With the help of a jailbreak, yes, I can install applications not approved by Apple.
Sure, but that's like arguing an inmate in a prison is free to watch TV whenever he likes... he just has to have the help of a jailbreak first... er... break out of jail first.
Seriously, that's pretty much the argument you just made.
The guy working at walmart pays no federal income taxes
And yet he likely pays taxes nonetheless.
Sin taxes, Sales taxes, fuel taxes, property taxes, etc all eat up a chunk of his very meager funds.
Many people that work at walmart actually get back more than they pay in.
Hmmm... Perhaps then walmart should pay employees enough to make them eligible to pay federal income taxes.
Did you think about that before you decided to open your maw?
Look at the big picture:
These people are "employed" but make so little money they can't afford to contribute to the running of government.
Perhaps either... a) The wealthy people paying them should pay them enough that the employees can afford to pay taxes.
or
b) The wealthly people not paying them enough to qualify them for federal income tax, shouldn't piss and moan about paying more taxes themselves to make up for the fact that all the jobs they created don't amount to squat in terms of governement revenue.
Perhaps "jobs creators" should only get tax breaks for creating jobs that create actual tax PAYERS. ??!
That's provided people don't ignore the update prompts because "I've heard they can break stuff," or "I think it might be trying to give me a virus."
I get that a lot.
Yeah, its kind of strange... we criticise regular users for clicking OK to anything and everything that pops up on their screen -- as this is how they get viruses, while at the same time most of them have a gaggle of pissed of tray icons nagging them to do actual needed updates.
Nothing cracks me up like cleaning someone's PC that's filled with toolbars, viruses, crapware, and other cruft that the user clicked OK too without reading... while acrobat reader, java, flash, windows update, and vaio update are all asking to install updates.
That said though, I think Dell and Sony update packages (though intolerably annoying) have been effective at getting a lot of that 3rd party stuff including bios updated.
I really think though, that Microsoft and the big vendors should get that software into the windows update track... 20 software updaters that check independantly is just annoying. Especially when most of the updaters themselves are especially annoying.
But even if you wouldn't go as far as saying that the interpretor sets the meaning, maybe we could all agree that going back and modifying a work that you've made is a shitty thing to do if that work already holds meaning for millions of people. As is pointed out in TFA, this is exactly what Lucas did that started this debate
The problem isn't that Lucas keeps going back and re-imagining / revising things. The public has no problem with a directors cut, director's recut, special edition directors re-re-cut...ad nauseum. Its lucas' ip and he's free and welcome to remaster it as much and as often as he likes.
The public however strongly objects to arrogantly being denied what they want.
Me, i want the the THX edition in HD. That is all. No extra scenes. Just a remaster of the original. There is a big market for that. People would be happy to tolerate Lucas indulging in as many editions and remakes and recuts alternate endings, inserted scenes, cgi replacing actors as he likes, if only he'd satisfy the demand for this ONE thing.
Did it occur to you that not having to put your data in RIMs hands was PRECISELY the thing that made RIM successful and desirable in enterprises.
Functionality wise they are the same. Security wise they aren't even in the same LEAGUE.
Comparing gmail to BES from a security standpoint is like asking why the president drives around in a motorcade run by the secret service... doesn't he know yellow cab can get him from point-A to point-B too?
How many end users update their own BIOS now? In my experience, it is precisely zero.
You'd be mistaken.
If they leave their Sony VAIO with its pile of OOBE "out of box experience" complete with Sony Update service, and so forth, then if there is a bios update. They'll get prompted to install it, and they will. Same goes for the bundled support software on many laptops and desktops from major vendors.
Now if you asked me how many end users CONSCIOUSLY update their BIOS i'd agree its precisely zero. But the last few years has seen an upswing in bios updates being handled almost transparently... provided the bundled support software is left intact to do its thing. (which it often is).
Because having a couple applications side by side on screen is a killer feature for a tablet. On a phone, i get there isn't enough screen real estate... but on a tablet there is.
