Slashdot Mirror

Of all the current administration's lies, that is the one you pick? How about the promises to protect whistle-blowers?

You now have to go the the Wayback Machine to even find it.

"Protect Whistleblowers: Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out. Such acts of courage and patriotism, which can sometimes save lives and often save taxpayer dollars, should be encouraged rather than stifled. We need to empower federal employees as watchdogs of wrongdoing and partners in performance. Barack Obama will strengthen whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud, and abuse of authority in government. Obama will ensure that federal agencies expedite the process for reviewing whistleblower claims and whistleblowers have full access to courts and due process."

The problem is that 23andMe started making medical claims. As the FDA says, "your company's website at www.23andme.com/health ... markets the PGS for providing "health reports on 254 diseases and conditions," including categories such as "carrier status," "health risks," and "drug response," and specifically as a "first step in prevention" that enables users to "take steps toward mitigating serious diseases" such as diabetes, coronary heart disease, and breast cancer." Those are health claims. Those have to be clinically tested.

The history of their web site shows the health claims becoming more blatant over time.

• From 2008: "Find out what current research can tell you about your genes."
• From 2013: "Living well starts with knowing your DNA. Our genes make us who we are, so naturally they impact our health. By knowing your DNA, you can take steps toward living a healthier life. Find out if your children are at risk for inherited conditions, so you can plan for the health of your family. Order now."

Their advertising thus shows a progression from marketing to the technically curious to marketing to parents worried about their kids. That's what properly concerns the FDA.

http://web.archive.org/web/20100708230258/http://people.csail.mit.edu/rahimi/helmet/

now?

The US is choosing the path of aggression instead of the path of civilized behavior. This is a strategy designed by fools.

It is called "game theory". It is a virus that teaches that the only way to achieve a predictable result is to cheat, steal and lie. Because everyone else does.

There are two kinds of people in this world, those who will lean into its principles thinking that (despite its ugly face) there is some shred of real science hidden underneath because of its (apparent) success in helping to model animal behaviors. But if Lassie played by the rules of Game Theory she'd leave Timmy down in the well because it would achieve a predictable result as opposed to the uncertain course of action where she'd have to try save him again, and might fail. If that makes sense to you then congratulations, you're a Game Theorist.

And those like myself who see Game Theory applied by or to anything human as a mental disorder masquerading as a tool. One of our training wheels for disaffected hypocrites.

The folks at Enron imagined themselves Game Theorists but it turned out they were just being assholes.

Conspirational racketeering isn't so hot either because it leads to the formation of larger committees over time to help hide its existence and effect.

I will always strive to be an unpredictable coefficient in any theory. My favorite sport is Drunkard's Walk Philosophy. You never know where you are morally speaking but eventually you find your way home.

Why did NSA infect 50,000 computer networks?

Lack of adult supervision. I really mean that.

Here is an announcement, here is an image. Both of these date from 2006.

for alternatives. When Apple bought AuthenTec (who made the fingerprint scanners on most laptops), they put out one final version of the software then unceremoniously dropped support for the hardware. Now the AuthenTec website is just gone. I managed to grab the latest (last) version of the software (for the scanner on my laptop) before the website vanished, but only because I happened to do a wipe and reinstall of the OS earlier in the year.

If Apple wants to make some tech exclusive to their devices, they have no problem with screwing over previous customers.

This story has to be one of the strangest freedom-zealot / anti-tory circle jerks I've seen in a while. Someone changed the robots.txt on their website so that it didn't include a folder. Maybe it's just me but that doesn't sound like an amazing story. Has there been any reporting so far that they wanted to, or even knew, that the internet archive would delete the content because it retrospectively respects robots.txt?

There's a good chance that they didn't know. But the primary result of robots.txt, that they will have known about, would be to stop some or all of the site appearing on Google. Why would be the justification for that?

Can anyone find a copy of Tony Blair's speech justifying the Iraq war on the Labour website via searching on google?

Of course not. All political parties will only have things that they currently still believe in on their current websites. But that's not the issue. This is about robot.txt and it's result of whitewashing the internet archive. I don't know which of the several Blair speeches on Iraq that you mean, but there are plenty of snapshots of the Labour website from that era, so you should be able to find the one you mean.
http://web.archive.org/web/20030615000000*/http://labour.org.uk

Can anyone find the transcript of Gordon Brown calling a voter a bigot (I'd also accept the audio) on the Labour website?..

