David Macauley did this decades ago.

Why should you expect that cost of living should be the same everywhere? Why should owning a house always be within your means? I live in SF and make six figs just to pay back my grad loans and pay rent. I'm still happy with living here because I like to hang out at the beach (I almost said swim in the ocean) then drive up to ski in Tahoe, weather permitting. Compare that with central Kansas. Nothing wrong with Kansas but I don't see people flocking to it.

It's expensive because lots of people recognize how great it is to live here. That doesn't mean that everyone actually can live here.

per plane! All that times number of planes in the air, to solve a very limited problem. Black boxes work most of the time. There are very few entirely missing flights.

Set up a dummy WEP-secured AP and teach them how to get on. Check out http://www.securitytube.net/groups?operation=view&groupId=9 for a good instructional video. You'll have to provide a few Alfa cards though. Have them work in teams of three or four and you won't need many.

Seriously. They will learn not to run WEP on their own APs nor to trust WEP APs in the wild. And since most people don't run WEP anymore, you aren't really setting them up for a life of criminal hacking. But it is just devious enough to entertain kids (and some adults).

I didn't just RTFHeadline but read the whole story and nowhere does it mention CO2 influencing the size of crab growth. In fact, quite the opposite, the article says that crabs don't feed as well under higher CO2. The article barely mentions CO2 and is really about conservation efforts of oysters and crabs.

I haven't finished the book nor did I finish this review. The osso buko was the only one I tried and I used chicken(!) instead of veal or lamb. But it was great! That is where you lost me. From what you wrote about this recipe, you over-thought it. My enjoyment in cooking is partially from winging it, making things works, learning new stuff like what dry wine is. Simply following exact instructions is just assembly-line work.

I bought the book for the first few chapters about Tim's approach to learning not about learning to cook specifically. I've always thought that if I woke up in the future, the first thing I would do is find out the latest technology to get information into my head. Learning quickly is a tremendous skill and one I'm still working on, after three college degrees.

Having said that, the book wasn't a revelation but I enjoy returning to those first chapters when I'm about to start a new project. They fire me up and focus me on how I should approach something new.

I had a contractor colleague who used to outsource, In The Same Office. Here was his scam:
1) Approach programmer #1 and say, "I'm new here and I want to work within the established company guidelines. How would you organize this?"
2) Approach programmer #2 and say, "I'm thinking of organizing my project like so because that fits in the company guidelines. I'm curious about your thoughts on this first step."
3) ...
4) Profit!

The lazy employee in TFA is a master of labor arbitrage.

Eric B.

> In all senses, it's a better solution
Ammonia? Not in my sense of smell.

Tell me when they have a silver/Mendocino Oatmeal Stout solution.

...once they have these new mass-storage devices, how can I turn it into a homebrew tunnel scanning microscope?

the GE subjects? They can be interesting and learning more makes you a better person, programmer, spouse, parent, neighbor, voter, etc. Learning and school, in general, really don't have to be bad things which you try to escape.

I was trying to tease out what exactly Mr. Beckerman was railing against with his comment "yes her poverty and illness and depression were factors in her failing to respond on time, since it is usually impossible for someone in her position to get a lawyer to take her case." Specifically, I wanted to make a point that his use of 'illness' was FUD. However, my response does come over as tongue-in-cheek and that is not appropriate here.

I agree with the difference b/n copyright and trademark law. Are you saying that, unlike trademark, just because you _can_ sue to protect your copyright, you don't _have_ to? Is it fair to extend this to say that the RIAA _should not_ have sued to protect in this case?
Would this bring up issues of discrimination, if some people get sued and others don't? How should the RIAA select who they go after? How can this be done 'fairly', by whatever standard of fairness you want?
I'm not against the idea of more selective enforcement. I just think it could use some fleshing out.

Thanks for the info. I only read the story off of one of the links and it didn't mention this stuff. I'm too tired to verify so I'll take your word :-)
Sounds like one case where the RIAA sued the mother. Mom said she didn't do it and she didn't have exclusive control of the computer. RIAA (eventually) drops suit on Mom and sues Daughter and Husband. The RIAA messed up a little in not dropping against Mom soon enough. So maybe they will learn their lesson here and drop against the ill girl and go after Dad?

