I agree that he had no right to be there (past 11PM). Yes, the initial confrontation was questionable, and some of the details aren't very clear. It's also obvious that Tabatabainejad had his own agenda from the beginning. His argument of racial profiling, which may be valid to some extent, is weak IMO.
However, the UC Police Officer (not a CSO - a CSO shooting someone is going to guarantee a lawsuit or two) probably shouldn't have fired any shots. The guy was not a physical threat, nor was he verbally threatening the officers.
But how can you argue that the first shot may not be justified, and the latter ones are? If you shoot someone (say, with a gun) walking away, the action is already questionable. To continuously shoot him while he's lying on the ground is even more difficult to justify. Now we're advocating to shoot every person just because they don't move? So I can fire a first shot, and then shoot four more times because he wouldn't shut up? Often, it's the additional shots that show intent. And throw in the threats of shooting the witnesses, and the police actions in the incident are harder to defend.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this ruling only applies to California, since it's a district court. I'm from California and I applaud the ruling, but it doesn't seem like it's going to have a huge impact unless it's a federal (or even international) court. Then again, California does have a lot of doctors...
Along those same lines, there's also the brand name vs generic drug issue that doctors deal with. A few months ago, the NY Times had an article about a breast cancer drug that is essentially a modified form of Taxol (paclitaxel), except that it costs $4200 a dose (according to the article, generic taxol is $150, brand name $1000).
The article points out that doctors and health insurance companies are caught in the same web, in that they are hesitant to encourage patients to use generic drugs, as it might alienate the patient. I certainly think that doctors and HMOs/PPOs perpetuate the problem, Not to mention the other biotechs/pharmaceuticals, medical device companies, FDA, etc.
I've always imagined that the system would be reformed; I just don't know where to start.
Did you buy this in the US? I bought an HP desktop 3 years ago and I was surprised that it came with no disks (I hadn't purchased a computer in a while before that), so I even called them and asked. Nope, they weren't going to give me CDs. Just burn the recovery CDs, they said. So I did, and I have never used them.
I bought a Compaq laptop 7 months ago. It didn't come with anything. I installed vanilla XP2 on it and then had to spend an hour chatting with their tech support because their useless website didn't have modem and sound drivers.
The Chinese believed eating long noodles would lead to a long life... so does eating lots of instant ramen allow us to live into our 90s? Well, that and a fairly large fortune.
So the moral of the story: Don't eat crushed, uncooked ramen noodles with the packets added in. I know you've done this before too! In the future, don't bother crushing it. (I know it's not Nissin, but the Maruchan stuff was good too..)
Actually, I would categorize their options as cancellation and "everything else". The suspension is nothing but a scam to take advantage of people (including those who are tech-savvy like the author). Honestly, most people don't read through the TOS with a fine-toothed comb, nor do they expect to have to go through a million clicks.
Is it legal to have customers agree "not to dispute any charges by True.com or its authorized agents"? It seems like the RIAA's tactic where they force defendents to reveal the files that they supposedly shared illegally. Except in this case, True.com will claim every charge as "authorized" (although they probably deny this), therefore making it a catch-22.
I agree with you that True.com seems to be worse than NetZero. Not by much, but at least with NetZero, he did eventually cancel it. With True.com, he got nothing but threats and ridiculous policies.
I've always wondered: How much money do (larger) companies get from all the advertisements and sponsorships they install in the OS? Like WildTangent, MS Office, Norton, and other programs. It seems to me that not installing an OS would then preclude them from these advertisements and thus more revenue.
I sent my laptop back to HP to fix a fan. And they reimaged the hard drive too. Ugh.
I'm a co-op at one of their other locations, but my impression is that most of the deployed computers run Windows (it's certainly true here, and possibly at the main site). OS X is certainly supported, but as far as I know, there hasn't been a push here for Macs.
Cingular? Cingular is horrible. You should be careful, as they add ridiculous fees and "features" even though you specifically requested that it be removed/disabled. In their free time, employees were told to slam the accounts of customers with text messaging and other fake charges. They were caught when a customer (company) found $7000 in other charges on their bill. They billed me for text messaging and allowed for long distance, even though I told them I didn't want it.
I was an old AT&T Wireless customer before Cingular bought them. Although they claimed they would support AT&T Wireless, soon after, they started removing TDMA towers - the customer service rep confirmed as such. Shitty ass company.
I don't think the comma there changes the meaning, as it still implies that AOL's letter shows the plaintiff downloaded comprighted materials.
