Monday, June 22, 2009
Friday, June 19, 2009
Jury Gives RIAA a Bailout
If there is anything that shows just how bad the jury system in America has gotten we have the case of Jammie Thomas who was just ordered by a jury to pay $1.92 million for "sharing" 24 songs on Kazaa.
Yes, there is more than the simple filesharing, There is the swapped HD. But seriously. This is a case of awards being far in excess of actual damages. And yes, we understand that there's willful infringement and penalties, but $1.92 for something that's not even class action?
Look each song is worth at most 99 cents at the time she had them. She would have to share each song 750 times just to make the minimum statutory damages. That's 18,000 shares. Just to meet the minimum. At best the MediaSentry program that the RIAA used to catch Jammie found 1 instance of sharing. One. Everything after that is speculation since there is no evidence to show how long she had been sharing the file or how many people actually "stole" the material from her.
Look I think she's guilty of file sharing. No doubt. But no way no how am I voting for an award so out of proportion to the actual damages. I understand that there is a desire to use judgments to deter other file sharing. No problem. at $750 a track the award would have been $18,000. That's the cost of a Kia. The average American faced with such a sudden debt would be seriously hurt by such an award. In fact for the average black person in America, that could actually bankrupt them.
I hope that none of these jury members find themselves in this position due to some behavior like say, smoking, that they had clear control over. Then they will now how it feels to be dicked by a small committee.
Yes, there is more than the simple filesharing, There is the swapped HD. But seriously. This is a case of awards being far in excess of actual damages. And yes, we understand that there's willful infringement and penalties, but $1.92 for something that's not even class action?
Look each song is worth at most 99 cents at the time she had them. She would have to share each song 750 times just to make the minimum statutory damages. That's 18,000 shares. Just to meet the minimum. At best the MediaSentry program that the RIAA used to catch Jammie found 1 instance of sharing. One. Everything after that is speculation since there is no evidence to show how long she had been sharing the file or how many people actually "stole" the material from her.
Look I think she's guilty of file sharing. No doubt. But no way no how am I voting for an award so out of proportion to the actual damages. I understand that there is a desire to use judgments to deter other file sharing. No problem. at $750 a track the award would have been $18,000. That's the cost of a Kia. The average American faced with such a sudden debt would be seriously hurt by such an award. In fact for the average black person in America, that could actually bankrupt them.
I hope that none of these jury members find themselves in this position due to some behavior like say, smoking, that they had clear control over. Then they will now how it feels to be dicked by a small committee.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Bike to Work 2009
And so this morning heralded the beginning of the 2009 Summer bike to work (Once a week). Last year I stopped after 3 trips due to a combination of vacation, weather and the closure of the cafeteria. The latter point was a real deal breaker as the last day I did it, I had to scramble to find food that I could both afford and get to me. I finally found a Chinese food joint but the prospect for walking around hungry after the ride was not appealing.
To that end, this year I have a small fridge in my office. I have plenty of water as I refuse to pay $2 for a 16 oz. bottle out the vending machine and on bike days I can easily hit that machine up 3-4 times. I keep lunch meat, bread, lettuce and carrot cake in there too. The object being to not to crash round 'bout midday.
See, the ride to work is mostly uphill with some steep portions. The ride back is easier but a bit more dangerous because it is downhill and I attain higher speeds and it appears that most people do not think a bike is moving 25 MPH (I've hit 33 MPH).
Today was humid and I had on layers because it was below 65 degrees so I sweated. A lot. I'll probably leave two of the layers in the locker overnight and take them home tomorrow. This leads me to the highlight of this post. There's a lot of talk about how people ought to bike to work. I think that most of the people who say this fall in the following categories:
1) They only need to go a mile or so and can take their own sweet time and not get sweaty.
2) The only go a mile or so and have access to showers at work.
3) Can go to work sweaty and nobody cares because everyone else is sweaty.
Most people are not in the shape to go long distance such as my commute (12 miles each way). It takes me an hour to make that trip thanks to the hills. For most people it would take closer to two hours to do. Who's leaving home 2.5 hours ahead of time to get to work when they don't have to?
