The punishment should fit the crime, not the criminal's motivation.
I thought that was the purpose of hate crime laws. In this case, just video taping your roommate and posting it online or sending it to friends, just because you are a jackass, would be a crime deserving less than 10 years. I suspect it's probably a max sentence of 5 years. Doing it expressly because you don't agree with the roommate's choice in lifestyle is a different crime, in this case the law states a max of 10 years in prison for that. If I went and lit a bag of dog shit on fire in someone's yard: trespass and vandalism. If I went and lit a cross on fire in a black family's yard: trespass and vandalism with hate crime multiplier. Would you argue that, in such a case, both cases of trespass and vandalism are the same crime?
No, because bias intimidation is not a crime, it is a mitigating factor that increases the punishment for a crime. Yelling at the rival team is not criminal, so bias intimidation would not come in to play. Now if you slugged one of them (battery) and then said you did it to show those other team's fans why they suck (multiplied by bias intimidation) then you would get to see how the law worked.
Killing someone in the heat of the moment (found someone sleeping with your spouse, shot them on the spot) has always been a different crime than killing someone for another reason (plotted and killed neighbor because their dog barks too much). Murder comes in degrees, and was measured such before hate crime laws.
*bzzzt* Wrong answer. The way most hate crime laws are written (and I say most cause I'm sure there are a few idiots writing laws out there) is that the crime is a hate crime if the victim is targeted, in whole or in part, due to their race, gender, sexual orientation, creed, or whatever. Technically, legally, those laws protect straight white christian men from being assaulted by pagan lesbians and transwomen of various races simply because they are straight white christian men. That those crimes are so rare prevents us from having a good legal groundwork to see if various city/state/federal attorneys are applying the law correctly.
Ravi proved his actions fell into the second category by trying the defense "I just don't understand gay people, I haven't been around many."
"I'm pranking my roommate" is one thing. "I'm pranking my roommate because I don't agree with his sexual orientation/skin color/gender" is a hate crime.
You know, this isn't just your country. If I had a choice, I would reject plenty of folks from my country.
Those who think 10 years in prison is an acceptable punishment for adults engaged in name calling should be first to go.
Those who think that a 10 year max for video invasion of privacy can follow them, alright? Or would you mind if I came to your house and planted some video cameras around?
Young people can be cruel and callous. However, that is equality. It makes no difference that the young man was gay. Every man, and every woman, has to deal with people like this, and a lot of stupid stunts pulled in high school and college. Yes, some of those stunts can be very invasive and designed to humiliate people. Welcome to college.
Welcome to life. When behavior crosses the line from legal and assholish to illegal, you are screwed if you get caught. The whole "well, they are young and stupid" thing is an understandable push back against the zero-tolerance agenda of the past decades, but both are wrong. Actions have consequences. Ravi did something illegal, that crime has a listed punishment of up to 10 years in prison. So that's what he should get. If you don't agree that it's reasonable in this case, get the law changed.
I made the decision to mark the donation card or not. I took as much time as I wanted to inform myself, more time than I would have had to think than if the paramedics asked me. Sure, I may not understand all the intricacies, so what? I made my informed decision.
no need to bother with precise focus while shooting if you can refocus when you edit.
Why do we need "focus" at all? Why not have photographs where everything is in focus
Because shooting at f-128 takes a hell of a lot of light? Because artistically depth of field is a tool, not a restraint? Sometimes the foreground or background is borring or distracting. Sometimes you want the bokeh or a soft focus. I've taken photos with near unlimited dof, from about 5 inches infront of the camera out to the horizon; in a hand made camera. Granted, that's a benefit of making a pinhole camera. Not to say I can't see uses for 'shoot everthing and pick the focus later', but I see more uses in personal history records and taking better snapshots, not artistic purposes. Focus stacking has been used for so long now, most people don't notice it. This may make that easier, but not until the resolution gets above vga.
