If I can stretch that analogy much too far, it's more like a store sending out hundreds of cars to block and harass people who may be shoplifters on the road without regard to the impact on other traffic. DOS attacks use the same infrastructure you're trying t'use to work, play games, read the news, post on /., and such. So in essence they're attacking everyone on the Internet as retaliation for one site ignoring an accusation of piracy.

Given that some, admittedly few, DCMA notices are sent out improperly formatted, in bad faith, or to the wrong people, this becomes particularly irksome. One hopes it opens up all kinds of crazy liability issues for both Kumar and whomever pays him, but we all know that big filmmakers, both in Bollywood and Hollywood, have a war chest larger than some nations' GNPs.

Obviously it's the code you'd use to decrypt the DAT tape on which your PINs are stored, including this one, the one for ATM machines, the one for EBT benefits, and so forth.

Au contraire, like: In the US, private citizens who are not law enforcement officers generally have no right to detain another citizen, only to arrest. TSA officers and other rent-a-cop types have a little more leeway on detention. Remember, to "detain" someone is to briefly stop that person for the purpose of asking questions under the implication that they are required to remain, although they may simply walk away. To "arrest" a person is to stop that person from leaving, and walking away becomes resistance.

When a cop asks you where you're going at 3 a.m., you're being detained, and you need only stop long enough to ask if you're free to go to ensure that you aren't under arrest. When a cop pulls you over for speeding, you're being briefly arrested.

There are special laws that may require you to remain in certain general vicinities at times (the scene of an accident or crime, for example), and courts may compel a person to be somewhere without arrest, but whenever one citizen prevents another from going somewhere else, it's an arrest.

54% of the US Senate is comprised of lawyers, as is about 36% of the House. At the state level, it thins out a bit; 15% overall, with a significantly stronger showing in the state Senates (see the National Conference of State Legislatures website for more detailed details, if you care for 'em). While a lawyer might agree that fits with your "largely not" statement, there's an implication that only a handful of legislators are lawyers, and that's misleading. It's also worth noting that these figures are the lowest seen in quite a few decades.

Lawyers, as a group, have a -very- strong hand in shaping the law today, in recent memory have had an even stronger voice, and have never been left out of the game. It's just fortunate that lawyers disagree as much--or more--as anyone else does.

I agree that we can't (entirely, or mostly) blame "the lawyers" for bad laws, not even the lobbydroids. Ultimately, public apathy, indifference, and plain stupid are the root causes of bad lawmaking. I -can- blame lawyers for perverting the courts into an overly-formalized, inaccessible, and almost incestuous haven for billable hours. I can also blame lawyers for not policing themselves well. The rules are made by and enforced by colleagues who're likely to be sympathetic, and that's a problem.

It took me about thirty seconds to shake nanometers out of my head and come up with nautical miles. "Gosh," thought I, "that's even flatter than Kansas, where the highest peak can be seen from several microns' distance."