Slashdot Mirror

Why not work with the good folks at archive.org and their Internet wayback machine?

The actual reason is legal. The British Library is a specially designated deposit library, and so under Section 44A of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 it is allowed to make an archival copy of anything from the internet without the copyright holder's permission. It's doubtful whether what archive.org is doing is legal under UK law, not that it cares because archive.org is based in the US.

Why doesn't the Library simply work a deal with the Wayback Machine Internet Archive. They seem to have this problem fairly well thought out. Maybe they plan to do that. I can't tell because the site that wants to archive all of Britain seems slashdotted at the moment.

I imagine that it will eventually happen, and that it will end up enriching the archive.org system when it does. Maybe it won't happen for a year or two, but when we're talking about long term preservation, that's not so important and the global nature of the internet makes it valuable (and logical) to globally coordinate the historical archives of it as well.

It seems that libraries are about the only place that can get away with ignoring copyright these days.

National libraries cannot ignore copyright, but they have a special position with regards to copyright law: they're explicitly empowered to retain copies for future generations whether the publishers like it or not (and whether or not they're Big Media). If you don't want it archived for future generations, don't publish it at all.

The National Library of Iceland has had a similar program for a couple of years. The national TLD is collected three times a year and made available via the Wayback Machine. The english version of the project's page is rather terse, but according to the Icelandic version, selected pages are collected more frequently when warranted, e.g. political debates around election times. Icelandic law requires publishers to deposit copies of ther work with the National Library. This includes web pages so the library doesn't have to worry about copyright.
For a small country with few resources, co-operation with other small countries and archive.org is probably best. The task of collectiing the british TLD is orders of magnitude bigger. It may well be cheaper for the British Library to pay for a system tailored to their needs rather than figure out how to make archive.org's software do what the library needs.

Unless you do this fairly frequently, say every 6 months at a minimum, the picture left for future generations will be muddled at best.
Its always interesting how the news changes with the passage of time, and events are seen very differently in just a few weeks.

On 9/11 I used this Adobe's web site mining software that essentially captures every link on every page of a site and builds a large web replicate in pdf form. All the links work within that PDF, and every page on the the site is preserved. I pointed it at all the major news web sites, one large PDF for each, burned them to disk, and still have them today. (Yup, I violated a boat load of copyrights).

Two weeks later I did it again. You would be astounded at the difference. Entire pages are missing, not just unlinked, but even when you look for them by URL that appeared in the first capture, you won't find them in the second. Other news sites kept the old stuff on line, but the links often disappeared from their own web pages so that the only way to find these pages was by following links from some other site.

The point is, that a snapshot of the web does very little good, unless it has some collection. Looking at the archives of a newspaper from June 6 1944, wouldn't give you much of an idea of the Normandy invasion, unless you had subsequent editions from days and months forward.
But a web site isn't a newspaper with discrete editions, it is a constantly evolving thing, and archiving it today (or any point in time) is fairly useless, but archiving it daily is largely redundant, (most stories will be the same). You can't tell which stories changed over time based solely on the dates either, so you pretty well have to grab it all.

Why doesn't the Library simply work a deal with the Wayback Machine Internet Archive. They seem to have this problem fairly well thought out. Maybe they plan to do that. I can't tell because the site that wants to archive all of Britain seems slashdotted at the moment.

It seems that libraries are about the only place that can get away with ignoring copyright these days.

Why not work with the good folks at archive.org and their Internet wayback machine?

Is it not a similar idea?

The Internet Wayback Machine folks could use the funding and would be achieving the same purpose, albeit not in a format that the library folks might want....but they could come to agreement.

ooooohhh, look at mr six-digit ID quoting Socrates! He probably doesn't have a TV either.
I'll just leave this here for the enlightenment of all /. .

News? This has already been around for almost 20 years.

http://web.archive.org/web/19970416020233/http://realaroma.com

It has come to my attention that the entire Linux community is a hotbed of so called 'alternative sexuality', which includes anything from hedonistic orgies to homosexuality to paedophilia.

What better way of demonstrating this than by looking at the hidden messages contained within the names of some of Linux's most outspoken advocates:

• Linus Torvalds is an anagram of slit anus or VD 'L,' clearly referring to himself by the first initial.
• Richard M. Stallman, spokespervert for the Gaysex's Not Unusual 'movement' is an anagram of mans cram thrill ad.
• Alan Cox is barely an anagram of anal cox which is just so filthy and unchristian it unnerves me.