Or worse are sites, I think picasaweb, have fine print that says images posted become "property" of them and not you. I forgot specifically which photosharing site
You mean Flickr. Picasa's terms were, when I read them, that you gave them a revocable license to the image for the sole purpose of displaying the image in the manner that you choose. They had been different at a much earlier state, but the terms were changed when people spoke up. Flickr's terms were "irrevocable, world-wide, perpetual, sub-license-able" license meaning they could redistribute the file to anyone under any terms they choose, completely ignoring what terms you choose to distribute the photo under. They couldn't claim to be the owner of the copyright, but they could sell the picture without recompense.
Maybe that's the future definition of a professional vs amateur photographer: pros either understand the law enough to not get bitten by crap like this or have a lawyer to help them, while amateurs complain about laws they don't understand and don't want to deal with.
My opinion of the Boy Scouts is pretty low; my opinion of the Girl Scouts depends on which troop and local they are with, since there is a lot of variance in what each Troop Mom allows. But why should it be necessary to replace the entire organization just to teach electronics, computers, and hacking skills? Get off the ideological high horse, and go offer to teach some scouts. If you don't agree with the policies of the scouts in your area, find an existing organization that you can help. A YMCA Open University, an after-school study program, any other program that already has the overhead covered. Starting from nothing is not the easy path to take, here. You'd have to negotiate for meeting spaces, cover the insurance costs, convince parents that you aren't a scary computer person teaching their kids to hack into banks and build killer robots, or worse. Then you need to get enough students enrolled, or you are just teaching your own kid. You'd need to get someone to teach the other age groups, or you'll be the only person teaching every group from k to 12; 13 meetings every 2 weeks will run you ragged. You'll need fund raisers to pay for computer parts if you get enough students. Even 5 students in each grade level works out to 65 kits. That's a lot of Arduinos, breadboards, soldering irons, etc. Do you have connection with the various fund raising companies that will sell you cookies/popcorn/wrapping paper cheap if you and your scouts sell it to other people? Do you have the cache to convince strangers that your scouts are legitimate, and they should give your troop money for overpriced cookies/popcorn/wrapping paper instead of buying from the boy/girl scouts?
In all, get out there and offer to volunteer at an existing facility. It'll be easier, and you'll be teaching the troop leaders or parents or staff as well as the students.
geohashing is creating a random lat/long pair based on data that can only be known a little while ahead of time. Take the string "YYYY-MM-DD-#" where # is the opening of the DOW stock exchange, and create a 32bit MD5 checksum of that string. Convert the first 16 bits to decimal 0.XXXXX (convert hex to decimal, prepend 0.####) and the second 16 bits to 0.YYYYY. Now, take your current location, say 37.4215 -122.0855. Well, the location for that day's gathering near you would be at 37.XXXXX by -122.YYYYY. So you can see it isn't really a replacement for latitude and longitude, it's just a way to find a random place to gather.
Globalhashing is nearly the same. Take (180*0.XXXXX)-90 for latitude, (360*0.YYYYY)-180 longitude. Greater than a 70% chance that the day's globalhash will be in the ocean.
The fact the there are multiple tweening libraries available isn't bloat, but using all of them is. Guess who's fault that is? If developers would just stop including the whole com.adobe package, this wouldn't be a problem. You really don't need everything in mx just to get the mx.data.crypto objects and functions.
Well, that's probably an issue that lawyers would like to try. Just imagine the SCO case all over again! The more simple issue is that you can't sue when someone else uses your GPL virus to modify code on their computer, and they don't distribute it. The closed source guys might sue the user, since modifying might be against the license. But remember, the GPL puts little restrictions on using the code, but lots of restrictions on re-releasing it.
What kinda high tech idiot watches LDs for analog video? You aren't going to get the real analog feel unless you are watching on CED. Laser discs just lack the tonal color, man. Besides, Laser Discs used PCM "digital" audio! That's not real analog, now is it!
