Posts by Lyndon Hood
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
According to the Herald, murderers imprisoned under the proposed legislation will need a new prison, costing $314 million.
Yes, the extra prison is for everyone that's covered;
"people who commit a violent offence that earns them a prison sentence of five years or more – regardless of whether or not they serve the full term – will not be eligible for parole if they commit a subsequent violent offence that receives a sentence of five years or more."
This will include some number of people with life sentences who will apparently never be let out and perhaps as many as two repeat murderers.
And I imagine we'll need an extra prison by 2011 anyway, so this would be on top of that.
My comment wasn't meant to directly reflect National's policy, but I will add that I don't think, say, Burton is going to be let out as it is.
That would make it at least three innocent people dead that shouldn't be...
Well, at least six if you count all the convictions.
It's just a question if you want to frame your debate on the justice system around that alone.
-
The surprising thing is how few offenders this will affect
Are we all familiar with the number of people currently in prison for murders committed after they served time for an earlier murder?
I believe it's three.
-
Well I don't think I paid more than $200 for my grinder. I admit I haven't managed to get a proper ristretto without cheating (opening the steam wand as the coffee's drawing) yet, but I don't have a tamper that's the right size or possibly the right kind of basket.
So you probably shouldn't take my advice, but I went to moore wilsons.
-
Re: DPF, Crime Stats my pet peeve is referring to the murder stats. The number of murders is really too small (and the typical murder, from a law-enforcement point of view, too random) to support any conclusions.
It really is like saying global warming is real/not real because this years was warmer/cooler than last year.
-
Vigorous debate (just scanning it there seems to be some actual give and take in places, starting with basics) at BoingBoing:
Lessig: YouTube takedown shows why fair use isn't enough -
... islander (cont'd)
The debate here could (partly) be described as between your question and "Why should anyone have to pay you?"
When you get down to it the answers to both questions rapidly approach "because".
-
Ta.
Not that it illustrates anything (much), but I'm reminded Don Quixote. The history of the book, rather than the idea that the RIAA is tilting at windmills.
Cervantes wrote a second part to Don Quixote, at least partly as a rejoinder to a conterfeit part two that had circulated. Cervantes is almost postmodern in the way he deal with this - the characters hear about these stories about them that have been circulating and are all like, WTF? That never happened to us! Then they bump into one of the characters from it and he's all apologetic and insists the guys he was in adventures with said they where Don Quixote and Sancho Panza.
In the end Cervantes has the Don die explicitly so nobody can write another sequel.
Aside from that Matthew, I do think you're overly dismissive of the public benefit that accrues during the copyright period.
Mark:Copyright's Paradox by Neil Weinstock Netanel, perchance?
That's the bunny.
Islander:why anyone should have the right to use my words in other media for their own benefit without paying me for the use of those words?
-
Can you copyright characters?
-
Just seeing the letter DRM up there - there's no reason for copyright law to have anything to do with DRM.
Quite apart from all the evils and problems currently, the DRM's hardly going to vanish when the copyright expires. If it doesn't, will it still be illegal to circumvent it?
-
Just to pop in and correct my first principles...
On examining my opinions I find that I do believe copyright is less artifical than I said. Artists are entitled to recompense and control of how their work is used.
While I don't think this is supportable from a natural rights point of view (I've seen more than one libertarian assume otherwise, and the makes me sad), I've remembered I don't believe in them anyway.
And I'm aware this attitude is probably a product of the times and the kind of practical compromises copyright works on, but there you go.