> It is reasonable for police to believe a principal.
Perhaps it's reasonable for the police to believe the principal *thinks* the kid has done it, but it's certainly not reasonable for the police to arrest anybody just based on somebody else's word -- they should have checked the evidence. The solicitor claims they didn't. As some of the other posters point out, police don't always act reasonably...
And what about the role of the court here? It sounds to me like the judge didn't even do the simplest weighing of the evidence: do the phone records support this claim?
TFA mentions (in paragraph two) that "American trade negotiators darkly warned that the Web site could jeopardize Russia's long-sought entry into the World Trade Organization" but there's no backup for this at all -- the quotes are from an RIAA VP and the director general of the international organization of collecting societies.
Of course, the RIAA has been able to influence American law, so it's certainly easy to believe they could influence our foreign policy... but it's just as easy to believe that they're just saber-rattling, trying to play up their influence, and as usual claim the sky is falling. Not to imply that the Times might ever miss a fact-checking opportunity or anything, but it's still worth asking:
Any supporting evidence for the potential impact on WTO negotiations?
Lastly, this is a confusing trend in the light of the long Kansas tradition of progressive politics, starting wwwwwaaayy back with the Grange organization, which pushed for social-security-type platforms to support destitute farmers in the 1800's.
Thomas Franks' What's the Matter With Kansas (http://www.tcfrank.com/index.html/) uses Kansas' divergence from its historical Progressive traditions as a lens on "how conservatives have won the heart of America". While a lot of his conclusions are debatable, it's well worth a read.
A non-geeky Slashdot-reading friend of mine said of the above: "Is this marked funny, or informative?" Apparently, in her world, lugging 22" monitors and ATX cases is not on the short list for important attributes of a new car (although she still wants a Smart car for all the other good reasons).
Exactly. I've been on both sides of this issues several times in the past, and while you might not be able to get things changed, it's worth the effort to bring it up in a constructive way rather than immediately going to confrontational mode. You want to work this out in a way that meets the company's legitimate interests as well as yours.
Often, you'll find that the company has basically used some standard NDA without thinking things through. If this is the case, they may well be willing to modify it -- not just for you, but in some cases more generally. [Your prospective boss might well discover that she's on your side in this discussion, since she may well have signed the same NDA.]
In some cases, the NDA really is intended to be this draconian -- or nobody wants to deal with the hassle of changing it. You're no worse off than you are now; you'll have to choose between signing it and hoping for the best, or going into confrontation mode which may mean you're losing the job... but you've still gained some useful information in the process (and if it were me, and I was in the situation where I really needed the job and so decided I couldn't risk confrontation, at least I'd know to keep interviewing so that I could get out of there as soon as possible).
And echoing the comments above: consult with a lawyer, especially on your proposed wording, but (unless things have already gotten confrontational) you probably don't want to bring the lawyer to any discussions or negotiations.
I got an Insight in early 2000, and like it quite a lot -- reliable, great mileage (duh), pickup's just fine in almost all situations (basically, except for trying to accelerate dramatically while going up a hill). The downside is that it only has enough storage for, oh, maybe three bags of groceries or one suitcase.
My SO points out an added bonus that nobody else here has mentioned: when people ask me about it, I get to explain and use my "presentation voice"! I'm thinking of starting to travel with a portable projecter and one of those little laser highlighter things... "so, as you can see, the gas engine's efficiency at low speeds... can we have the next slide, please?"
Comments are due by Monday (Feb. 24) on the Department of Transportation's proposal for a "system of records" tracking massive amounts of information about every air traveler. The proposal is extremely broad and vague, and they are requesting exempt from the requirements of the Privacy Act -- so you would not be allowed to see information is stored about you, or challenge correct incorrect information. Comments must be mailed (not faxed or e-mailed), so get them out quickly to ensure they arrive by Monday.
PrivacyActivism (http://www.privacyactivism.org) has a page (http://www.privacyactivism.org/Items/63) with more information and a sample comment letter.
Slashdot Mirror
> It is reasonable for police to believe a principal.
...
Perhaps it's reasonable for the police to believe the principal *thinks* the kid has done it, but it's certainly not reasonable for the police to arrest anybody just based on somebody else's word -- they should have checked the evidence. The solicitor claims they didn't. As some of the other posters point out, police don't always act reasonably
And what about the role of the court here? It sounds to me like the judge didn't even do the simplest weighing of the evidence: do the phone records support this claim?
jon
TFA mentions (in paragraph two) that "American trade negotiators darkly warned that the Web site could jeopardize Russia's long-sought entry into the World Trade Organization" but there's no backup for this at all -- the quotes are from an RIAA VP and the director general of the international organization of collecting societies.
... but it's just as easy to believe that they're just saber-rattling, trying to play up their influence, and as usual claim the sky is falling. Not to imply that the Times might ever miss a fact-checking opportunity or anything, but it's still worth asking:
Of course, the RIAA has been able to influence American law, so it's certainly easy to believe they could influence our foreign policy
Any supporting evidence for the potential impact on WTO negotiations?
A non-geeky Slashdot-reading friend of mine said of the above: "Is this marked funny, or informative?" Apparently, in her world, lugging 22" monitors and ATX cases is not on the short list for important attributes of a new car (although she still wants a Smart car for all the other good reasons).
Exactly. I've been on both sides of this issues several times in the past, and while you might not be able to get things changed, it's worth the effort to bring it up in a constructive way rather than immediately going to confrontational mode. You want to work this out in a way that meets the company's legitimate interests as well as yours.
... but you've still gained some useful information in the process (and if it were me, and I was in the situation where I really needed the job and so decided I couldn't risk confrontation, at least I'd know to keep interviewing so that I could get out of there as soon as possible).
Often, you'll find that the company has basically used some standard NDA without thinking things through. If this is the case, they may well be willing to modify it -- not just for you, but in some cases more generally. [Your prospective boss might well discover that she's on your side in this discussion, since she may well have signed the same NDA.]
In some cases, the NDA really is intended to be this draconian -- or nobody wants to deal with the hassle of changing it. You're no worse off than you are now; you'll have to choose between signing it and hoping for the best, or going into confrontation mode which may mean you're losing the job
And echoing the comments above: consult with a lawyer, especially on your proposed wording, but (unless things have already gotten confrontational) you probably don't want to bring the lawyer to any discussions or negotiations.
I got an Insight in early 2000, and like it quite a lot -- reliable, great mileage (duh), pickup's just fine in almost all situations (basically, except for trying to accelerate dramatically while going up a hill). The downside is that it only has enough storage for, oh, maybe three bags of groceries or one suitcase.
... "so, as you can see, the gas engine's efficiency at low speeds ... can we have the next slide, please?"
My SO points out an added bonus that nobody else here has mentioned: when people ask me about it, I get to explain and use my "presentation voice"! I'm thinking of starting to travel with a portable projecter and one of those little laser highlighter things
http://www.privacyactivism.org/Item/63
Sorry about that.
Comments are due by Monday (Feb. 24) on the Department of Transportation's proposal for a "system of records" tracking massive amounts of information about every air traveler. The proposal is extremely broad and vague, and they are requesting exempt from the requirements of the Privacy Act -- so you would not be allowed to see information is stored about you, or challenge correct incorrect information. Comments must be mailed (not faxed or e-mailed), so get them out quickly to ensure they arrive by Monday.
PrivacyActivism (http://www.privacyactivism.org) has a page (http://www.privacyactivism.org/Items/63) with more information and a sample comment letter.
No, it's actually called "courtesy".