Turns out doing a thousand lines of heavy DSP INSIDE the interrupt handler
I'm not a computer engineer, or EE, or signals person, but even I can tell you why that would fail. Sounds like the problem is not that people program general purpose chips, but that someone hired general purpose programmers to write DSP code. DSP is a beast, it's its own subset of programming that requires knowledge of physics (waves and nyquist) that some programmers don't know. Or maybe the problem really was that your programmers don't know what a bloody interrupt is, and shouldn't even be writing embedded programs.
I'm just a software geek who, after a MIPS course, decided that doing neat artsy tricks with smaller and smaller processors was fun. The Arduino works fine for that, even doing minor audio processing. Why? Because $30 for a board and $1 for extra Atmel chips was a cheaper option than a ton of breadboards, some dedicated usb to serial programmers, and a PIC or ARM dev board. Why? Because at the time the Arduino came out, the programmer for a PIC cost $30 or more unless you already had another programmer and could build your own. There was no cheap way into the field unless you knew someone already in the field. Forget digging through a digikey catalog, no one completely new to embedded programming is going to be able to make sense out of the hundred of different JTAG programming cables, and the brand name ones are still insanely expensive compared to a $30 Arduino or close and a usb cable. Only jobs I've gotten to use these skills on are art projects, where something small needs to be hidden out of sight while still being able to control some larger object. Arduino + Java is easier for the artists to read and understand what's going on, and since the board and a wall wart can be hidden in places that a even a mini ITX motherboard couldn't, and is quieter, it makes it an easy sell. Yeah, you do crazy things that the chip wasn't designed for, so what? Sure, the Java programming language sucks, but if you need to you can get around that if you know C. And you can learn AVR C by reading the datasheets and knowing enough C++; I did anyways.
The photographer retains copyright of the photograph, but also has to abide by the subjects rights to privacy, right of promotion, and other state specific rights. If the photograph is of something newsworthy, the photographers copyright and the newsworthyness trumps right of privacy. So the real question is, why does a photographer get copyright and the ability to use an image of a historical event, but an audio recorder doesn't?
Maybe the King family are the only ones with a recording. That's the only reason I can come up with.
The guy who runs the local photography store is there; I heard he's been going every year for a while. He might personally buy a new top-shelf Nikon or Canon, but it's nothing that gets carried at the store as far as I know. Helps me, though, since I can ask him what's there and get a better opinion on what fancy new tech is coming out.
Not the OP, so I can't say. But in the American school I went to, the consensus from the other students was that 'geeks and dweebs are worthless'. If you weren't a jock, cheerleader, or in the theater or choir, you weren't. The teachers were less cruel than the students and the general faculty, but the parents of the other students often were as bad as the students. The guidance department, staff that helped students find colleges and tried to work on esteem issues, were overworked. I think I talked to them once in 4 years, told them 'yeah, I know what colleges I want to apply to' and got a form from them.
And no, highschool and colleges aren't supposed to give scholastic credits for sports participation, other than the required generic 'gym class' if they even had that, or elective physical classes in college. The major team sports that compete in the NCAA are not supposed to get credit for courses, or be allowed to avoid required papers or tests. But if you find me a university where that is completely true, you've found nirvana; some professors will give the team a break, and reschedule something based on the players in the class. Or throw the grading curve really high to avoid failing the star player. But you are right about the cliche, that's why it exists. I couldn't explain how sports became the primary focus of tax-payer-funded schools. Schools funded by only those attending (and alumni and such) tend to be much less focused on sports, in my experience. Rather frightening.
cause saying that 'some people need to not feel ostracized because of their intellect' is completely the same as saying 'and everyone else is worthless'. I see it now, you opened my eyes to how the OP is subversively ruining this country.
MILCs have the same disadvantages as P&S cameras in terms of autofocus performance - like P&S cameras, they are fundamentally limited to contrast detection autofocus, which is MUCH slower than the phase detect systems in DSLRs. 90% of the time when you see someone complain about "shutter lag" in a P&S, the lag is actually the autotofocus system reconfirming focus. (A contrast detect system must "wiggle" the focus to confirm that it is correct, even if starting at perfect focus. A phase-detect system knows when it's at optimal focus immediately.)
