klnnurv

looks like a photo op and nothing more. this 'intellectual property' business is getting out of hand, correct me if i'm wrong, but afaik clothing goods and the like dont have copyright per se. there are trademarks, and specific features can be copyrighted, but its not entirely accurate to say that a pair of jeans is copyrighted. theres only so many ways to make a pair of jeans, or a pair of trousers, or a shirt, no? a good example is louis vuitton stuff. the pattern is copyrighted, and the logos are trademarked, but the basic shape of a bag shouldnt be copyrightable. a great example of this sort of bullying is when christian louboutin convinced american customs to confiscate all imported women's shoes with red soles that arent from them. i'd think that such an obvious single design detail would be too vague to copyright or patent. its just a color, nothing more. patents, unlike trademarks or copyrights, have to be functional. they describe how something works or is built. software is very complex, and trivially easy to duplicate perfectly, so its easy to determine whether piracy has occurred. the same is true for music and movies. for physical goods, i think its time for this sort of stunt to stop. "it looks sort of like levis" isnt a good enough reason to do this. follow the letter of the law, and if some big brand thinks a 'generic brand' is copying them, without actual identifiable trademark, copyright or patent infringement, tell them to f*** off!

A bit more detail:

* technically, anything that requires effort or thought is illegal without a work permit. obviously the law is so broad in its current wording that any sane court would throw it out. most likely its broad deliberately so that it can be used to deal with anyone who needs dealing with.

* student work permits exist. they are 6 months long and require a letter from the university. they also only allow 'trainee' positions. in many companies this means either no salary or a slave-wage salary.

* online work is not explicitly forbidden but as there is no legal framework to regulate it, it is forbidden by the blanket law mentioned above. there are several reasons for this. racism is an issue, but not a huge one. in the marxist system, work is power. if someone can do something useful, they benefit themselves in an abstract sense - experience, duty, etc. if they get paid for it, thats a practical reward, too. limiting the ability of foreigners to sustain themselves outside of 'the system' touches on national security. furthermore, there might be worry about how much 'damage' or change could be done by computer-weilding farangs if online work was allowed. so many aspects of business, society and governance are moving into cyberspace. the only way those in charge can stay in charge (for now) is by slamming on the brakes.

* practically, the line between actually working online and just messing around is very blurry. i have personally been told by someone from the ministry of labor that a website or blog is considered to be 'work' of the content is useful or beneficial in some way, and not work if it is more unprofessional or amateurish. this brings up an interesting problem: some people just are mature and professional in how they do things. its a personality trait. some people just dont do a half-assed attempt at whatever they do. which type of farang are our esteemed hosts looking to attract? the lazy seat-warmer kind or the hardworking and socially responsible kind? could this issue be a way to formally challenge the policy?

* i would guess that whenever someone is arrested for working online without a work permit, they did something else wrong first to attract attention. practically, it is next to impossible to prove that someone is actually working if there is no offline, real-world evidence, and if basic online security precautions are taken.

"Now Windows will reportedly offer versions of its Windows CE and Windows Phone 7 systems that run on ARM chips. Its standard Desktop Windows system will be designed for x-86 architecture chips from Intel and AMD."

On top of things as always This was news in the mid- to late 90s...

Windows CE (anything that says "Pocket PC" or "Windows Mobile") already runs on ARM chips and has for about a decade. Windows Phone 7 runs on ARM right from the start. This looks like a misinterpretation of speculation that Windows 7 (for the pc) might be ported and optimized for ARM-based netbooks and tablets, to compete with the ipad and various Android-based tablets. Currently Windows 7 has a fairly poor UI for tablets, but Windows Phone 7 has a very limited UI for what a user might expect from anything larger than a phone or music player.

I'm hearing unconfirmed news that Central World is still on fire... anyone can confirm?

the collapsed area is still smoldering. other parts might still be on fire but there are no photos available yet

Its a matter of human rights.