That wasn't a speech, it was a gaff, recorded by chance, and so of course would never have made it onto a party's website. Just as Tory gaffs understandably never make it onto their web site. You've now made it absolutely clear that YOU are the party political zealot here.

The internet archive adheres to robots.txt, even retroactively.

I apologize for my mistake. Until just a few minutes ago, I was unaware that the Internet Archive agrees to RETROACTIVELY honor a robots.txt file. So once a robots.txt file restricts access to content, they voluntarily remove access to previously archived content from the archive. Here's the related item from their FAQ:

Some sites are not available because of robots.txt or other exclusions. What does that mean?

The Internet Archive follows the Oakland Archive Policy for Managing Removal Requests And Preserving Archival Integrity

The Standard for Robot Exclusion (SRE) is a means by which web site owners can instruct automated systems not to crawl their sites. Web site owners can specify files or directories that are disallowed from a crawl, and they can even create specific rules for different automated crawlers. All of this information is contained in a file called robots.txt. While robots.txt has been adopted as the universal standard for robot exclusion, compliance with robots.txt is strictly voluntary. In fact most web sites do not have a robots.txt file, and many web crawlers are not programmed to obey the instructions anyway. However, Alexa Internet, the company that crawls the web for the Internet Archive, does respect robots.txt instructions, and even does so retroactively. If a web site owner decides he / she prefers not to have a web crawler visiting his / her files and sets up robots.txt on the site, the Alexa crawlers will stop visiting those files and will make unavailable all files previously gathered from that site. This means that sometimes, while using the Internet Archive Wayback Machine, you may find a site that is unavailable due to robots.txt (you will see a "robots.txt query exclusion error" message). Sometimes a web site owner will contact us directly and ask us to stop crawling or archiving a site, and we endeavor to comply with these requests. When you come accross a "blocked site error" message, that means that a siteowner has made such a request and it has been honored.

Currently there is no way to exclude only a portion of a site, or to exclude archiving a site for a particular time period only.

When a URL has been excluded at direct owner request from being archived, that exclusion is retroactive and permanent.

Now all Karateka requires is a web browser.

25 countries are not able to screen all donated blood for one or more of the above infections. [HIV, hepatitis B, hepatitis C and syphilis]

24% blood donations in low-income countries are not screened following basic quality procedures which include documented standard operating procedures and participation in an external quality assurance scheme.

The prevalence of transfusion-transmissible infections (TTIs) in blood donations in high-income countries is considerably lower than in low- and middle-income countries. The prevalence of HIV in blood donations in high-income countries is 0.003% (median), in comparison with 0.1% and 0.6% in middle- and low-income countries respectively.

With those things in mind, I don't have a problem of disallowing donations from certain countries, in theory. In practice, it depends on exactly which countries are on the "no-fly list", and the safety statistics of those countries.

Also, the American Red Cross has called for an end to the lifetime male homosexual donation ban.

I'd prefer to give to other charities with lower administrative overhead, but none of the information you've provided argues compellingly for a boycott of Humble Bundle...then again, that's your choice to make for yourself.

A series of three documentaries about the use of fear for political gain

"Narrator: In the past, politicians promised to create a better world. They had different ways of achieving this, but their power and authority came from the optimistic visions they offered their people. Those dreams failed and today people have lost faith in ideologies. Increasingly, politicians are seen simply as managers of public life, but now they have discovered a new role that restores their power and authority. Instead of delivering dreams, politicians now promise to protect us: from nightmares. They say that they will rescue us from dreadful dangers that we cannot see and do not understand. And the greatest danger of all is international terrorism, a powerful and sinister network with sleeper cells in countries across the world, a threat that needs to be fought by a War on Terror.

But much of this threat is a fantasy, which has been exaggerated and distorted by politicians. It's a dark illusion that has spread unquestioned through governments around the world, the security services and the international media. This is a series of films about how and why that fantasy was created, and who it benefits. At the heart of the story are two groups: the American neo-conservatives and the radical Islamists. Both were idealists who were born out of the failure of the liberal dream to build a better world, and both had a very similar explanation of what caused that failure.

These two groups have changed the world, but not in the way that either intended. Together, they created today's nightmare vision of a secret organized evil that threatens the world, a fantasy that politicians then found restored their power and authority in a disillusioned age. And those with the darkest fears became the most powerful."