You would be fundamentally wrong about that. The Nikon 1 uses a hybrid phase-detect and contrast-detect autofocus. The Sony LA-EA2 adapter for the NEX, which lets it mount their large SLR lenes, adds phase-detect autofocus. Wiki even says that the "Olympus Pen E-P3 surpassed top range DSLRs in focusing speed for still shots" in the MILC article. And the small size of the cameras, which you alluded to in your complaints, could be seen as a good thing when using a large telephoto lens. After all, the better long range lenses mount to the tripod directly, and support the camera. Having the camera, then, be smaller and lighter, would be a good thing.
You didn't travel with my family, then. Dad invested in a Minolta X-700 when they first came out, and there are multiple shoe-boxes full of negatives. Not prints, those got put in a closet full of photo albums. When VHS/Beta war was settled, he got a VHS camcorder, and then there was video and stills of everything that happened. When I got access to a darkroom in high school, I put 5 to 10 rolls through that X-700 on any major trip, and schlepped the camera bag and tripod everywhere we went. Developing and making contact prints, then tagging only the ones to enlarge only took an hour, if the class was lucky enough to have a lunch break in the middle to let the negative dry.
Sure, by the 80s and 90s most people were using point and shoot 35mm cameras. And they may take 2 rolls of pictures and get them all developed. But those are the same people with P&S or cell phone digitals, posting every photo to flickr/facebook/twit/tumblr/wordpress/blogger. They were never the same types of people.
If they hold on a ruling long enough, then the defendant did not receive a "speedy" trial as the 6th amendment requires, and the case can be dismissed on appeal. SCOTUS agreed to hear the case, and may issue a ruling, but until that time the ruling is issued, all the local judge has to go on is local, district, and prior federal precedent.
Slashdot Mirror
The punishment should fit the crime, not the criminal's motivation.
I thought that was the purpose of hate crime laws. In this case, just video taping your roommate and posting it online or sending it to friends, just because you are a jackass, would be a crime deserving less than 10 years. I suspect it's probably a max sentence of 5 years. Doing it expressly because you don't agree with the roommate's choice in lifestyle is a different crime, in this case the law states a max of 10 years in prison for that. If I went and lit a bag of dog shit on fire in someone's yard: trespass and vandalism. If I went and lit a cross on fire in a black family's yard: trespass and vandalism with hate crime multiplier. Would you argue that, in such a case, both cases of trespass and vandalism are the same crime?
No, because bias intimidation is not a crime, it is a mitigating factor that increases the punishment for a crime. Yelling at the rival team is not criminal, so bias intimidation would not come in to play. Now if you slugged one of them (battery) and then said you did it to show those other team's fans why they suck (multiplied by bias intimidation) then you would get to see how the law worked.
Killing someone in the heat of the moment (found someone sleeping with your spouse, shot them on the spot) has always been a different crime than killing someone for another reason (plotted and killed neighbor because their dog barks too much). Murder comes in degrees, and was measured such before hate crime laws.
*bzzzt* Wrong answer. The way most hate crime laws are written (and I say most cause I'm sure there are a few idiots writing laws out there) is that the crime is a hate crime if the victim is targeted, in whole or in part, due to their race, gender, sexual orientation, creed, or whatever. Technically, legally, those laws protect straight white christian men from being assaulted by pagan lesbians and transwomen of various races simply because they are straight white christian men. That those crimes are so rare prevents us from having a good legal groundwork to see if various city/state/federal attorneys are applying the law correctly.
Ravi proved his actions fell into the second category by trying the defense "I just don't understand gay people, I haven't been around many."
"I'm pranking my roommate" is one thing. "I'm pranking my roommate because I don't agree with his sexual orientation/skin color/gender" is a hate crime.