A simple example, of HUNDREDS, is to be able to text with someone on skype, or msn messenger or whatever, at the same time as looking at web page...
Oh and to find an app? Well there's no simple way to do that. It's no less than 4 clicks, then you need 'search' for it.
Sounds pretty much like iOS to me. Which is fine on a tablet. Let me guess your cousin and all her friends hate iphones and ipads because its clunky? I seriously doubt it.
Come to think of it, early iterations of OSX were pretty bad for finding any app not on the dock too. But OSX has gotten a lot better over the years in that regard. (At least to snow leopard, I'm still very undecided on lion)
In any case, I'm skeptical that this will be the only way to find an application when using a keyboard and mouse at launch. really skeptical. And if it is, expect to see a plethora of power-toys and utilities to solve it even before release.
If you hit F3 to search, you're taken to the Metro search interface.
And its these little quirks that i think need to be cleaned up between now and release or its going to be another Vista.
If you are in the explorer windows interface, you should be able to search withotu leaving it. You should be able to open a web browser window without leaving it etc.
I'm REALLY skeptical that they would force you to keep ending up on a metro tile if you start within the explorer desktop.
Yes IE will run in Metro as a full screen app... but I'd be truly SHOCKED if it couldn't also be run as a windowed app in the classic desktop. And i would expect a link access from the classic desktop to launch a browser in the classic desktop.
A link from another metro app.. sure that might take you to a meto instance of explorer.
When I see "What we've been told is that we're going to have to "change the way you do a lot of things" and that we need to "interact with the screen" more. " I see that as being merely describing how metro will work when using metro. And it makes sense in that context.
Suppose someone has simply accounting, and excel, and outlook, and skype, and 3 different contracts in Word open all in different windows... to suggest that they would be thrown out of that onto a full screen tile to do a search or look at a web page is absurd.
It doesn't make sense. Its counter productive. And nobody wants that.
Now, I'll concede there might be some hiccups and growing pains that do idiotic things... such as launching a full screen search tile from inside the classic desktop whenever you want to search for something... but I think that's this sort of thing will be resolved before launch.
Hard to say what is more or less difficult on an OS that ain't released yet... izn't?
Not really, the new metro stuff is a lot like windows phone 7, and will clearly feel very ipad-esque on a tablet / netbook.
And the classic windows explorer is a pretty well known quantity.
Its not that hard to see that Apple got a lot of things right with the ipad user interface. (It got a lot of things wrong too... and quite bluntly I think windows 8 shows a lot of promise in terms of addressing those short comings.
Because Microsoft is changing the default behaviour in the new product. And the new default behaviour will be LESS effective for the users of the traditional Windows systems (desktops and laptops).
First, the classic desktop is an application tile in the new interface. They've added an abstraction layer. The old system is not "gone", its just one step away. Its not even an "either or" really... because you launch the classic desktop from Metro... and then switch to and from that and other metro tiles. Hell... might even support running multiple instances of explorer in separate tiles... i wonder... that'd be really cool if you could.
Here's an idea. Why not leave the DEFAULT behaviour as it is already and add a new OPTION to change it to the tablet-friendly format for those who want it that way?
1) Because the people who would most benefit from the "new" Window manager are the ones that would be least likely to find the option to turn it on.
2) Because the full classic desktop manager is simply a "full screen" application. In other words, its a tile in the new system.
The user does not need to "switch" to classic, they just launch it, because its an application.
Metro will be good on tablets which is what its aiming for. And I already like it more than iOS on the ipad.
Nobody should seriously be using the metro interface while writing an artical in word while referencing websites, email, pdfs, etc... that's just asinine.
Use explorer where it makes more sense. Its not going away anytime soon, and if it does go away it will be replaced with something just as powerful... its absurd to think we are going to be forced into metro.
Re:So we're back to Windows 1.0?
on
Windows 8 Roundup
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
The windows 8 tiles system supports true multitasking, and has a few window arrangements that let you have 1/2/3 (or 4?) applications on screen at once.
