Comment Re:Interesting (Score 1) 239
Disappointing.... Guess I'll start getting my A/V from Peter Norton instead.
Not Peter North, then?
Disappointing.... Guess I'll start getting my A/V from Peter Norton instead.
Not Peter North, then?
Xio’s own expert admitted there are “almost unlimited number” of ways to design the pieces and the board and the game would still “function perfectly well.” Pl. Motion, at 35.
Basically, the judge was given wrong information about the realistic possibility of using blocks of other shapes or configurations. While there may be some other piece designs that would work, there are not that many that would avoid introducing a fairly complex and thus hard-to-play geometry.
The judge also seemed to believe that a falling block game was a completely novel idea, without any real-world counterpart. I'm puzzled by this, and think she didn't comprehend the gravity of the situation (puns intended).
"start operating the courts in English" as opposed to legalese that only superficially looks like English but has completely different non-obvious meanings for words that ordinary people use all the time. . . . It is the legal system that perverts those meanings.
It's really sad to see someone say that technical legal terms are somehow bad. You want the law to be simple? Fine. If you do something some people think is bad, the state kills you. Simple. No need for extenuating circumstances like self-defense, accident, etc. Death penalty for everything.
Just like any other complex field (think computer technology or some other typical Slashdotter field), legal terms often have a lot of nuance. They need to - they describe non-simple concepts.
If you want the jury to get it right, come up with a list of commonly misunderstood (for the courtroom meaning) words and make sure to spend some time educating the jurors.
Despite what you may think from TV, they actually DO that - they are called "jury instructions," which define terms and explain how they fit together. If something has a meaning other than what a layperson thinks, it is the JOB of the attorneys and/or judge to explain that to the jury. That's the whole point of having a trial: to give the jury the information needed on which to base a decision. It's not perfect, but it's the best system we've come up with so far. Like the myriad proposed solutions for spam tend to ignore reality, most alternatives to the jury system fail to understand basic human nature.
I would be much more likely to try to look it up myself instead of asking the judge to explain it. For one thing, even the friendliest of judges is very intimidating, just because he is a judge and you are in his courtroom, whether you're the one on trial or not.
Looking up words on your own is a very bad idea. Would you want your technophobe relative setting up your own systems by reading articles on USAToday? Don't try to become the attorney or judge by looking up a term on "teh intrawebs."
IAAL, but not yours. Hopefully if you ever need one, you'll get a good one that does his/her job and makes sure the jury knows what it needs to give you justice (although if justice would be bad for you, I suppose my "hopes" wouldn't be yours *grin* ).
It almost sounds like the Chinese government is somehow implicated in the attack, which would sound incredible if it didn't include the personal information of dissidents.
Incredible? Where have you been? Governments around the world have strongly suspected the Chinese government has been silently providing support and encouragement, if not directly paying, hackers to probe and outright attack government and national infrastructure computer systems. Do you get all your news via China-censored sources?
cause outrage amongst all of our members.
Shouldn't that be something like "within each individual unique member" - or is even that too much like a multiple item set?
So, is it a $300 video gets a $30 million deal, like the title, or a $30 video gets a $300 million movie deal?
Based on the comments from people who appear to have RTFA, it seems the title is correct: $300 / $30 million. I sure hope whoever wrote that summary is working in entertainment and not engineering. Hollywood gets things wrong by a factor of ten all the time and no one dies, right?
[ Come on, that's a softball - someone post a good response. ]
first herd of the big band theory.
Is the first herd the trumpets? Would the second herd be the trombones? Sousa, is that you?
Say "twenty-three-skiddoo" to logout.