You can't make one person pay for the transgressions of 100 others.
That would be the case if the RIAA/MPAA argued that you are responsible for them downloading.
I think the MPAA/RIAA argument is that you are responsible for 100 counts of uploading (for n=100).
I think that's a reasonable argument: if you do something wrong a hundred times, you should pay for all hundred.
It's just that they don't provide any good evidence.... And their legal maneuvers are dubious. Go to Ray Beckerman's site for a lawyer's argument as to why.
The plural of anecdote is bullshit. Let me contribute my story to the pile of manure:)
My latest date runs Linux. There's an "internet" icon in her panel, every once in a while she clicks the "update" thing and answers a few questions and everything Just Works (tm).
[her xbf, an avid user, might have had a hand in setting it up, though].
What I'd really like to see is a more decentralized Internet.
The results you aim for sound really great, I'm with you on those. How about the implementation? Let's see if I understod you right.
If your solution removes control from the hand of the monopoly (or oligopoly), then every user more or less has to be multi-homed: they need to have more than one neighbour who routes their outbound traffic.
I predict a usability challenge: how do you present the choices to the user in a way that makes them able to make an informed decision (if they want to)?
Also, users will need an IP address. Where will they get it from? Just grab a random one themselves? Pick it from some obscure formula based on their birthdate, current address and local regulations? From their ISP who doesn't exist? At city hall?
Just some things that spring to mind. Cheers, let's toast to teh intarnets.
we can get back to using the Internet for what it was intended for, making us smarter rather then selling us shit...
Yeah!
I'm sure I wouldn't mind printing out an order form for XKCD T-shirts, filling it out by hand and sending it via snail-mail to the XKCD store.
I'm sure I wouldn't mind losing the ability to buy wii games cheaper than in my local shopping mall. I wouldn't mind having to go price-comparing by foot (or bike).
I sure hate the fact that I could buy my laptops on the internet. Such a bitch not having to walk around to several stores.
Down with internet commerce!
</sarcasm>
I think we can agree that some ungodly deeds are done in the name of profit. That doesn't make all deeds done in the name of profit ungodly.
What would I do if I could make up arbitrary rules regarding domains, charge whatever I like for it, and no one out there is likely to step in and stop me?"
Auction off.sex, get insanely rich offa' that alone, then do the right thing for my preciousss intarnetssss;-)
Any free-market loving capitalist (who believes econ 101 theory) should know that profit is not a good in itself, but a good only because it can only be generated from valuable transactions---i.e. (most often) doing work that's valuable to society.
Or, it's a direct message to the citizenry that misconduct by government agents will not be tolerated. If the prosecution is simply allowed to "try again", there is no incentive to behave appropriately in the future.
How about punishing the prosecutors and forbidding them from trying the case again, while still letting the case itself be tried again by someone else.
Then it'd be in each individual lawyer's best interest to play by the rules, but we don't throw justice out with the lawyers... erm, so to speak:)
As long as there is an opportunity, however small or convoluted, for people to cheat the system by having a case thrown out, that loophole will be exploited. By those with the power to exploit it.
You did get the fact that the verdict was thrown out (and Stevens' name cleared) due to the (mis)behavior of the prosecution, right?
The prosecution had the power to have their own goddamn case thrown out. If you worry about such loopholes, here's a killer one that can get any case thrown out of court: "prosecution dismisses all charges".
If retrials are not even enforced but just allowed, what prosecution wouldn't withhold evidence from the defense knowing that the worst case scenario is "oops, okay, now you get to see the evidence, let's go back to square one and try again"?
Allowing retrials with no punishment to the prosecution means you let them get away with attempting end-runs around the rules of process.
I'm not particularly in favor of letting crooks off the hook, but crooks can wear either jail stripes or pin stripes.
Slashdot Mirror
horrible spam [...] 1 eegg on each single page
No sausage or spam?
d-bags.
Touche ;-)
VA better watch itself, all of us Slashdoters may assemble, protest and overthrow their state government!
But I need to stay at home and watch my code compile. Besides, SC2GG Commentator Idol is on...
Can we do it next week? Besides, I'm not american.
* Promotes non-mainstream, rabid devotion to fanatical religions--including Linux
Oh no, Slashdot makes the Linux Zealots come out. Quick, if we zergling rush /., we can take out the pylon that powers their default gateway!
And Bingo was his name-o!
http://www.twiztv.com/scripts/southpark/season2/southpark-211.htm
For those too lazy to make the conversion
If anyone knows how to do this on a stock XP without installing anything (such as a new language), please share.
('cause that's where I'm stuck right now...)
Can't blame them, really, given the quality of education we as a society have decided to give our citizens.
Wait, you're saying there's a correlation? So? ;-)
You can't make one person pay for the transgressions of 100 others.
That would be the case if the RIAA/MPAA argued that you are responsible for them downloading.
I think the MPAA/RIAA argument is that you are responsible for 100 counts of uploading (for n=100).
I think that's a reasonable argument: if you do something wrong a hundred times, you should pay for all hundred.
