Hashemian Blog Web Tools, Financial Markets, Technology Tuesday, March 29, 2005 P2P - pirate to pirate, er, peer to peer  Admit it. You have broken the law at least once in your life. Maybe you have gone above the speed limit a time or two, or made a copy of your cousin's music CD. The law doesn't have the patience nor the time to worry about these occasional lapses. Society must rely on people's good characters in some instances, lest be crippled under a mountain of enforcement actions. But when an illegal activity reaches critical mass, it is the duty of the law to step in and curb the abuse. Such is the case heard before the supreme court regarding the file sharing and file swapping products known as P2P or peer to peer software. No one in their right mind is going to admit that the products they create are intended to encourage people to break the law, but actions speak louder than words. Napster, the original digital piracy tool wasn't heralded as a bootlegging product either, but once its true usage in swapping pirated music became obvious, the law had no choice but to shut it down. Proponents of P2P products such as Kazaa, Grokster, and eMule claim that their creators have the right to innovate and can't be held liable for people's misuse of their creations. There is some merit to that argument, but when these wares become tools in the hands of millions to break the law and bilk others of their rightful living, the law has no choice but to intercede. If the purveyors of the P2P products are looking the other way and getting rich on the backs of others' hard work, even if it is inadvertent, they must bear some responsibility. They would holler just the same if someone found a dubious method to unwittingly hijack their creations and dent their pocketbooks. <P2P - pirate to pirate, er, peer to peer> // posted by rh 0 comments | Monday, March 28, 2005 IRS and USPS – taxing your wallet and patience  Checking my mailbox over the weekend, I was greeted with my tax return documents. Only thing is that those were supposed to be delivered to the darlings at the IRS. What steams me is that I made sure to mail my return from another government entity, the post office. They weighed the enveloped, printed the postage stamp, and sent it on its way. I even paid for delivery confirmation. Thankfully I had a return address on the envelope (I normally don't bother), and the envelope returned to me with an insufficient postage sticker. Nice! Wonder what would have happened if I was at the deadline date (I wasn't) and I owed money (I didn't). I guess on top of the wasted time and postage money, I would have been slapped with late IRS penalties too. Moral of the story? I'm not sure. I mean how much more certain can you be than taking your tax return envelope to the post office to send to the IRS? Maybe get a second opinion on the postage from a different post office? For some, e-file may be an option. I tried it a couple of years ago and it worked out great, but last year I had some hassles with it and ended up mailing in the return. It's back to e-file for me this year. And, what are my chances of recovering my postage fee from the USPS? Yeah, right. <IRS and USPS – taxing your wallet and patience> // posted by rh 0 comments | Saturday, March 26, 2005 Jury duty, Part VI - The discharge  We had taken almost the entire court day, but we were relieved to have finally reached a verdict. We shuffled back in the jury box for the reading of the verdict. As the clerk read the decision, I kept wondering whether my vote was cast in good conscience. I could have held out for a lower amount, I could have argued my position more strongly, and I didn't have to compromise. In the end I decided that my vote was 1/6 of the verdict and I had fought a fair fight in the jury room. The defense lawyer was obviously displeased with the decision, so he asked the judge for permission to poll the jury, that is to make sure that the entire jury was in agreement. One by one we were asked if we agreed with the verdict and we all answered yes. The judge thanked us for our service and we were then discharged. The case was over, at least as far as we were concerned. As we were gathering our personal effects in the jury room the judge made an appearance to thank us personally. It was a nice touch. We asked him whether our figure was within an acceptable range. Wisely he replied that there are were no wrongs here and our decision, in view of the judicial system, was the right one, no matter what. In the days that followed I often thought about the case and questioned my judgment. Had I voted in best conscience, as I was sworn to do? The answer to that question still eludes me. In the end one must accept that the laws of this land are created by people, who, by nature, are imperfect and fallible. My training as an engineer gives me a tendency to see everything in black and white. But human nature doesn't fit within the rigid rules of science and engineering. It's a gray area and no amount of rules can address its every nuance. What we have is the best our society could come up with in the face of our profound flaws and short-comings. Still I am thankful that we have our laws. They're not perfect, but neither are we. Jury duty, Part I - The summons Jury duty, Part II - The opening statements Jury duty, Part III - The testimonies Jury duty, Part IV - The deliberation Jury duty, Part V - The verdict Jury duty, Part VI - The discharge <Jury duty, Part VI - The discharge> // posted by rh 0 comments | Friday, March 25, 2005 Jury duty, Part V - The verdict  I have always wondered how one would put a price on pain and suffering. Here I was tasked to come up with one. The case was even more nebulous since the plaintiff's credibility was in question. Almost immediately we polled ourselves to see where each juror stood on the matter. The range was between $50,000 and $500,000. Mine was the lowest number. In my mind the plaintiff was in much less pain that she was claiming and $50,000 was a generous award. The man with the highest number was wondering if his figure was too low. This was going to be trouble. After an hour of discussion, I found an ally who agreed with my number (we had chosen him as the foreman), but the rest weren't so pleased, least of them the high-number man. How had I arrived at my number? A