Except that capitalism is the current situation here in America and it's run by nothing BUT greedy, corrupt people.
Except that, in America, it seems to be a strange fusion of capitalism with a hefty dash of regulatory interference. If it was *just* capitalism then, I suspect, that the market would adjust more quickly; simply because they'd have to. As opposed to the current version where legacy players don't want to compete with up-starts and go crying to the government for aid and comfort.
Doesn't seem any better, currently, in the UK either, unfortunately. If it wasn't for all the inhumane actions and oppression of free speech, expression and outright censorship, I'd consider relocating. As it is, it's not, yet, worth the costs.
If one of my children had this issue, $7000 would seem a small price to pay to achieve the end result.
Well said! After all, in this economic climate, who doesn't have $7000 dollars lying around and easily accessible? The inconsiderate cheap-skates! Man, I wish they'd just have the decency to think of the kid(s)!
One would presume that the right to free speech on a platform to which another, unrelated user, has posted potentially infringing materials (since innocence must be proven, 'fair use' seems to be disregarded, until proven).
So...free speech on any platform not owned by the person speaking (since all other platforms, that allow user-submission, may well be blocked because of the scope of action allowed by SOPA and PIPA) is being 'stolen,' or, rather, denied.
In what way is Mike being shameful? It appears that some senators, and chief executives, believe that DNS filtering is possible/achievable because of implementation of the same by repressive regimes.
This is true, regardless of the impetus behind that filtering by those regimes.
I, personally, would not want my elected representatives aligning my country with such regimes, rather that they should set a higher standard for us, we should aim to be the best (for a given value of 'best'), rather than look to the morass for the sake of easy fund-raising, and the potential for a future job as lobbyist.
It's interesting that you quote those words, but omit their opening, and to my mind far more important, sentences. Please, allow me:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.
Did Sony really just point the finger of accusation at Anonymous? With nothing more than a text file to support their accusation?
...I suppose after two fairly major network problems in the space of a couple of weeks, it's not like Anonymous can do them any more damage than they've already suffered, but it seems highly unwise to poke that particular hornets' nest.
I wonder who gets to make the allegations? On the assumption that networked photocopiers/laser-printers can be found infringing (Would You Believe Copyright Infringement Notices Are Based On Faulty Information?), I imagine that there is the (good) chance that an IP address in the Houses of Parliament could be found to be downloading torrents. Certainly if the French government, under Sarkozy, is anything to go by...
Could we get the Houses of Parliament/the British Government suspended from the internet? =)
"you can't force defendant to provide evidence for his own prosecution."
That's the point of this story, that here in the UK, apparently, you can. The problem is that now, if you say 'oops, I forgot the password' there's a chance you can be jailed for refusing to cooperate.
"A suspect has been identified that has an unusual relationship with society and is in possession of various materials that he has chosen not to explain."
He had nine nanograms of RDX on his hands, four more than the usually-dismissed/discounted by forensics, five nanograms. The other items were, according to the Register, encrypted hard drives and thumb drives. What possible danger do they represent? The fact that he remained silent under interview is typical for a schizophrenic -I'm no expert, but have worked extensively with the client group in various mental health settings.
Nothing in the story suggests that he had any reason to volunteer information, and precious little to suggest reason to investigate. Perhaps a positive outcome is that the guy's now recieving treatment, but, under a Section of the Mental Health Act, that's not so different to forced captivity in the jail system.