Sadly yes. Perhaps one of the worst, most far reaching and just plain legally wacky judgments the US Supreme court ever handed down.
What I wonder is why corporations, being as they are legal individuals who benefit from the protections of the constitution and federal law, are exempt from the prospect of being drafted. Perhaps Blackwater, et al, might show a bit more sense, if they realized they might not get paid an exhorbitant amount for the services they provide the US, if they could be drafted during a national emergency to provide those service for the good of the nation at a much more reasonable rate.
If it were an open criminal proceeding not subject to a quash/sealing order, the information might be avialable to anyone who reviewed the case files. Get the IP, have it presented as evidence, include it in a motion to the court and it's there for anyone who looks to see.
At least, that's my guess on why they convinced the prosecutors to go forward with a criminal trial.
"I guess where you're from, a conspiracy is not a civil & criminal offense?"
Conspiracy is, in almost every jurisdiction, a seperate prosecutable offense related to a violation of the law. It's understood to be illegal to conspire to violate the law, due to the fact that one or more of the conspirators do not actually violate the law.
In this case, they weren't the ones obtaining the IP addresses under (presumably) false pretenses, nor providing them illegally. They convinced the prosecutors, who have an obligation to the public, to do such a thing. Ire placed solely upon the "anti-piracy" group is misplaced; the bulk of it should go to the prosecutors who were the ones *directly* violating the law and abusing the public trust.
Did the conspiracy violate a law? yes. Did the conspiracy violate the *privacy* law specifically? no. Semantic difference, but the law is all about trifling details and semantics.
The "anti-piracy" group didn't violate the privacy laws, they conspired with the prosecutors, who are the ones who may have violated the privacy laws (if a criminal case was not warranted).
Either way, it's still a gross violation of the spirit of the law, and certainly reprehensible.
"Biographies of living persons (BLPs) must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy." from the policy. Basically, since there's no actual confirmation of the events from either side, only speculation and (honestly) rumor being discussed, they won't put it on there. Rightfully so, in my opinion. If Wikipedia wants to be taken seriously, it should act seriously. No place for tabloid style "reporting" in something that is purporting to be a neutral, factual repository of human knowledge. Controversies regarding other people (like Stephen Glass) are mentioned because there is factual information available.
Not that they succeed, based upon information I've seen in other articles, but this is a sensible approach.
It's not on wikipedia due to concerns with a living person being involved.
And who'd have thought that/. was the appropriate place to discuss a topic relevant only to a subsection of the geek crowd.
Indeed, the summary paints a glowing portrait of an article which does not exist. Nothing is explored, and there's certainly nothing even remotely relating the pseudo-scientific terms of "probility curve" within the article itself.
It all breaks down to a statement of the events which occurred, without any actual insights into the particular motivations (there's some pure speculation, but no actual information).
Cultures of success breaking down when encountering failure is nothing new, and doesn't need vague exploration. Actual exploration of the problem, with statistical models to help understand and, possibly, predict the curve would be helpful. Too bad this article offers none of that.
6. You should stop playing American "football". There is only one kind of football. What you refer to as American "football" is not a very good game.
The 2.15% of you who are aware that there is a world outside your borders may have noticed that no one else plays "American" football. You will no longer be allowed to play it, and should instead play proper football.
I, for one, will take up arms against a sea of troubles upon this one point only. You can have my football only after you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
Besides, if we're going to go after silly sports that no one else plays, there are a bunch of others that top this one. Curling, for example.
Something gives me the feeling that it might have nothing to do with buffy, and that it might have a deeper and older meaning. It's just a hunch, though...
"The IRS submitted only after it was blanketed with thousands of petty Co$ lawsuits and it did not have the resources to defend all those lawsuits."
Sorry to pick at a nit, but it wasn't the lack of resources that brought it about. It was more the hassle and feeling that the time was wasted. The IRS has nearly infinite resources from which to draw, else they wouldn't be a threat to actual tax-evaders, now would they?
Hey, any game where bronze-age spearmen can beat a tank is hard in my book!
Seriously though, the amount of skill and thought required for those games puts it on a completely seperate level from any other strategy game. Let's face it, managing every aspect of a world-spanning empire isn't the easiest thing in the world.
So why is there talk about trading liberty for security?
There should be no such talk, it's a losing proposition from the start.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." -Benjamin Franklin
All you need to do is look at his corpus of work and realize he doesn't even have a full understanding of "high art" in film either. The guy has opined over the quality and worth of Russ Meyer moves, ffs (faster pussycat, kill kill! amongst others).
Slashdot Mirror
Of course they are, Apple is based almost entirely upon image anyway.
Sadly yes. Perhaps one of the worst, most far reaching and just plain legally wacky judgments the US Supreme court ever handed down.
