I made a payment yesterday and bought some songs using those credits. I can understand that some are vary about paying on russian or non-us operated websites. But let me point out that it would be very foolish for allofmp3.com engage in any fraudulent activity, since appearently they are under heavy scrutiny.
Though you may say that I am pretty ignorant about the accusations against them, I keep an eye on any *official* news regarding their legality. I find their service of good quality (ogg encoding anywhere else?) and value, I need more than accusations to stop using their service.
Newer songs and/or smaller bands are not always avialable on allofmp3.com. I recently bought a CD online from a local band. I made sure of course that the label in question is NOT an RIAA member (wikipedia has a list).
That is why you should not buy CDs, but instead download from iTunes, emusic.com, allofmp3.com, etc. If you are still buying a CD (especially from an RIAA member label) you are part of the problem. (If you buy from the band directly, ask them, I doubt that they will have a problem with you listening to their music while jogging, etc.)
This is posted way too late, but maybe the parent poster(s) will take notice. Without claiming that I know exactly what kind of people to elect I offer the following for consideration:
When political leaders (especially in the executive branch) are treated as moral/ethical examples (set the bar for behaviour) then the political process will be about moral and family values which results in such distorted campaigns which are tradmark of the USA. The "character" will be the deciding factor and not the economical/social policy stands or qualifications. In my home country (Hungary) the prime minister has been married three times, in France having extramarital relations will not bar someone reaching high office etc. (The Hungarian prime minister is a f**ktard and has no integrity or leadership skills either, but that is a different story. This just shows that not requiring a spotless personal life is not guarantee for being a good politician...)
Why not look for moral examples in the religous leaders or in non-profit activists, or artists, what have you. I want the executable branch to have integrity and be law abiding and efficient, this does not box them to be moral examples for behaviour.
In the parent posts the part about being law-abiding should be stressed. The problem is that hating Bush does not alter the fact that he has not been indicted for any crime so far. I personally hold him responsible for:
1. Faking evidence and misledading congress about Iraq. (Meanwhile I supported the removal of Saddam, who gassed the Kurds and defied countless UN resolutions, only I did not trust Bush's ability to successfully carry out the mission which includes a workable plan after the main fighting ended.)
2. The prisoner abuse, which I think was due to the conflicting (and lack of) "guidelines" that indirectly (and unlawfully) encouraged the behaviour; while sadly acknowledging that sick people (for example who are willing to (enjoy?) torture others) exist in every section of society including the military.
However I think that it is a far-fetched idea that Bush's behaviour noticably effected business leaders (as opposed to the countless other factors worth discussing). I do not think that the original poster thought so either. It just made him/her feel good to lash out like that. Those who moderated it up felt better too I guess...
All other beef I have with Bush and his ilk stems from that they make policy decisions that IMHO may ruin (if left unchanged) the country long term (education, healthcare, environment, foreign relations). It is also good to remember that it is not him alone, but rather a political machine as a whole that runs behind him. Lashing out at him at every opportunity is stupid: it is not working and does not help us identify the problems and the solutions.
Or: methamphetamines are ruining people, but if it is so bad for them, why are they caught taking it?
You may think the analogy extreme. Yes, as far as the consequences/importance is argued, it certainly is.
However, consider that nowadays more and more movies and TV shows attempt to greatly overwhelm the sensory perception to achieve that 'high' that appears to be the *only* thing that keeps larger and larger portion of the audience watching. This applies mostly to entertainment, but also more and more to newscast as well.
The movies today better be fast paced, with stunning visuals, sound effects and tricks (with or without computer animation) with less and less appeal to the intellect which requires WORK from the recepient, including the use of imagination, reasoning etc. Classics are becoming considered slow and boring. Some films appearing on the face as intellectual films use cliches, do not really encourage independent thinking etc. You get the picture.
My point is that the crap they are pushing is addictive, while valuable entertainment (art, science, history, philosophy etc.) needs acquired taste and be nurtured by parents, peers etc. I am not surprised that addicts break the law to feed their addiction.
