Disqus - Latest Comments for Jurisprudence

Re: What Kind Of Vaio P Can $1500 Get You In USA vs. Japan

Jurisprudence — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 21:33:50 -0000

As you probably already know Its worse again in Europe. i checked the Vaio P (its gorgeous) at my local Sony Centre. It was about €1,100 ($1,545 USD) (Y147,283) for the 1.33ghz model, standard battery and 60gb 4200rpm HDD. Its beautiful yes, but I just couldn't bring myself to go for it knowing what was on offer elsewhere. I'll try and import from Japan I reckon.

The 1.6ghz with 128gb SSD and standard battery costs a whopping €1,689 ($2,373 USD) (Y226,145). I know we have VAT at 20% which is part of this but in reality the bottom line is its just Sony taking the piss out of Europeans. Unfortunately I reckon that alot of people are marching away from not only this model but other Sony laptops in this recession and they are realizing Sony are using them as cash cows.

Re: Freedom Of Internet Is Dead On Sony China’s Vaio Computers

Jurisprudence — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 20:45:42 -0000

This will actually be my last comment on this. I have a paper due on the application of torture as a method used for law and political policy enforcement, the PRC part is long since done. Lets see, career and life versus continuing this. Eh, I'll pick the 1st option.

Your right on one thing, there is so much more to discuss on this issue, its vast and important. And I also feel the same as you in that I don't think such a discussion can be advanced by speaking to you since you can't answer questions but merely call people racists to make up for your argumentative weakness. Its shown by the fact you switch language at the end to insult me when I told you I have difficulty reading Chinese script. Nice play, if your an 8 year old. If not you need to grow up and act maturely, even on the internet. Btw using caplock in arguments is not helpful to your arguments. Try posting without it to the next person unfortunate enough to speak with you.

I see your doing the old 'must get the last word on the forum in even if it has nothing to add' thingy. Great stuff. You ceased to partake in the discussion long ago anyway. I dont have time to play kid. I'll give it over to you to send the next comment but you'll be speaking to dead air from now on. Enjoy.

Re: Freedom Of Internet Is Dead On Sony China’s Vaio Computers

Jurisprudence — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 19:50:09 -0000

I'm not quite sure what your laughing at really. To anyone who is reading this its clear you have no answers to the questions posited other than to verbalize and re-iterate base level propaganda of the PRC government and retreat from explanations for policies which restrict the rights of the Chinese people using Sony products. You had your chance, you can't handle it. Quite sad really. You also look like a fool and someone with no grasp of basic logic. I hope people like you don't hold sway over these important matters. Go back to your little myopic world. Your out of your league on these matters. Let the grown ups get on with things and fight for the rights of free speech on the net and elsewhere.

Re: Freedom Of Internet Is Dead On Sony China’s Vaio Computers

Jurisprudence — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 19:23:55 -0000

And sorry for the edit but your still not getting the logical point. Using the reference to the Dixie Chicks is great. If they were Chinese under the PRC they wouldn't be able to say they were ashamed now would they. They were only able to be tell you they were ashamed due to their ability to access forums for and use free speech, which you are doing in this forum and those in China are being denied. You are using free speech to argue against allowing free speech. Illogical, simply illogical.

Have a good day yourself. Your never in a far off land on the net, your always just a ping away. Unless your behind a national firewall that is.

Re: Freedom Of Internet Is Dead On Sony China’s Vaio Computers

Jurisprudence — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 18:56:02 -0000

Thats fantastic. I'm glad you feel that "nothing in ur reply is worth my direct reply". Rather that is an excuse made by people who cannot defend their own comments.

I have a very well versed understanding of Chinese history, her trials and tribulations, wars lost and won, political troubles and social upheavals, mass innovations and unfortunate losses. All taught to me by the Chinese, nice enough to do it in English as I still have trouble getting used to the script. Those I know do not speak well of their time at the hands of the PRC, yet are proud of being Chinese. Its better they are here where they cannot be told what they are allowed to say or imprisoned if they do not tow the line. I only hope the economy doesn't force them to move away, or worse for them, back to China. Therefore your statement that "u have NO RIGHT to even talk about it, cuz it is not for you or anyone to judge the right or wrong something you have NO CLUE of" is false. I do know the history, I do know the culture and people (as best a westerner can I feel) and as stated in my 1st post I have a right to discuss it by virtue of my constitution, its not for you to say I do not merely because I was not born there or I am not from your racial grouping.