Most places of employment to do not have community showers and lockers so that the employees can shower and change clothes, so a lot of people, even if they wanted to, could not bike to work.
Lastly, many places simply do not have storage for bikes. I know that when I started last year, one of my biggest concerns was where to put my bike. it could not go into my office and I didn't want to just leave it out. I ended up leaving it out but viewable by other staff members. Still it's not like there are bike racks all over the place.
Anyway, my N800 seems to have a dying touchscreen so I did not run e-coach to map my speed and altitude. I'll probably end up purchasing an 810 since I've come to depend on this thing for many things. I may run it this afternoon provided I haven't killed the battery (which usually happens on days I don't bring my laptop).
'Till next time.
To that end, this year I have a small fridge in my office. I have plenty of water as I refuse to pay $2 for a 16 oz. bottle out the vending machine and on bike days I can easily hit that machine up 3-4 times. I keep lunch meat, bread, lettuce and carrot cake in there too. The object being to not to crash round 'bout midday.
See, the ride to work is mostly uphill with some steep portions. The ride back is easier but a bit more dangerous because it is downhill and I attain higher speeds and it appears that most people do not think a bike is moving 25 MPH (I've hit 33 MPH).
Today was humid and I had on layers because it was below 65 degrees so I sweated. A lot. I'll probably leave two of the layers in the locker overnight and take them home tomorrow. This leads me to the highlight of this post. There's a lot of talk about how people ought to bike to work. I think that most of the people who say this fall in the following categories:
1) They only need to go a mile or so and can take their own sweet time and not get sweaty.
2) The only go a mile or so and have access to showers at work.
3) Can go to work sweaty and nobody cares because everyone else is sweaty.
Most people are not in the shape to go long distance such as my commute (12 miles each way). It takes me an hour to make that trip thanks to the hills. For most people it would take closer to two hours to do. Who's leaving home 2.5 hours ahead of time to get to work when they don't have to?
Most places of employment to do not have community showers and lockers so that the employees can shower and change clothes, so a lot of people, even if they wanted to, could not bike to work.
Lastly, many places simply do not have storage for bikes. I know that when I started last year, one of my biggest concerns was where to put my bike. it could not go into my office and I didn't want to just leave it out. I ended up leaving it out but viewable by other staff members. Still it's not like there are bike racks all over the place.
Anyway, my N800 seems to have a dying touchscreen so I did not run e-coach to map my speed and altitude. I'll probably end up purchasing an 810 since I've come to depend on this thing for many things. I may run it this afternoon provided I haven't killed the battery (which usually happens on days I don't bring my laptop).
'Till next time.
Friday, May 1, 2009
Stuck on Stupid with Sexting
This week has been chock full of articles written by people who are supposedly intelligent discussing things with what I can only say is shockingly weak supporting arguments. The latest from Alternet (which seems to have had a good run of this type of stuff of late)Super Prude Prosecutors Charge Teenagers with Pornography and Worse For Sexy Text Messages which leads with:
Lets understand a few things:
1) Minors, by and large are legally unable to consent to various things. One of those things is to be photographed or filmed while under the age of 18.
2) Minors who are photographed or filmed engaging in sexual activities are legally victims of child pornography. There is no provision that the photographer be a certain age.
3) the Dissemination of photographs or video featuring a nude minor engaged in sexual activities is a crime. It's called distribution of child pornography.
Now it is apparently clear that parents have their heads stuck in the ground regarding these little facts. Furthermore; while many parents rail about sex-offenders living in their neighborhoods, they are completely blinded to the idea that their little boy or girl is in fact a sex-offender. And many of them are now caught in the "careful what you ask for situation." Of course little Johnny is not like THOSE men out THERE. Sure. Whatever.
Somewhere along the line the parents neglected to inform their sons and daughters about the RESPONSIBILITIES that comes with this thing called a camera-phone. Let's take for example the young man who was on Good Morning America a couple of weeks back. His ex sent him pictures of herself. They broke up, he got mad, posted the pictures to the Web. Boo-Hoo. Now he's a registered sex offender.