What I wonder is why corporations, being as they are legal individuals who benefit from the protections of the constitution and federal law, are exempt from the prospect of being drafted. Perhaps Blackwater, et al, might show a bit more sense, if they realized they might not get paid an exhorbitant amount for the services they provide the US, if they could be drafted during a national emergency to provide those service for the good of the nation at a much more reasonable rate.
Where's the -1 self-promoting doggerel mod option?
Happens to all of us. I just couldn't skip out on the obvious chance for humor.
sudo universities/OSU/profit
Be a shame if sumfin' were to happen to it, like.
If it were an open criminal proceeding not subject to a quash/sealing order, the information might be avialable to anyone who reviewed the case files. Get the IP, have it presented as evidence, include it in a motion to the court and it's there for anyone who looks to see.
At least, that's my guess on why they convinced the prosecutors to go forward with a criminal trial.
Correction: the conspiracy most likely violated the law. I don't know the specifics of Swiss law, nor am I a lawyer, nor do I play one on tv.
"I guess where you're from, a conspiracy is not a civil & criminal offense?" Conspiracy is, in almost every jurisdiction, a seperate prosecutable offense related to a violation of the law. It's understood to be illegal to conspire to violate the law, due to the fact that one or more of the conspirators do not actually violate the law.
In this case, they weren't the ones obtaining the IP addresses under (presumably) false pretenses, nor providing them illegally. They convinced the prosecutors, who have an obligation to the public, to do such a thing. Ire placed solely upon the "anti-piracy" group is misplaced; the bulk of it should go to the prosecutors who were the ones *directly* violating the law and abusing the public trust.
Did the conspiracy violate a law? yes. Did the conspiracy violate the *privacy* law specifically? no. Semantic difference, but the law is all about trifling details and semantics.
The "anti-piracy" group didn't violate the privacy laws, they conspired with the prosecutors, who are the ones who may have violated the privacy laws (if a criminal case was not warranted).
Either way, it's still a gross violation of the spirit of the law, and certainly reprehensible.
Read the talk page for the article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons
"Biographies of living persons (BLPs) must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy." from the policy. Basically, since there's no actual confirmation of the events from either side, only speculation and (honestly) rumor being discussed, they won't put it on there. Rightfully so, in my opinion. If Wikipedia wants to be taken seriously, it should act seriously. No place for tabloid style "reporting" in something that is purporting to be a neutral, factual repository of human knowledge. Controversies regarding other people (like Stephen Glass) are mentioned because there is factual information available.
Not that they succeed, based upon information I've seen in other articles, but this is a sensible approach.
It's not on wikipedia due to concerns with a living person being involved. And who'd have thought that /. was the appropriate place to discuss a topic relevant only to a subsection of the geek crowd.
Just get it a bigger antenna, it'll feel much better compared to wired networks in no time.
It's a trap!
Indeed, the summary paints a glowing portrait of an article which does not exist. Nothing is explored, and there's certainly nothing even remotely relating the pseudo-scientific terms of "probility curve" within the article itself.
It all breaks down to a statement of the events which occurred, without any actual insights into the particular motivations (there's some pure speculation, but no actual information).
Cultures of success breaking down when encountering failure is nothing new, and doesn't need vague exploration. Actual exploration of the problem, with statistical models to help understand and, possibly, predict the curve would be helpful. Too bad this article offers none of that.
Fuck me. Say what you will about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos.
I, for one, will take up arms against a sea of troubles upon this one point only. You can have my football only after you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
Besides, if we're going to go after silly sports that no one else plays, there are a bunch of others that top this one. Curling, for example.
Something gives me the feeling that it might have nothing to do with buffy, and that it might have a deeper and older meaning. It's just a hunch, though...
"Take away, take away
Take away this ball and chain
Well I'm lonely and I'm tired
And I can't take any more pain"
-Social Distorion
Now just hoping no one decides that violates their copyrights...
will have to start doing the neeful?
"The IRS submitted only after it was blanketed with thousands of petty Co$ lawsuits and it did not have the resources to defend all those lawsuits."
Sorry to pick at a nit, but it wasn't the lack of resources that brought it about. It was more the hassle and feeling that the time was wasted. The IRS has nearly infinite resources from which to draw, else they wouldn't be a threat to actual tax-evaders, now would they?
Hey, any game where bronze-age spearmen can beat a tank is hard in my book!
Seriously though, the amount of skill and thought required for those games puts it on a completely seperate level from any other strategy game. Let's face it, managing every aspect of a world-spanning empire isn't the easiest thing in the world.
There should be no such talk, it's a losing proposition from the start.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." -Benjamin Franklin
All you need to do is look at his corpus of work and realize he doesn't even have a full understanding of "high art" in film either. The guy has opined over the quality and worth of Russ Meyer moves, ffs (faster pussycat, kill kill! amongst others).
"Is there some reason that you advocate we commit ANOTHER crime other than the fact that we had committed one before?"
Why not, that's exactly the sort of pseudo-logic used by the administration in question.