I'm sure that Eric S. Raymond, composer of the satanic homosexual propaganda diatribe The Cathedral and the Bizarre, is probably an anagram of something queer, but we don't need to look that far as we know he's always shoving a gun up some poor little boy's rectum. Update: Eric S. Raymond is actually an anagram for secondary rim and cord in my arse. It just goes to show you that he is indeed queer.

Update the Second: It is also documented that Evil Sicko Gaymond is responsible for a nauseating piece of code called Fetchmail, which is obviously sinister sodomite slang for 'Felch Male' -- a disgusting practise. For those not in the know, 'felching' is the act performed by two perverts wherein one sucks their own post-coital ejaculate out of the other's rectum. In fact, it appears that the dirty Linux faggots set out to undermine the good Republican institution of e-mail, turning it into 'e-male.'

As far as Richard 'Master' Stallman goes, that filthy fudge-packer was actually quoted on leftist commie propaganda site Salon.com as saying the following: 'I've been resistant to the pressure to conform in any circumstance,' he says. 'It's about being able to question conventional wisdom,' he asserts. 'I believe in love, but not monogamy,' he says plainly.

And this isn't a made up troll bullshit either! He actually stated this tripe, which makes it obvious that he is trying to politely say that he's a flaming homo slut!

Speaking about 'flaming,' who better to point out as a filthy chutney ferret than Slashdot's very own self-confessed pederast Jon Katz. Although an obvious deviant anagram cannot be found from his name, he has already confessed, nay boasted of the homosexual perversion of corrupting the innocence of young children. To quote from the article linked:

'I've got a rare kidney disease,' I told her. 'I have to go to the bathroom a lot. You can come with me if you want, but it takes a while. Is that okay with you? Do you want a note from my doctor?'

Is this why you were touching your penis in the cinema, Jon? And letting the other boys touch it too?

We should also point out that Jon Katz refers to himself as 'Slashdot's resident Gasbag.' Is there any more doubt? For those fortunate few who aren't aware of the list of homosexual terminology found inside the Linux 'Sauce Code,' a 'Gasbag' is a pervert who gains sexual gratification from having a thin straw inserted into his urethra (or to use the common parlance, 'piss-pipe'), then his homosexual lover blows firmly down the straw to inflate his scrotum. This is, of course, when he's not busy violating the dignity and c

MySQL is the Microsoft Windows of databases. Sure, it may be half decent now, but for many years it was clunky, anti-standards, and would modify your data silently. There even used to be a section in the documentation about how bad foreign keys were and why MySQL doesn't have them. MySQL had to be brought kicking and screaming to the basic level that Postgres had already been at for years. I don't trust it to work right. I wouldn't use it if I had to use a database for anything other than a requirement for an existing product (Wordpress and the like).

I can't fathom why open-source people keep defending MySQL or its forks when they will turn around and knock Windows. MySQL is to MS windows as PostgreSQL is to Linux. Being popular doesn't mean it's better, or we'd all be using Windows and talking about how inferior Linux is.I'd rather have the fast, standards compliant database that's written by developers who value correctness of my data.

The traditional trick of these publicity stunts is to post a challenge, and claim there was no response otherwise and therefore it is true. The claim is made while plugging fingers in the ears and pretending there's no contradictions.

Look back to the Kent Hovind challenge, where he posted $250,000 to prove evolution. He gradually shifted the challenge from "provide any evidence of evolution" to "demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that God couldn't cause the big bang" - and each step at asking for clarification was given non-answers (if any).

Even if someone did manage to complete his challenge, Kent Hovind couldn't pay the amount - he's a NINJA - No Income, Job or Asset, by his own bankruptcy claim. Both a scientific and financial fraud.

This challenge is archived, with the current page saying you followed an imaginary link. "If you can't win, burn the evidence of losing."

This challenge may be "possible", but don't waste time on it. You have better luck compleing the James Randi challenge instead.

That is the best demo ever, another link : http://archive.org/details/Fr-041Debris

That they fitted the demo into 177KB is mind-boggling.

Not JS, but if you are impressed by large results in small code you'll probably love this and maybe this

I agree: she is highly hypocritical. Adria's work seems to be primarily in marketing, not technology, so she isn't exactly a poster girl for women in technology. And she is using sexual innuendo, unprofessional dress and gestures, and controversy over feminist causes as part of her image and work.

Especially your noting PERSONAL interest - that's everything, more than anything. IF you "give a hoot" about something & find it interesting, you'll become involved in "how it works" as best you can @ the nuts-N-bolts levels. Otherwise, you're wasting your time (and won't do well in it either, or as you put it, "in 1 ear & out the other").