Back to the Alternet piece though. I'm not saying that girls and boys ought to be barred from sending certain types of photos to each other. However; it needs to be understood that the photo in question is only for the recipient. Any other distribution of the photo/video is dissemination. That needs to be clear. Paedophiles love it when these guys (and gals) post this stuff to the net and I believe this is asking for legal trouble. If a teen can give permission to have her picture taken then why can't any OTHER man be in possession of said material? Or for another example is a porn star from the 70's or 80's, I can't recall her name but she starred in a few films before it was found out that she was under-age. Being in possession of any material of her when she was underage can land you in jail even though she willingly performed, willingly signed contracts, and is now "old as dirt."
I simply cannot see how if it is allowed that a minor can view and distribute what is legally child pornography, that one can prosecute and convict an adult for the same. Oh I can see the emotional arguement, but if justice is blind, that won't fly.
Meanwhile I suggest parents have serious sit down's with their children if they are giving them phones or other devices capable of multimedia. I think schools should hold assemblies or hand out documentation about the relevant laws. A part of growing up is learning the rules.
Sending a nude or semi-nude picture to a friend's cell phone is apparently a crime -- if you're a teen.
Lets understand a few things:
1) Minors, by and large are legally unable to consent to various things. One of those things is to be photographed or filmed while under the age of 18.
2) Minors who are photographed or filmed engaging in sexual activities are legally victims of child pornography. There is no provision that the photographer be a certain age.
3) the Dissemination of photographs or video featuring a nude minor engaged in sexual activities is a crime. It's called distribution of child pornography.
Now it is apparently clear that parents have their heads stuck in the ground regarding these little facts. Furthermore; while many parents rail about sex-offenders living in their neighborhoods, they are completely blinded to the idea that their little boy or girl is in fact a sex-offender. And many of them are now caught in the "careful what you ask for situation." Of course little Johnny is not like THOSE men out THERE. Sure. Whatever.
Somewhere along the line the parents neglected to inform their sons and daughters about the RESPONSIBILITIES that comes with this thing called a camera-phone. Let's take for example the young man who was on Good Morning America a couple of weeks back. His ex sent him pictures of herself. They broke up, he got mad, posted the pictures to the Web. Boo-Hoo. Now he's a registered sex offender.
Back to the Alternet piece though. I'm not saying that girls and boys ought to be barred from sending certain types of photos to each other. However; it needs to be understood that the photo in question is only for the recipient. Any other distribution of the photo/video is dissemination. That needs to be clear. Paedophiles love it when these guys (and gals) post this stuff to the net and I believe this is asking for legal trouble. If a teen can give permission to have her picture taken then why can't any OTHER man be in possession of said material? Or for another example is a porn star from the 70's or 80's, I can't recall her name but she starred in a few films before it was found out that she was under-age. Being in possession of any material of her when she was underage can land you in jail even though she willingly performed, willingly signed contracts, and is now "old as dirt."
I simply cannot see how if it is allowed that a minor can view and distribute what is legally child pornography, that one can prosecute and convict an adult for the same. Oh I can see the emotional arguement, but if justice is blind, that won't fly.
Meanwhile I suggest parents have serious sit down's with their children if they are giving them phones or other devices capable of multimedia. I think schools should hold assemblies or hand out documentation about the relevant laws. A part of growing up is learning the rules.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
RE:'I Was Raped' Should Horrify
An agreeable article marred by faulty writing. Let's take for example this:
My first and major objection here is the apparent equivocation of "rape" with "sexual assault." Yes all rapes are sexual assaults. No, all sexual assaults are not rapes. Yet this, and a great deal of other writings on the subject continuously (and I believe purposely) exchange the two. Clearly it is easier to, and more "shocking" to make a statement about something that happens every two minutes (a statistical argument) rather than one that may happen, statistically speaking, once every five minutes (and that's a quick hack up based on 1996 numbers 71/100,000 females and using the current US population of 300,000,000 divided in half. the rates of rape have dropped since then).
Also given that a great deal of rapes occur between people who know each other, it's not likely that on average a woman outside of a war zone is going to be grabbed up by a man.