Unfortunately, I think semantics does play a major role in the legal system. Although it was not the same situation, the "McLibel" case was partly able to drag on for so many years because of semantics. To summarize, some environmental activists had distributed pamphlets that made statements about McDonald's. The company sued them for libel, saying that all the claims in the pamphlet were false - allowing the defendents to call witnesses to support those claims. Also, there's a story (not sure if it's true) of 3 children who inherited money from their parents through a will, stating that the wealth would be distributed equally between "A, B and C." Naturally, one assumes each person to receive 1/3, but A sued claiming that the will really meant for him to get 1/2, and for "B and C" to split the remaining half.
Colbert is a huge nerd/geek/whatever. When he was younger, he played Dungeons & Dragons and read some J.R.R. Tolkien books. When Viggo Mortenson went on the Daily Show a while back, Jon Stewart played an audio tape of Colbert reciting (from memory, I believe) Aragorn's history.
I'm pretty sure Colbert knows about games in general, if not The Sims and Spore specifically. On the show, he pretends to be an arrogant, condescending jerk - being a technical, geeky person would not really fit that role. However, I do agree that he did give Wright more speaking time than he usually gives some of his guests.
Sure, IE may have been better than Netscape at some point, but Microsoft's dealings had a lot to deal with that. In U.S. v. Microsoft, Judge Jackson's Court's Findings of Fact document many instances of Microsoft deliberately using their power and influence to gain marketshare (e.g., withholding APIs, tying IE to the OS, etc.).
Out of curiosity, how does the lack of sleep affect REM sleep and the body's metabolism? I have narcolepsy and I take modafinil (Provigil) to help me stay awake through the day. I could care less about Cephalon, but trying to stay awake without taking the drug is sometimes a hopeless endeavor. And also, how does narcolepsy change things? (I'm referring to metabolism; I already know about lacking non-REM sleep and such.) Thanks.
But it's still disturbing how PR departments always try to downplay incidents (with phrases like "a very small percentage of those accounts", "a rigorous and thorough review".) Granted, it is a nice gesture, but a 20-day credit is nothing to Blizzard anyway. I'm sure that if they offered longer free trials, they could get more users to play the game and eventually pay for it.
And as for that other company... they always seem to amaze me with new ways to piss off their customers.
I do agree that he was probably being a self-righteous asshole trying to make a point (is it really that hard to show ID?). However, I wouldn't consider his actions to be descriptive of an intellectual practicing civil disobedience. His actions were pointless.
Given that, the police had no right to shock him at all, since, according to all accounts, he was leaving when they grabbed him. Additionally, even the Daily Bruin article two days later was somewhat questioned the description that he was trying to build resistance:
Neither the video footage nor eyewitness accounts of the events confirmed that Tabatabainejad encouraged resistance, and he repeatedly told the officers he was not fighting and would leave.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree that he had no right to be there (past 11PM). Yes, the initial confrontation was questionable, and some of the details aren't very clear. It's also obvious that Tabatabainejad had his own agenda from the beginning. His argument of racial profiling, which may be valid to some extent, is weak IMO.
However, the UC Police Officer (not a CSO - a CSO shooting someone is going to guarantee a lawsuit or two) probably shouldn't have fired any shots. The guy was not a physical threat, nor was he verbally threatening the officers.
But how can you argue that the first shot may not be justified, and the latter ones are? If you shoot someone (say, with a gun) walking away, the action is already questionable. To continuously shoot him while he's lying on the ground is even more difficult to justify. Now we're advocating to shoot every person just because they don't move? So I can fire a first shot, and then shoot four more times because he wouldn't shut up? Often, it's the additional shots that show intent. And throw in the threats of shooting the witnesses, and the police actions in the incident are harder to defend.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this ruling only applies to California, since it's a district court. I'm from California and I applaud the ruling, but it doesn't seem like it's going to have a huge impact unless it's a federal (or even international) court. Then again, California does have a lot of doctors...
Along those same lines, there's also the brand name vs generic drug issue that doctors deal with. A few months ago, the NY Times had an article about a breast cancer drug that is essentially a modified form of Taxol (paclitaxel), except that it costs $4200 a dose (according to the article, generic taxol is $150, brand name $1000).
The article points out that doctors and health insurance companies are caught in the same web, in that they are hesitant to encourage patients to use generic drugs, as it might alienate the patient. I certainly think that doctors and HMOs/PPOs perpetuate the problem, Not to mention the other biotechs/pharmaceuticals, medical device companies, FDA, etc.
I've always imagined that the system would be reformed; I just don't know where to start.
Did you buy this in the US? I bought an HP desktop 3 years ago and I was surprised that it came with no disks (I hadn't purchased a computer in a while before that), so I even called them and asked. Nope, they weren't going to give me CDs. Just burn the recovery CDs, they said. So I did, and I have never used them.
I bought a Compaq laptop 7 months ago. It didn't come with anything. I installed vanilla XP2 on it and then had to spend an hour chatting with their tech support because their useless website didn't have modem and sound drivers.
