worse than that, it now doesn't work on my PDA (HP iPAQ running the last version of CE before it was rebranded Windows Mobile). And by not work I mean IE crashes completely.
Agreed. It's "stupid" unless the litigant has a reason to believe the homeless person could come into some money in the future to pay any judgement that might be awarded.
I've always wondered... does it work that way? If I sue someone for some amount (say... $1m) and I win, but they don't actually have any money, what happens? Does the debt get written off or if they win the lottery at some point in the future do I get my $1m then?
He may not have been homeless and/or may have had internet access when he allegedly committed the "crime" the RIAA claims.
Just because they're down and out does not excuse them from being prosecuted for any crimes they committed.
I think you make have your civil and criminal courts confused. I'm not sure exactly how the legal system works where all this is taking place, but in Australia the civil and criminal courts are fairly separate animals. I don't think any of the RIAA action is anything to do with a crime, or even a "crime" (unless you count the actions of the RIAA itself:). In Australia at least, the RIAA would never be the one serving legal documents for a criminal case.
Taking a homeless person to court to try and get some money out of them may not be wrong, but it's probably pretty stupid.
If there was a way for me to legally watch my favourite TV shows within a reasonable time of the episodes first airing I wouldn't have a use for BitTorrent at all.
I'm guessing here that you are probably my age (32) or younger. I'm at the older end of the generation that, for some reason, seems to want everything right now. A new series comes out and we have to have it right now, not when our local TV broadcaster gets around to showing it. Even though there is plenty of stuff to do in the meantime, and the show will be just as good in 6 months time as it is now, we still have to have it now.
Never, of course, is a different matter altogether... that's what DVD's are for:)
A friend later told me that the meat was actually fully usable, and that it's destruction may have been unnecessary. She suggested we should have fed it to the elderly population, which did not have time to develop cancer from the meat anyhow.
I don't think you have a very thorough understanding of how the food chain works. Soylent Green will in turn be eaten by the younger population. We need to be taking care of what we feed our elderly!
'Cause if 100Ks/millions of people contract a really serious flu strain, I doubt they'll be doing much of anything beyond, you know, screaming, moaning, and dying.
I think the point is that everyone will be stuck at home because they are afraid they _might_ catch something.
Anyway, what will kill the internet is everyone blogging about the tiniest sniffle they get if there is ever a flu scare, and then recording video's of themselves coughing and submitting it to video sites and asking "does this sound like the flu?". And of course all the 'internet doctor' sites will break under the load. And finally, nobody will want to go out of their house to fix things when they break.
You mean the Titanic was real? I thought it was just a fairy tale parents told their kids to make sure they would do quality work when they grew up. Next you'll be telling me Apollo 13 was a real spaceship!
Just kidding... but I wonder how long it will be until this is a common reaction?
If these farmers don't like the new genetically modified seeds, they can keep planting the old garden variety ones
I may be misquoting a report here because I don't have it handy, but wasn't the problem that if your neighbor planted a gm crop and your crop became 'contaminated' (and therefore your next generations seeds), you could be sued for infringing on Monsanto's IP?
The proper way to implement this sort of business strategy would be to offer some sort of payment plan for that initial $20k so it works out the same over x number of years, not try and use stupid legal tactics to make a broken business model work (sound familiar?)
And remember, when you are supporting the software that runs the former, don't accidentally say the latter instead. And don't agree with your customers when they intentionally say the latter instead of the former!
We've already discussed that there is a treatment for autism.
That is a treatment for some causes of autism. Autism has been known to have been caused by all manner of things (periods of oxygen deprivation during birth, brain damage from other causes) as well as many cases where no cause is obvious, either because the cause hasn't been identified or because that's just how that persons brain happens to be wired.
It's not like measles where there is a single causative agent.
For autism, simple dietary changes like cutting out certain food additives have worked wonders for some people (where a reaction to a food additive was the cause), and done nothing for others. Omega3 supplements have helped some people and not others.
Just remember... when all you have is a hammer, sometimes everything looks like a skull^H^H^H^H^Hnail.