HOWEVER: When you DO have someone that's genuinely interested (in anything really, just using a concrete specific example from my own experience in this very area - showing others how to TRULY secure a Windows NT-based OS as best as is currently possible)?

THIS is the kind of results you get & this is a discrete example of it by quoted testimonial from THRONKA below:

To "immunize" a Windows system, I effectively use the principles in "layered security" possibles!

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE

I.E./E.G.-> I have done so since 1997-1998 with the most viewed, highly rated guide online for Windows security there really is which came from the fact I also created the 1st guide for securing Windows, highly rated @ NEOWIN (as far back as 1998-2001) here:

http://www.neowin.net/news/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text

& from as far back as 1997 -> http://web.archive.org/web/20020205091023/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml which Neowin above picked up on & rated very highly.

That has evolved more currently, into the MOST viewed & highly rated one there is for years now since 2008 online in the 1st URL link above...

Which has well over 500,000++ views online (actually MORE, but 1 site with 75,000 views of it went offline/out-of-business) & it's been made either:

---

1.) An Essential Guide
2.) 5-5 star rated
3.) A "sticky-pinned" thread
4.) Most viewed in the category it's in (usually security)
5.) Got me PAID by winning a contest @ PCPitStop (quite unexpectedly - I was only posting it for the good of all, & yes, "the Lord works in mysterious ways", it even got me PAID -> http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2007/09/04/pc-pitstop-winners/ (see January 2008))

---

Across 15-20 or so sites I posted it on back in 2008... & here is the IMPORTANT part, in some sample testimonials to the "layered security" methodology efficacy:

---

SOME QUOTED TESTIMONIALS TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SAID LAYERED SECURITY GUIDE I AUTHORED:

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=2

"I recently, months ago when you finally got this guide done, had authorization to try this on simple work station for kids. My client, who paid me an ungodly amount of money to do this, has been PROBLEM FREE FOR MONTHS! I haven't even had a follow up call which is unusual." - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

"APK, thanks for such a great guide. This would, and should, be an inspiration to such security measures. Also, the pc that has "tweaks": IS STILL GOING! NO PROBLEMS!" - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=3

"Its 2009 - still trouble free! I was told last week by a co worker who does a

Former Apple CEO Steve Jobs was very public in his condemnation of Flash as a tool for rich-content playback, denigrating it in an April 2010 letter posted on Apple's Website as flawed with regard to battery life, security, reliability and performance.

That was just PR to keep the masses thinking Apple was on their side. The real reason they ddin't support Flash was because it was a code interpreter. i.e. It let you run external code. That meant if iOS supported Flash, you could use it to run apps on your iOS device without having gotten them via the App Store. At the time, Apple had a very strict policy against code interpreters. They've loosened their stance somewhat since then, but it's still pretty restrictive. It's their garden, and they want to keep it walled off. On the one hand this does improve the security of their devices somewhat. On the other it means all executables which are bought and sold for the device have to go through their App Store and 30% cut. Battery life, reliability, and performance were all red herrings because in most Android browsers, the Flash plugin wouldn't play by default. If you went to a web page with embedded Flash, an image of a stylized F would show up in its place, and you had to click on it before the Flash would actually play. No hit to the device's performance unless you specifically wanted the Flash to play.

Don't think you understand how these technologies work. Apple has adopted HTML5 capabilities such as local storage, offline caching, and web workers as fast as anyone. You can make fantastic mobile web apps on top of HTML5 completely bypassing the app store. Flash is an abomination and needed to go. There was no ulterior motive here. It was a terrible technology that needed to be put down.

Former Apple CEO Steve Jobs was very public in his condemnation of Flash as a tool for rich-content playback, denigrating it in an April 2010 letter posted on Apple's Website as flawed with regard to battery life, security, reliability and performance.

That was just PR to keep the masses thinking Apple was on their side. The real reason they ddin't support Flash was because it was a code interpreter. i.e. It let you run external code. That meant if iOS supported Flash, you could use it to run apps on your iOS device without having gotten them via the App Store.

At the time, Apple had a very strict policy against code interpreters. They've loosened their stance somewhat since then, but it's still pretty restrictive. It's their garden, and they want to keep it walled off. On the one hand this does improve the security of their devices somewhat. On the other it means all executables which are bought and sold for the device have to go through their App Store and 30% cut.

Battery life, reliability, and performance were all red herrings because in most Android browsers, the Flash plugin wouldn't play by default. If you went to a web page with embedded Flash, an image of a stylized F would show up in its place, and you had to click on it before the Flash would actually play. No hit to the device's performance unless you specifically wanted the Flash to play.

Don't spread the MAFIAA's FUD for them. File sharing is already legal. "File sharing" and "copyright infringement" are not the same thing.

