That you should hate your father and your mother.
I'm pretty sure that the Bible doesn't say that.
The leaks at the Ocean Saratoga site have been leaking since Hurricane Ivan which caused an undersea mudslide nearly six years ago destroying the rig. Taylor Energy have been working since that time to stop the leaks. A ten-mile oil strip was discovered today near the Saratoga site.
... The Ocean Saratoga well was once operated by BP
Alabama's Press Register reports that this 10km long oil slick is now visible from satellite images. This seems to indicate it may be leaking more than the 14 gallons of oil per day reported by the Examiner.
According to the indictment, Lowson and Kirsch interviewed former employees of online ticket vendors to determine what measures they took to thwart automated buying and also obtained source code, in some cases through hacking.
Emphasis mine. It would seem to me that acquiring copyrighted source code either via buying it illegitimately or taking a copy via hacking is something that most of us can agree is and should be illegal.
For example, in March 2009, the Ministry of Administrative Reform (MenPAN) issued Circular Letter No. 1 of 2009 to all central and provincial government offices including State-owned enterprises, endorsing the use and adoption of open source software within government organizations. While the government issued this circular in part with the stated goal to "reduc[e] software copyright violation[s]," in fact, by denying technology choice, the measure will create additional trade barriers and deny fair and equitable market access to software companies.
There they go using backwards English again. They admit that Indonesia was trying to reduce copyright violations with this advice. Then they turn around and claim that adopting OSS solutions creates trade barriers that deny them fair and equitable market access. Whiskey Tango, Foxtrot? Did these guys go to a special school to learn how to talk like that?
If OSS is so hard to compete against maybe you should give some thought to your business model and realize that it needs some serious fixing. No, easier to get the government to take out the competition for you. Lazy Bastards.
It's not flawed logic.
It's flawed English, both semantically and syntactically ("does not give due consideration to the value to intellectual creations.")
The logic is faultless. What these vendors of proprietary software are saying is that open source competition will reduce the value the market assigns to their products.
The question is whether you share the unspoken assumptions: that this is a bad thing, and that the government should do something about it.
There are really only a few explanations for the secrecy and ALL of them strongly suggest that the public should oppose any ratification.
Simplest is that it's secret because they know we won't like it. Perhaps they don't want the people of the world to understand all the tricks and traps they're building in.
Next up, they don't talk about it openly because they imagine themselves above the opinions and thoughts of the vast unwashed masses. If they let us in on it it might encourage us to give them our annoying, uneducated, simpleton input. If that's what they think of us, how likely is it that ACTA in any way respects us?
Compounding factors include that they're SO divorced from reality and human psychology that they never imagined secrecy would breed distrust. If so, anything they come up with is likely to be equally divorced from reality and human nature.
Finally, perhaps they don't give a damn how it all comes out so long as someone foots the bill for the hookers and blow.
Playing games doesn't seem like a particularly lofty goal for the computer club - what about teaching them to make their own games (plenty of easy-to-use game authoring software out there), make their own web pages, or just learn the basics of programming through something like Lego Mindstorms (budget-dependent, of course).
Oh, he is an "artist". You just need to put "scam" in front to truly appreciate the art....
Never let someone who says it cannot be done interrupt the person who is doing it.