--

From the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was ratified by Thailand in 1948:

Article 2

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 7

All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 10

Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 19

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

--

All I am able to say is that the above 4 articles from the UDHR answer the ethical questions of this mess quite clearly with legally binding answers. Unfortunately the UN is unable to enforce the UDHR, even in nations that ratified it. There are simply too many violations. Only the most serious and obvious violations, such as genocides and slavery, receive enough practical attention.

First, condolences to Dissolution, Anna, and anyone else who has lost loved ones.

Now for an analysis of what is known:

1: It seems clear that the fire started either on the outer roof, or between the outer roof and the ceiling. The available videos of the countdown show that the indoor fireworks did not start the fire. Witness accounts that say the stage fireworks or 'evil farangs' caused the fire should be ignored. (Thai Rath shouldnt be used for anything more than window rags)

From available overhead photos, the roof looks like it is made of asbestos-cement composite, though some sources say corrugated steel. There are 2 possible ignition causes of the fire and 2 possible fuel sources.

-Ignition from a fireworks 'missile': The roof could have been covered with tar paper or a plastic tarp for waterproofing, or the projectile could have gone through the roof and stayed in the ceiling space. If the roof was made of asbestos-cement composite, this is possible since it breaks easily upon hard impacts.

-Ignition from an electrical short-circuit:It is possible that an electrical short circuit started a fire inside the ceiling space which initially only burned upwards. Possible, but unlikely.

2: The supporting structure of the roof was most likely made of thin steel C-beams and L-beams. These would be strong enough to support the weight of the roof, heavy wind and rain, and even a few maintainence workers now and then. In addition, there appears to have been a chandelier-type light fixture hanging from the ceiling. Judging from the size, it could easily have weighed at least 50lbs, possibly as much as 50kg.

Most likely, the steel beams, which get their strength from their shape, not their thickness, weakened as the roof burnt, and the weight of the light fixture helped to pull the roof down quickly. Keep in mind that the roof was probably burning for at least 10 minutes before anyone inside saw flames. This would explain reports that the air became unusually hot after the countdown.

3: Could it have been arson? probably not, at least in the sense of someone actually lighting the match. It is highly suspicious that the fire spread so quickly once it got inside. This could be because of unsafe materials, or there could have been some accelerant. We might not know until the forensic report comes out, or we might never know. There is nothing to suggest any deliberate ignition, and nothing to suggest that anyone had any foreknowledge.

4: Apare from the lack of preparedness, there does not as yet seem to have been any serious criminal negligence. The staff should have been better trained. There should have been emergency lighting. There should have been clearly marked emergency exits. In fact, emergency lighting would have probably saved many lives simply by helping to prevent panic. However all of this probably applies to every major building in the country.

5: The legal issues may look fishy, but TiT. The possibly cooked books, the insurance, the licensing, etc are by no means unique to Santika. These details just came to light because of what has happened. How do you think the Channel and Louis Vuitton 'museums' in Siam Paragon manage to pay their rent?

6: Due to 'the way things are' here, it is likely that someone will be made an example of, whether they deserve it or not. Based on the above, it is hard to say whether there really should be stiff charges brought against someone. Yes there were many deaths. But we dont know if there was any criminal negligence or foul play. Chances are that it was a rogue firework that punctured the roof and started the insulation burning.

Just my $.02

Good luck to anyone still looking for someone

#15 isn't necessary. The Queen is the largest shareholder in the Bank of England, which indirectly controls the 'Fed'.

Taxes have always been promptly collected

Nice joke, though...

Do you study at ABAC?

They have internal jobs allowing 60 hours a month with pay of up to 3000B a month. As for 'real' jobs, you need a work permit to do *any* work. "Work" is basically anything that is productive or creates value, regardless of where it gets done or if you get paid or not. If you have a student visa, you cannot get a work permit. One legal loophole might be working for you country's embassy. Since an embassy has legal jurisdiction over the land it is built on, technically you wouldnt be working in Thailand. At least that's the theory.

It might be legally possible to get a business visa and a work permit and continue studying, but the paperwork and expense of doing that is more than most employers would consider worthwhile for a student, especially considering the quotas.