Admittedly I am not a Barrister. But I believe these are people who have been arrested but not charged. This isn't about proving beyond a reasonable doubt in a court. However the police do still need some evidence to bring charges (I guess also, a reasonable amount, that would put the police beyond doubt). After the police bring charges, then (especially in a sensitive cases such as this) the police can spend a long time to mass futher evidence as the trial wont be for a long time.
I dont know how much input a judge legally gets in to terrorism investigations, but I am pretty sure that MI5 would just ignore them whatever.
But someone more qualified could well correct me on all this.
Mod that comment up
If they don't have enough proof to charge someone after even a couple of days, why are they so sure someone is a suspect at all? They must have some reason to arrest someone in the first place and I sincerely hope that reason is based on a collection of very compelling evidence. At which point they can charge him/her and have as much time as they want anyway.
It might be. But I think that Microsoft is working on much more simpler motives this time, all any large (or small) software company wants is to deal with one set of legal limitations. It is much easier to create software (online stuff mainly) that conforms with only one legal limit for an entire country than it is to create software that has to conform to 50 different and in many cases contradicary laws.
So it would be as beneficial to Google as it would be for Microsoft.
If Microsoft really cared at all about the consumer on this one, they would deal with the state laws, choose the strictest of them
That has the naive assumption that the strictest laws are best for the consumer. And that only the laws put forward in the USA are the best. Here in Britain, BT had a service for people registering an interest in ADSL, unfortunately, due to an albeit good privacy law, they couldn't provide this information to the other part of the business that could actually decide whether to install the service in the exchanges. A good privacy law that wasn't necessarily good for the consumer in this case.
Re:How many 3rd world countries has he been to?
on
Printing Wikipedia
·
· Score: 1
Well yeah, there is that as well.
Which I guess adds weight to the point about using Wikipedia as a method of educating third-world countries. There are other stumbling blocks than simply an internet connection and a computer.
Re:How many 3rd world countries has he been to?
on
Printing Wikipedia
·
· Score: 1
Yes, because in China, they will have internet access to Wikipedia, especially the entries like 'democracy'. Which might well be blocked by Chinese government firewalls.
. . . In resident evil, you see through the super zombies eyes as it runs across the courtyard and through the door towards you, and you can't do anything. I just died straight away.
. . . In Balders Gate 2 when you first turn into a crazy stalker demon and attack your party, you are desperately trying to get them to run away while it takes chunks out of your people.
Of course they will,
for a start they will just dump it in the Irish Sea like they have before.
This only annoys the Irish, in a sort of international "Not in my back Yard".
If you are worried about those who vote for/against you, you just piss off those who can't.
Slashdot Mirror
Thus my point about MI5 not caring about the law anyway. It should probably be extended to cover the Mets anti-terrorist unit, the FBI, the NSA etc.
Admittedly I am not a Barrister.
But I believe these are people who have been arrested but not charged. This isn't about proving beyond a reasonable doubt in a court. However the police do still need some evidence to bring charges (I guess also, a reasonable amount, that would put the police beyond doubt).
After the police bring charges, then (especially in a sensitive cases such as this) the police can spend a long time to mass futher evidence as the trial wont be for a long time.
I dont know how much input a judge legally gets in to terrorism investigations, but I am pretty sure that MI5 would just ignore them whatever.
But someone more qualified could well correct me on all this.
Mod that comment up
If they don't have enough proof to charge someone after even a couple of days, why are they so sure someone is a suspect at all?
They must have some reason to arrest someone in the first place and I sincerely hope that reason is based on a collection of very compelling evidence. At which point they can charge him/her and have as much time as they want anyway.
It might be. But I think that Microsoft is working on much more simpler motives this time, all any large (or small) software company wants is to deal with one set of legal limitations. It is much easier to create software (online stuff mainly) that conforms with only one legal limit for an entire country than it is to create software that has to conform to 50 different and in many cases contradicary laws.
So it would be as beneficial to Google as it would be for Microsoft.
If Microsoft really cared at all about the consumer on this one, they would deal with the state laws, choose the strictest of them
That has the naive assumption that the strictest laws are best for the consumer. And that only the laws put forward in the USA are the best. Here in Britain, BT had a service for people registering an interest in ADSL, unfortunately, due to an albeit good privacy law, they couldn't provide this information to the other part of the business that could actually decide whether to install the service in the exchanges. A good privacy law that wasn't necessarily good for the consumer in this case.
Well yeah, there is that as well.
Which I guess adds weight to the point about using Wikipedia as a method of educating third-world countries. There are other stumbling blocks than simply an internet connection and a computer.
Yes, because in China, they will have internet access to Wikipedia, especially the entries like 'democracy'. Which might well be blocked by Chinese government firewalls.
. . . In resident evil, you see through the super zombies eyes as it runs across the courtyard and through the door towards you, and you can't do anything. I just died straight away. . . . In Balders Gate 2 when you first turn into a crazy stalker demon and attack your party, you are desperately trying to get them to run away while it takes chunks out of your people.
Of course they will, for a start they will just dump it in the Irish Sea like they have before. This only annoys the Irish, in a sort of international "Not in my back Yard". If you are worried about those who vote for/against you, you just piss off those who can't.