I once got a speeding ticket for 10mph above 45 limit. The officer had "estimated" my speed. When I challenged him in court, he presented a training certificate, certifying that he could estimate speed with some ridiculous accuracy (forgot the actual number, maybe within 3mph).
So the officer was properly calibrated; what's your problem?
The judge got tired of me reaming the detective and says "I really don't care what evidence you have, you're paying for the ticket. Dismissed." That was the end of that. Traffic court is a joke.
That's why you need to go to your local university's law library and research relevant case law. The judge can often choose whether they want to accept your evidence or not; they have much less leeway if you quote similar cases where the evidence was accepted.
so I went to court on the principal of it, after reading up on speeding ticket defense and the city's speed ordinance at the local University Library.
That is the best "non-legal" advice you can get. The local university's law library (if they have one, otherwise find a different university) is a great way to research relevant case law, and judges/magistrates follow case law.
Name one content model that works in your ideal world. How can the initial outlay for a $200M movie ever be recouped?
Let's try a mental experiment:
1. Piracy becomes so widespread that "initial outlay for $200M movies" cannot be recouped. 2. Studios stop making $200M movies.
From here we have several possibilities. One:
3a. Society gets over it. 4a. Nothing of value is lost (for the majority of the population, at least).
Another:
3b. There is still demand for "$200M movies". 4b. Somebody finds a way to leverage that demand with a new business model. For example, they may realize that *modest* profits are better than none and find ways to provide attractive content with lower costs.
Personally, I believe that, given the chance, option #b will emerge as a viable business model, because: - There will always be people willing to pay *reasonable* amounts for content, particularly if the alternative is that the content will not otherwise be made. - There is no mandated requirement to pay $20M/movie to the Daniel Radcliffes and $100M/movie to the Michael Bays. There are enough talented people that will gladly do it for <10% the amounts.
To summarize: If people want your content badly enough to be willing to pay for it, you will find ways of monetizing it even without artificial protection. Otherwise, you should choose another line of business.
Google does not like communicating with people, they are "too big to care"(TM). Not that it is a big surprise, after all McDonald's also doesn't give a damn about what the cows have to say, but it highlights the company's behavior and sends a clear message: if you ever have a problem with one of our products or services, you are on your own.
I can't speak about all of their offerings, as I only experienced this with Google maps and Google Toolbar.
With Maps, Google removed the extremely useful "saved locations" feature. When enough people complained, Google addressed the issue by "archiving" the support group.
With Toolbar, after numerous complaints about bugs and broken functionality, Google also responded by "archiving" all the Toolbar support groups (closing them to new posts). I managed to sneak a comment on Brian Rose's blog during a window when commenting was enabled. I'll reproduce it here just in case:
Hello Brian,
I have several questions: one general, the others more specific.
First, the general: Why is Google, and in particular the ToolBar team, so averse to open communication with the users? On 2/16 you "archived" the support group http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Toolbar/thread?tid=71bb5612b2fdcabc), directing comments to this blog, but commenting on the posts was disabled until 5/21. That's over three months of telling the users "we don't want your feedback". Not to mention that comments on a blog, even when enabled, are not a substitute to a support group.
Now the first specific question: You list "Multiple usernames not suggested when Toolbar enabled" as a known unresolved issue. You were alerted to it on 3/1/09 for version 5.0 beta (http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Toolbar/thread?tid=361f7a8de92e04c6). 15 months and 2 major versions later the problem still exists. Why does it take so long to fix a known, reproducible and documented issue that breaks a built-in Firefox functionality?
The second specific question: ToolBar Version 7.1.20100408Wb1 is completely unusable since it will not allow me to change the settings. Setting "Restrict Toolbar settings to this computer" as per the suggestion on the "known issues" page does not help at all. Where can I get an older version that does not exhibit this behaviour?
The third specific issue: After upgrading from 7.0 to 7.1 (well, trying to upgrade, I ended up uninstalling it due to the above) the Toolbar deleted all my custom buttons, the auto-fill entries, etc. -- basically all my custom settings were gone.
Please address these issues.
Regards, Alex.
So basically your experience with Google seems to be the norm. I used to be a big Google fan, now I suggest using alternatives whenever possible.
How wrong you are. At the end of the 19th century, most [who?] scientists did think everything worth discovering had been discovered [citation needed].
(c) Grab peeping tom by the scruff of his neck, drag him into his house, and go through his crap looking for the pictures. Take what you need as evidence against him, destroy what you need to. Break his fingers, etc.
An interesting approach. What if: (a) Said peeping tom is bigger/stronger/more violent/better trained/better armed/better connected/all-of-the-above than you are? (b) You don't find any evidence but instead get sued both criminally (assault) and civilly, financially ruining you and your family?
I'm paying attention and therefore decide to swerve out of the way.
There are so many scenarios where swerving is not feasible: you're stopped at a traffic light, you have obstructions (possibly other vehicles) on either side, the other vehicle ran a stop sign in a limited-visibility intersection,...