You know, this isn't just your country. If I had a choice, I would reject plenty of folks from my country.
Those who think 10 years in prison is an acceptable punishment for adults engaged in name calling should be first to go.
Those who think that a 10 year max for video invasion of privacy can follow them, alright? Or would you mind if I came to your house and planted some video cameras around?
Young people can be cruel and callous. However, that is equality. It makes no difference that the young man was gay. Every man, and every woman, has to deal with people like this, and a lot of stupid stunts pulled in high school and college. Yes, some of those stunts can be very invasive and designed to humiliate people. Welcome to college.
Welcome to life. When behavior crosses the line from legal and assholish to illegal, you are screwed if you get caught. The whole "well, they are young and stupid" thing is an understandable push back against the zero-tolerance agenda of the past decades, but both are wrong. Actions have consequences. Ravi did something illegal, that crime has a listed punishment of up to 10 years in prison. So that's what he should get. If you don't agree that it's reasonable in this case, get the law changed.
A jury disagrees.
I made the decision to mark the donation card or not. I took as much time as I wanted to inform myself, more time than I would have had to think than if the paramedics asked me. Sure, I may not understand all the intricacies, so what? I made my informed decision.
Then got told by the state "thanks, but no."
Why do we need "focus" at all? Why not have photographs where everything is in focus
Because shooting at f-128 takes a hell of a lot of light? Because artistically depth of field is a tool, not a restraint? Sometimes the foreground or background is borring or distracting. Sometimes you want the bokeh or a soft focus. I've taken photos with near unlimited dof, from about 5 inches infront of the camera out to the horizon; in a hand made camera. Granted, that's a benefit of making a pinhole camera. Not to say I can't see uses for 'shoot everthing and pick the focus later', but I see more uses in personal history records and taking better snapshots, not artistic purposes. Focus stacking has been used for so long now, most people don't notice it. This may make that easier, but not until the resolution gets above vga.
Or worse are sites, I think picasaweb, have fine print that says images posted become "property" of them and not you. I forgot specifically which photosharing site
You mean Flickr. Picasa's terms were, when I read them, that you gave them a revocable license to the image for the sole purpose of displaying the image in the manner that you choose. They had been different at a much earlier state, but the terms were changed when people spoke up. Flickr's terms were "irrevocable, world-wide, perpetual, sub-license-able" license meaning they could redistribute the file to anyone under any terms they choose, completely ignoring what terms you choose to distribute the photo under. They couldn't claim to be the owner of the copyright, but they could sell the picture without recompense.
Maybe that's the future definition of a professional vs amateur photographer: pros either understand the law enough to not get bitten by crap like this or have a lawyer to help them, while amateurs complain about laws they don't understand and don't want to deal with.
My opinion of the Boy Scouts is pretty low; my opinion of the Girl Scouts depends on which troop and local they are with, since there is a lot of variance in what each Troop Mom allows. But why should it be necessary to replace the entire organization just to teach electronics, computers, and hacking skills? Get off the ideological high horse, and go offer to teach some scouts. If you don't agree with the policies of the scouts in your area, find an existing organization that you can help. A YMCA Open University, an after-school study program, any other program that already has the overhead covered. Starting from nothing is not the easy path to take, here. You'd have to negotiate for meeting spaces, cover the insurance costs, convince parents that you aren't a scary computer person teaching their kids to hack into banks and build killer robots, or worse. Then you need to get enough students enrolled, or you are just teaching your own kid. You'd need to get someone to teach the other age groups, or you'll be the only person teaching every group from k to 12; 13 meetings every 2 weeks will run you ragged. You'll need fund raisers to pay for computer parts if you get enough students. Even 5 students in each grade level works out to 65 kits. That's a lot of Arduinos, breadboards, soldering irons, etc. Do you have connection with the various fund raising companies that will sell you cookies/popcorn/wrapping paper cheap if you and your scouts sell it to other people? Do you have the cache to convince strangers that your scouts are legitimate, and they should give your troop money for overpriced cookies/popcorn/wrapping paper instead of buying from the boy/girl scouts?