"How did Microsoft squander the lead they had with the Windows CE devices? They had a great lead, they were years ahead. And they completely blew it. And they completely blew it because of the bureaucracy." ref

They didn't, they could have been way ahead of the curve, when they joined the Tron consortium, but not totally owning it, they acted to supress it in the US while promoting the much inferior WinCE. A replay of the WinNT - OS/2 collaboration/war with IBM.

'Microsoft Teams Up with Japanese Group That Promotes Archrival Tron'

'Microsoft Corp said on Thursday it would collaborate with a consortium that promotes an open operating system for consumer electronics called TRON'

'Microsoft Corp., which was the first U. S. supplier to lobby Washington about TRON'

'We don't want the Japanese to create a specification that would preclude competition,', former Deputy U. S. Trade Representative Michael B. Smith

If the issue was actually insurance like we issue for cars, then the costs would be trivial. There are really good reasons why this stuff is so expensive.

I think I'll trust an actuary to calculate the actual cost. Put in a reasonable mark-up, and you have: insurance. If the market is, well, efficient, then the mark-up will be reasonable. So let's apply those good-old liberal ideas of free markets, and let the magic happen.

Otherwise, the bill should be in the mail.

And if you can't pay, and declare bankruptcy? Who pays then? You pretending this isn't a problem?

There were issues that could have been addressed by our government that could have actually helped.

Right, like an almost-single-payer system, like what works in most of the OECD. Instead, in an attempt to compromise, we get a regulated insurance market and a mandate, just like leading conservatives supported up until 2008.

What happened in 2008? Obama was elected, adopted the GOP healthcare plan, and was promptly labelled a tyrant by an apocalyptic cult. Just the opinion of a 20+ year GOP insider who knows a hell of a lot more about what happens on the hill than you do.

Now we know the president either lied outright about what would happen to existing policies

You _can_ keep your policy if you like it, so long as you've had the policy since before the ACA was passed. The fact that insurance companies are changing the policies and then trying to up-sell clients onto more expensive planes: who would have thunk it, that businesses would act this way. I agree that Obama shouldn't have used the language he did, because it is too easy to pick apart. But it is hardly the lie you WANT it to be.

That's just it, you can't write a client to handle the protocol. Or, more specifically, you can, but that protocol doesn't include the information necessary to write a client. The protocol was designed to be typed by hand and interpreted by a human, not software. When an FTP client shows you a file listing, it is guessing at how to interpret the file listings.

As for firewalls, no, there are problems there as well. Firewalls have to actively watch for FTP connections and treat them specially, and even when they do, they can't get it completely right because the protocol is fundamentally broken.

Don't take my word for it, read what the people who have implemented FTP have to say on the matter: 1 2.

I use Github Releases.

You could also use Internet Archive, which offers unlimited file storage and bandwidth. Yes, you can use them for this.

MIT OpenCourseWare (https://archive.org/details/mit_ocw) stores a copy of all the videos on its site on the Internet Archive. Currently that is 75 full video lecture courses and 17 full audio lectures courses, plus a ton of smaller one-offs and mini-series video and audio files. Over a thousand hours of teaching. I would like to think that would be something of use to the human race.

Have you ever used the Wayback Machine? The building that houses the Internet Archive was damaged in a fire and the group the runs the operation is making a plea for donations. The content is backed up in multiple locations and so is not in danger, but the $600,000 worth of damage is a tremendous blow to the organisation. Please consider donating a little today.

Luckily, our "Allies" are above that, but, what of the future with these people now?

Fact is the governments of the US ally countries don't care that the USA spies on them, they already know the US spies on them and their citizens, and some may have even helped to do it- it's been an open secret for at least a decade - UKUSA, Echelon and all that. The Australians even blabbed about it: http://web.archive.org/web/19990826082232/http://theage.com.au/daily/990523/news/news3.html
NZ too: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0105/S00104.htm
http://cryptome.org/echelon.htm
http://cryptome.org/echelon-baby.htm

Think about it - if they were really that pissed off they wouldn't have stopped the Bolivian ambassador's plane just because they thought Snowden was on it. Why for instance would France do that if France was so pissed off with the USA spying on them? Why wouldn't France instead give Snowden asylum? Heck they gave Roman Polanski asylum. So wouldn't Snowden be more deserving?

Therefore all the fuss they are making now is:
1) A show to placate the masses.
2) Haggling to get stuff/concessions/goodies from the USA

A note to the NSA cheerleaders. It should be obvious that you cannot allow your spy agency to freely spy on those who are supposed to regulate or rein in your spy agency. The NSA lying to Congress proves that they are out of control. And if the NSA gets away with lying to Congress and doing all that illegal stuff, that should make you ask who really is in control.