Its actually pretty well though out, and should work pretty well for tablet users and netbooks.
For those of us power users with big desktops and multiple screens with 10+ windows open... guess what... that's not going away. You just launch Explorer, and have a full desktop window manager.
Seriously... what's with all the idiotic hate on this?
Microsoft is only changing the DEFAULT window manager to be more consumer / tablet friendly. Good for them.
The prosumer/business/productivity group will still have the more pro oriented traditional window manager for doing what we do.
Nobody even half expects people working on an excel spreedsheet business projection drawing data from pdfs, web pages, and their email to do so using the new interface. Some things make sense to do in multiple overlapping windows. That's not going away.
I think everyone has a USB disk/key nowadays. If not, you can buy one for a couple of bucks. Have them make a "click here to prepare a bootable USB disk which will flash your BIOS" application and be done with it.
And how do they boot off it? Few computers are set by default to boot off the usb drive, and most shouldn't be.
So now, in addition to fiddling with a hardware dongle, you want them to go into bios and mess around with the selection of boot devices, and then later change it back...
"and be done with it"? Making the bootable disk is just the first step in a needless process that only gets more complicated from here... expect
a) support calls to skyrocket in frequency... as millions of users flail about useless because they had trouble making one... they used a 2 Terabyte external usb hard drive instead of a flash drive and lost all their data, they managed to locate a usb drive from 5 years ago that is too small or doesn't work... and then after getting flash drive... can't figure out how to get the pc to boot off of it.
b) bios updates to not happen because they are "too hard"
Bash can pass objects from one module to the other, that's what the pipe is for.
I think you have no idea what "objects" are, and are just parroting linux fanboism.
Piping a character stream from one program to the next is not "passing objects".
And the windows shell runs on things that have, at the very least Windows Embedded, and you can assume there will be a certain threshold of minimum specs. Powershell isn't not going to push you over the top.
You didn't really answer my question, but rather side stepped it and gave an example where a column could have both.
I've certainly been there, but then why not simply:
UPDATE oldTable SET newField= ''
Rather than have the old records with NULLs?
If its a non-required field, that is blank most of the time anyway... what value is there is letting it stay for old records and then dealing with the possibility it might be null all over the place in one's code?
So... you can opt not to be tracked by registering with google your wifi access piont and contact information, including name, street address etc.
Is that handing over the information we're asking them not to track, and then some?
That would be like being able to "opt out" of a TSA groping by taking all your clothes off, bending over and separating your cheeks. Not much of a win.
It is not a subtle fucking difference. It is a huge big honking difference. Either you don't know the information which is null or you know it to be "".
I'm curious, while in theory a good database can differentiate... how do you realistically capture the information in a user interface?
You've got some form: Please enter your name: firstname : middlename : last-name :
If someone leaves middlename blank and submits the form, do you think it is known to be "", or is it NULL? If you assume NULL and someone doesn't have a middle name, how do they indicate that they don't have one so you don't assume its missing.
If you assume its "" then your database is full of incorrect information, because most people's middle name is not "" even if they omitted it from the form.
Do you really have a checkbox next to every field... this field intentionally left blank because the correct value is "". I have NEVER seen such a form...
What is the actual right / normal course of action?
That assumes people are rational in their decision making.
The government has in several occasions made a dramatic change in the prescribed punishment (adding mandatory prison time, or increasing its minimum length, or doubling or trebling the prescribed fines...) to a crime to make the Punishment greater. There has NEVER been a corresponding drop in the rate of that crime as a result.
The idea that people committing the crimes are evaluating the cost function before acting is thoroughly debunked in my opinion.
Psycho-altering everyone who shoplifts, pees in public fountains, gropes people, and cheats on taxes sounds like some kind of futuristic dystopia. I'm not sure we really want to go there.
I don't disagree.