simple, common sense approach. It was the amount that the plaintiff's pain was worth to me throwing in the benefit of doubt for good measure. Others were going about it by calculating how much the plaintiff's loss of life pleasure and loss of work could financially harm her. Finally we decided to calculate what the average award would be. In one instance we averaged all of the figures, in another, we threw out the lowest and highest numbers and averaged the rest. The results were fairly close for both calculations - too high for me, too low for the high-number man. Some tried other approaches to justify the average number, like loss of opportunity during lifetime, child bearing difficulties, or even lifetime medical bills to treat anxiety. By lunch, it was obvious we weren't making any progress on a final figure. Hopeless, we sent a note to the judge explaining the deadlock and asking for guidance. I know we wanted to finish the job that day but without a unanimous vote, we weren't going anywhere. The judge did his best instructing us to do the best we can and then sent us to lunch hoping that nourishment would smooth things over. Eating lunch might have helped a bit. We found ourselves in a hard bargaining mode in the afternoon. It was like trying to broker a deal come hell or high water. I would reluctantly raise my award and others would reciprocate by lowering their figures. Finally we were within a striking distance of a $30,000 difference and that's when I lost my ally as he joined the other four jurors on one side, and left me on the other side. I found myself as the only juror pacing back and forth in the room trying my best not to give in. The stare-down went on for a while with both sides stubbornly defending their positions, vowing not to compromise. But finally a small peace gesture from their side clinched the deal. I raised my number by an additional $20,000. The deliberation was over and suddenly the plaintiff was going to be $170,000 richer. Jury duty, Part I - The summons Jury duty, Part II - The opening statements Jury duty, Part III - The testimonies Jury duty, Part IV - The deliberation Jury duty, Part V - The verdict Jury duty, Part VI - The discharge <Jury duty, Part V - The verdict> // posted by rh 0 comments | Thursday, March 24, 2005 Green Day  Yeah, I know I'm a late-comer to this, but I finally bought their last gig, American Idiot. They are still punk at heart but you could tell that aging has mellowed them out a bit. A couple of tracks are definite anti-Bush rants, which is fine by me. The rest is a mixture of fast-paced and melodic tracks. Some took a while to grow on me, but now I like most of them. I'm not a big Green Day fan, but I must admit, they've done a fine job on this album. The album has explicit lyrics such as the f... word, but it's used lightly. <Green Day> // posted by rh 0 comments | Friday, March 18, 2005 Jury duty, Part IV - The deliberation  It was now time for us, the jury, to begin deliberation. But before that could start the judge had to give us some instructions on the applicable laws. He spent an hour going over the Connecticut motor vehicle laws, some of which went right over my head. I clearly remember thinking of all the years that must have been spent writing reams of legalese about every nuance of traffic rules and regulations. Surely a thankless job. We were then charged with determining fault and damages, if any, consisting of actual and compensatory types. With an hour to go before closing time, we were ushered into the deliberation room to begin the process. It was a relief to finally be able to express opinions about the case. The first task was to determine fault and that went smoothly. We all agreed that the plaintiff had indeed been careless and had wrongfully cut off the plaintiff. By the end of the session, we had all decided that the plaintiff was 90% at fault, but that would be as far as we could go on that day. We were called back into court and were summarily dismissed for the day. That meant having to take another day off from work to continue with the deliberation. Again, we were barred from discussing the case until we returned after the weekend. The weekend passed uneventfully and Monday was a government holiday. I sporadically thought about the case, but I kept finding myself undecided about the proper damages. On Tuesday we were once again back at court. The plaintiff was missing due to school, but the rest of the parties were present. The judge wanted to make sure that we made no inferences about the plaintiff's absence and we then found ourselves back in the deliberation room. The documents and our notes were still lying on the table. We took our seats and began our work. This day, however, was not to go as smoothly as the previous. Jury duty, Part I - The summons Jury duty, Part II - The opening statements Jury duty, Part III - The testimonies Jury duty, Part IV - The deliberation Jury duty, Part V - The verdict Jury duty, Part VI - The discharge <Jury duty, Part IV - The deliberation> // posted by rh 0 comments | Monday, March 14, 2005 The Boeing affair  Being liberal minded goes along with accepting the concept of live and let live. Somehow in the US we have a morality crisis by which every person seems to be solely judged by their personal lives rather then their public talents. The resignation of the Boeing CEO over an alleged affair with a female executive is yet another example of the link between Godliness and trustworthiness. Some seem to incessantly harp on how Clinton corrupted the minds of the nation by his trysts. And we must continue to say, "nonsense". People had affairs long before Clinton committed the act in the Oval Office. Of course the self-righteous would never engage in such immoral acts. Surely they've never watched porn, been to a strip club, or coveted a womanly curve (yes, I am assailing men here, but I'm sure there are some female perverts out there too). It's time we grow up and stop acting like saints when we really aren't. Many powerful people in this world have had questionable personal lives including affairs. As long as it's consented and legal, it's not for us to condemn or condone their acts. What people do in their private lives, should remain just that, private. <The Boeing affair> // posted by rh 0 comments | Thursday, March 10, 2005 Credit cards and bankruptcy  Hardly a day goes by that I don't receive multiple credit card offers in the mail. It's always from the same gang of goons trying to rope me in with some enticing offer. 