You might know the answer to this then... I go to the supermarket and buy a bag containing 15 bags of chips. They little bags say 'not for individual sale'. Is that enforceable? I'm in Australia so whatever you say may not apply but i'd be interest in the answer anyway.
I mostly just assumed that there would be a problem because the little bags wouldn't have the statutory ingredients, nutrition, and expiry info on them, but school fete's etc do it all the time.
There's something for people to think about. Yes, the carbon was buried for millions of years. Yes, by burning the fossils we can put the carbon back into the atmosphere. But the carbon must have already been in the atmosphere before, or it couldn't have ended up in the oil or coal.
But the carbon being buried over the millions of years more or less offset the natural sources of CO2 like volcanos. Wikipedia says that volcano's put out around around 1/130th of the amount of CO2 that man made sources do, but we've only been pumping out a significant amount of carbon for a few hundred years, while volcano's have been doing it more or less constantly for millions of years.
That's a lot of excess carbon that's been safely stored away, and now we want to get it all out again?
Depends what you mean by 'use'. If you mean 'burn' then yes, there are plenty of reasons, and almost all of them have to do with taking carbon out of the ground and putting it into the air, while we are spending billions of dollars trying to figure out how to put the carbon back into the ground again.
If you mean 'turn into other products like plastic and vaseline' then go for it:)
Why would a mosque need internet access? Isn't it suppose to be a place of worship, not an internet cafe?
People should be free to worship their deity of choice in their own way. If they want to do so sitting in front of a computer screen looking at pictures of naked women then who are you to judge them?
this should be reflected by at the very least 20% increase in Vista userbase, because 1/5 of the people should have replaced their machines (assuming a 5 year cycle).
The Y2K 'bug' aligned quite a few purchase cycles. A lot of companies brought their purchase cycles forward to 1998/99 to make sure that there weren't any lingering issues with Y2K (the hardware itself should have been fine - any name brand bought between 1995 and 2000 should have had no issues with Y2K or should have had an upgrade available, but if your accounting system needed an upgrade it may well have increased hardware requirements, and others just wanted to take advantage of the tax concessions available). In Australia we also introduced some pretty major tax changes at about the same time, which often involved upgrades to existing accounting software too, with a corresponding increase in hardware requirements.
I wonder how much the 5 year cycles have diverged since then, making your 20% estimate incorrect. Maybe the Y2K thing was too small in the grander scheme of things to make a difference...
Limits that are too low cause problems because some people will always try to follow the law; a car going 65, which is the speed limit for many highways, on a section of road where the majority of traffic is going 75, the SLOWER car is six times more likely to be in an accident. That's why the limit (if you MUST have a limit) should be set by figuring out what the 85th percentile is doing. You mostly eliminate speed differences, and roads are safer overall.
So... if the policing of speed limits is thorough enough (eg not just when a police office happens to be looking your way, but every time), everyone will do 65 and the problem of speed differences between drivers will be solved too. The difference in pollution output between 75 and 65 is quite a bit, so everyone wins, except for people who are in a hurry, and they are the biggest problem on the roads anyway in terms of risk taking (overtaking when there isn't a guaranteed safe passage etc)
For all its badness, Vista does bring a few nice features. Just enough that the Vista zealot(s?) can point to them and say "isn't Vista great!". It also contains plenty of bloat that the XP zealots can point to and say how slow it is. So there is great entertainment to be had for the rest of us while they fight it out:)
Just in case anyone thinks i'm making stuff up, Vista includes: . user switching while joined to a domain (XP could do this when not joined to the domain, and there were addons to do it when joined to a domain, but they didn't work) . HAL changes making mass deployment easier . Group Policy updates . Security update (I know most people hate these, but in a corporate environment where users SHOULD NEVER install stuff, it makes things easier) . More strict driver signing requirements, which means when you have a BSoD you can blame Microsoft even if they didn't write the driver, because their qualification isn't up to scratch:)
I, for one, think that truth is not only stranger than fiction, but quickly becoming creepier as well.
