elmer92413’s Comments

• May 21st, 2010 @ 8:00pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Looks like

  on Attorney Decodes Numbers On Redlight Camera Photo To Prove That The Light Was Green
  You still don't get it.
  
  He is saying that he *was* traveling 15mph in the second picture. And if he ran the red light, which was only red for another .1sec, and thus was going 15mph in the first picture. Then he would have only been 2.2ft from his staring position in the first picture. And because he was much further along then that it is obvious that the light was long ago green.
• Sep 3rd, 2009 @ 12:03pm

  Justification?

  on John Dillinger's Family In Lawsuit With EA Over Dillinger Name
  Is there not a certain amount of justification for something like this in order to maintain a deceased person's true identity? For instance would a movie that purports itself to be a kind of biopic (what hollywood picture doesn't horrible distort true events anyway) that depicts Washington as a satan incarnate be ok? Or would someone be able to stop it by saying that it gross misrepresents him? Obviously things like satire would not fall under this as the main goal of satire is not to tell a story.
  
  But what this guy is doing is pretty stupid. He doesn't own a name no matter what his connection with someone else who is well know with that name. I don't have a monopoly over elmer do I?
• Jul 30th, 2009 @ 6:34pm

  I can see why (as elmer)

  on How You Feel About Rorschach Tests On Wikipedia Says A Lot About You
  I can see why they wouldn't what these readily available. It's not a matter of copyright but of being able to administer the test without having the results muddled by prior exposure. It's akin to having the answers to personality tests given out (that is how different answers are measured). It would seriously undermine the legitimacy of the tests.
  
  I'm a little surprised though that there are only 10 images that are used. It seems that with so much time having passed new ones would have been created to supplement/replace the old ones.
• Aug 15th, 2008 @ 8:07am

  (untitled comment) (as elmer)

  on Indian Court Demands Google Hand Over Anonymous Blogger's Identity
  What is stopping Google from handing over bogus info? Or for that matter claiming the IP comes from out of India and is thus out of jurisdiction?
  
  With all of these countries demanding IDs from bloggers I imagine that any serious blogger from these countries is already taking security measures, so using an US based proxy wouldn't be to far of a stretch.
  
  The whole liability thing should be just as simple to deal with. It should be India/the company that has to prove that the blogger falls within their jurisdiction. And all Google has to do is point to an IP that isn't based in India to prove that he isn't. Meanwhile they should countersue for all the bad PR they are getting! Especially if they are forced to reveal any information, bogus or not.