Oh and calling me a racist, thats even better. I work and am friends with citizens from over 60 different countries on a one to one basis, including Chinese. Two of my best mates are from HK (are you one of those that doesn't consider them real Chinese???), long term and hard core friends and now both naturalized Irish and both damn proud of it, them and me. But I do not pull punches with them on any matter regards their country, and nor do they on mine (now also theirs, hehe). Heated discussion on important issues is better than silence and restriction of free speech. People who pull the racist (should I use caps??) excuse in making an argument like yourself only show a clear inability to argue rationally and are generally considered racist themselves. Its the old race card. When caught in a corner, you pull it out and expect to win. Sorry, but that doesn't work in a multi-ethnic country such as mine. Keep the racist card in your pocket, it makes you look like the joker of the pack. Thats playground tactics.

Your right on one point, we cannot control where we are born, but we sure as hell can ensure that if that place is one where free speech and freedom has been gained (700 years for my people including the genocide of half my countries population) that it be maintained and allowed to flourish to others if they may not be so fortunate as ourselves. It must be fought for lest it be lost as the fight back has destroyed nations, even continents. As Marcus Tullius Cicero once stated “Freedom suppressed and again regained bites with keener fangs than freedom never endangered.” Arguing against maintaining free speech has the unfortunate effect of not being able to avail of it if is later needed. We had that with Adolf Hitler in Europe once before, never again.

As for conflict history, I've spent 20 years studying all aspects of WW2, all theatres, all political entities, all social and economic structures, cultures and causative interactions from all players of the most horrific game in world history, both before and after the conflicts. As you know yourself regards that particular conflict the struggle for China's people had begun long before Germany invaded Poland, and for many continued long after the surrender in Berlin or the conclusion of the war in the Pacific theatre. It is merely not well acknowledged or documented in modern western texts unless you educate yourself. I have. You will have to do better than attack me on that front (pun intended).

However the questions and assertions posited in my 1st reply to your original posts stand and you have not brought anything to the table rather than an accusation that I am an racist. They are observations, both mine and others, legal positions not in dispute, and queries regards the implementation of this software and its legal basis as is one of the points of the originating article. If you Google my tag you would see what Jurisprudence stands for. In a court if questioned you have to answer. This is not a court, luckily, but if someone in any sphere merely walks away from important questions leaving them unanswered by dismissing their maker they appear to the world that those positions cannot be defended.

There is a phrase, when in Rome...., I'm sure you know the rest. When unlawful censorship, or possibility thereof, whether intentionally or unintentionally, may be shown to be practiced by the PRC government outside its jurisdiction that is a national (for the effected country) and international affair for the world of paramount importance and not just for the Chinese people but for those worldwide. If you have looked at the terms of Green Dam at all you would see its allowance of remote access entry, amongst many other questionable areas. However it does not define where in the world this might be accessed. International governments do not allow another unauthorized government to access electronics which are attached to their networks. This opens the possibility of spidering to occur using innocent Chinese travelers using consumer grade laptops to be used as collection and observation points by foreign governments, in this case from China. That government is well known (as with many others) to be engaged already in espionage using already established networks. That is illegal and stands as a serious threat to national and international security if used wholesale. The sale of tens of millions of laptops fro multinationals moving globally from the PRC is an international issue of wholesale proportions. As someone involved deeply in law (particularly human rights aspects), networking, security and as a citizen of my country and the EU that is my business and always will be.

P.S: it didn't take me that long to write either this or the other reply. I think and type fast.

Re: Freedom Of Internet Is Dead On Sony China’s Vaio Computers

Jurisprudence — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 10:59:36 -0000

I actually had to register just to comment on what has been said by Zizone and realSONYGuru. Particularly a few points to realSONYGuru who is obviously has issues with basic argumentative logic and the law.

1) It is a right to express myself in my country (Ireland). That is where I am posting from. You cannot tell me not to do so. This website is obviously not under the PRC governments control and as such I'll express myself as I feel as shall the writer as allowed by law, just not theirs.

2) For many states it is an obligation (I don't need to use caps like a child to get a point across) for government to pronounce externally whether a particular state of affairs is not deemed permissible and is indeed incompatible with their laws, constitutions, charters etc. It not only solidifies the lines of their own laws but often assists in drawing attention to laws in another country which may (subjectively) be deemed unjust, often by the majority of their citizens and or UN nations. It also allows their citizens greater understanding of varying laws and regimes.

3) All governments have an obligation to protect the country. However, they must show it is for the greater good. Problematically the PRC government merely state it is so and do nothing more to convince the wider (even non-western) world. It is also a states responsibility to act responsibly when faced with such questions by outside countries even when such countries have no legal mandate. Its called relations, look it up, if your allowed.

4) You continue to say "we in the west". If you don't like the west why are you here. If China is so great why are you not there. Why are you living with people and in countries you obviously have no respect for?