It's just that they don't provide any good evidence. ... And their legal maneuvers are dubious. Go to Ray Beckerman's site for a lawyer's argument as to why.
The plural of anecdote is bullshit. Let me contribute my story to the pile of manure :)
My latest date runs Linux. There's an "internet" icon in her panel, every once in a while she clicks the "update" thing and answers a few questions and everything Just Works (tm).
[her xbf, an avid user, might have had a hand in setting it up, though].
If you find an Archons though
Will two High Templars do?
What I'd really like to see is a more decentralized Internet.
The results you aim for sound really great, I'm with you on those. How about the implementation? Let's see if I understod you right.
If your solution removes control from the hand of the monopoly (or oligopoly), then every user more or less has to be multi-homed: they need to have more than one neighbour who routes their outbound traffic.
I predict a usability challenge: how do you present the choices to the user in a way that makes them able to make an informed decision (if they want to)?
Also, users will need an IP address. Where will they get it from? Just grab a random one themselves? Pick it from some obscure formula based on their birthdate, current address and local regulations? From their ISP who doesn't exist? At city hall?
Just some things that spring to mind. Cheers, let's toast to teh intarnets.
compensated for the ineffiency(sp)
inefficiency, I believe. HTH.
pile them onto a launch vehicle and send them to the sun..
No need to shoot it into the sun. Just let it be navigated by telephone sanitizers.
that I'm beginning to wonder whether I, myself, am a bot.
So, the CAPTCHA... earned bonus points?
Sorry for the self-reply. My post was meant as a reply to http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1192603&cid=27507499
Nothing to see here, move along.
we can get back to using the Internet for what it was intended for, making us smarter rather then selling us shit...
Yeah!
I'm sure I wouldn't mind printing out an order form for XKCD T-shirts, filling it out by hand and sending it via snail-mail to the XKCD store.
I'm sure I wouldn't mind losing the ability to buy wii games cheaper than in my local shopping mall. I wouldn't mind having to go price-comparing by foot (or bike).
I sure hate the fact that I could buy my laptops on the internet. Such a bitch not having to walk around to several stores.
Down with internet commerce!
</sarcasm>
I think we can agree that some ungodly deeds are done in the name of profit. That doesn't make all deeds done in the name of profit ungodly.
What would I do if I could make up arbitrary rules regarding domains, charge whatever I like for it, and no one out there is likely to step in and stop me?"
Auction off .sex, get insanely rich offa' that alone, then do the right thing for my preciousss intarnetssss ;-)
Any free-market loving capitalist (who believes econ 101 theory) should know that profit is not a good in itself, but a good only because it can only be generated from valuable transactions---i.e. (most often) doing work that's valuable to society.
(Leonard Nimoy as a surprise guest [would that be an oxymoron (was he dressed in Vulcan prostitute garb?)?]?)
(loop (print (eval (read)))) ;-)
I go for encryption, SSL, and HTTPS.
Then how do you log in on slashdot?
It takes two paranoid people to use encryption. We really need everyone to be paranoid, which is a hard sell.
Even my slowest home system can easily handle this.
Can the server you're slashdotting handle one thousand (or million) times what your home PC can handle?
Sometimes, when I'm transferring stuff around at home, ssh (sshfs) or kcryptd is the bottleneck, not the disk/wire.
Damn, that makes me sad :(
Deep Panty Inspection
Performed for (and/or on) you by the Female Body Inspectors in cooperation with the Clitoris Investigation Agency.
(note: I didn't say pus*y or any other naughty word)
Or, it's a direct message to the citizenry that misconduct by government agents will not be tolerated. If the prosecution is simply allowed to "try again", there is no incentive to behave appropriately in the future.
How about punishing the prosecutors and forbidding them from trying the case again, while still letting the case itself be tried again by someone else.
Then it'd be in each individual lawyer's best interest to play by the rules, but we don't throw justice out with the lawyers... erm, so to speak :)
As long as there is an opportunity, however small or convoluted, for people to cheat the system by having a case thrown out, that loophole will be exploited. By those with the power to exploit it.
You did get the fact that the verdict was thrown out (and Stevens' name cleared) due to the (mis)behavior of the prosecution, right?
The prosecution had the power to have their own goddamn case thrown out. If you worry about such loopholes, here's a killer one that can get any case thrown out of court: "prosecution dismisses all charges".
If retrials are not even enforced but just allowed, what prosecution wouldn't withhold evidence from the defense knowing that the worst case scenario is "oops, okay, now you get to see the evidence, let's go back to square one and try again"?
Allowing retrials with no punishment to the prosecution means you let them get away with attempting end-runs around the rules of process.
I'm not particularly in favor of letting crooks off the hook, but crooks can wear either jail stripes or pin stripes.
automatically adds the track to your itunes and WMP libraries
No support for Music Player Daemon? :(
the ${LANGUAGE} IDE is a toy
How dare you insssult my preciousss emacsssssss!!
is that your native tongue is Chewbacca
Which of course has a phrase for "I do not make sense!"