In all, get out there and offer to volunteer at an existing facility. It'll be easier, and you'll be teaching the troop leaders or parents or staff as well as the students.
geohashing is creating a random lat/long pair based on data that can only be known a little while ahead of time. Take the string "YYYY-MM-DD-#" where # is the opening of the DOW stock exchange, and create a 32bit MD5 checksum of that string. Convert the first 16 bits to decimal 0.XXXXX (convert hex to decimal, prepend 0.####) and the second 16 bits to 0.YYYYY. Now, take your current location, say 37.4215 -122.0855. Well, the location for that day's gathering near you would be at 37.XXXXX by -122.YYYYY. So you can see it isn't really a replacement for latitude and longitude, it's just a way to find a random place to gather.
Globalhashing is nearly the same. Take (180*0.XXXXX)-90 for latitude, (360*0.YYYYY)-180 longitude. Greater than a 70% chance that the day's globalhash will be in the ocean.
The fact the there are multiple tweening libraries available isn't bloat, but using all of them is. Guess who's fault that is? If developers would just stop including the whole com.adobe package, this wouldn't be a problem. You really don't need everything in mx just to get the mx.data.crypto objects and functions.
Well, that's probably an issue that lawyers would like to try. Just imagine the SCO case all over again! The more simple issue is that you can't sue when someone else uses your GPL virus to modify code on their computer, and they don't distribute it. The closed source guys might sue the user, since modifying might be against the license. But remember, the GPL puts little restrictions on using the code, but lots of restrictions on re-releasing it.
What kinda high tech idiot watches LDs for analog video? You aren't going to get the real analog feel unless you are watching on CED. Laser discs just lack the tonal color, man. Besides, Laser Discs used PCM "digital" audio! That's not real analog, now is it!
Turns out doing a thousand lines of heavy DSP INSIDE the interrupt handler
I'm not a computer engineer, or EE, or signals person, but even I can tell you why that would fail. Sounds like the problem is not that people program general purpose chips, but that someone hired general purpose programmers to write DSP code. DSP is a beast, it's its own subset of programming that requires knowledge of physics (waves and nyquist) that some programmers don't know. Or maybe the problem really was that your programmers don't know what a bloody interrupt is, and shouldn't even be writing embedded programs.
I'm just a software geek who, after a MIPS course, decided that doing neat artsy tricks with smaller and smaller processors was fun. The Arduino works fine for that, even doing minor audio processing. Why? Because $30 for a board and $1 for extra Atmel chips was a cheaper option than a ton of breadboards, some dedicated usb to serial programmers, and a PIC or ARM dev board. Why? Because at the time the Arduino came out, the programmer for a PIC cost $30 or more unless you already had another programmer and could build your own. There was no cheap way into the field unless you knew someone already in the field. Forget digging through a digikey catalog, no one completely new to embedded programming is going to be able to make sense out of the hundred of different JTAG programming cables, and the brand name ones are still insanely expensive compared to a $30 Arduino or close and a usb cable. Only jobs I've gotten to use these skills on are art projects, where something small needs to be hidden out of sight while still being able to control some larger object. Arduino + Java is easier for the artists to read and understand what's going on, and since the board and a wall wart can be hidden in places that a even a mini ITX motherboard couldn't, and is quieter, it makes it an easy sell. Yeah, you do crazy things that the chip wasn't designed for, so what? Sure, the Java programming language sucks, but if you need to you can get around that if you know C. And you can learn AVR C by reading the datasheets and knowing enough C++; I did anyways.
The photographer retains copyright of the photograph, but also has to abide by the subjects rights to privacy, right of promotion, and other state specific rights. If the photograph is of something newsworthy, the photographers copyright and the newsworthyness trumps right of privacy. So the real question is, why does a photographer get copyright and the ability to use an image of a historical event, but an audio recorder doesn't?
