It'll be OK - no one will be holding it on the moon so it'll get great reception. And given they're so tough the extremes of space will not be a problem.
Mate, give up what you're smoking because it's already done some serious damage.
If a law is written and approved and upheld by the court then you have no right to violate that. The download of an illegally leaked copy of software, which you have no permission to use, is theft. Copyright theft is still theft - despite the MAFIAA's determined efforts to prove that claims for compensation against that theft is actually more like theft than the breach of copyright. Receipt of stolen goods, be they electronic or physical, is still receipt of stolen goods. Whether the receipt of those goods is through the purchase of those goods or simply downloading them from a web site or from torrents etc. it is still illegal.
Sure, the leak of their product is stupid, and someone deserves to get their arse kicked. But don't use your stupidity as a defense against breaking the law. You don't have the "right" to do so.
Buy a Logitech Wave keyboard then. The "Insert" is in the row of keys that normall holds the Print Screen, Scrlk and Pause keys and the Delete is in it's usual position (but is much larger).
Yeah - when you only have one finger on each hand, and the torn muscles in your right shoulder prevent you from moving your right hand to the left, I can see how Ctrl+V would be harder than Shift+Insert.
Maybe if you are using a 20+ year old legacy system Shift+Insert would be useful, but beyond that....?
NT4.0 (IIRC) could be installed with all ones and the Office upgrade pack could be installed by pointing it to it's own CD when it asked for the qualifying product.
Ah the good ol' days.
Now my 10 license copy of Office requires me to ring M$ after installing it once to read out and then enter a 12,000 digit number which apparently protects me in some way. Ummmm riiiiiight....
You wouldn’t steal a handbag. You wouldn’t steal a car. You wouldn’t steal a baby. You wouldn’t shoot a policeman. And then steal his helmet. You wouldn’t go to the toilet in his helmet. And then send it to the policeman’s grieving widow. And then steal it again! Downloading films is stealing. (Using this copy of Avast is stealing) If you do it, you will face the consequences.
Every major automaker spends billions of dollars a year on research and development costs. And they know that when they launch certain new technologies, they will lose money for some years before costs fall and volumes rise to let economies of scale make a particular new feature or technology profitable.
That almost sounds like what I wrote. And, in case you missed it:
You lose money on every product until you've sold enough to pay off the retooling process, the design process and to force the price of new materials/parts to drop
You lose money on every product until you've sold enough to pay off the retooling process, the design process and to force the price of new materials/parts to drop. If you spend $1,000,000,000 developing a product that you sell for $50k then you will make a loss to start with - no matter what.
but by that logic you should be able to find tellurium in sulfur, which isn't the case
Maybe it is, but not at levels that have been detectable before, as in this case. However the following link seems to indicate that Tellurium is found in Sulfides.
Her defense is that she didn't know she was distributing it, and the court says that doesn't matter. This line strikes me as odd though:
Easy enough to do if your a nub and you use something like DC++ (but mostly it comes down to being a Nub).
claiming "innocence" was no defense
I guess there's a reason they wrote it in quotes, but I was under the impression that innocence, by definition, is in fact always a defense. Apparently not.
Yeah - I lol'd at that too. However essentially what her defence came down to is "Ignorance" - which is not a defence here in Oz and probably isn't accepted as a defence in the US too.
Agreed. I'm always amazed that the amount of sharing involved doesn't ever get a mentioned. Sure, she shared it with 50,000 people, meaning that she effectively stole 150,000 CD's and gave them out. So 50k ppl are then guilty of receiving stolen goods while one is guilty of the theft. However, if she downloaded the 37 songs and had a share ratio of 0.1 across the entire collection, she's guilty of stealing the 3 CD's (as you've described) but has she actually provided anything more than 3 songs worth to other people? Ultimately the only person that has really done any measurable harm is the person that originally ripped the CD's and shared them.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps you should try Chrome 10 - it's out now you know.
OMG I laughed at the mental picture of a member of the Brass choking having inhaled one of their spy drones...
It'll be OK - no one will be holding it on the moon so it'll get great reception. And given they're so tough the extremes of space will not be a problem.
lol - install a decent AV and it'll catch and remove Norton every time...
But what do they mean the copy is unfinished?
They mean they haven't finished downloading it yet.
Mate, give up what you're smoking because it's already done some serious damage.
If a law is written and approved and upheld by the court then you have no right to violate that. The download of an illegally leaked copy of software, which you have no permission to use, is theft. Copyright theft is still theft - despite the MAFIAA's determined efforts to prove that claims for compensation against that theft is actually more like theft than the breach of copyright. Receipt of stolen goods, be they electronic or physical, is still receipt of stolen goods. Whether the receipt of those goods is through the purchase of those goods or simply downloading them from a web site or from torrents etc. it is still illegal.