As for the NSA shills, you bunch are a despicable traitorous lot.

It's a common trait of psychopaths and sociopaths

While that may be true, it is more so a trait of organized groups of victims, disenfranchised & those who disagree with the status quo they live under. When power becomes usurped from all but the few, a manifesto will(should) soon follow.
 
 

There is no justice in following unjust laws. It's time to come into the light and, in the
grand tradition of civil disobedience, declare our opposition to this private theft of public
culture.

Aaron Swartz July 2008

The U-2 spy plane is still flying and it can carry a 5,000-pound payload of surveillance equipment. So there is plenty of air surveillance; you just didn't know about it.

How about this:

http://web.archive.org/web/19961025120541/http://www.lycos.com/

Want a nice copy of MIcrosoft Money anyone (ironic eh?)

Min

It may be of interest that in November of that year, search on google.com was labeled as "Might-work-some-of-the-time-prototype"... https://web.archive.org/web/19981111184551/http://google.com/

ob. link.

From the linked article there:

Together with the giant American National Security Agency (NSA) and its Canadian, British, and New Zealand counterparts, DSD operates a network of giant, highly automated tracking stations that illicitly pick up commercial satellite communications and examine every fax, telex, e-mail, phone call, or computer data message that the satellites carry. ...
According to the former Canadian agent Mike Frost, it would be "nave" for Australians to think that the Americans were not exploiting stations like Kojarena for economic intelligence purposes. ""They have been doing it for years," he says. ""Now that the Cold War is over, the focus is towards economic intelligence. Never ever over-exaggerate the power that these organisations have to abuse a system such as Echelon. Don't think it can't happen in Australia. It does."

My, how much progress we've made in fifteen years...

You sure showed me. They were $22, with free shipping, in 2009.

I browse with SSLv3 disabled... and https://archive.org/ only supports SSLv3... why? Most webservers have supported TLS 1.1/1.2 for ages now.. right?

They'd better ship the thing. There have been some large, overfunded Kickstarter projects that never shipped. Remember "Clang and the Pitfalls of Kickstarter"? Then there was the Form 1 low-cost 3D printer. Despite being way overfunded, the delivery date always seems to be four months away. It was four months away last December, and it's four months away now.

This isn't a recent change; component distributors such as mecanique (see https://web.archive.org/web/20070825070852/http://www.mecanique.co.uk/products/usb/pid.html) used to on-sell blocks of PIDs from their VID many years ago, but the USB-IF started cracking down a number of years ago. Likewise, voti.nl was threatened with legal action (see http://www.voti.nl/shop/catalog.html?USB-PID-10).

For some projects, you can obtain a PID from the manufacturer of a USB chip (eg http://www.ftdichip.com/Support/Knowledgebase/caniuseftdisvidformypr.htm), but this generally means using the manufacturer supplied driver, and doesn't really help if you want to customize things more.

There doesn't seem to be a reasonable solution for small runs beyond the prototype phase. So in effect the USB-IF is motivating hobbyists to simply reuse VID/PID pairs from similar devices, which is only going to lead to compatibility headaches in the future.

I can understand that they wish to have an orderly process so that operating systems can have automatic device recognition and driver installation, but it is short-sighted not to provide an opportunity to licence a much smaller address space at a reasonable cost.

(For futher information, the prototype VID is 0x6666 and many known VID/PID pairs in http://www.linux-usb.org/usb.ids)

Tim McVeigh self-identified as an agnostic.

Nope that's total bullshit.

TIME: Are you religious?

MCVEIGH: I was raised Catholic. I was confirmed Catholic (received the sacrament of confirmation). Through my military years, I sort of lost touch with the religion. I never really picked it up, however I do maintain core beliefs.

TIME: Do you believe in God?

MCVEIGH: I do believe in a God, yes. But that's as far as I want to discuss. If I get too detailed on some things that are personal like that, it gives people an easier way alienate themselves from me and that's all they are looking for now.

So he's an agnostic but clearly says he believes in God?

And add staff, lots more staff. That will make it better, and get the job done faster. (Wasn't that one of the conclusions of The Mythical Man Month? (Archive.org download))

Remember when we could vote articles up or down (http://web.archive.org/web/20100612085708/http://slashdot.org/)? If tonights updates brings us to that fucking god awful beta site permanently with no option to keep classic /. then I'm done. The only exception would be if they unfuck the comment system and get rid of that emaciated layout.

