but the first thing that came to mind was that getting only a couple of bad posts per 10 good ones would be a fantastic improvement.
I was going to argue the counter case to the parent, but having done some more research it does seem like electricity deregulation in the USA has actually made things worse: http://assembly.state.ny.us/member_files/044/20070913/ (note: I don't know enough to say it's fact).
I would however like to say that regulation or de-regulation can be beneficial in different circumstances. In the case of Electricity in the US states perhaps a model based on maintaining a state owned supplier, but allowing new private competitors into the market could be beneficial? Perhaps artificial competition formed by splitting the public electricity firm into two providers would work.
I am not sure if this was a response to my post, but on the assumption it is I'll try and answer. Is the fact that you have a student loan something that employers can find from publicly available information online? In the UK you'd have to authorise a credit check for someone to find out about that.
On the assumption that companies would want to check this in order to cut out poorer candidates, surely if they have that intention they can already make assumptions based on accent, place of birth, family home and a myriad of other metrics? Or they market the job with an extremely low wage for the first couple of years to cut those who can't afford it? If that is an issue then surely it would make more sense to make discrimination on the grounds of wealth illegal.
Absolutely, but if you put a blanket ban on companies looking into what you do they also couldn't find out any of the really stupid stuff you did last week. I'm just old enough to have dodged this issue, social networking became flavour of the month at the end of my time at university, and I fortunately had the common sense at the time to ensure I am careful about the distribution and presentation of information relating to me. I feel very sorry for people 2-10 years younger than me that are growing up in a world with so much data sharing and no way to remove things. Their is a real issue here, but the solution is to try and think about how we as society judge people unreasonably, not simply ban recruiters from doing web searches.
Also, if I am hiring a chief beancounter and there are pictures of them doing something 'really stupid' online, do you think the papers won't use those pictures if our company became news worthy? The media already loves to hunt out stupid/poor/big mouthed relatives of anyone remotely famous in order to dig dirt and create controversy.