One may argue that some segments of the entertainment industry is just slightly better than the tobacco industry.
Of course there are still good movies, music, newscoverage out there (being produced still). But there is a frightening trend to note.
I have a T41 and I like it (got it new several years ago). Somebody saying it sucks caught me by a complete surprise.
Maybe we value different features? I am considering buying a new laptop, here is the list of feaures I am interested in: - hardware stability, sturdiness, feel (drops, scratches etc.) - trackpoint (I tried the 'massage mouse' in other models, yuck!) - weight (less than 4lb would be great) - at least 1400x1050 (SXGA+) resolution (14"), no wide screens please - power consumption/battery life - max memory support (at least 2G) - 64 bit processor - CD/DVD reader. Writing is not that important, and due to pen drives and a portable Ogg player the CD/DVD lost its importance. - price, the last since I am rich, or I want to think I am:->
Of course it must run linux, but that does not seem to be a problem anymore (as it used to be). Notice the lack of processor speed requirements; my current processor does 1.4GHz, I will need no more than 1.8GHz, in fact I really prefer to save energy/battery life instead (by the way I drive a 105 horsepower car (manual though) and I find that quite sufficient too).
I could not find a model satisfying all the above conditions, I keep looking... I could settle for the X series, if they had come with an SXGA+ screen!!
It seems that inserting DRM threatens Freedom 0. The insertion act is protected by Freedom 3. If the Freedoms are listed in priority order, I see no problem restricting Freedom 3 to protect Freedom 0, in fact it means more freedom if lexicographical order is assumed.
Is this 51% (or is it > 50%) rule is real? That means that almost half the time the court may get it wrong... So why not just flip a fair coin instead of an expensive trial? The coin flip will assure a 50% success rate and it is very cheap.
>If a company pushes out a faulty product, they should be legally obligated to correct the problem. We seem to have very high standards for say auto manufactors whenever there exists a problem. Why shouldn't a company who is pushing a electric consumer product be under the same scrutinty.
There is a difference in that a faulty auto, airplane, bridge design etc. may cost lives. The Xbox is *just* a game. Yes, scrutiny and protection of the consumer is necessary, but not by the same standards. As long as the unit does not pose a fire risk (say it shuts off due to internal damage prior) I am not too concerned. If there is fire hazard, then a lawsuit may be needed, but I would assume that some other government agency (under the ministry of interior? FTC?) should be alerted first.
> The system's broken anyway, others are exploiting it, so maybe we shouldn't be so hard on these people for joining in. If someone told you that you could have $1000000 for nothing except exploiting a system that's getting fucked over anyway, would you really be that bad for taking it?
Yes. That $10^6 would come from people who are trying to play fair.
Although, I admit maybe it is the price tag that differentiates us. I might do it for $10^9, so that I could realize my dream of founding a University (which would attempt to promote critical thinking, problem solving, ethical behaviour, yada, yada)
>the most of it. Corporations are the epitome of selfishness, and many people are going the same way. Perhaps it's time to give up and go with the flow, because I'm losing sight of any other way to 'win' here.
You can win only if you find it rewarding to do the right thing for its own sake; not if you are only good to avoid being locked up (economically punished etc.)
This depends on the election system. It needs to provide equal representation, so that a smaller group can effectively organize. However, this may result in a small minority gaining too much power as well, when they become the balance between two bigger parties (in Germany there are examples of this I believe). Hence there is an effort to limit small/fringe/radical etc. political parties to participate.
A 30-50% unemployment locally would naturally mean a stronghold locally for a party organizing these people, but there is a lot of discrimination/racism in France and so such a party could not do well overall in the country. The result? These areas and their interests are not represented in the higher echelons of government, but let to become slums. A solution could be more power to local government. However, that has its pitfalls too as the resources could be very unevenly distributed in the country, etc.
It is not easy to devise a good election system. On the other hand France may not even be trying...
