Comment Re:There would be no need... (Score 1) 337
But will it be able to identify the instructions - stop, go or take a different route (eg because of an incident ahead) - given by a trafic cop?
But will it be able to identify the instructions - stop, go or take a different route (eg because of an incident ahead) - given by a trafic cop?
What about reporing the debt/very late payment to one or more of the credit reference agencies?
Sadly, this mentality is too prevalent in the Science/IT community. It goes like this:
If 'person X' can't prove to me that 'law Y' is 'beneficial/valid/just/whatever-polarised-measure-of-truth-I-like-at-the-time', then we should all just ignore it.
I disagree. The way I think it goes is "This law/procedure was introduced because of X and Y. Now X & Y no longer apply/exist but we have situation A which means that the reason/justification for these laws no longer exists so the laws should be revoked or amended to take into account the current circumstances.
For some events, such as Tennis, the (BBC) live streams without commentary were more enjoyable than those with commentary. On the commentary-less feeds, you could clearly hear the umpire, line judges and the crowd. When there was commentary, the sound level from the court was reduced below that of the commentary. Added to that, much of the commentary consisted of the commentators inane chatter amongst themselves about what the players had done in the past. This actually detracted from the enjoyment of the event.
Which is one of the stupid things with TV stations (especially the satellite ones). They will only allow people from the 'target' location to subscribe. So, for example, a UK ex-pat living on mainland Europe cannot subscribe to Sky (the UK satellite broadcaster) and view domestic UK channels and someone living in the UK cannot subscribe to mainland European providers. As long as someone is willing to pay the subscription fee and can receive the signals from the satellite, what difference should it make which country they live in?
Interesting question actually. Not sure that's been tested in law yet.
People doing things as a consequence of their employment are representing a company and the company is responsible.
Officers of a company are vicariously liable for the things that their employees do.
But is a company responsible for the actions of software claiming to represent it?
IANAL, just a business student (in another country), so if there's anyone out there who does know, I'd be interested...
One would expect so. Otherwise the banks and other financial institutions would be repudiating stock market trades made by their automated systems but which they later wished had not been made.
(4) At that point the alleged copyright owner can file a lawsuit against the alleged violator. The ISP has immunity since it followed steps 1-3
Could the actual copyright owner (NASA in this case) not initiate a prosecution for perjury against the person/organisation who submitted the original takedown notice.? Not only that but claim damages from them as well.
Both links and torrents are essentially equivalent to bibliographical references in paper books. The only difference is the mechanism used to follow the reference. With a reference in a printed book you go to the library index to determine on which stack/shelf the work is located, with links and torrents your software does a DNS lookup get to get the IP address of the server holding the work, In both cases you (or your software) visit the location and read the referenced work.
Yet while tablets, smartphones etc have made the actual computing devices smaller, monitors for desktop computers have got bigger. Systems such as the Commodore PET and the original MAC had very small screens. Not too long ago, 14" or 15" monitors were standard, now 20+" are common.
The solution to that is for Author A to licence it to distribution company E for online access worldwide,
I agree if he bought the domains legally and mail was sent to those he didn't unlawful interception anything since it was sent to a domain he owned. It would be like a letter from someone else ending up in my mail box and cause i took it outta my mail box its tampering with the mail.
And not only ending up in your mail box, but also having your name and address on the envelope. ie It was correctly delivered according to the sender's instructions.
As the adverts all say, "the value of investments can go down as well as up". The stock market is gambling pure and simple, so punters (investers) should not be surprised if they sometimes lose. Following the initial floating of the shares, the price will naturally settle to their current true value - sometimes this will be up and sometimes it will be down. The people who bought the shares at their opening value obviously thought they were worth it, otherwise they should not have bought them at that price. They took a gamble and lost!
Saliva causes cancer, but only if swallowed in small amounts over a long period of time. -- George Carlin