But putting them in cages for their rest of their lives isn't dystopic? (Not to mention a huge drain on the non-criminal public's resources.)
Another common situation where a manslaughter charge may be given is when you defend yourself but use excessive force to do so. Say you're outside late, somebody runs up to you from behind, you get scared and grab a nearby blunt object and hit the person to defend yourself. It then turns out that he was just trying to give you your wallet back that you dropped earlier, and your blow was severe enough to kill. That kind of situation could , depending on circumstances, land you a manslaughter conviction, but locking you up for many years would obviously not be appropriate.
Locking you up at all makes no sense. The convicted is a) Not a danger to society b) Not of a criminal state of mind c) Not in need of rehabilitation d) truly remorseful e) Likely more in need of counseling to get over what he did than anything else.
The victims family likely want to see "justice" but what is justice? Taking 5+ years of another mans life over an accident is just revenge.
But letting him off scott free seems wrong even to me... but perhaps a few thousands of hours of community service over a period of several years seem more a propos than incarceration to me. Have him do some good to make up for the evil he unintentially inflicted.
How many people did he kill while he was in jail? How many did he kill after he was executed? Seems like it IS working, to me.
It didn't change him so that he wasn't a serial killer. He didn't feel remorse... so the punishment rehabilitation failed completely.
Sure it succeeded by physically isolating him from the rest of society and mitigated the damage he could do.
But what about a mugger? Or a guy who shoplifts? Or defrauds old women? Or gropes people on the bus? Or pees in a public fountain? Or cheats on his taxes? Or hacks into a computer?
Prison might prevent people from doing this while they are there, and killing them will stop them from doing it ever. But it RARELY makes people better people and unless you plan to incarcerate for live, or execute everyone who is guilty of a crime... most of them are going to be back in with the public. Mostly no better than they were before. (And many worse.)
Slashdot Mirror
With the help of a jailbreak, yes, I can install applications not approved by Apple.
Sure, but that's like arguing an inmate in a prison is free to watch TV whenever he likes... he just has to have the help of a jailbreak first... er... break out of jail first.
Seriously, that's pretty much the argument you just made.
The guy working at walmart pays no federal income taxes
And yet he likely pays taxes nonetheless.
Sin taxes, Sales taxes, fuel taxes, property taxes, etc all eat up a chunk of his very meager funds.
Many people that work at walmart actually get back more than they pay in.
Hmmm... Perhaps then walmart should pay employees enough to make them eligible to pay federal income taxes.
Did you think about that before you decided to open your maw?
Look at the big picture:
These people are "employed" but make so little money they can't afford to contribute to the running of government.
Perhaps either...
a) The wealthy people paying them should pay them enough that the employees can afford to pay taxes.
or
b) The wealthly people not paying them enough to qualify them for federal income tax, shouldn't piss and moan about paying more taxes themselves to make up for the fact that all the jobs they created don't amount to squat in terms of governement revenue.
Perhaps "jobs creators" should only get tax breaks for creating jobs that create actual tax PAYERS. ??!
That's provided people don't ignore the update prompts because "I've heard they can break stuff," or "I think it might be trying to give me a virus."
I get that a lot.
Yeah, its kind of strange... we criticise regular users for clicking OK to anything and everything that pops up on their screen -- as this is how they get viruses, while at the same time most of them have a gaggle of pissed of tray icons nagging them to do actual needed updates.
Nothing cracks me up like cleaning someone's PC that's filled with toolbars, viruses, crapware, and other cruft that the user clicked OK too without reading... while acrobat reader, java, flash, windows update, and vaio update are all asking to install updates.
That said though, I think Dell and Sony update packages (though intolerably annoying) have been effective at getting a lot of that 3rd party stuff including bios updated.
I really think though, that Microsoft and the big vendors should get that software into the windows update track... 20 software updaters that check independantly is just annoying. Especially when most of the updaters themselves are especially annoying.