Indeed. And there is a lot of music available which is either in the Public Domain, or under one of the Creative Commons licenses. For instance, excellent recent recordings of classical music were released as 320kbps MP3 and as lossless tracks, and these are explicitly in the Public Domain. Lots more (typically electronic & rock & metal & house, etc.) can be found at the Netlabels collections. MusOpen typically has classical music, and also has some PD or CC sheet music.

Share away, with these files. Upload, download, give away, stream, sell, whatever. And quite legally. Just about the only thing you can't do with Public Domain stuff is claim that you own the copyright, or that you act on behalf of the copyright owner. Either copyright has expired, or it was never copyrighted to begin with.

Don't spread the MAFIAA's FUD for them. File sharing is already legal. "File sharing" and "copyright infringement" are not the same thing.

Indeed. And there is a lot of music available which is either in the Public Domain, or under one of the Creative Commons licenses. For instance, excellent recent recordings of classical music were released as 320kbps MP3 and as lossless tracks, and these are explicitly in the Public Domain. Lots more (typically electronic & rock & metal & house, etc.) can be found at the Netlabels collections. MusOpen typically has classical music, and also has some PD or CC sheet music.

Share away, with these files. Upload, download, give away, stream, sell, whatever. And quite legally. Just about the only thing you can't do with Public Domain stuff is claim that you own the copyright, or that you act on behalf of the copyright owner. Either copyright has expired, or it was never copyrighted to begin with.

Don't spread the MAFIAA's FUD for them. File sharing is already legal. "File sharing" and "copyright infringement" are not the same thing.

Indeed. And there is a lot of music available which is either in the Public Domain, or under one of the Creative Commons licenses. For instance, excellent recent recordings of classical music were released as 320kbps MP3 and as lossless tracks, and these are explicitly in the Public Domain. Lots more (typically electronic & rock & metal & house, etc.) can be found at the Netlabels collections. MusOpen typically has classical music, and also has some PD or CC sheet music.

Share away, with these files. Upload, download, give away, stream, sell, whatever. And quite legally. Just about the only thing you can't do with Public Domain stuff is claim that you own the copyright, or that you act on behalf of the copyright owner. Either copyright has expired, or it was never copyrighted to begin with.

Isn't a key element of the legal case that he also retransmitted the private information? He did not merely receive it.

From the court filing, it appears both charges are predicated on the notion that sending GET requests to an unprotected, publicly-accessible web server constitute unauthorized access under Title 18, Section 1030(a)(2)(C).

Actually, from your own link, the charges were predicated on the notion that spoofing an identity in order to fool someone into giving you confidential information is a crime. These weren't just GET URL requests like your browser is sending to read Slashdot, but requests with spoofed IDs - closer to sending GET requests to Slashdot with spoofed cookie IDs in an attempt to get emails of other Slashdot users.

Or, as an analogy, this would be like calling a phone number and saying "Hi, this is Bill at [Bank of America/Sovereign Bank/Citizens Bank/DCU/etc], and there's been a fraud report on your account. So that we can unlock your account, can you verify your full name, address, date of birth, and social security number," and trying it with different bank names each time until the person stops saying "but I don't have an account with your bank" and responds "oh, gracious, that's my account. Here's my info." Except that you do that thousands of times a second.

The point is that you wouldn't be arrested for "making a phone call" or "sending GET requests," but obtaining confidential information through fraud.

Isn't a key element of the legal case that he also retransmitted the private information? He did not merely receive it.

From the court filing, it appears both charges are predicated on the notion that sending GET requests to an unprotected, publicly-accessible web server constitute unauthorized access under Title 18, Section 1030(a)(2)(C).

Check here, first. Assuming you know the old URL.

Reocities has a handy neighborhood listing in their archives.

Ref: Carl Boyer A History of Mathematics - Chapter III. Mesopotamia 26, 2 Positional numeration.

