Subj : Re: How much should I charge for fixed-price software contract? To : comp.programming From : Richard Heathfield Date : Mon Aug 22 2005 12:49 am Randy Howard wrote: > Richard Heathfield wrote > (in article > ): > >>> It seems that you really, really, really, really, really, really >>> take this seriously. >> >> Oh yes. If anyone were thinking of traveling to the USA, I'd advise them >> against it, on the grounds that they might - just might - get arrested. > > Millions visit each year. You can name /one/ example of someone > having this problem. Yep. I think it's a serious bug, and it needs fixing. Until then, I can't recommend the program. > I think the risk is lower than the risk of > having the airplane crash into a tall building while making the > journey, by several orders of magnitude. However, flail away at > tilting those windmills, they do so enjoy the attention. Thank you. :-) BTW you're quite right about the dangers of air travel. >>> I don't see grain sanctions against russia or any other >>> country for someone being arrested (even falsely) for >>> potentially breaking a law. >> >> Ah, you still don't understand. No law was broken. Not even the silly >> DMCA law. > > I know you understand, but fail to make it clear in your > comments, that people are arrested on suspicion of breaking the > law. They are convicted AFTER the arrest in civilized countries > if they are guilty and released otherwise. Actually, a great many people are /not/ arrested even when it is suspected that they have broken the law - at least, that's true here in the UK, and I think it's true in the USA too. Speeding offences are a typical example. It is appropriate to arrest someone in some circumstances, but not all. To arrest someone on suspicion of violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is overkill. >> But even if it had been (which it wasn't), it's stupid to consider it >> a jailing matter. > > When the police suspect you in the commission of a crime, you > get arrested. If it's appropriate, yes. But not if it's not. In this case, it wasn't appropriate. > That's the way it works. You may or may not make > bail, but you will be arrested. The DA then may attempt to > obtain an indictment, then decides whether or not to take you to > trial, or arranges a plea bargain, etc. It is not up to the > police to decide the punishment. Unless you're a Brazilian travelling on a London tube train, it seems. :-( >>>> But because it's >>>> Americans doing it, it seems to be okay to some Americans. That's >>>> called "special pleading". >>> >>> No, we simply understand that mistakes are made. The mistake >>> you are upset about was corrected, perhaps too slowly in your >>> opinion, but it was. >> >> Was it? Was Elcomsoft compensated for their lost time? > > Here's a little hint from your uncle Randy, if you are arrested > for suspicion of a crime, and found not guilty, you (and your > employer) are /not/ compensated for lost time. The good news is > that it is possible to be found not guilty after being arrested, > a luxury not afforded in many countries even today. Here's a little reply from your nephew Richard. If the police arrested everyone they suspected of breaking any law, the jails would be full - and many of the inmates would be policemen! Please bear in mind that we're not talking drug-running, murder, or arson here. Even if we were to grant that there was an offence (which doesn't seem to be the case), and that it was committed in the USA (which is far from clear), arrest is overkill in this circumstance. > >>> I would expect the British people understand that pretty well >>> after shooting an innocent person quite famously just recently. >>> I would claim that was a more egregious example than yours, or >>> the actual event with DS. >> >> The British people didn't shoot anyone, any more than the US people >> imprisoned Dmitri Sklyarov. > > Semantics aside (it is government for and by the people, at > least over here), you know what I mean. Government for and by the people is all very well in theory, but I have yet to see it put into practice. Still, that's another debate for another day. >> One police officer murdered an innocent man on >> a Tube train while others assisted by holding the guy down. > > It would appear so, but we get so little real news reporting > anymore, I don't pretend to possess even 5% of the true facts in > the matter. Hardly surprising, since the police have provided so much dysinformation. (It has emerged that the guy didn't know he was being followed, didn't run, didn't vault the barrier, wasn't wearing suspiciously capacious clothing, and was so calm and relaxed in his last few minutes of life that he even picked up a "Metro" (a free newspaper) to browse through whilst on the train. All of this contradicts initial police reports. > >> a full independent public inquiry into the incident should be conducted. > > To accomplish what worthy goal? Such "independent inquiries" > are just feel-good politics to smooth over the mob. To stop it happening again? >> I also hope the guy who arrested Sklyarov is punished, and that Sklyarov >> and Elcomsoft receive full compensation for their inconvenience, expense, >> and loss of liberty. > > Keep holding your breath. Heh - I don't feel like committing suicide today. > Governments get overthrown when they try to steal > power (and usually money) too rapidly, but when they do it > methodically, it usually continues unabated until the economy > collapses. I suspect that is where the US, and perhaps the EU > as well is currently headed. Alas, you are almost certainly correct. -- Richard Heathfield "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999 http://www.cpax.org.uk mail: rjh at above domain .