The 2.4 inch LCD screen supports a 3GP, MP4, video. You can look for other features like, 1.3 mega-pixel camera, MP3, MP4, Hands free, SMS group sending, Voice recorder, WAP, Handwritten input, Handwritten + keyboard input, Bluetooth, GPRS download, MMS, Memory extended, E-book, personalized fashion, sound record, self-designed ring, calculator, memos, calendar, IP Dial, stopwatch, rates exchange. Did I tell you that even the battery is embossed with a “Buddha” logo?

Source:

The RIAA claims that the re-runs “will be readily subject to editing and manipulation by any reasonably tech-savvy individual.”

That is among the arguments the RIAA is making in urging a federal appeals court to reverse a Massachusetts federal judge’s order that would allow the pretrial broadcast this Thursday. The broadcast, assuming it goes forward, will include a Boston University student and his attorney challenging the RIAA’s copyright infringement case. It is believed to be the first time a U.S. federal trial court has allowed a live internet stream from the courtroom.

“Petitioners are concerned that, unlike a trial transcript, the broadcast of a court proceeding through the internet will take on a life of its own in that forum,” the RIAA wrote (.pdf) the U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals. “The broadcast will be readily subject to editing and manipulation by any reasonably tech-savvy individual. Even without improper modification, statements may be taken out of context, spliced together with other statements and broadcast (sic) rebroadcast as if it were an accurate transcript. Such an outcome can only do damage to Petitioner’s case.”

The RIAA is taking exception to the fact that the feed will be distributed on the Berkman Center for Internet and Society‘s website. The head of the center is Charles Nesson, who is defending Joel Tennenbaum, the defendant in the case.

“Accordingly, in the name of ‘public interest,’ the district court has directed the general public to a website replete with propaganda regarding the Defendant’s position in connection with this case, and that is specifically designed to promote Defendant’s interests in this case,” the RIAA wrote.

Last week, U.S. District Judge Nancy Gertner of Massachusetts granted the over-the-internet coverage for the 2 p.m. hearing. Only a handful of U.S. trial judges have ever allowed cameras in their courtrooms during a live proceeding. Most of the states grant local judges the discretion whether to allow cameras.

“At previous hearings and status conferences, the Plaintiffs have represented that they initiated these lawsuits not because they believe they will identify every person illegally downloading copyrighted material. Rather, they believe that the lawsuits will deter the Defendants and the wider public from engaging in illegal file-sharing activities. Their strategy effectively relies on the publicity resulting from this litigation,” Gertner wrote in granting the internet coverage.

The 1st Circuit did not indicate when it would rule.

The RIAA also said the broadcast “creates a serious risk of unfairly infecting the pool from which the jury in this case will be selected.”

The RIAA, which has sued about 30,000 individuals on allegations of copyright infringement, claims it is winding down its 5-year-old litigation campaign. The recording industry’s litigation and lobbying arm told the circuit court that, “The public interest will not be served by broadcasting a single snippet of these proceedings, because doing so places a misleading emphasis on a limited aspect of the judicial process.”

original

11.) Reporters Asking Us For Jobs

While working at Jalopnik may seem like a dream job, we’re sometimes treated as a curiosity by print journalists who don’t understand how the web works. Not this year. The sheer number of people asking, and the flood of resumes into Wert’s inbox sort of harshed our buzz.

10.) The Lack Of A Firehouse

If you want to understand the sheer impact the Carpocalypse has had on the world, consider the fact the Firehouse bar is no more. For those unaware, the “Firehouse” was a real firehouse converted by Chrysler each year into a bar where they’d pay for free drinks and food for journalists. It was a fun afterparty. The kind of place you can have Dr. Z pour you a beer or Motor Trend Editor-in-Chief Angus McKenzie lecture you on the new media landscape for an hour. The Post’s “Hacks n’ Flacks” BYOB (Buy Your Own Beer) after-party, while fun, just wasn’t quite the same.

