The intrigue couldn't possibly lie in the fact that he is an aide in a congressman's office, could it?
It's important that he is a congressional employee. The fact that he's republican is just extra fodder for the fire.
Using this logic, we should all be just fine with Congress passing laws that could make net neutrality a thing of the past. Sure, they don't have to understand everything about a particular subject, but that is absolutely no excuse for passing legislation that will corrupt and destroy one of the country's (and world's) best means of communication.
As was stated elsewhere in this thread, it's all about who fills the congressional coffers. Money talks and free communication walks.
Sorry for my incorrect verbage. However, both articles I read stated that the court order required her to produce the drive (or at least a copy) as evidence. And from what I read, I gathered that she did something to tamper with said evidence. She may very well have "wiped" and/or "defragged" with no intention of harming any files that could be considered eveidence, but under the circumstances this definitely would look suspicious.
There are too many folks looking for some conspiracy in this whole ordeal. Sure, the method that the record companies use to recoop their supposed losses is a little less than scrupulous. However, it's not like they're just randomly targetting someone. They found out she was downloading copyrighted material (which is currently illegal) and sent out a court order to have her HDD seized, etc. It was only after learning of this court order that the defendant attempted to erase the incriminating material.
Look at the timeline before jumping to conclusions, folks!
In addition, keep in mind that this is a civil case, so the court will have to find liability on the part of the defendant first. Deleting stuff after learning of a court order is not exactly a practice that would inspire a best-faith relationship with the courts.
You are quite correct. Evolution is a scientific theory. However, I think you're confusing the terms "theory" and "hypothesis." A theory is a idea/belief that is backed by several different pieces of verifiable evidence. Newton's idea of gravity is technically a theory.
I don't really give a damn either way about who is right or wrong in this whole clusterf**k of a debate, but don't argue using a half-assed point that isn't even accurate.
Slashdot Mirror
You are aware that people put up billboards and fliers for advertising purposes every day, right?
The intrigue couldn't possibly lie in the fact that he is an aide in a congressman's office, could it? It's important that he is a congressional employee. The fact that he's republican is just extra fodder for the fire.
Using this logic, we should all be just fine with Congress passing laws that could make net neutrality a thing of the past. Sure, they don't have to understand everything about a particular subject, but that is absolutely no excuse for passing legislation that will corrupt and destroy one of the country's (and world's) best means of communication. As was stated elsewhere in this thread, it's all about who fills the congressional coffers. Money talks and free communication walks.
Sorry for my incorrect verbage. However, both articles I read stated that the court order required her to produce the drive (or at least a copy) as evidence. And from what I read, I gathered that she did something to tamper with said evidence. She may very well have "wiped" and/or "defragged" with no intention of harming any files that could be considered eveidence, but under the circumstances this definitely would look suspicious.
There are too many folks looking for some conspiracy in this whole ordeal. Sure, the method that the record companies use to recoop their supposed losses is a little less than scrupulous. However, it's not like they're just randomly targetting someone. They found out she was downloading copyrighted material (which is currently illegal) and sent out a court order to have her HDD seized, etc. It was only after learning of this court order that the defendant attempted to erase the incriminating material. Look at the timeline before jumping to conclusions, folks! In addition, keep in mind that this is a civil case, so the court will have to find liability on the part of the defendant first. Deleting stuff after learning of a court order is not exactly a practice that would inspire a best-faith relationship with the courts.
You are quite correct. Evolution is a scientific theory. However, I think you're confusing the terms "theory" and "hypothesis." A theory is a idea/belief that is backed by several different pieces of verifiable evidence. Newton's idea of gravity is technically a theory.
I don't really give a damn either way about who is right or wrong in this whole clusterf**k of a debate, but don't argue using a half-assed point that isn't even accurate.
My mistake. That's what I get for attempting to make a joke that early.
Razer's marketing budget makes it a RTS/RPG mouse.
You misspelled "l33t" in your post above. Just thought I'd let you know.
Revelation! Someone buy this man a drink!
Looks like Grandma and her illegal downloads of the "Happy Birthday" song can rest easy once again.