Seems like cheating doesn't it? I don't see how it could ever be ruled illegal, unless you are monitoring viewers brainwaves when they haven't consented to it.
The only way around it is to educate the public on how to tell when they are being manipulated by this sort of marketing technique, eg the phrases and other tricks that are used to trick your brain into believing or wanting something which you otherwise wouldn't want. That sort of education would be beneficial on many many levels in terms of helping the general public 'wise up'...
Perhaps the down under has saner laws, but here in the US driver violations are seen as revenue, not safety issues
Probably we are arguing here based on living in different countries. Down here during the holiday seasons (Christmas, Easter), the various states will tend to double the demerit points (you have 12 on your license and lose them for various offences - lose them all and you lose your license. You get the points back after 3 years or something) rather than increased fines. They tried increasing fines but there was the big 'revenue raising' outcry, which was probably a fair call. I think the only people who claim it is revenue raising here are the people who continuously get caught and are just whining.
I'm not sure if it's true now, but a while back Australia was reported as having one of the oldest car fleets in the western world, which may well be a contributing factor to the decision as to what speed limits to set. If you can be reasonably sure that all cars on the road are in good condition then a faster speed may well be acceptable.
Maybe you also have lower wildlife hazards over where you are? We have lots of kangaroo's over here, and they are insanely stupid animals when it comes to highway traffic. The sheep and deer I have seen on the roads over here tend to just run the other way, but Kangaroos are not nearly as easy to predict, often running in front of or crashing into the side of vehicles as they pass, even at very low (20kph) speeds. If you've ever seen the difference in damage between a car hitting a large kangaroo at 160kph (~100mph) and 100kph (~60mph) you'll appreciate the difference a lower speed can make:)
Because if they actually ticketed everyone that broke the speed limit law, government would finally be forced to raise speed limits... especially since Australia is likely in the same spot as the US; illegally setting limits lower than dictated by civil engineers for the purpose of raising revenue and pushing more draconion measures on drivers.
Nope. It's all good in Australia, or at least in Victoria where I live. I do a fair bit of driving and have never been particularly concerned with speed limits being low. In fact more to the contrary... there are a few spots in my regular travels which I think could be a bit slower. Maybe a few of the freeways could have the speed bumped up from 100 to 110, but are people seriously in that much of a hurry that they are going to throw a tantrum over it?
Being pretty happy with the speed limits set in Australia, I hope that anyone who breaks them gets caught. Any money the big bad government doesn't get through fines, gambling taxes, etc, they'll get through another means that will probably come out of my pocket!
Over Easter, the state of New South Wales apparently had record numbers of police out on the roads, and scored their equal lowest road related death toll ever - zero. That may well be a statistical anomaly, but human nature being what it is, you're much more likely to speed if you think you'll get away with it than if you can be pretty sure that you won't, so I think people driving a little bit slower might have been a contributing factor in the low road death toll.
Slashdot Mirror
worse than that, it now doesn't work on my PDA (HP iPAQ running the last version of CE before it was rebranded Windows Mobile). And by not work I mean IE crashes completely.
I've always wondered... does it work that way? If I sue someone for some amount (say... $1m) and I win, but they don't actually have any money, what happens? Does the debt get written off or if they win the lottery at some point in the future do I get my $1m then?
I think you make have your civil and criminal courts confused. I'm not sure exactly how the legal system works where all this is taking place, but in Australia the civil and criminal courts are fairly separate animals. I don't think any of the RIAA action is anything to do with a crime, or even a "crime" (unless you count the actions of the RIAA itself
Taking a homeless person to court to try and get some money out of them may not be wrong, but it's probably pretty stupid.
I'm guessing here that you are probably my age (32) or younger. I'm at the older end of the generation that, for some reason, seems to want everything right now. A new series comes out and we have to have it right now, not when our local TV broadcaster gets around to showing it. Even though there is plenty of stuff to do in the meantime, and the show will be just as good in 6 months time as it is now, we still have to have it now.