9.) Swag And Press Releases

Any journalist worth his or her salt could walk out of an auto show with three or four-hundred USB flash drives and lots of toys. Back in the good ol’ days of, you know, last year, automakers would pass out unnecessarily ornate press packs filled with USB drives on keychains and leather-bound press releases. This year they were back to pieces of paper and discs. The nicest USB drive we received was from BYD, which promptly corrupted the files we loaded on it (no joke).

8.) Cheap Floor Space

The lack of certain automakers meant companies like Revenge were no longer relegated to Michigan Hall in Cobo’s basement. The reason this is so sad is it makes it seem like DUB cars are on the same level as the new offerings from Chrysler. Well… come to think of it.

7.) Chrysler

Chrysler President Jim Press used part of his press conference to explain why Chrysler would resurrect itself and how great a job the company has done in firing people. Seriously, they laid off like thousands of people. That makes them awesome how? But that’s just Jim, the rest of the company was even worse. Like Cubs fans convinced this will be their year, Chrysler’s need to convince everyone they have a future with cars like the 200C EV Concept is just depressing. This is especially true when you consider they didn’t have the requisite cash to mount their logo without almost killing someone.

6.) GM’s Fake Rally

GM built a fake card-carrying rally with employees around their reveal on Sunday morning of the Detroit Auto Show. You know it’s bad when you look around and realize they couldn’t even get enough employees together to make the rally look impressive.

5.) The Plight Of Male Booth Professionals

Since they had nothing to reveal, Lamborghini merely trotted out their typical team of hot booth professionals to pose in front of their cars. They held a press conference to do this and we, like others, took lots of photos. We felt awful for the male model as the sound of shutters clicking drastically declined when he walked on the platform. Sorry, guy who looks vaguely like a taller Mark Rufallo.

4.) Alcohol Consumption-to-New Product Ratio

There were a number of reveals this year, but not of new product. Most were concept cars of the pie-in-the-sky variety. The absence of new product on the show floor was made up for by automaker booze. Normally, we expect that type of thing in the after-hours, but this year that was cut back in favor of allowing cheaper offerings on the show floor in even greater quantities.

3.) Michigan Hall Basement Smell

Though it gave us a chance to drive the Ford Escape Plug-In Hybrid, the electric test track in the basement smelled awful. Was it the cars? No. Was it the Wayne State Formula SAE team? No. Actually, it was the mulch. The smell was so intolerable indoors, the VW booth above was forced to run their air conditioning to blow the smell out. That caused the air conditioning units to drip water into the basement, onto the track where it ran off into the mulch — thus causing the smell to become worse. By the end of the press preview, the Volkswagen booth was smelling like the inside of an abandoned Westfalia camper.

2.) Tuesday

Tuesday is usually a down day for the show, reserved for non-product press conferences and demonstrations. This year there was so little to report on we ended up in a two-way battle with dozens of auto reporters to get to the Tesla press conference and then again to get to Senator Bob Corker. Seriously, ou’d have thought Elon Musk and Corker were both Bono. Neither needs the added ego boost.

1.) Dead People

On the first night of the show we went out to a restaurant near Cobo to grab some food and do some work. We wandered out around 11 pm and noticed flashing police lights. We have to thank the jerk who said “Don’t mind him, he’s dead” and made us turn to see the lifeless body lying in the cold Detroit street because we’d have otherwise not noticed. We told the interns he was “sleeping” just to make sure they didn’t go home with nightmares. Instead, we did.

Photo Credit: Bill Pugliano / Getty Images News

via

I never thought I would be arguing for the rights of Adolph Hitler.

A three year old boy named Adolph Hitler Campbell by his parents as well as his two sisters who were also given “Nazified” names were removed from the custody of their parents by New Jersey Youth And Family Services.  The “unique” names of the children were first brought to national light when ShopRite supermarket refused to sell them a birthday cake with Adolf Hitler’s name on it. It is unknown if the children’s names were the sole reason for the removal.  There were no previous official complaints of any type of abuse in the family.