But even if you wouldn't go as far as saying that the interpretor sets the meaning, maybe we could all agree that going back and modifying a work that you've made is a shitty thing to do if that work already holds meaning for millions of people. As is pointed out in TFA, this is exactly what Lucas did that started this debate
The problem isn't that Lucas keeps going back and re-imagining / revising things. The public has no problem with a directors cut, director's recut, special edition directors re-re-cut...ad nauseum. Its lucas' ip and he's free and welcome to remaster it as much and as often as he likes.
The public however strongly objects to arrogantly being denied what they want.
Me, i want the the THX edition in HD. That is all. No extra scenes. Just a remaster of the original. There is a big market for that. People would be happy to tolerate Lucas indulging in as many editions and remakes and recuts alternate endings, inserted scenes, cgi replacing actors as he likes, if only he'd satisfy the demand for this ONE thing.
The GMail app does this perfectly.
Did it occur to you that not having to put your data in RIMs hands was PRECISELY the thing that made RIM successful and desirable in enterprises.
Functionality wise they are the same. Security wise they aren't even in the same LEAGUE.
Comparing gmail to BES from a security standpoint is like asking why the president drives around in a motorcade run by the secret service... doesn't he know yellow cab can get him from point-A to point-B too?
How many end users update their own BIOS now? In my experience, it is precisely zero.
You'd be mistaken.
If they leave their Sony VAIO with its pile of OOBE "out of box experience" complete with Sony Update service, and so forth, then if there is a bios update. They'll get prompted to install it, and they will. Same goes for the bundled support software on many laptops and desktops from major vendors.
Now if you asked me how many end users CONSCIOUSLY update their BIOS i'd agree its precisely zero. But the last few years has seen an upswing in bios updates being handled almost transparently... provided the bundled support software is left intact to do its thing. (which it often is).
Why?
Because having a couple applications side by side on screen is a killer feature for a tablet. On a phone, i get there isn't enough screen real estate... but on a tablet there is.
A simple example, of HUNDREDS, is to be able to text with someone on skype, or msn messenger or whatever, at the same time as looking at web page...
Oh and to find an app? Well there's no simple way to do that. It's no less than 4 clicks, then you need 'search' for it.
Sounds pretty much like iOS to me. Which is fine on a tablet. Let me guess your cousin and all her friends hate iphones and ipads because its clunky? I seriously doubt it.
Come to think of it, early iterations of OSX were pretty bad for finding any app not on the dock too. But OSX has gotten a lot better over the years in that regard. (At least to snow leopard, I'm still very undecided on lion)
In any case, I'm skeptical that this will be the only way to find an application when using a keyboard and mouse at launch. really skeptical. And if it is, expect to see a plethora of power-toys and utilities to solve it even before release.
If you hit F3 to search, you're taken to the Metro search interface.
And its these little quirks that i think need to be cleaned up between now and release or its going to be another Vista.
If you are in the explorer windows interface, you should be able to search withotu leaving it. You should be able to open a web browser window without leaving it etc.
I'm REALLY skeptical that they would force you to keep ending up on a metro tile if you start within the explorer desktop.
Yes IE will run in Metro as a full screen app... but I'd be truly SHOCKED if it couldn't also be run as a windowed app in the classic desktop. And i would expect a link access from the classic desktop to launch a browser in the classic desktop.
A link from another metro app.. sure that might take you to a meto instance of explorer.
When I see "What we've been told is that we're going to have to "change the way you do a lot of things" and that we need to "interact with the screen" more. " I see that as being merely describing how metro will work when using metro. And it makes sense in that context.
Suppose someone has simply accounting, and excel, and outlook, and skype, and 3 different contracts in Word open all in different windows... to suggest that they would be thrown out of that onto a full screen tile to do a search or look at a web page is absurd.
It doesn't make sense. Its counter productive. And nobody wants that.
Now, I'll concede there might be some hiccups and growing pains that do idiotic things... such as launching a full screen search tile from inside the classic desktop whenever you want to search for something... but I think that's this sort of thing will be resolved before launch.
Hard to say what is more or less difficult on an OS that ain't released yet... izn't?
Not really, the new metro stuff is a lot like windows phone 7, and will clearly feel very ipad-esque on a tablet / netbook.
And the classic windows explorer is a pretty well known quantity.
Its not that hard to see that Apple got a lot of things right with the ipad user interface. (It got a lot of things wrong too... and quite bluntly I think windows 8 shows a lot of promise in terms of addressing those short comings.
Because Microsoft is changing the default behaviour in the new product. And the new default behaviour will be LESS effective for the users of the traditional Windows systems (desktops and laptops).
First, the classic desktop is an application tile in the new interface. They've added an abstraction layer. The old system is not "gone", its just one step away. Its not even an "either or" really... because you launch the classic desktop from Metro... and then switch to and from that and other metro tiles. Hell... might even support running multiple instances of explorer in separate tiles... i wonder... that'd be really cool if you could.
Here's an idea. Why not leave the DEFAULT behaviour as it is already and add a new OPTION to change it to the tablet-friendly format for those who want it that way?
1) Because the people who would most benefit from the "new" Window manager are the ones that would be least likely to find the option to turn it on.
2) Because the full classic desktop manager is simply a "full screen" application. In other words, its a tile in the new system.
The user does not need to "switch" to classic, they just launch it, because its an application.
Metro will be good on tablets which is what its aiming for. And I already like it more than iOS on the ipad.
Nobody should seriously be using the metro interface while writing an artical in word while referencing websites, email, pdfs, etc... that's just asinine.
Use explorer where it makes more sense. Its not going away anytime soon, and if it does go away it will be replaced with something just as powerful... its absurd to think we are going to be forced into metro.
The windows 8 tiles system supports true multitasking, and has a few window arrangements that let you have 1/2/3 (or 4?) applications on screen at once.
Its actually pretty well though out, and should work pretty well for tablet users and netbooks.
For those of us power users with big desktops and multiple screens with 10+ windows open... guess what... that's not going away. You just launch Explorer, and have a full desktop window manager.
Seriously... what's with all the idiotic hate on this?
Microsoft is only changing the DEFAULT window manager to be more consumer / tablet friendly. Good for them.
The prosumer/business/productivity group will still have the more pro oriented traditional window manager for doing what we do.
Nobody even half expects people working on an excel spreedsheet business projection drawing data from pdfs, web pages, and their email to do so using the new interface. Some things make sense to do in multiple overlapping windows. That's not going away.
So stop flipping out about it.
I think everyone has a USB disk/key nowadays. If not, you can buy one for a couple of bucks. Have them make a "click here to prepare a bootable USB disk which will flash your BIOS" application and be done with it.
And how do they boot off it? Few computers are set by default to boot off the usb drive, and most shouldn't be.
So now, in addition to fiddling with a hardware dongle, you want them to go into bios and mess around with the selection of boot devices, and then later change it back...
"and be done with it"? Making the bootable disk is just the first step in a needless process that only gets more complicated from here... expect
a) support calls to skyrocket in frequency ... as millions of users flail about useless because they had trouble making one... they used a 2 Terabyte external usb hard drive instead of a flash drive and lost all their data, they managed to locate a usb drive from 5 years ago that is too small or doesn't work... and then after getting flash drive... can't figure out how to get the pc to boot off of it.
b) bios updates to not happen because they are "too hard"
Bash can pass objects from one module to the other, that's what the pipe is for.
I think you have no idea what "objects" are, and are just parroting linux fanboism.
Piping a character stream from one program to the next is not "passing objects".
And the windows shell runs on things that have, at the very least Windows Embedded, and you can assume there will be a certain threshold of minimum specs. Powershell isn't not going to push you over the top.
You didn't really answer my question, but rather side stepped it and gave an example where a column could have both.
I've certainly been there, but then why not simply:
UPDATE oldTable SET newField= ''
Rather than have the old records with NULLs?