Maybe the King family are the only ones with a recording. That's the only reason I can come up with.
The guy who runs the local photography store is there; I heard he's been going every year for a while. He might personally buy a new top-shelf Nikon or Canon, but it's nothing that gets carried at the store as far as I know. Helps me, though, since I can ask him what's there and get a better opinion on what fancy new tech is coming out.
Not the OP, so I can't say. But in the American school I went to, the consensus from the other students was that 'geeks and dweebs are worthless'. If you weren't a jock, cheerleader, or in the theater or choir, you weren't. The teachers were less cruel than the students and the general faculty, but the parents of the other students often were as bad as the students. The guidance department, staff that helped students find colleges and tried to work on esteem issues, were overworked. I think I talked to them once in 4 years, told them 'yeah, I know what colleges I want to apply to' and got a form from them.
And no, highschool and colleges aren't supposed to give scholastic credits for sports participation, other than the required generic 'gym class' if they even had that, or elective physical classes in college. The major team sports that compete in the NCAA are not supposed to get credit for courses, or be allowed to avoid required papers or tests. But if you find me a university where that is completely true, you've found nirvana; some professors will give the team a break, and reschedule something based on the players in the class. Or throw the grading curve really high to avoid failing the star player. But you are right about the cliche, that's why it exists. I couldn't explain how sports became the primary focus of tax-payer-funded schools. Schools funded by only those attending (and alumni and such) tend to be much less focused on sports, in my experience. Rather frightening.
cause saying that 'some people need to not feel ostracized because of their intellect' is completely the same as saying 'and everyone else is worthless'. I see it now, you opened my eyes to how the OP is subversively ruining this country.
twerp
why do you even let what other people do in their own free time bother you?
MILCs have the same disadvantages as P&S cameras in terms of autofocus performance - like P&S cameras, they are fundamentally limited to contrast detection autofocus, which is MUCH slower than the phase detect systems in DSLRs. 90% of the time when you see someone complain about "shutter lag" in a P&S, the lag is actually the autotofocus system reconfirming focus. (A contrast detect system must "wiggle" the focus to confirm that it is correct, even if starting at perfect focus. A phase-detect system knows when it's at optimal focus immediately.)
You would be fundamentally wrong about that. The Nikon 1 uses a hybrid phase-detect and contrast-detect autofocus. The Sony LA-EA2 adapter for the NEX, which lets it mount their large SLR lenes, adds phase-detect autofocus. Wiki even says that the "Olympus Pen E-P3 surpassed top range DSLRs in focusing speed for still shots" in the MILC article. And the small size of the cameras, which you alluded to in your complaints, could be seen as a good thing when using a large telephoto lens. After all, the better long range lenses mount to the tripod directly, and support the camera. Having the camera, then, be smaller and lighter, would be a good thing.
You didn't travel with my family, then. Dad invested in a Minolta X-700 when they first came out, and there are multiple shoe-boxes full of negatives. Not prints, those got put in a closet full of photo albums. When VHS/Beta war was settled, he got a VHS camcorder, and then there was video and stills of everything that happened. When I got access to a darkroom in high school, I put 5 to 10 rolls through that X-700 on any major trip, and schlepped the camera bag and tripod everywhere we went. Developing and making contact prints, then tagging only the ones to enlarge only took an hour, if the class was lucky enough to have a lunch break in the middle to let the negative dry.
Sure, by the 80s and 90s most people were using point and shoot 35mm cameras. And they may take 2 rolls of pictures and get them all developed. But those are the same people with P&S or cell phone digitals, posting every photo to flickr/facebook/twit/tumblr/wordpress/blogger. They were never the same types of people.
If they hold on a ruling long enough, then the defendant did not receive a "speedy" trial as the 6th amendment requires, and the case can be dismissed on appeal. SCOTUS agreed to hear the case, and may issue a ruling, but until that time the ruling is issued, all the local judge has to go on is local, district, and prior federal precedent.