Let us start with the fact that parents who would give their children such a name are either  racist, anti-Semitic, mentally unbalanced or a combination of the three.  It is possible they are simply Nazi history buffs but my money is on the first three. None of these in themselves constitute child abuse, or constitute an imminent danger to the children.  Is that not what we are talking about when the state takes the extreme action of  removing children from the home?  Is there an immediate danger to the children?  I am not a family law attorney but I suspect the standard has to rise above an “uncomfortable upbringing”  Does naming your child Adolph Hitler(as a middle name)  constitute the type of  abuse in itself to warrant removal from the home?   If this were enough itself , half the stars in Hollywood would be guilty of child abuse for naming giving their children whacked out names that will make things difficult for them growing up.   Does the State have the power to force the parents to change the name or get a court order on their own changing the name?  If the parents state that using Hitler as a middle name was a form of political expression can the state intervene?  There are constitutional issues here on a number of levels. The right to privacy and freedom of expression to name a couple. There has to be more going on than meets the eye.  I suspect that there was enough of an outcry when  the national spotlight was on the family Hitler that prompted Youth and Family Services to take a close look at the family.  It would not be shocking that the mental instability flowing from parents who would give such names to their children also manifested itself  in more egregious abuse that did put the children in danger.  If this was not the case, this was the ultimate abuse in state authority.

I wonder what the only decedents of Adolph Hitler living in the United States would have to say about this. They  are alive and well in Long Island, New York living quietly under assumed names.  I suspect that the Campbells  are now wishing they had baked their own birthday cake for little Adolph’s party.

When his teacher, Guo, found out that young Zheng had not completed his homework, she flipped out.

“She was very angry at the time,” he said. “She ripped and twisted my cheeks with both her hands and then she lifted me off the ground.”

The teacher held the boy up until one of his cheeks actually ripped off and the boy was bleeding profusely.

Without hesitation the teacher reached down and picked up Zheng’s cheek skin, put it on his face, and instructed the boy go home immediately.

When the parents saw Zheng, they immediately took him to the hospital where it took 52 stitches to have his cheek sewn back on.

Zheng’s father has reported the case to the police and is expected to press for damages.

(link)

One of first the first decisions of US defence that the President-elect will face in office will be whether or not to continue funding for the futuristic Airborne Laser weapons programme.

The system aims to send an invisible, ultra-powerful laser beam from aircraft hundreds of miles from their targets, and could one day alter the nature of aerial warfare.

Primarily designed to strike enemy missile silos, the US Missile Defence Agency has called the ABL the answer to “rogue states” or terror groups equipped with intercontinental ballistic missiles.

The first, very limited, test firing was staged in late November. The laser was loaded on to a Boeing 747 and fired from a stationary plane at a target on the ground just a few yards away.

But already 12 years in the making and way over budget at $4.3 billion (£2.9 billion), developers Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrup Grumman fear it could fall victim to the new administration as it seeks to save costs. Mr Obama has stated a preference for abandoning weapons whose efficacy is not yet proven.

Boeing is now planning to develop the weapon’s planned target range to include aircraft and enemy ballistic missiles in flight.

Mike Rinn, head of Boeing’s Airborne Laser programme, has indirectly pleaded for leniency from the Obama administration. “We remain on track to complete a lethal demonstration in 2009,” he told the New Scientist.

“There’s nothing like flaming missile wreckage to show the world the system is viable.”

He added: “It’s important that we keep this momentum going for this critical technology.”

“The location of the grave site was marked in a UN report from 2004 which has not been officially given to the Serbian War Crimes Prosecution. The prosecution gained access to this part of the report through unofficial channels even though it has asked the UN for the full report on many occasions,” the daily’s source said.

“There are suspicions that the grave, which is located on a field close to a cement factory near the village of Burrel, contains the bodies of Serbs, Roma and disloyal Albanians that the Kosovo Liberation Army, with the cooperation of the Albanian government, took to a psychiatric hospital in Burrel, where their organs were harvested for sale,” the source states.

The UN forensic report contains a photograph of the cement factory and the field, together with detailed evidence found in the yellow house.

Surgical instruments and medicine were found in the house. The UN forensic scientists photographed the evidence and included them in the report.

source

President-elect Obama’s selection Saturday of a Harvard physicist and a marine biologist for science posts is a sign he plans a more aggressive response to global warming than did the Bush administration. In actuality, any action will be more than the moronic approach taken by the idiot Bush.

NOTE: Remember, it wasn’t too long ago that the White House “doctored” oficial science reports in order for them to be in line with their political agenda.

John Holdren and Jane Lubchenco are leading experts on climate change who have advocated forceful government action. Holdren will become Obama’s science adviser as director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. Lubchenco will lead the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which oversees ocean and atmospheric studies and does much of the government’s research on global warming.

Holdren also will direct the president’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology. Joining him as co-chairs will be Nobel Prize-winning scientist Harold Varmus, a former director of the National Institutes of Health, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor Eric Lander, a specialist in human genome research.

“It’s time we once again put science at the top of our agenda and worked to restore America’s place as the world leader in science and technology,” Obama said in announcing the selections in his weekly radio address.

The president-elect said promoting science means more than just providing money, but also is about ensuring that facts and evidence are never twisted or obscured by politics or ideology.

“From landing on the moon, to sequencing the human genome, to inventing the Internet, America has been the first to cross that new frontier because we had leaders who paved the way,” Obama said. “Leaders who not only invested in our scientists, but who respected the integrity of the scientific process.”

The four scientists will confront challenges in global warming after years of inaction by the Bush administration, which opposed mandatory cuts of greenhouse gas pollution. Last year, former Surgeon General Richard Carmona testified to Congress that top administration officials often dismissed global warming as a “liberal cause” and sought to play down public health reports out of political considerations.

Since 1993, summer Arctic sea ice has lost the equivalent of Alaska, California and Texas, and global warming is accelerating. The amount of carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere has already pushed past the level some scientists say is safe.

Holdren, 64, is a former president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington who has pushed for more urgent action on global warming. As Obama’s top science adviser, he would manage about 40 Ph.D-level experts who help shape and communicate science and technology policy.

“Global warming is a misnomer. It implies something gradual, something uniform, something quite possibly benign, and what we’re experiencing is none of those,” Holdren said a year ago in a speech at Harvard. “There is already widespread harm … occurring from climate change. This is not just a problem for our children and our grandchildren.”

Lubchenco, an Oregon State University professor specializing in overfishing and climate change, will be the first woman to head NOAA. A member of the Pew Oceans Commission, Lubchenco has recommended steps to overcome crippling damage to the world’s oceans from overfishing and pollution and has expressed optimism for change once President George W. Bush leaves office.

“The Bush administration has not been respectful of the science,” she said this year. “But I think that’s not true of Republicans in general. I know it’s not. I am very much looking forward to a new administration that does respect scientific information and that considers it very seriously in making environmental policies.”

Varmus, who was a co-recipient of the Nobel Prize for his research on the causes of cancer, served as NIH director during the Clinton administration. A former medical professor at the University of California, San Francisco, he helped found the Ralph Lauren Center for Cancer Care and Prevention and chairs a scientific board at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Lander, who teaches at both MIT and Harvard, founded the Whitehead Institute-MIT Center for Genome Research in 1990,which became part of the Broad Institute in 2003. A leading researcher in the Human Genome Project, he and his colleagues are using the findings to explore the molecular mechanisms behind human disease.

HERE IS OUR PRESIDENT-ELECT INTRODUCING SCIENCE TEAM