Yes, you have more experience in this. But even I feel bad when a student or university employee gets hit with a "Settle for $4000 (if you are lucky) or go to court!". Unfortunately, that is the law right now.
As part of a _solution_, I think the $750 statutory damages should be revisited and settlement amount be made more flexible. But that is just me being "cold and dispassionate" again.

The underlined statement in the summary talks about the RIAA possibly using threat of lawsuit to force settlements. Yes, forcing settlement through threat of lawsuit is bad for defendants. Also bad is preventing valid lawsuits to protect copyrights. An individual, independent artist has the same right to file a suit to collect $750/infringement or settle as the RIAA does so I don't think it is entirely fair to pick on the RIAA for using the law as it stands.
    As far as solutions go, I want to see the RIAA be more reasonable and flexible in the amount the sue for and the amount they will settle for.

This case talked about the invalidity of the 'Making Available' argument. Yes, I disagree with 'Making Available' also. The hard part is this, to prove that someone actually distributed copyright-protected digital content, you have to listen to all the network traffic going into or out of their computer and watch for your work to go across. This is a serious invasion of privacy. There needs to be some way to gather an amount of information that lends credible belief that a copyrighted work was distributed yet without being such an invasion of privacy. I'll admit, even with a graduate degree in IT and years of experience as a programmer and sys admin, I haven't been able to come up with any good ideas on this one, yet :-)

Ah yes, failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. I fired up Westlaw and read the RIAA's amended complaint. I saw that this case was cited in the Elektra case you mentioned above. What did the court have to say about this case(Interscope)?
"Defendant notes that in a recent case, Interscope Records v. Rodriguez, No. 06-CV-2485, 2007 WL 2408484 (S.D.Cal. Aug. 17, 2007), a federal district court applied the Twombly pleading standard and held that a complaint similar to the one in this case did not sufficiently state a claim upon which relief could be granted. See id. at *1. Respectfully, the Court is unpersuaded that Twombly demands such a restrictive interpretation of the Rule 8(a) pleading standard."
So the 'law' here is not settled.

Open to discussion,
Eric B

Mr. Beckerman, you and I are in the same boat, sort of. But I still have to call FUD here. You are using the same inflammatory remarks used in other religious wars that serve only to weaken your otherwise valid arguments.

Neither of those make it illegal or even wrong to file suit against 'helpless people'. As long as the claim isn't frivolous, it is within the RIAA's rights to bring it. Are you challenging the veracity of MediaSentry's (or whoever they are now) data collection? That might be a valid argument.

I RTFA and I only saw her claim that she didn't do it. Granted there were a few links to different sources covering the story. Can you post a link to the coverage that made the compelling argument to her innocence, please?
I know the 'innocent until proven guilty" line but that doesn't mean just saying 'Innocent!' keeps you from having to defend yourself.
Here is the URL I read:
http://www.p2pnet.net/story/17765

Ok, this is the one that sticks in my craw. Back this up with some cites. My personal experience (with a very limited n of 5 or so) shows that all of them had Limewire or some such software installed, on default settings, downloading and sharing songs.

Really? What level of illness triggers this heightened standard for plaintiffs? I haven't heard about that in law school.
What more should they do besides identify an IP address purportedly sharing music and linking that IP with a name? What more _can_ they do?
Also, do you really believe the $3 damage argument? Sure, if they were only downloading a song, the damages would be the market value of $1 (Thanks iTunes!) But if they are truly distributing (directly or contributarily), then the damages go up for each infringement. This could be 100s or even 1000s of dollars. Agreed, it isn't the $750/infringement the law allows but again, that is something that should be changed.

I agree with you here. Maybe more pro bono work from lawyers for sick and impoverished people? Maybe a more efficient and simple system of presenting and defending against claims so that non-lawyers can represent themselves in most cases? I'm not being cynical here. I agree that there is room for improvement.

As far as I can tell, under the current law, copyright holders have the right to enforce their copyright through lawsuits. Why all the FUD here?

Are you saying that lawyers won't represent sick people? No, so the illness part is FUD. Are you saying that lawyers tend not to represent poor people? I agree, that is a problem. Especially since the byzantine legal system requires someone with legal training to successfully navigate.

To summarize my point(s)...
Less FUD, more solutions.

Wow. I mean... I disagree with you but I'm not advocating that you serve an eternity in Hell. I'm just asking for a more balanced and well thought out discussion.

Eric B.
3L USF School of Law