0% APR until hell freezes over, free balance transfers, use the money for home improvement, new car, vacation, college bills, or maybe a bet with your local bookie. As if that's not enough, my own credit card company has been sending me a stream of blank checks with the bold font on the envelope screaming "LAST CHANCE". So far I've had 20 last chances and I'm sure many more last chances are to come. And yes, I have written them letters asking them to stop the soliciting to no avail. They really should start using other urgent scam lines. How about "final chance", "drop-dead chance", or "ultimate chance", or "really last chance, or not"? The recent bankruptcy laws, thanks to the almighty credit card lobby, has made it ever harder to slip away from these loan sharks. Poor babies. Let me take a moment to cry for their plight. They throw a mountain of money at us, and when we can't pay back their racket, they are the victims. Instead of the putting the law on their side, how about protecting the consumer? How about taking away their right to collect, if they solicit the same person more than 5 times, or 10 times, or how about 50 times? But no, that would be unfair to them, wouldn't it? Now if you excuse me, I have a stack of offers to rip up and throw in the trash. The next thing you know, they'd be charging us for filling our mailboxes with their junk. <Credit cards and bankruptcy> // posted by rh 1 comments | Wednesday, March 02, 2005 MSN Spaces, Where's the Space?  Now that blogging has taken the Web by storm, in its true, come-from-behind style Microsoft has joined the fray with its MSN Spaces offering and it is rapidly adding subscribers to this free blogging service which is currently in beta. Spurred by an enticing link in my Hotmail account, I recently paid a visit to MSN Spaces. All I can say is that this service has a long way to go before it can catch up with the other blogosphere titans such as Blogger and Movable Type (and by extension the TypePad service). MSN Spaces is designed nicely, but it is cluttered and cumbersome to navigate. There are no options to save the blogs to an external site, and the space provided (10 MB) is inadequate for an active blogger who uses lots of images. I use Movable Type at work and Blogger at home, and both of these products provide a superior blogging experience. They have simpler interfaces, provide better functionality, and have more useful options. I am certain that with time Spaces will improve. Whether or not it can catch up with the old reliables, we'll have to wait and see. For now, this is the only blog I'm going to place in my Spaces account. I must try everything at least once. <MSN Spaces, Where's the Space?> // posted by rh 0 comments | Tuesday, March 01, 2005 Jury duty, Part III - The testimonies  The testimonial phase of the trial took 3 days to complete. There is certainly a stark difference between going to work and going to the court as jury. The proceedings start relatively late in the day, lunch time is never shortened or delayed and the sessions end promptly at 4:45. The wheels of justice move, but at a much slower rate than in the civilian world. I often thought that if the court outsourced the trials to private companies, we would have been done with the case in 4 hours and not the 4 days that it took. I don’t exactly recall the order by which the witnesses were called, but here’s a summary of their testimonies: The defendant testified that she did nose out in the plaintiff’s lane, but barely more than a foot. In her opinion, the defendant was going too fast or was distracted, and therefore was unable to avoid an otherwise avoidable accident. Her testimony was basically an admittance of not yielding the right of way. The policeman on the scene testified that he recalled the accident, but his testimony added little in favor of either side. The defense lawyer tried to elicit a response confirming the high speed of the plaintiff using the laws of physics applied to skid marks and weight and velocity, but the cop claimed no knowledge of the relevant formula. The plaintiff’s orthopedic surgeon testified that he had observed some limitation of movement and some spine irregularity. His testimony was inconclusive, at least to me. The plaintiff testified going through the ordeal of the accident. She complained of constant pain and frequent sharp pains that interfered with her daily routine as well as prevented her form fully enjoying life. Her testimony turned emotional in a couple of occasions. I believed that she had some pain but not at the level she was testifying to. The defense produced a physician of their own that gave us a detailed tour of the X-Rays and the MRI images of the plaintiff, concluding that degeneration was present in the plaintiff's spine, and no damages were caused by the accident. His testimony was believable as far as proving that the plaintiff was not physically harmed in the accident. The defendant's husband who actually witnessed the accident from the outside tried his best to support his wife's position by asserting that the plaintiff was driving too fast, but basically admitted that the plaintiff's car was visible as it approached the defendant. Finally the driver who had been rear ended by the defendant as the result of the collision, a morose and grumpy woman, testified that the plaintiff's car was visible for a fair amount of time. During the testimonies I had no emotional reaction to any of the witnesses, save the last witness. Her dress and demeanor was one of upper-class society. Her attitude however reeked of trashy personality. Two witnesses also noted that just after the accident she was using loud vulgar language towards the plaintiff. Thankfully she wasn't on trial, otherwise I would have decided against her right then and there. The trial phase was now over and it was almost time to deliberate. Jury duty, Part I - The summons Jury duty, Part II - The opening statements Jury duty, Part III - The testimonies Jury duty, Part IV - The deliberation Jury duty, Part V - The verdict Jury duty, Part VI - The discharge <Jury duty, Part III - The testimonies> // posted by rh 0 comments |

