POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.off-topic : Privacy Myth Server Time
29 Jul 2024 16:21:32 EDT (-0400)
  Privacy Myth (Message 41 to 50 of 53)  
<<< Previous 10 Messages Goto Latest 10 Messages Next 3 Messages >>>
From: Warp
Subject: Re: Privacy Myth
Date: 25 May 2012 03:51:17
Message: <4fbf39f5@news.povray.org>
scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> Of course having better lawyers than the other side helps, especially in 
> complex cases.

  Screw the rules, I have money!

-- 
                                                          - Warp


Post a reply to this message

From: Francois Labreque
Subject: Re: Privacy Myth
Date: 25 May 2012 08:58:55
Message: <4fbf820f$1@news.povray.org>

> scott<sco### [at] scottcom>  wrote:
>> Of course having better lawyers than the other side helps, especially in
>> complex cases.
>
>    Screw the rules, I have money!
>
That's the Golden rule.  He who has the gold, makes the rules.

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }


Post a reply to this message

From: Warp
Subject: Re: Privacy Myth
Date: 25 May 2012 09:35:52
Message: <4fbf8ab8@news.povray.org>
Francois Labreque <fla### [at] videotronca> wrote:
> Le 2012-05-25 03:51, Warp a écrit :
> > scott<sco### [at] scottcom>  wrote:
> >> Of course having better lawyers than the other side helps, especially in
> >> complex cases.
> >
> >    Screw the rules, I have money!
> >
> That's the Golden rule.  He who has the gold, makes the rules.

  And history is written by the victors.

-- 
                                                          - Warp


Post a reply to this message

From: Kevin Wampler
Subject: Re: Privacy Myth
Date: 25 May 2012 11:20:42
Message: <4fbfa34a$1@news.povray.org>
On 5/25/2012 6:35 AM, Warp wrote:
>
>    And history is written by the victors.
>

Specifically by Victor Ehrenberg and Victor Davis Hanson, among others.


Post a reply to this message

From: Darren New
Subject: Re: Privacy Myth
Date: 26 May 2012 22:05:54
Message: <4fc18c02@news.povray.org>
On 5/23/2012 8:28, Jim Henderson wrote:
> Lawmakers define law.  The courts interpret it - and sometimes interpret
> it to mean something other than what the lawmakers wrote it to mean.

Or they often have to interpret it to decide whether a particular case is 
covered. (Hence the term "case law".)

For example: The carpool lane can only be used by a car with at least two 
passengers. Does a hearse with a driver and a dead body count? Does a woman 
8 months pregnant count?

Or, from an Oracle/Google point of view, can you copyright an API?

The lawmakers can pass new laws to override cases that got decided in a way 
they didn't like, if they want, so yes, the lawmakers make the laws.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
   "Don't panic. There's beans and filters
    in the cabinet."


Post a reply to this message

From: Francois Labreque
Subject: Re: Privacy Myth
Date: 28 May 2012 08:25:26
Message: <4fc36eb6$1@news.povray.org>
Le 2012-05-26 22:05, Darren New a écrit :
> On 5/23/2012 8:28, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Lawmakers define law. The courts interpret it - and sometimes interpret
>> it to mean something other than what the lawmakers wrote it to mean.
>
> Or they often have to interpret it to decide whether a particular case
> is covered. (Hence the term "case law".)
>
> For example: The carpool lane can only be used by a car with at least
> two passengers. Does a hearse with a driver and a dead body count? Does
> a woman 8 months pregnant count?

If the 8-month pregnant woman qualifies for using the carpool lane, she 
can also be fined for driving with a child on her lap.



-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }


Post a reply to this message

From: Jim Henderson
Subject: Re: Privacy Myth
Date: 28 May 2012 14:33:00
Message: <4fc3c4dc$1@news.povray.org>
On Mon, 28 May 2012 08:25:36 -0400, Francois Labreque wrote:

> If the 8-month pregnant woman qualifies for using the carpool lane, she
> can also be fined for driving with a child on her lap.

Technically the child isn't on her lap.

Jim


Post a reply to this message

From: Francois Labreque
Subject: Re: Privacy Myth
Date: 29 May 2012 08:24:41
Message: <4fc4c009$1@news.povray.org>
Le 2012-05-28 14:33, Jim Henderson a écrit :
> On Mon, 28 May 2012 08:25:36 -0400, Francois Labreque wrote:
>
>> If the 8-month pregnant woman qualifies for using the carpool lane, she
>> can also be fined for driving with a child on her lap.
>
> Technically the child isn't on her lap.
>
> Jim

In my province, a child has to be in a car seat until he or she is 63cm 
(25in) from the seat to the top of the head, so she could still be fined 
for having an unrestrained kid in the car.

Also, she still can't use the car pool lane has you have to have two (in 
some cases three) people of driving age to be able to use it.  The goal 
is to reduce the number of cars on the roads.  An infant can't drive a 
car by herself, therefore her mom does not qualify to use the carpool 
lane, as the baby's presence has no bearing on the number of cars used 
by that family.

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }


Post a reply to this message

From: Jim Henderson
Subject: Re: Privacy Myth
Date: 29 May 2012 13:28:41
Message: <4fc50749$1@news.povray.org>
On Tue, 29 May 2012 08:24:41 -0400, Francois Labreque wrote:

> In my province, a child has to be in a car seat until he or she is 63cm
> (25in) from the seat to the top of the head, so she could still be fined
> for having an unrestrained kid in the car.

It's not like she can take the kid out and place it in a child safety 
seat.

> Also, she still can't use the car pool lane has you have to have two (in
> some cases three) people of driving age to be able to use it.  The goal
> is to reduce the number of cars on the roads.  An infant can't drive a
> car by herself, therefore her mom does not qualify to use the carpool
> lane, as the baby's presence has no bearing on the number of cars used
> by that family.

Yes, and that is something that IMHO makes sense.  But if the law doesn't 
specify that, then generally the cops aren't going to pull someone over 
(especially as most cops really dislike having to do paperwork) unless 
the situation is particularly egregious.

Seeing one person in the car would be such a situation for a cop on 
enforcement duty for a HOV lane.

Jim


Post a reply to this message

From: Orchid Win7 v1
Subject: Re: Privacy Myth
Date: 29 May 2012 15:00:59
Message: <4fc51ceb$1@news.povray.org>
On 28/05/2012 07:33 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, 28 May 2012 08:25:36 -0400, Francois Labreque wrote:
>
>> If the 8-month pregnant woman qualifies for using the carpool lane, she
>> can also be fined for driving with a child on her lap.
>
> Technically the child isn't on her lap.

Kids on the backseat cause accidents.

Accidents on the backseat cause kids.


Post a reply to this message

<<< Previous 10 Messages Goto Latest 10 Messages Next 3 Messages >>>

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.