This time I just built my own PC.
The Chinese believed eating long noodles would lead to a long life... so does eating lots of instant ramen allow us to live into our 90s? Well, that and a fairly large fortune.
So the moral of the story: Don't eat crushed, uncooked ramen noodles with the packets added in. I know you've done this before too! In the future, don't bother crushing it. (I know it's not Nissin, but the Maruchan stuff was good too..)
Actually, I would categorize their options as cancellation and "everything else". The suspension is nothing but a scam to take advantage of people (including those who are tech-savvy like the author). Honestly, most people don't read through the TOS with a fine-toothed comb, nor do they expect to have to go through a million clicks.
Is it legal to have customers agree "not to dispute any charges by True.com or its authorized agents"? It seems like the RIAA's tactic where they force defendents to reveal the files that they supposedly shared illegally. Except in this case, True.com will claim every charge as "authorized" (although they probably deny this), therefore making it a catch-22.
I agree with you that True.com seems to be worse than NetZero. Not by much, but at least with NetZero, he did eventually cancel it. With True.com, he got nothing but threats and ridiculous policies.
I've always wondered: How much money do (larger) companies get from all the advertisements and sponsorships they install in the OS? Like WildTangent, MS Office, Norton, and other programs. It seems to me that not installing an OS would then preclude them from these advertisements and thus more revenue.
I sent my laptop back to HP to fix a fan. And they reimaged the hard drive too. Ugh.
I'm a co-op at one of their other locations, but my impression is that most of the deployed computers run Windows (it's certainly true here, and possibly at the main site). OS X is certainly supported, but as far as I know, there hasn't been a push here for Macs.
Cingular? Cingular is horrible. You should be careful, as they add ridiculous fees and "features" even though you specifically requested that it be removed/disabled. In their free time, employees were told to slam the accounts of customers with text messaging and other fake charges. They were caught when a customer (company) found $7000 in other charges on their bill. They billed me for text messaging and allowed for long distance, even though I told them I didn't want it.
I was an old AT&T Wireless customer before Cingular bought them. Although they claimed they would support AT&T Wireless, soon after, they started removing TDMA towers - the customer service rep confirmed as such. Shitty ass company.
I don't think the comma there changes the meaning, as it still implies that AOL's letter shows the plaintiff downloaded comprighted materials.
Unfortunately, I think semantics does play a major role in the legal system. Although it was not the same situation, the "McLibel" case was partly able to drag on for so many years because of semantics. To summarize, some environmental activists had distributed pamphlets that made statements about McDonald's. The company sued them for libel, saying that all the claims in the pamphlet were false - allowing the defendents to call witnesses to support those claims. Also, there's a story (not sure if it's true) of 3 children who inherited money from their parents through a will, stating that the wealth would be distributed equally between "A, B and C." Naturally, one assumes each person to receive 1/3, but A sued claiming that the will really meant for him to get 1/2, and for "B and C" to split the remaining half.
Colbert is a huge nerd/geek/whatever. When he was younger, he played Dungeons & Dragons and read some J.R.R. Tolkien books. When Viggo Mortenson went on the Daily Show a while back, Jon Stewart played an audio tape of Colbert reciting (from memory, I believe) Aragorn's history.
I'm pretty sure Colbert knows about games in general, if not The Sims and Spore specifically. On the show, he pretends to be an arrogant, condescending jerk - being a technical, geeky person would not really fit that role. However, I do agree that he did give Wright more speaking time than he usually gives some of his guests.
Wikipedia has some more information about him: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_colbert
Sure, IE may have been better than Netscape at some point, but Microsoft's dealings had a lot to deal with that. In U.S. v. Microsoft, Judge Jackson's Court's Findings of Fact document many instances of Microsoft deliberately using their power and influence to gain marketshare (e.g., withholding APIs, tying IE to the OS, etc.).
The document can be found here: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm
Out of curiosity, how does the lack of sleep affect REM sleep and the body's metabolism? I have narcolepsy and I take modafinil (Provigil) to help me stay awake through the day. I could care less about Cephalon, but trying to stay awake without taking the drug is sometimes a hopeless endeavor. And also, how does narcolepsy change things? (I'm referring to metabolism; I already know about lacking non-REM sleep and such.) Thanks.
But it's still disturbing how PR departments always try to downplay incidents (with phrases like "a very small percentage of those accounts", "a rigorous and thorough review".) Granted, it is a nice gesture, but a 20-day credit is nothing to Blizzard anyway. I'm sure that if they offered longer free trials, they could get more users to play the game and eventually pay for it.
And as for that other company... they always seem to amaze me with new ways to piss off their customers.