Links Technorati Profile TMCnet.com ARCHIVES 09/01/2003 - 10/01/2003 03/01/2004 - 04/01/2004 04/01/2004 - 05/01/2004 05/01/2004 - 06/01/2004 06/01/2004 - 07/01/2004 07/01/2004 - 08/01/2004 08/01/2004 - 09/01/2004 09/01/2004 - 10/01/2004 10/01/2004 - 11/01/2004 11/01/2004 - 12/01/2004 12/01/2004 - 01/01/2005 01/01/2005 - 02/01/2005 02/01/2005 - 03/01/2005 03/01/2005 - 04/01/2005 04/01/2005 - 05/01/2005 05/01/2005 - 06/01/2005 06/01/2005 - 07/01/2005 07/01/2005 - 08/01/2005 08/01/2005 - 09/01/2005 09/01/2005 - 10/01/2005 10/01/2005 - 11/01/2005 11/01/2005 - 12/01/2005 12/01/2005 - 01/01/2006 01/01/2006 - 02/01/2006 02/01/2006 - 03/01/2006 03/01/2006 - 04/01/2006 04/01/2006 - 05/01/2006 05/01/2006 - 06/01/2006 06/01/2006 - 07/01/2006 07/01/2006 - 08/01/2006 08/01/2006 - 09/01/2006 09/01/2006 - 10/01/2006 10/01/2006 - 11/01/2006 11/01/2006 - 12/01/2006 12/01/2006 - 01/01/2007 01/01/2007 - 02/01/2007 02/01/2007 - 03/01/2007 03/01/2007 - 04/01/2007 04/01/2007 - 05/01/2007 05/01/2007 - 06/01/2007 06/01/2007 - 07/01/2007 07/01/2007 - 08/01/2007 08/01/2007 - 09/01/2007 09/01/2007 - 10/01/2007 10/01/2007 - 11/01/2007 11/01/2007 - 12/01/2007

هاشمیان.com

 Home

 Blog

 Web Tools
Usage

 News

 Articles

 FAQ

 About

 Contact

 Financial Markets Book
Read Complete Book

Search Amazon: