Phorm and Fraud Act?

[Nicholas Bohm]

Adrian Midgley wrote:
> Nicholas Bohm wrote:
> 
>> The problem will be understanding, explaining and convincing a jury that
>> a cookie is a representation to anyone about anything.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> As a rather less simple person than many, I would still find it very
> very difficult to even know where to start wtih for example one of my
> professional colleagues, in presenting what goes on with cookies as
> being anything other than detail that the machines get up to on their own.
> 
> However, again resorting to my professional colleagues as touchstones of
> what may play, it seems the la is being altered so that simply pointing
> out that although there is no actual proof or clear definition of an
> offense, the person concerned is clearly a bad egg, and therefore should
> be dealt with.
> 
> So we may not need  to resort to logic in considering the dealings of
> the State in the protection of its citizens, particualrly the children,
> and as long as no profit is being made that generates tax.

Quite.  I understand that Professor Lessig argues that code is law.  It 
is important, especially for geeks, to realise that law does not work 
like code.  It is designed, or at least expected, to run on wetware, not 
hardware, and some slack gets cut.

Nicholas
-- 
Salkyns, Great Canfield, Takeley,
Bishop's Stortford CM22 6SX, UK

Phone  01279 870285    (+44 1279 870285)
Mobile  07715 419728    (+44 7715 419728)

PGP public key ID: 0x899DD7FF.  Fingerprint:
5248 1320 B42E 84FC 1E8B  A9E6 0912 AE66 899D D7FF