Cults tend to have large followings despite what people running them say, for example Micro$oft.

"There's nobody getting rich (by) writing software" - Bill Gates

http://wayback.archive.org/web/20120605103241/http://www.msversus.org/

For anyone wondering, this is actually freely available on The Internet Archive

Oops, the link for "as of October 4" should have been to the archive.org version: http://web.archive.org/web/20131004230702/http://www.scientificamerican.com/partners/

The fact that they apparently deleted it from their partner list indicates that they do seem to have some sense of shame about the issue.

In ten pages of google scholar results, I couldn't find a single one where someone had actually performed the famous "boiling frog experiment."

Sedgwick, W.T., 1888, On Variations Of Reflex-Exciteablilty In The Frog, Induced By Changes Of Temperature. Studies From The Biological Laboratory, pp385-410.

"Last of the Wild Ones", Roger Zelazny, Omni Magazine, March 1981, pp 53+

I thought they also published "Devil Car" in Omni, but I can't track that one down.

Hi Shavano,

In this post you wrote:
> Let's be clear about this. Silk Road operators had a guy killed.

And in another post you wrote:
> These guys are also murderers.

While I think your main point is correct, that Ross Ulbricht is (allegedly) a thug, I also think we should be clear that (probably) nobody actually died. Ulbricht is accused of paying bitcoins to have two people killed, but neither "hit" was carried out. See
http://www1.icsi.berkeley.edu/~nweaver/UlbrichtCriminalComplaint.pdf
bottom of page 23, for a summary of one "hit", and
https://ia601904.us.archive.org/1/items/gov.uscourts.mdd.238311/gov.uscourts.mdd.238311.4.0.pdf
starting on page 6, for a step-by-step account of the other.

Wasn't there some discussion about how the NSA couldn't really store "zettabytes" of data at this site as claimed?

Maybe they really do have all that capacity. Them transcapacitors are power-hungry, I hear.

In the US since the late 1980's, getting arrested for any (and no) reason has become a huge socioeconomic problem as many employers, including low-tier employers, run background checks on prospective employees that flag subjects in the Federal NCIC database which records all arrests regardless of conviction, acquittal, guilt, or innocence.

As a result, many people (but especially black males and LNWI's, or Low Net Worth Individuals) are relegated to a lifetime of poor employment prospects, unable to land jobs even as burger-flippers. This is true even if these arrestees are innocent!

Dale Carson, a criminal defense attorney with experience as a police officer and an FBI agent, has written a book called "Arrest-Proof Yourself" which basically makes the argument that individuals should do anything they can (within the law) to avoid arrest for the simple fact that in the United States being arrested will bring incalculable financial harm to people who find themselves arrested for any reason.

The book is enlightening and can be profitably be read by almost everyone, even if one's risk of arrest is low.

Though it's interesting to see that with Tomb of the Cybermen, not everyone felt that way:

Those fans who were too young to have seen the black-and-white stories when they originally went out were generally disappointed, because they had unrealistic expectations and a lack of understanding of what TV shows in general, and Doctor Who in particular, were like in the 1960's.

Personally I love the early Doctor Who episodes, especially Tomb of the Cybermen, but I have to be honest that the quality of some of these early episodes is very hit and miss, and while some are great, classic pieces of television, others have really not aged well.

Description
Blueprint for information revolution.
Creative Commons license: Public Domain Mark 1.0

Guerilla Open Access Manifesto

Information is power. But like all power, there are those who want to keep it for
themselves. The world's entire scientific and cultural heritage, published over centuries
in books and journals, is increasingly being digitized and locked up by a handful of
private corporations. Want to read the papers featuring the most famous results of the
sciences? You'll need to send enormous amounts to publishers like Reed Elsevier.

There are those struggling to change this. The Open Access Movement has fought
valiantly to ensure that scientists do not sign their copyrights away but instead ensure
their work is published on the Internet, under terms that allow anyone to access it. But
even under the best scenarios, their work will only apply to things published in the future.
Everything up until now will have been lost.

That is too high a price to pay. Forcing academics to pay money to read the work of their
colleagues? Scanning entire libraries but only allowing the folks at Google to read them?
Providing scientific articles to those at elite universities in the First World, but not to
children in the Global South? It's outrageous and unacceptable.

