| ||||||
| 2003/6/14-15 [Reference/Law/Court] UID:28730 Activity:moderate |
6/14 Can digital pictures be used in court room?
\_ of course they can
\_ why of course? Can't pictures be doctored?
\_ just because they can be doctored doesn't mean they
aren't allowed. If you DO doctor photos and get caught
you are in for loads of trouble.
\_ i've just assumed "real" photos can be doctored as well,
albeit with a bit more effort.
\_ most of the techniques for doctoring digital photos
are emulations of well-understood darkroom
techniques. -tom
\_ I used to use photoshop in the darkroom all the
time when I was on the high school year book staff
and you were in band.
\_ lets say I took pictures of the apartment before and after moving
out, gets deducted for ridiculous amounts and didn't get the
deposit back. Can I still use digital pictures as evidence in
a small claims court? I mean it's sooooo easy to doctor pictures.
\_ you're supposed to have someone witness you taking pics
when you move in. ObGoogle.
\_ Yes. The small claims court judge will decide based on anything
they feel like. Who says they're digital sourced anyway once
you've had them printed on kodak? Don't tell the judge unless
he asks, dumbass.
\_what are the discovery rules in small claims court? if it
was regular court, you wouldn't only have the judge to worry
about but the opposing party. that a photo was doctored
would come out on cross-examination. the opposing party
would very likely have the photo ruled inadmissible on lack
of foundation alone. even if the rules are way more relaxed
in small claims court, there has to be some similar
mechanism, i'd imagine.
\_ Can't you read? I just told you small claims court
judges decide based on whatever they feel like. The
typical case time in front of a judge is about 45 seconds
for each side. You watch too much TV.
\_ don't forget to check if this landlord has done these kind of
things to other tenants in the past. That could be more firepower
than any pictures, digital or not. i highly doubt that digital
pictures would be ruled out as evidence. you can scan a negative
and doctor it up as well.
\_ in real court, they can ask for the negative and have
experts analyze the negative. Small claims court could
have more lenient rules. |
| 2003/6/14 [Uncategorized] UID:28731 Activity:kinda low |
6/14 erikred, green tea has like 20mg of caffeine in it. That is
pretty trivial. Anyway, once you get to the green tea stage
it is pretty easy to just drop off, though i don't know why
you would want to. -phuqm
\_ how much caffeine is in semen? I love drinking cum! -bukkake boy
\_ There's this new invention called 'email' for these kinds of
messages. |
| 2003/6/14-15 [Computer/SW/WWW/Browsers] UID:28732 Activity:moderate |
6/14 I fill out a lot of forms for sweepstakes/free stuff that basically
just ask for name, address, email. Is there any way to partially
automate this within mozilla? Preferably it would generate random
answers to any survey questions and generate a new spamgourmet
email address.
\_ good idea... may be you should post this at the mozdev site
and someone will write it :p
\_ do you ever win anything?
\_ I've never won any drawings, but I do get a lot of free stuff.
I have free subscriptions to Maxim, InfoWeek, Field and Stream
ect. Occasionally I get small things like a free Webster
dictionary and golf balls. Whatever... free= good. And I
really haven't seen much of an increase in spam because of it.
\_ It's not truly free. They're getting some info out of you.
\_ given that the op is implying that he is providing false
data, the companies are really recieving something
of negative value in exchanege for their giveaways.
of course, the op's time is probably worth way more per
hour than the compensation from the giveaways for
filling out stupid web forms. It seems to me that both
sides are losing.
\_ You can't provide all false data and expect to get
anything in the mail ;) Besides, if you look at it
that way every time you write to this you're loosing
$$ for little gain. But really, I've got nothing
better to do while currently unemployed :)
\_ uhm, look for work?
\_ Well, I have a job lined up for next month. |
| 2003/6/14-15 [Computer/SW/Unix, Computer/SW/Editors/Emacs] UID:28733 Activity:nil |
6/14 In older versions of xemacs, if I click anywhere on foo_bar_baz, the
entire string is highlighted. But with newer versions the highlight
stops at the underscore. I have to click on the underscore to highlight
the whole string. Anybody know if this is a configurable thing? I've
searched the FAQs and didn't find anything. This problem is very
annoying because I highlight and paste function names into
M-x grep or other search tools a lot. Thanks.
\_ use the older version. |