If its a non-required field, that is blank most of the time anyway... what value is there is letting it stay for old records and then dealing with the possibility it might be null all over the place in one's code?
Get rid of mental clutches and start using your brain is my advice.
Because memorizing API's is what makes a good programmer? Spare me.
So... you can opt not to be tracked by registering with google your wifi access piont and contact information, including name, street address etc.
Is that handing over the information we're asking them not to track, and then some?
That would be like being able to "opt out" of a TSA groping by taking all your clothes off, bending over and separating your cheeks. Not much of a win.
Microsoft isn't saying anything about linux, however this is a direct attack against linux and unix in general
Its real competition, not "an attack". This is a good thing.
It is not a subtle fucking difference. It is a huge big honking difference. Either you don't know the information which is null or you know it to be "".
I'm curious, while in theory a good database can differentiate... how do you realistically capture the information in a user interface?
You've got some form: Please enter your name:
firstname :
middlename :
last-name :
If someone leaves middlename blank and submits the form, do you think it is known to be "", or is it NULL? If you assume NULL and someone doesn't have a middle name, how do they indicate that they don't have one so you don't assume its missing.
If you assume its "" then your database is full of incorrect information, because most people's middle name is not "" even if they omitted it from the form.
Do you really have a checkbox next to every field... this field intentionally left blank because the correct value is "". I have NEVER seen such a form...
What is the actual right / normal course of action?
That assumes people are rational in their decision making.
The government has in several occasions made a dramatic change in the prescribed punishment (adding mandatory prison time, or increasing its minimum length, or doubling or trebling the prescribed fines...) to a crime to make the Punishment greater. There has NEVER been a corresponding drop in the rate of that crime as a result.
The idea that people committing the crimes are evaluating the cost function before acting is thoroughly debunked in my opinion.
Psycho-altering everyone who shoplifts, pees in public fountains, gropes people, and cheats on taxes sounds like some kind of futuristic dystopia. I'm not sure we really want to go there.
I don't disagree.
But putting them in cages for their rest of their lives isn't dystopic? (Not to mention a huge drain on the non-criminal public's resources.)
Another common situation where a manslaughter charge may be given is when you defend yourself but use excessive force to do so. Say you're outside late, somebody runs up to you from behind, you get scared and grab a nearby blunt object and hit the person to defend yourself. It then turns out that he was just trying to give you your wallet back that you dropped earlier, and your blow was severe enough to kill. That kind of situation could , depending on circumstances, land you a manslaughter conviction, but locking you up for many years would obviously not be appropriate.
Locking you up at all makes no sense.
The convicted is
a) Not a danger to society
b) Not of a criminal state of mind
c) Not in need of rehabilitation
d) truly remorseful
e) Likely more in need of counseling to get over what he did than anything else.
The victims family likely want to see "justice" but what is justice? Taking 5+ years of another mans life over an accident is just revenge.
But letting him off scott free seems wrong even to me... but perhaps a few thousands of hours of community service over a period of several years seem more a propos than incarceration to me. Have him do some good to make up for the evil he unintentially inflicted.
$14? $100?
The summary said they were $3000 to $8000 a pair...
How many people did he kill while he was in jail? How many did he kill after he was executed? Seems like it IS working, to me.
It didn't change him so that he wasn't a serial killer. He didn't feel remorse... so the punishment rehabilitation failed completely.
Sure it succeeded by physically isolating him from the rest of society and mitigated the damage he could do.
But what about a mugger? Or a guy who shoplifts? Or defrauds old women? Or gropes people on the bus? Or pees in a public fountain? Or cheats on his taxes? Or hacks into a computer?
Prison might prevent people from doing this while they are there, and killing them will stop them from doing it ever. But it RARELY makes people better people and unless you plan to incarcerate for live, or execute everyone who is guilty of a crime... most of them are going to be back in with the public. Mostly no better than they were before. (And many worse.)