A good starting point for an efficient/fair system could be the Hungarian system (devised after 1989). It was supposed to be designed with inputs from mathematicians, it aims to ensure that the number of representatives strongly correlates with the public's support, while skewing the results towards bigger parties somewhat to allow efficient governing. (For example if 4 parties get 40%, 30%, 15%, 15%, then probably the biggest party will end up at least with half of the seats but not 2/3, this allows them to govern but not change the constitution say, while the smaller parties will have an opportunity to critique. The system also encourages coalitions in the second phase of the two-phased election system.)
I agree. What puzzles me is why the US administration cited the above as the reason to invade Iraq? Why they talked about nuclear weapons, ties to al Queda at all when there was a perfectly legitimate and undisputable reason at that time?
I am confused and not sure who is a 'blogger' and what is a blog anymore. I thought that a blog basically is a web page by some individual. (Do I need some special blogging software if I want to be a blogger?)
So what is not clear is why anyone is restricted by putting up a web page with their opinion on it? This is in no way at odds with restricting what someone can say who is PAID (compensated) for it, and so I thought that is what the campaign finance reform addresses.
For example a conservative(liberal) talk show host can say what they want as long as they express their opinion and they are not subsidized by some party, political group etc. (under the scope of the campaign finace laws), that is he/she is not paid for the content but for the service as a talk show host. From the media company's point of view they should simply pay someone whose opinion/drivel draws in audiences that pays thier bills. The media company should not care what these opinions are actually (within law, like no CIA agent identity revealed in the process, etc.) and should not air or suppress opinions,because someone handed them some money.
So briefly, why this decision restricts me from putting up political speach on my website?
Solution: move your research to some country without these patent problems. My prediction is that Chinese and Russian companies will emerge doing this. The end result is probably that the US will have to licence or buy back the inventions and technologies (the really important ones, such as cures) say 10-20-40 years down the line.
Do not miss the point of the harvested IP-s. Even if they have no case, a lawsuit brought on you by **AA is a HUGE inconvenience, and will have the desired deterring effect.
Same can be said about most of history, geography, art, philosophy, etc.
Yeah, if the society wants to raise shopping drones then math education can stop at addition and multiplication. (I just would not feel at home among that crowd.)
Math concepts are more important than their direct applications. They teach general problem solving skills, logical thinking. Granted this is the case only if it is taught well; if they teach only the formulas but not the reasons (those 'pesky proofs') then its usefullness is deminished.
I am amazed when the following simple question causes problem for most people (even with university degrees!): A store has a 15% general sale. On top of it they give a 20% reduction on the given day. Is this better (on the given day) than if they give a 20% reduction first and a 15% reduction second? (And countless variations of this coming up when people want to use their coupon after the tax was applied to save more etc...)
In my high school (grade 9) the first group of problems we solved were those involving the prisoner who can talk to 2 guards, one always telling the truth, the other lying but you do not know which is which. There are 2 doors in the cell one leading to freedom the other to execution; you get to ask one question to find out which door leads to freedom.
At the end of that section we solved this problem: I think a number between 1-64. You may ask yes/no questions to find out this number. I am allowed to lie to you once during this questioning. How many questions do you need to figure out the number? (10 and prove it!)
(Disclaimer: I am a CS PhD student and I use sin/cos all the time: e.g. I need them for the orthogonal transformations used to do stable numerical computations on matrices (which are used in MANY applications). In my job at IBM I do not use trigonometry, but I have used graph theory, boolean logic/circuits and the concept of a value table, number theory to get good hash functions etc.)
Many comments focus on the harshness of punisment, and the password being taped there etc.
For me the main question is the following: Why is it appearent that the kids did misuse the laptops? I have a laptop, and I regularly install software and check that noone monitors my activity etc. Of course if there was a contract signed detailing what can or cannot be done... But we have not seen that, and even if there was one, I am doubtful that the legal language was legible to the kids and we can expect them to follow it the same way as, say, an employee would.
I would let the owners do whatever they want with their laptop. If, as a consequence they break it or cannot login to the test administering server they will face the academic consequences. Just like not bringing pen to school or losing their textbooks.
And often someone stands waiting in front of the door you attempt to open (because it is not a swing door). It happened that I started opening it slowly, so that I do not cause injury to the moron and once he figured that the door can be opened, he tried to get through first. This was in vain of course, since I was already in the doorway which opened towards him. This is an especially problematic situation from a social point of view, if the person is a woman and gets upset and loud when not let through first.
Recently (in London) they painted a line 2 feet away from the belt. Amazingly, the area between the line and the belt remained unoccupied!! The distance should have been 3-4 feet though.
By the way, there are similar ones to this 'conveyor belt syndrome': on public transport it is obvious to any intelligent being that those entering the car should let those leaving the car go first. Does not happen. A simple solution is to have the front doors operate as entrances and the back doors operate as exits only. This simple solution have not caught on as much as it should have.
This will be perfect for the police for those sit-in (non-violent) demonstrations. A problem there is to apply force to remove the demonstartors: that puts the police action in pretty bad light.
With this weapon the police seemingly will not touch the demonstrators, no physical force will be used, but the dissenters will clear away regardless.
And no, not just in Iraq... It is a perfect tool for ANY government that wants to look like humane and democratic while needs to silence political dissent. It is time to pass a law about what type of weapons could be used for crowd control, especially in case of nonviolent protesters. (What is wrong with water cannons anyway?)
Here is a solution. Allow the advertiser to provide either a verification algorithm for valid clicks or let them decide about every click whether they are accepting it or not.
This way the advertiser can either accept or reject a click and would pay for the clicks they explicitly accepted. Yes, there are costs associated with this solution, but I think they are far outweighed by the advanteges.
Slashdot Mirror
I made a payment yesterday and bought some songs using those credits. I can understand that some are vary about paying on russian or non-us operated websites. But let me point out that it would be very foolish for allofmp3.com engage in any fraudulent activity, since appearently they are under heavy scrutiny.
Though you may say that I am pretty ignorant about the accusations against them, I keep an eye on any *official* news regarding their legality. I find their service of good quality (ogg encoding anywhere else?) and value, I need more than accusations to stop using their service.
Newer songs and/or smaller bands are not always avialable on allofmp3.com. I recently bought a CD online from a local band. I made sure of course that the label in question is NOT an RIAA member (wikipedia has a list).
That is why you should not buy CDs, but instead download from iTunes, emusic.com, allofmp3.com, etc. If you are still buying a CD (especially from an RIAA member label) you are part of the problem. (If you buy from the band directly, ask them, I doubt that they will have a problem with you listening to their music while jogging, etc.)
This is posted way too late, but maybe the parent poster(s) will take notice. Without claiming that I know exactly what kind of people to elect I offer the following for consideration:
When political leaders (especially in the executive branch) are treated as moral/ethical examples (set the bar for behaviour) then the political process will be about moral and family values which results in such distorted campaigns which are tradmark of the USA. The "character" will be the deciding factor and not the economical/social policy stands or qualifications. In my home country (Hungary) the prime minister has been married three times, in France having extramarital relations will not bar someone reaching high office etc. (The Hungarian prime minister is a f**ktard and has no integrity or leadership skills either, but that is a different story. This just shows that not requiring a spotless personal life is not guarantee for being a good politician...)
Why not look for moral examples in the religous leaders or in non-profit activists, or artists, what have you. I want the executable branch to have integrity and be law abiding and efficient, this does not box them to be moral examples for behaviour.
In the parent posts the part about being law-abiding should be stressed. The problem is that hating Bush does not alter the fact that he has not been indicted for any crime so far. I personally hold him responsible for:
1. Faking evidence and misledading congress about Iraq. (Meanwhile I supported the removal of Saddam, who gassed the Kurds and defied countless UN resolutions, only I did not trust Bush's ability to successfully carry out the mission which includes a workable plan after the main fighting ended.)
2. The prisoner abuse, which I think was due to the conflicting (and lack of) "guidelines" that indirectly (and unlawfully) encouraged the behaviour; while sadly acknowledging that sick people (for example who are willing to (enjoy?) torture others) exist in every section of society including the military.
However I think that it is a far-fetched idea that Bush's behaviour noticably effected business leaders (as opposed to the countless other factors worth discussing). I do not think that the original poster thought so either. It just made him/her feel good to lash out like that. Those who moderated it up felt better too I guess...
All other beef I have with Bush and his ilk stems from that they make policy decisions that IMHO may ruin (if left unchanged) the country long term (education, healthcare, environment, foreign relations). It is also good to remember that it is not him alone, but rather a political machine as a whole that runs behind him. Lashing out at him at every opportunity is stupid: it is not working and does not help us identify the problems and the solutions.
Matyas
Or: methamphetamines are ruining people, but if it is so bad for them, why are they caught taking it?
You may think the analogy extreme. Yes, as far as the consequences/importance is argued, it certainly is.
However, consider that nowadays more and more movies and TV shows attempt to greatly overwhelm the sensory perception to achieve that 'high' that appears to be the *only* thing that keeps larger and larger portion of the audience watching. This applies mostly to entertainment, but also more and more to newscast as well.
The movies today better be fast paced, with stunning visuals, sound effects and tricks (with or without computer animation) with less and less appeal to the intellect which requires WORK from the recepient, including the use of imagination, reasoning etc. Classics are becoming considered slow and boring. Some films appearing on the face as intellectual films use cliches, do not really encourage independent thinking etc. You get the picture.
My point is that the crap they are pushing is addictive, while valuable entertainment (art, science, history, philosophy etc.) needs acquired taste and be nurtured by parents, peers etc. I am not surprised that addicts break the law to feed their addiction.
One may argue that some segments of the entertainment industry is just slightly better than the tobacco industry.
Of course there are still good movies, music, newscoverage out there (being produced still). But there is a frightening trend to note.
Interesting. So would the use of alloca() make a difference?
Matyas
I have a T41 and I like it (got it new several years ago). Somebody saying it sucks caught me by a complete surprise.
:->
Maybe we value different features? I am considering buying a new laptop, here is the list of feaures I am interested in:
- hardware stability, sturdiness, feel (drops, scratches etc.)
- trackpoint (I tried the 'massage mouse' in other models, yuck!)
- weight (less than 4lb would be great)
- at least 1400x1050 (SXGA+) resolution (14"), no wide screens please
- power consumption/battery life
- max memory support (at least 2G)
- 64 bit processor
- CD/DVD reader. Writing is not that important, and due to pen drives and a portable Ogg player the CD/DVD lost its importance.
- price, the last since I am rich, or I want to think I am
Of course it must run linux, but that does not seem to be a problem anymore (as it used to be). Notice the lack of processor speed requirements; my current processor does 1.4GHz, I will need no more than 1.8GHz, in fact I really prefer to save energy/battery life instead (by the way I drive a 105 horsepower car (manual though) and I find that quite sufficient too).
I could not find a model satisfying all the above conditions, I keep looking... I could settle for the X series, if they had come with an SXGA+ screen!!
It seems that inserting DRM threatens Freedom 0. The insertion act is protected by Freedom 3. If the Freedoms are listed in priority order, I see no problem restricting Freedom 3 to protect Freedom 0, in fact it means more freedom if lexicographical order is assumed.
Matyas
Is this 51% (or is it > 50%) rule is real? That means that almost half the time the court may get it wrong... So why not just flip a fair coin instead of an expensive trial? The coin flip will assure a 50% success rate and it is very cheap.
I am not a lawyer, I am a mathematician.
Matyas
>If a company pushes out a faulty product, they should be legally obligated to correct the problem. We seem to have very high standards for say auto manufactors whenever there exists a problem. Why shouldn't a company who is pushing a electric consumer product be under the same scrutinty.
There is a difference in that a faulty auto, airplane, bridge design etc. may cost lives. The Xbox is *just* a game. Yes, scrutiny and protection of the consumer is necessary, but not by the same standards. As long as the unit does not pose a fire risk (say it shuts off due to internal damage prior) I am not too concerned. If there is fire hazard, then a lawsuit may be needed, but I would assume that some other government agency (under the ministry of interior? FTC?) should be alerted first.
> The system's broken anyway, others are exploiting it, so maybe we shouldn't be so hard on these people for joining in. If someone told you that you could have $1000000 for nothing except exploiting a system that's getting fucked over anyway, would you really be that bad for taking it?
Yes. That $10^6 would come from people who are trying to play fair.
Although, I admit maybe it is the price tag that differentiates us. I might do it for $10^9, so that I could realize my dream of founding a University (which would attempt to promote critical thinking, problem solving, ethical behaviour, yada, yada)
>the most of it. Corporations are the epitome of selfishness, and many people are going the same way. Perhaps it's time to give up and go with the flow, because I'm losing sight of any other way to 'win' here.
You can win only if you find it rewarding to do the right thing for its own sake; not if you are only good to avoid being locked up (economically punished etc.)
This depends on the election system. It needs to provide equal representation, so that a smaller group can effectively organize. However, this may result in a small minority gaining too much power as well, when they become the balance between two bigger parties (in Germany there are examples of this I believe). Hence there is an effort to limit small/fringe/radical etc. political parties to participate.
A 30-50% unemployment locally would naturally mean a stronghold locally for a party organizing these people, but there is a lot of discrimination/racism in France and so such a party could not do well overall in the country. The result? These areas and their interests are not represented in the higher echelons of government, but let to become slums. A solution could be more power to local government. However, that has its pitfalls too as the resources could be very unevenly distributed in the country, etc.
It is not easy to devise a good election system. On the other hand France may not even be trying...
A good starting point for an efficient/fair system could be the Hungarian system (devised after 1989). It was supposed to be designed with inputs from mathematicians, it aims to ensure that the number of representatives strongly correlates with the public's support, while skewing the results towards bigger parties somewhat to allow efficient governing. (For example if 4 parties get 40%, 30%, 15%, 15%, then probably the biggest party will end up at least with half of the seats but not 2/3, this allows them to govern but not change the constitution say, while the smaller parties will have an opportunity to critique. The system also encourages coalitions in the second phase of the two-phased election system.)
I agree. What puzzles me is why the US administration cited the above as the reason to invade Iraq? Why they talked about nuclear weapons, ties to al Queda at all when there was a perfectly legitimate and undisputable reason at that time?
I am confused and not sure who is a 'blogger' and what is a blog anymore. I thought that a blog basically is a web page by some individual. (Do I need some special blogging software if I want to be a blogger?)
So what is not clear is why anyone is restricted by putting up a web page with their opinion on it? This is in no way at odds with restricting what someone can say who is PAID (compensated) for it, and so I thought that is what the campaign finance reform addresses.
For example a conservative(liberal) talk show host can say what they want as long as they express their opinion and they are not subsidized by some party, political group etc. (under the scope of the campaign finace laws), that is he/she is not paid for the content but for the service as a talk show host. From the media company's point of view they should simply pay someone whose opinion/drivel draws in audiences that pays thier bills. The media company should not care what these opinions are actually (within law, like no CIA agent identity revealed in the process, etc.) and should not air or suppress opinions,because someone handed them some money.
So briefly, why this decision restricts me from putting up political speach on my website?
Solution: move your research to some country without these patent problems. My prediction is that Chinese and Russian companies will emerge doing this. The end result is probably that the US will have to licence or buy back the inventions and technologies (the really important ones, such as cures) say 10-20-40 years down the line.
"...U.S. control, which stems from the country's role in creating the Internet as a Pentagon project and funding much of its early development."
/ Spotlight/SpotlightAandD-en.html
The internet was invented by a CERN scientist in Europe. Visit
http://public.web.cern.ch/Public/Content/Chapters
for more. At the same time the contribution of the US may well justify their control.
By the way, read the 'Da Vinci Code' and the 'Angels & Demons' by Dan Brown!
Matyas
Do not miss the point of the harvested IP-s. Even if they have no case, a lawsuit brought on you by **AA is a HUGE inconvenience, and will have the desired deterring effect.
Same can be said about most of history, geography, art, philosophy, etc.
Yeah, if the society wants to raise shopping drones then math education can stop at addition and multiplication. (I just would not feel at home among that crowd.)
Math concepts are more important than their direct applications. They teach general problem solving skills, logical thinking. Granted this is the case only if it is taught well; if they teach only the formulas but not the reasons (those 'pesky proofs') then its usefullness is deminished.
I am amazed when the following simple question causes problem for most people (even with university degrees!): A store has a 15% general sale. On top of it they give a 20% reduction on the given day. Is this better (on the given day) than if they give a 20% reduction first and a 15% reduction second? (And countless variations of this coming up when people want to use their coupon after the tax was applied to save more etc...)
In my high school (grade 9) the first group of problems we solved were those involving the prisoner who can talk to 2 guards, one always telling the truth, the other lying but you do not know which is which. There are 2 doors in the cell one leading to freedom the other to execution; you get to ask one question to find out which door leads to freedom.
At the end of that section we solved this problem: I think a number between 1-64. You may ask yes/no questions to find out this number. I am allowed to lie to you once during this questioning. How many questions do you need to figure out the number? (10 and prove it!)
(Disclaimer: I am a CS PhD student and I use sin/cos all the time: e.g. I need them for the orthogonal transformations used to do stable numerical computations on matrices (which are used in MANY applications). In my job at IBM I do not use trigonometry, but I have used graph theory, boolean logic/circuits and the concept of a value table, number theory to get good hash functions etc.)
That seems pretty early. Did the course involve the proof?
I hope google makes this clear to its users in China by displaying something like:
"Some search results were censored by your government."
Many comments focus on the harshness of punisment, and the password being taped there etc.
For me the main question is the following: Why is it appearent that the kids did misuse the laptops? I have a laptop, and I regularly install software and check that noone monitors my activity etc. Of course if there was a contract signed detailing what can or cannot be done... But we have not seen that, and even if there was one, I am doubtful that the legal language was legible to the kids and we can expect them to follow it the same way as, say, an employee would.
I would let the owners do whatever they want with their laptop. If, as a consequence they break it or cannot login to the test administering server they will face the academic consequences. Just like not bringing pen to school or losing their textbooks.
Matyas
And often someone stands waiting in front of the door you attempt to open (because it is not a swing door). It happened that I started opening it slowly, so that I do not cause injury to the moron and once he figured that the door can be opened, he tried to get through first. This was in vain of course, since I was already in the doorway which opened towards him. This is an especially problematic situation from a social point of view, if the person is a woman and gets upset and loud when not let through first.
Recently (in London) they painted a line 2 feet away from the belt. Amazingly, the area between the line and the belt remained unoccupied!! The distance should have been 3-4 feet though.
By the way, there are similar ones to this 'conveyor belt syndrome': on public transport it is obvious to any intelligent being that those entering the car should let those leaving the car go first. Does not happen. A simple solution is to have the front doors operate as entrances and the back doors operate as exits only. This simple solution have not caught on as much as it should have.
This will be perfect for the police for those sit-in (non-violent) demonstrations. A problem there is to apply force to remove the demonstartors: that puts the police action in pretty bad light.
With this weapon the police seemingly will not touch the demonstrators, no physical force will be used, but the dissenters will clear away regardless.
And no, not just in Iraq... It is a perfect tool for ANY government that wants to look like humane and democratic while needs to silence political dissent. It is time to pass a law about what type of weapons could be used for crowd control, especially in case of nonviolent protesters. (What is wrong with water cannons anyway?)
I want your subject on a T-shirt! Matyas
---
Support Folding at Home, join the Ballroom Dancers team! Visit folding.stanford.edu
Here is a solution. Allow the advertiser to provide either a verification algorithm for valid clicks or let them decide about every click whether they are accepting it or not.
This way the advertiser can either accept or reject a click and would pay for the clicks they explicitly accepted. Yes, there are costs associated with this solution, but I think they are far outweighed by the advanteges.