Never, of course, is a different matter altogether... that's what DVD's are for
Remind me... what are animals made of again?
At least they might finally believe that we actually went there.
I don't think you have a very thorough understanding of how the food chain works. Soylent Green will in turn be eaten by the younger population. We need to be taking care of what we feed our elderly!
Now lets burn down the observatory so this can never happen again!
I think the point is that everyone will be stuck at home because they are afraid they _might_ catch something.
Anyway, what will kill the internet is everyone blogging about the tiniest sniffle they get if there is ever a flu scare, and then recording video's of themselves coughing and submitting it to video sites and asking "does this sound like the flu?". And of course all the 'internet doctor' sites will break under the load. And finally, nobody will want to go out of their house to fix things when they break.
You mean the Titanic was real? I thought it was just a fairy tale parents told their kids to make sure they would do quality work when they grew up. Next you'll be telling me Apollo 13 was a real spaceship!
Just kidding... but I wonder how long it will be until this is a common reaction?
I may be misquoting a report here because I don't have it handy, but wasn't the problem that if your neighbor planted a gm crop and your crop became 'contaminated' (and therefore your next generations seeds), you could be sued for infringing on Monsanto's IP?
The proper way to implement this sort of business strategy would be to offer some sort of payment plan for that initial $20k so it works out the same over x number of years, not try and use stupid legal tactics to make a broken business model work (sound familiar?)
And remember, when you are supporting the software that runs the former, don't accidentally say the latter instead. And don't agree with your customers when they intentionally say the latter instead of the former!
That is a treatment for some causes of autism. Autism has been known to have been caused by all manner of things (periods of oxygen deprivation during birth, brain damage from other causes) as well as many cases where no cause is obvious, either because the cause hasn't been identified or because that's just how that persons brain happens to be wired.
It's not like measles where there is a single causative agent.
For autism, simple dietary changes like cutting out certain food additives have worked wonders for some people (where a reaction to a food additive was the cause), and done nothing for others. Omega3 supplements have helped some people and not others.
Just remember... when all you have is a hammer, sometimes everything looks like a skull^H^H^H^H^Hnail.
You might know the answer to this then... I go to the supermarket and buy a bag containing 15 bags of chips. They little bags say 'not for individual sale'. Is that enforceable? I'm in Australia so whatever you say may not apply but i'd be interest in the answer anyway.
I mostly just assumed that there would be a problem because the little bags wouldn't have the statutory ingredients, nutrition, and expiry info on them, but school fete's etc do it all the time.
But the carbon being buried over the millions of years more or less offset the natural sources of CO2 like volcanos. Wikipedia says that volcano's put out around around 1/130th of the amount of CO2 that man made sources do, but we've only been pumping out a significant amount of carbon for a few hundred years, while volcano's have been doing it more or less constantly for millions of years.
That's a lot of excess carbon that's been safely stored away, and now we want to get it all out again?
Depends what you mean by 'use'. If you mean 'burn' then yes, there are plenty of reasons, and almost all of them have to do with taking carbon out of the ground and putting it into the air, while we are spending billions of dollars trying to figure out how to put the carbon back into the ground again.
If you mean 'turn into other products like plastic and vaseline' then go for it
And here was me thinking that we'd finally run out of IPv4 addresses and that the storm troopers had been deployed to sort the problem out.
People should be free to worship their deity of choice in their own way. If they want to do so sitting in front of a computer screen looking at pictures of naked women then who are you to judge them?
That is one if the funniest comments I've read this year
I guess nothing else is going to make a man cry more than the loss of his pr0n collection.
The Y2K 'bug' aligned quite a few purchase cycles. A lot of companies brought their purchase cycles forward to 1998/99 to make sure that there weren't any lingering issues with Y2K (the hardware itself should have been fine - any name brand bought between 1995 and 2000 should have had no issues with Y2K or should have had an upgrade available, but if your accounting system needed an upgrade it may well have increased hardware requirements, and others just wanted to take advantage of the tax concessions available). In Australia we also introduced some pretty major tax changes at about the same time, which often involved upgrades to existing accounting software too, with a corresponding increase in hardware requirements.