5) You continue to state that 'we' (who is this collective) continue to force our values (there is no universal set of values BTW) on others, specifically China. There has been no use of 'force' as defined in the dictionary by this article or anyone else. This article can no more 'force' a country, individual, ethnic, religious, racial, governmental or political group to be compelled to do, not do, or comply with anything than it can make you act in a rational, reasoned and logical manner.

6) You continue to talk about people 'selling' China to the west. China has been engaged in 'selling' itself wholesale for over a generation (at least) to the so-called 'west' and anyone who can pay the highest price. This was done by the Chinese government and the Chinese government alone. If you cant deal with that reality you need counseling, a history lesson, a short course in modern economics and more importantly to wake up from the sleep you have been in for decades.

7) As regards selling, I was brought up that it was preferable to stealing which is what China has been engaged in for quite some time. If someone in the west has an idea, or a legal copyright the Chinese (as a nation, not a race) will attempt to pilfer it and sell it as their own. China's courts and government have no issue with such theft and as such Chinas reputation regards having any respect for intellectual property (or anything else) has muddied its overall reputation. Do not expect people to respect thieves. The coding of much of this Green Dam software has been shown to have been stolen from a US based, licensed and copyrighted filtering software.

8) At a practical level if a Chinese sold laptop exits the PRC what happens then. It will be in breach of the laws of other nations which prohibit such censorship. Not that China has any respect for this but I do. If the government of China feel it is their right to extend their jurisdiction and laws beyond their borders that is forcing (by definition) users outside that jurisdiction using that piece of equipment (not owned by the Chinese government) to adhere to that law. That is illegal, no question. Furthermore if that laptop where to be repaired outside China and this software re-installed by Sony or other authorized company acting as agent that company is in clear breach of the law of that country. If this software is enabled outside China then that piece of equipment should, by law, be prevented from entering/being used in another sovereign country.

9) The 'west' as you put it have had a hand in Chinese affairs for quite some time, true. They had a slight hand in defeating the Japanese (non-western) who were busy slaughtering Chinese people by their millions. Without such western interference the Japanese would never have left China and tens, if not hundreds of millions more would have been murdered. What bad people the westerners are. Furthermore the South Koreans (again non-westerners) may view western 'interference' a little differently as they were assisted in protecting their nation from slaughter by a North Korea supported by China, your wonderful PRC. BTW, as an Irishman, an evil westener, the only thing we have attacked or had our hands in in our history was a pint of Guinness, so mind your generalisations.

10) Another history lesson. I trust my eyes more than I trust any government, least that of the PRC. Regards Tienanmen I saw what I saw on TV, hastily recorded by fleeing cameramen. It did not look to me like a staged recording and that will be how I view the matter. No PRC propaganda or you coming on here will change that without empirical evidence and data. As for the tanks having sheaths on their muzzles you should be aware of 3 understandings. Firstly, it takes moments to remove those sheaths, they do not prevent tank crews from engaging in firing shells for more than 2 minutes. Secondly, the use of tank shell to disperse at close range groups of non-armoured rioters is known not to be effective, causing confusion, friendly casualties and allowing protestors to get under fire range and attack the tank directly where she is vulnerable. Thirdly, I would doubt the PRC government would have seen the destruction of Tienanmen square through tank shell fire as either warranted, desirable or indeed allowable. Machine cannon and short-range mounted gun fire, in addition to smoke are far more efficient methods, which all tanks where equipped with as compliment.

11) "do u know what it is like to govern 1.4 billion ppl". No, neither do you unless your Hu Jintao so stop asking stupid rhetorical questions.

12) You appear to be acting in your own mind as the mouth-piece for the Chinese people and their views on this matter. If these are the views of the people this can never be known if you do not allow the Chinese people to speak, speech which this software is undeniably designed to prevent and is the point of the article. Fantastic irony don't you think, but then again its questionable whether its you thinking or the PRC doing it for you (filter if necessary). Do try and use logic next time you comment on an open forum regards politics which people from the 'WEST' (caps) can read, reply to and you would not be able to if your argument to allow such software were to succeed. Using free speech to argue against free speech. Ironic, hypocritical and argumentatively suicidal.

BTW: Do the government of the PRC know your talking to us westerners on an open forum or should I tell them. If you actually are an individual and not a government employee and you move to the wonderful fantastic PRC I hope your soon forced to run your favourite governments wonderful software and therefore I won't have to hear from you ever again. I hear Sony have a wonderful range of computers which you may or may not be allowed to purchase and use. Do tell, or try to, if you get one. Hypocrite.