Sure, the leak of their product is stupid, and someone deserves to get their arse kicked. But don't use your stupidity as a defense against breaking the law. You don't have the "right" to do so.
Australian government announces that it will officially keep doing what it has done for years.
/. ers something to complain about.
aka - use microsoft products. Not sure how this is news, but I guess it gives the
or police officers equipped with off-the-shelf forensics equipment
So? If you're not doing anything wrong, then why worry about this?
He could also spend less on fancy images of himself as a way of begging for money. Not that I care - I get my information from Fox News...
Col: You’re so dumb you’re such an idiot you’re so...so...stupendous!
Frank: um...I don’t think you know what that word means...
Col: I do know what it means, and you’re just jealous... because im so much better, because im so great, because im so, so...superfluous!!
-- Lano & Woodley
most of them are dumb as bricks
And they tent to have egos larger than their multi-ton planes
tent huh... lol
She's no less accurate than I am with a mouse either.
How is your parkinsons going btw?
Buy a Logitech Wave keyboard then. The "Insert" is in the row of keys that normall holds the Print Screen, Scrlk and Pause keys and the Delete is in it's usual position (but is much larger).
Yeah - when you only have one finger on each hand, and the torn muscles in your right shoulder prevent you from moving your right hand to the left, I can see how Ctrl+V would be harder than Shift+Insert.
Maybe if you are using a 20+ year old legacy system Shift+Insert would be useful, but beyond that....?
I like to see the study done where the Sea Stars were confirmed to be native rather than a species introduced via the ballast water of a passing Freighter.
NT4.0 (IIRC) could be installed with all ones and the Office upgrade pack could be installed by pointing it to it's own CD when it asked for the qualifying product.
Ah the good ol' days.
Now my 10 license copy of Office requires me to ring M$ after installing it once to read out and then enter a 12,000 digit number which apparently protects me in some way. Ummmm riiiiiight....
You wouldn’t steal a handbag.
You wouldn’t steal a car.
You wouldn’t steal a baby.
You wouldn’t shoot a policeman.
And then steal his helmet.
You wouldn’t go to the toilet in his helmet.
And then send it to the policeman’s grieving widow.
And then steal it again!
Downloading films is stealing. (Using this copy of Avast is stealing) If you do it, you will face the consequences.
Every major automaker spends billions of dollars a year on research and development costs. And they know that when they launch certain new technologies, they will lose money for some years before costs fall and volumes rise to let economies of scale make a particular new feature or technology profitable.
That almost sounds like what I wrote. And, in case you missed it:
You lose money on every product until you've sold enough to pay off the retooling process, the design process and to force the price of new materials/parts to drop
Quit boring everyone
You lose money on every product until you've sold enough to pay off the retooling process, the design process and to force the price of new materials/parts to drop. If you spend $1,000,000,000 developing a product that you sell for $50k then you will make a loss to start with - no matter what.
So why is this news? (Slashvertisement anyone?)
but by that logic you should be able to find tellurium in sulfur, which isn't the case
Maybe it is, but not at levels that have been detectable before, as in this case. However the following link seems to indicate that Tellurium is found in Sulfides.
Ah, you must work for a "newspaper". Learn to use robots.txt like the rest of the planet.
I just typed "avast ye mateys" and it still appeared in the autocomplete.
Her defense is that she didn't know she was distributing it, and the court says that doesn't matter. This line strikes me as odd though:
Easy enough to do if your a nub and you use something like DC++ (but mostly it comes down to being a Nub).
claiming "innocence" was no defense
I guess there's a reason they wrote it in quotes, but I was under the impression that innocence, by definition, is in fact always a defense. Apparently not.
Yeah - I lol'd at that too. However essentially what her defence came down to is "Ignorance" - which is not a defence here in Oz and probably isn't accepted as a defence in the US too.
Agreed. I'm always amazed that the amount of sharing involved doesn't ever get a mentioned. Sure, she shared it with 50,000 people, meaning that she effectively stole 150,000 CD's and gave them out. So 50k ppl are then guilty of receiving stolen goods while one is guilty of the theft. However, if she downloaded the 37 songs and had a share ratio of 0.1 across the entire collection, she's guilty of stealing the 3 CD's (as you've described) but has she actually provided anything more than 3 songs worth to other people? Ultimately the only person that has really done any measurable harm is the person that originally ripped the CD's and shared them.