When Speedtest.net shows my upload speed, it goes up to 0.5Mb/s, stays there for a while (until about 3/4 of the way) and then immediately drops to 0.3Mb/s and stays there for the rest of the test.
It is entirely up to interpretation if allowing prayer in schools constitutes an "establishment of religion" or whether it is "prohibiting the free exercise thereof".
I did not say that the US innovates more because it's right leaning, I said that when European countries institute leftist policy they tend to be less innovative. In other words, I'm not saying one create the innovation, I'm saying one retards it.
Ok, then. Provide actual data that supports your assertions. And by "actual data" I mean numbers and dates.
This great quote sums it up for me and my son: "Martin Gardner has turned dozens of innocent youngsters into math professors, and thousands of math professors into innocent youngsters."
Which of his books can be recommended for youngsters (grade school)?
Slashdot Mirror
So the officer was properly calibrated; what's your problem?
That's why you need to go to your local university's law library and research relevant case law.
The judge can often choose whether they want to accept your evidence or not; they have much less leeway if you quote similar cases where the evidence was accepted.
That is the best "non-legal" advice you can get. The local university's law library (if they have one, otherwise find a different university) is a great way to research relevant case law, and judges/magistrates follow case law.
I don't blame him either. Hell, If I could get such an amount, I'd be asking it as well.
That was not my point.
You don't *need* a $20M Daniel Radcliffe to make a good movie.
The Blair Witch Project had a total budget of $22K.
Let's try a mental experiment:
1. Piracy becomes so widespread that "initial outlay for $200M movies" cannot be recouped.
2. Studios stop making $200M movies.
From here we have several possibilities. One:
3a. Society gets over it.
4a. Nothing of value is lost (for the majority of the population, at least).
Another:
3b. There is still demand for "$200M movies".
4b. Somebody finds a way to leverage that demand with a new business model. For example, they may realize that *modest* profits are better than none and find ways to provide attractive content with lower costs.
Personally, I believe that, given the chance, option #b will emerge as a viable business model, because:
- There will always be people willing to pay *reasonable* amounts for content, particularly if the alternative is that the content will not otherwise be made.
- There is no mandated requirement to pay $20M/movie to the Daniel Radcliffes and $100M/movie to the Michael Bays. There are enough talented people that will gladly do it for <10% the amounts.
To summarize:
If people want your content badly enough to be willing to pay for it, you will find ways of monetizing it even without artificial protection. Otherwise, you should choose another line of business.
Will I regret asking what the "F" stands for?
Just FYI, "samizdat" is literally "self publishing".
> Biochemistry is crazy stuff.
This.
Google does not like communicating with people, they are "too big to care"(TM). Not that it is a big surprise, after all McDonald's also doesn't give a damn about what the cows have to say, but it highlights the company's behavior and sends a clear message: if you ever have a problem with one of our products or services, you are on your own.
I can't speak about all of their offerings, as I only experienced this with Google maps and Google Toolbar.
With Maps, Google removed the extremely useful "saved locations" feature. When enough people complained, Google addressed the issue by "archiving" the support group.
With Toolbar, after numerous complaints about bugs and broken functionality, Google also responded by "archiving" all the Toolbar support groups (closing them to new posts). I managed to sneak a comment on Brian Rose's blog during a window when commenting was enabled. I'll reproduce it here just in case:
So basically your experience with Google seems to be the norm.
I used to be a big Google fan, now I suggest using alternatives whenever possible.
<wikipedia>
</wikipedia>
Wasn't it a patent office examiner?
What about L. Ron Hubbard then?
An interesting approach. What if:
(a) Said peeping tom is bigger/stronger/more violent/better trained/better armed/better connected/all-of-the-above than you are?
(b) You don't find any evidence but instead get sued both criminally (assault) and civilly, financially ruining you and your family?
Re-read his statement. He's not talking about cars, he's talking about American drivers' expectations.
There are so many scenarios where swerving is not feasible: you're stopped at a traffic light, you have obstructions (possibly other vehicles) on either side, the other vehicle ran a stop sign in a limited-visibility intersection, ...
Not a problem then, right?
I offer my sincere condolences.
However, nowadays this condition is considered treatable.
Nudity is natural. It can be inappropriate in some circumstances but the same can be said about eating. Still, four out of five ain't bad.
Other than that, kudos for a well reasoned and well presented opinion.
When Speedtest.net shows my upload speed, it goes up to 0.5Mb/s, stays there for a while (until about 3/4 of the way) and then immediately drops to 0.3Mb/s and stays there for the rest of the test.
Can anyone explain this behaviour? Throttling?
s/allowing/mandating and stop creating strawmen.
Ok, then. Provide actual data that supports your assertions.
And by "actual data" I mean numbers and dates.
You have to be reasonably intelligent to understand xkcd. You may still not like it.
Which of his books can be recommended for youngsters (grade school)?
Seems to be compatible with Mindstorms
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff631056(v=MSDN.10).aspx
Huh? "Luck" is a handy shorthand for "falling near the far end of the statistical bell curve".
> Yeah, Geekman is much better.
Faster than a speeding Xeon...
That's five circles right there!