"I agree," many say, "but what can we do? The companies hold the copyrights, they
make enormous amounts of money by charging for access, and it's perfectly legal â"
there's nothing we can do to stop them." But there is something we can, something that's
already being done: we can fight back.

Those with access to these resources â" students, librarians, scientists â" you have been
given a privilege. You get to feed at this banquet of knowledge while the rest of the world
is locked out. But you need not â" indeed, morally, you cannot â" keep this privilege for
yourselves. You have a duty to share it with the world. And you have: trading passwords
with colleagues, filling download requests for friends.

Meanwhile, those who have been locked out are not standing idly by. You have been
sneaking through holes and climbing over fences, liberating the information locked up by
the publishers and sharing them with your friends.

But all of this action goes on in the dark, hidden underground. It's called stealing or
piracy, as if sharing a wealth of knowledge were the moral equivalent of plundering a
ship and murdering its crew. But sharing isn't immoral â" it's a moral imperative. Only
those blinded by greed would refuse to let a friend make a copy.

Large corporations, of course, are blinded by greed. The laws under which they operate
require it â" their shareholders would revolt at anything less. And the politicians they
have bought off back them, passing laws giving them the exclusive power to decide who
can make copies.

There is no justice in following unjust laws. It's time to come into the light and, in the
grand tradition of civil disobedience, declare our opposition to this private theft of public
culture.

We need to take information, wherever it is stored, make our copies and share them with
the world. We need to take stuff that's out of copyright and add it to the archive. We need
to buy secret databases and put them on the Web. We need to download scientific
journals and upload them to file sharing networks. We need to fight for Guerilla Open
Access.

With enough of us, around the world, we'll not just send a strong message opposing the
privatization of knowledge â" we'll make it a thing of the past. Will you join us?

Aaron Swartz

July 2008, Eremo, Italy

https://archive.org/stream/GuerillaOpenAccessManifesto/Goamjuly2008_djvu.txt

Why isn't this on wikipedia's list of manifestos?

Help me understand why Wikipedia hasn't added this to their listing of manifestos.

  "A manifesto is a published verbal declaration of the intentions, motives, or views of the issuer, be it an individual, group, political party or government."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifesto

"Guerilla Open Access Manifesto

Information is power. But like all power, there are those who want to keep it for
themselves. The world's entire scientific and cultural heritage, published over centuries
in books and journals, is increasingly being digitized and locked up by a handful of
private corporations. Want to read the papers featuring the most famous results of the
sciences? You'll need to send enormous amounts to publishers like Reed Elsevier.

There are those struggling to change this. The Open Access Movement has fought
valiantly to ensure that scientists do not sign their copyrights away but instead ensure
their work is published on the Internet, under terms that allow anyone to access it. But
even under the best scenarios, their work will only apply to things published in the future.
Everything up until now will have been lost.

That is too high a price to pay. Forcing academics to pay money to read the work of their
colleagues? Scanning entire libraries but only allowing the folks at Google to read them?
Providing scientific articles to those at elite universities in the First World, but not to
children in the Global South? It's outrageous and unacceptable.

"I agree," many say, "but what can we do? The companies hold the copyrights, they
make enormous amounts of money by charging for access, and it's perfectly legal â"
there's nothing we can do to stop them." But there is something we can, something that's
already being done: we can fight back.

Those with access to these resources â" students, librarians, scientists â" you have been
given a privilege. You get to feed at this banquet of knowledge while the rest of the world
is locked out. But you need not â" indeed, morally, you cannot â" keep this privilege for
yourselves. You have a duty to share it with the world. And you have: trading passwords
with colleagues, filling download requests for friends.

Meanwhile, those who have been locked out are not standing idly by. You have been
sneaking through holes and climbing over fences, liberating the information locked up by
the publishers and sharing them with your friends.

But all of this action goes on in the dark, hidden underground. It's called stealing or
piracy, as if sharing a wealth of knowledge were the moral equivalent of plundering a
ship and murdering its crew. But sharing isn't immoral â" it's a moral imperative. Only
those blinded by greed would refuse to let a friend make a copy.

Large corporations, of course, are blinded by greed. The laws under which they operate
require it â" their shareholders would revolt at anything less. And the politicians they
have bought off back them, passing laws giving them the exclusive power to decide who
can make copies.

There is no justice in following unjust laws. It's time to come into the light and, in the
grand tradition of civil disobedience, declare our opposition to this private theft of public
culture.