So that 'quibble" aside, we get to the next problem. The use of rape by people to describe bad situations they've found themselves in. While I can see the point of the author that the random use of the phrase "raped" to describe a non-sexual intercourse situation, I think it also is a recognition of rape as a power play by the rapist imposed upon his or her victim. If one says one feels "raped" by a certain situation, one is saying that one felt powerless and victimized by the other party. Usually when I've heard the term used, it is in connection with the taking of something valuable or a great defeat. So in a sense those wishing to get the point across that rape is about power have succeeded.
I think that if the author is serious about keeping rape "serious", then I think it should start with not exchanging the general category of sexual assault (which can be an unwanted pinch on the ass), with rape.
Clearly this was not a fun experience for Kitsch, and you feel for him. Doing badly on an audition sucks. But it does not suck as much as sexual assault, something that happens every two minutes in America.
My dictionary defines rape as "The unlawful compelling of a woman through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse," is experiencing a dangerous shift in meaning.*
My first and major objection here is the apparent equivocation of "rape" with "sexual assault." Yes all rapes are sexual assaults. No, all sexual assaults are not rapes. Yet this, and a great deal of other writings on the subject continuously (and I believe purposely) exchange the two. Clearly it is easier to, and more "shocking" to make a statement about something that happens every two minutes (a statistical argument) rather than one that may happen, statistically speaking, once every five minutes (and that's a quick hack up based on 1996 numbers 71/100,000 females and using the current US population of 300,000,000 divided in half. the rates of rape have dropped since then).
Also given that a great deal of rapes occur between people who know each other, it's not likely that on average a woman outside of a war zone is going to be grabbed up by a man.
So that 'quibble" aside, we get to the next problem. The use of rape by people to describe bad situations they've found themselves in. While I can see the point of the author that the random use of the phrase "raped" to describe a non-sexual intercourse situation, I think it also is a recognition of rape as a power play by the rapist imposed upon his or her victim. If one says one feels "raped" by a certain situation, one is saying that one felt powerless and victimized by the other party. Usually when I've heard the term used, it is in connection with the taking of something valuable or a great defeat. So in a sense those wishing to get the point across that rape is about power have succeeded.
I think that if the author is serious about keeping rape "serious", then I think it should start with not exchanging the general category of sexual assault (which can be an unwanted pinch on the ass), with rape.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Andre 3000 speeding in GA
Apparently he was caught doing 109 in a 65 in his Porsche. I ask: Is that all? I had a rented Mercury Sable which I hit the rev or speed limiter on between Tuskegee and Montgomery. On the NJ Turnpike I hit 116 MPH in a rented Taurus and the best Andre could do in his Porsche was 103? Wimpy, Wimpy, Wimpy.
And dude if you're going to push that kind of speed you need to have a built in omni-directional radar/lidar detector/jammer. Seriously.
The dumb part though is the law that Ga wants to pass a law adding an additional $200 fine for speeds over 85 MPH. 85? Clearly these idiots haven't been to Michigan, where going 85 will get you passed by grannies.
Anyway the problem is not the extremely rare 1 ton crowd out there. It's the damn cell phone users. I mean I've seen fools driving through parking lots while texting! But in a country full of nervous nellies 85 MPH speed surcharges scores political points. Asking people to pay attention to their driving: not so much.
And dude if you're going to push that kind of speed you need to have a built in omni-directional radar/lidar detector/jammer. Seriously.
The dumb part though is the law that Ga wants to pass a law adding an additional $200 fine for speeds over 85 MPH. 85? Clearly these idiots haven't been to Michigan, where going 85 will get you passed by grannies.
Anyway the problem is not the extremely rare 1 ton crowd out there. It's the damn cell phone users. I mean I've seen fools driving through parking lots while texting! But in a country full of nervous nellies 85 MPH speed surcharges scores political points. Asking people to pay attention to their driving: not so much.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
LG Shine and Nokia N800
If you're looking for a phone to use as to tether your N800 to the net sans wifi, the LG shine works out of the box with the standard N800 Diablo OS. Inexpensive with a contract (free at some places with contract).
Technorati Tags: N800
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