I wonder how much the 5 year cycles have diverged since then, making your 20% estimate incorrect. Maybe the Y2K thing was too small in the grander scheme of things to make a difference...
So... if the policing of speed limits is thorough enough (eg not just when a police office happens to be looking your way, but every time), everyone will do 65 and the problem of speed differences between drivers will be solved too. The difference in pollution output between 75 and 65 is quite a bit, so everyone wins, except for people who are in a hurry, and they are the biggest problem on the roads anyway in terms of risk taking (overtaking when there isn't a guaranteed safe passage etc)
For all its badness, Vista does bring a few nice features. Just enough that the Vista zealot(s?) can point to them and say "isn't Vista great!". It also contains plenty of bloat that the XP zealots can point to and say how slow it is. So there is great entertainment to be had for the rest of us while they fight it out :)
:)
Just in case anyone thinks i'm making stuff up, Vista includes:
. user switching while joined to a domain (XP could do this when not joined to the domain, and there were addons to do it when joined to a domain, but they didn't work)
. HAL changes making mass deployment easier
. Group Policy updates
. Security update (I know most people hate these, but in a corporate environment where users SHOULD NEVER install stuff, it makes things easier)
. More strict driver signing requirements, which means when you have a BSoD you can blame Microsoft even if they didn't write the driver, because their qualification isn't up to scratch
Seems like cheating doesn't it? I don't see how it could ever be ruled illegal, unless you are monitoring viewers brainwaves when they haven't consented to it.
The only way around it is to educate the public on how to tell when they are being manipulated by this sort of marketing technique, eg the phrases and other tricks that are used to trick your brain into believing or wanting something which you otherwise wouldn't want. That sort of education would be beneficial on many many levels in terms of helping the general public 'wise up'...
Probably we are arguing here based on living in different countries. Down here during the holiday seasons (Christmas, Easter), the various states will tend to double the demerit points (you have 12 on your license and lose them for various offences - lose them all and you lose your license. You get the points back after 3 years or something) rather than increased fines. They tried increasing fines but there was the big 'revenue raising' outcry, which was probably a fair call. I think the only people who claim it is revenue raising here are the people who continuously get caught and are just whining.
I'm not sure if it's true now, but a while back Australia was reported as having one of the oldest car fleets in the western world, which may well be a contributing factor to the decision as to what speed limits to set. If you can be reasonably sure that all cars on the road are in good condition then a faster speed may well be acceptable.
Maybe you also have lower wildlife hazards over where you are? We have lots of kangaroo's over here, and they are insanely stupid animals when it comes to highway traffic. The sheep and deer I have seen on the roads over here tend to just run the other way, but Kangaroos are not nearly as easy to predict, often running in front of or crashing into the side of vehicles as they pass, even at very low (20kph) speeds. If you've ever seen the difference in damage between a car hitting a large kangaroo at 160kph (~100mph) and 100kph (~60mph) you'll appreciate the difference a lower speed can make
Nope. It's all good in Australia, or at least in Victoria where I live. I do a fair bit of driving and have never been particularly concerned with speed limits being low. In fact more to the contrary... there are a few spots in my regular travels which I think could be a bit slower. Maybe a few of the freeways could have the speed bumped up from 100 to 110, but are people seriously in that much of a hurry that they are going to throw a tantrum over it?
Being pretty happy with the speed limits set in Australia, I hope that anyone who breaks them gets caught. Any money the big bad government doesn't get through fines, gambling taxes, etc, they'll get through another means that will probably come out of my pocket!
Over Easter, the state of New South Wales apparently had record numbers of police out on the roads, and scored their equal lowest road related death toll ever - zero. That may well be a statistical anomaly, but human nature being what it is, you're much more likely to speed if you think you'll get away with it than if you can be pretty sure that you won't, so I think people driving a little bit slower might have been a contributing factor in the low road death toll.