We need to take information, wherever it is stored, make our copies and share them with
the world. We need to take stuff that's out of copyright and add it to the archive. We need
to buy secret databases and put them on the Web. We need to download scientific
journals and upload them to file sharing networks. We need to fight for Guerilla Open
Access.

With enough of us, around the world, we'll not just send a strong message opposing the
privatization of knowledge â" we'll make it a thing of the past. Will you join us?

Aaron Swartz

July 2008, Eremo, Italy
"
https://archive.org/stream/GuerillaOpenAccessManifesto/Goamjuly2008_djvu.txt

To the jerk at the NIST who decided to take down dlmf.nist.gov, I have only this to say: The day you need to accelerate the convergence of a power series, I hope some jerk comes along and shuts down your resource website too so you know how irritating this is.

To everyone else, I say: Use the archive:
DLMF: Wayback Machine.

Wait, the cops told Ulbricht he should have the admin murdered? Attorneys will have a field day with that.

Entrapment requires that the police induce a suspect to commit a crime which they would otherwise be unlikely to commit. You have to show that the cop induced the victim to do something he wouldn't normally do himself without the cop's specific involvement. (e.g. If you go to a line up of hookers and just pick the one that happens to be a cop, that's not entrapment.)

In the Maryland indictment, an uncover cop posed as a supplier and arranged a deal with DPR to move cocaine in bulk since shipments to small time users wasn't profitable for him. A couple of weeks after they finished that deal, DPR contacted the same undercover cop about one of the site's admins who had been caught by the police and who had stolen money from other Silk Road users. He asked if he could arrange for the man to be roughed up and forced to return the money before later asking to have him killed. The indictment implies that DPR was the one to tell the cop about the guy being caught, though it's hard to tell how it went from there. He paid $40k up front and after and gave the go ahead after being told assassins were waiting to get him alone away from his wife and kid. This took place over two months with multiple chances to pull out.

This first also comes up later in a second hit request against someone trying to blackmail him.

The federal indictment describes an incident in which someone by the nickname "FriendlyChemist" claimed to have hacked into another Silk Road vendor's machine and downloaded the real names of vendors and customers. He attempted to blackmail DPR to the tune of half a million that he said he needed to pay off his suppliers. DPR then asked for his supplier so that they could work things out. Behind FriendlyChemist's back, he asked for the supplier to have him killed as a liability and to sell his wares directly instead. The supplier quoted a price of $150k-$300k, which DPR haggled down to the lower end of the range saying that he'd paid for $80k in the past for a hit. He was later mailed a picture of the guy dead and thanked him for his swift action.

Ok; Take a 1/3 pie slice. Enlarge it by 50%. It is still a 1/3 pie slice, in value and visually.

Okay, I'll bite. Take that 1/3 pie slice and move it from the front of the pie to the back. Is it still a 1/3 pie slice visually?

Now draw two Tootsie Rolls, one twice as long as the other. Does that accurately represent the values of each roll, or is the longer one one big Twinkie?

Learning to use tools lie pie charts and bar graphs is just as important to students as reading their first copy of How to Lie With Statistics.

1997-1998: Main page and story

1998-2006: Main page and story

2006-2008: Main page and story

2008-2010: Main page and story

2011-present: Main page and story

Personally I think 2006-2008 version had the best overall usability. That's also the last version that was compatible with pretty much any web browser.

1997-1998: Main page and story

1998-2006: Main page and story

2006-2008: Main page and story

2008-2010: Main page and story

2011-present: Main page and story

Personally I think 2006-2008 version had the best overall usability. That's also the last version that was compatible with pretty much any web browser.

1997-1998: Main page and story

1998-2006: Main page and story

2006-2008: Main page and story

2008-2010: Main page and story

2011-present: Main page and story

Personally I think 2006-2008 version had the best overall usability. That's also the last version that was compatible with pretty much any web browser.

1997-1998: Main page and story

1998-2006: Main page and story

2006-2008: Main page and story

2008-2010: Main page and story

2011-present: Main page and story

Personally I think 2006-2008 version had the best overall usability. That's also the last version that was compatible with pretty much any web browser.

1997-1998: Main page and story

1998-2006: Main page and story

2006-2008: Main page and story

2008-2010: Main page and story

2011-present: Main page and story

Personally I think 2006-2008 version had the best overall usability. That's also the last version that was compatible with pretty much any web browser.