Yes but Star Wars is also a movie in which time was measured in units of distance (your mother in how many parsecs?
So I've been watching the debate here:
And I am not exactly sure whom I should vote for? Any ideas?
Link to Original Source
If I operate on a patient, and then give them instructions on how to properly care for their wound, which they fail to follow, I still have to treat their infection.
I think it's a well-accepted practice that commercial software that is within its useful life gets security patches. Given that CS6 is barely off the press, I would think it reasonable that CS5 still gets at least some support.
This is akin to buying a 2010 Chevy (under warranty), then finding out that the brakes catch on fire under certain circumstances, and the company's suggestion: buy a 2012.
Despite what the "tough on crime" short-sighted idiots would say, this is not only a necessary decision, but a really long-time-coming one. Considering how many links people click on over the course of the day, with hardly any idea (implicitly or explicitly) of what's going to be found on the other side, there have been many unintentional violations of the current law. Furthermore, I wonder how many people who surfed the internet for legal (consentual, adult) pornography, have seen what looked like child porn at one time or another. But under current law, no matter how disgusted you may have been, or how quickly you closed the page, you were guilty by definition. Furthermore, if you reported what you saw, you not only were guilty, but you had confessed as well. This was akin to the UK case where a man found a shotgun that was thrown into his garden from a passing vehicle, and turned it into the police, only to be jailed for weapons possession, since he was "in possession" of it during the course of bringing it to the police station.
This is an important decision for internet safety, and should be applauded, and will hopefully serve as precedent for cases outside of New York as well, since the practice of trawling the browser cache for suspect images is fairly prevalent. And I have to say - I doubt that anyone who intentionally views child pornography would be that obvious, unless they were stupid. And if they were that stupid, there'd be plenty of other "downloaded" evidence all over the place. In short, the draconian law as it stands right now is simply not necessary for prosecution of real purveyors of child porn, and likely served only to trawl for victims.
Why wait for facts? Ban!
Is there an option to mod down for stream-of-stupidity?
I just have one thing to say:
We will all go together when we go.
The only way I can envision this actually happening the way the story is written, is if this particular method was well-known to the law enforcement and they had already worked out all the necessary tools for detecting AND breaking the hidden container.
Otherwise, it sounds like a false flag operation to me.
That's what I think, and I'm one of those people who wants to hit conspiracy nuts most of the time. That's how obvious this sounds.