As the Akkadians adopted the Sumerian form of writing, lexicons were
compiled giving equivalents in the two tongues, and forms of words and
numerals became less varied. Thousands of tablets from about the time of
the Hammurabi dynasty (ca. 1800-1600 B.C.) illustrate a number system that
had become well established. The decimal system, common to most civiliza-
tions, both ancient and modern, had been submerged in Mesopotamia
under a notation that made fundamental the base sixty. Much has been
written about the motives behind this change; it has been suggested that
astronomical considerations may have been instrumental or that the
sexagesimal scheme may have been the natural combination of two earlier
schemes, one decimal and the other using the base six. It appears more
likely, however, that the base sixty was consciously adopted and legalized
in the interests of metrology, for a magnitude of sixty units can be subdivided
easily into halves, thirds, fourths, fifths, sixths, tenths, twelfths, fifteenths,
twentieths, and thirtieths, thus affording ten possible subdivisions. Whatever
the origin, the sexagesimal system of numeration has enjoyed a remarkably
long life, for remnants survive, unfortunately for consistency, even to this
day in units of time and angle measure, despite the fundamentally decimal
form of our society.

http://web.archive.org/web/20100131034321/http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3553

Some of the PDF they linked at
http://ia701508.us.archive.org/28/items/gov.uscourts.cacd.543744/gov.uscourts.cacd.543744.71.0.pdf

  has redacted parts. You can simply copy/paste the redacted part into a text file to see what was said. LOL.

I believe you are referring to the highlighted parts (they should show in yellow) not the redacted parts (show in black). An easy test would be the actual home address right at the beginning of the questioning. If you get anything more than "Minneapolis, Minnesota" then you are right.

They want to support the "journalists" other wise it would mean "everyone" this way they can come back and arrest/prosecute non journalists.

This argument becomes harder to maintain when you read the actual government brief, and realize that while Ars Technica (and, following them, the Slashdot summary) use language that makes it seem like a government defense of special privileges for journalists, the actual brief takes the exact opposite position, arguing "that both the First and Fourth Amendments protect an individual who peacefully photographs police activity on a public street" and "the First Amendment right to record police officers performing public duties extends to both the public and members of the media, and the Court should not make a distinction between the public’s and the media’s rights to record here."

TFS is (and so is TFA) misleading when it says that the government argues that the Constitution "prohibits police officers from arresting journalists for exercising those rights", as the actual brief filed by the Justice Department explicitly argues (heck, its a bolded section heading) that "Members of the Public and the Media Are Both Entitled to Protection Under the First Amendment", and, more specifically, "The First Amendment protections afforded members of the public and press when recording public police activity are coextensive" and "Although Mr. Garcia alleges facts here that show that he is a member of the press, this makes no difference to the analysis under the First Amendment",and "Courts have long held that recordings made by private citizens of police conduct or other items of public interest are entitled to First Amendment protection".

The DoJ isn't arguing that police can't arrest journalists from recording police activity, the DoJ is arguing that "that both the First and Fourth Amendments protect an individual who peacefully photographs police activity on a public street", and that "core First Amendment conduct, such as recording a police officer performing duties on a public street, cannot be the sole basis" for discretionary charges such as disturbing the peace, etc., and, finally, that "the First Amendment right to record police officers performing public duties extends to both the public and members of the media" without distinction.

Some of the PDF they linked at http://ia701508.us.archive.org/28/items/gov.uscourts.cacd.543744/gov.uscourts.cacd.543744.71.0.pdf has redacted parts. You can simply copy/paste the redacted part into a text file to see what was said. LOL.

(X) Microsoft will not put up with it

Uh, no. Microsoft actually wanted to do this ten years ago.

No, someone committed suicide because society had no place for them. What he was doing may have had value to him, but society as a whole has, through its legal system, has made it so even in cases where there is no financial or physical harm to others, said that what he was doing had no value. Since what he was doing was at the core of who he was (obviously, since it drove him to kill himself when he was deprived of it), it is more accurate to say society had no place for him. Whether that's moral, or ethical, right, or wrong, I leave to you. But that is why he died.

You make it sound as if the legal system represents society's will, which is obviously not the true (and never was). Society had a place for him, but those who rule did not, and despite any illusions you may have of living in a democracy, rest assured those who rule are not the people.

Are you sure about that?

I reckon there is a very good chance he good have opted for a jury trial and been found guilty. His lawyer will probably have warned him this was a distinct possibility too. That is not to say it was a certainty he would be found guilty, but there have been less likely things happen in courts of law with regard to juries.

The reality is that a majority of the population seem to support law of copyright and think that people like him who advocate breaking laws they do not agree with (read his manifesto to see that he does just this: http://archive.org/details/GuerillaOpenAccessManifesto) actually do deserve to be punished for it, especially if they are caught trying to break those laws themselves. He might have been caught very early in the process, but a prosecutor friendly jury may well have found him guilty anyway based on his stated intent.

The best place to start looking to change copyright law in the manner Aaron desired is by trying to convince the public that the law needs to change.

If his lawyer had advised him it was a joke prosecution and he was never going to be found guilty then he probably would still be alive (assuming his suicide was anything to do with his legal problems).

"Uh. What he did was really illegal."

Uh. No, it wasn't.

He had authorization to download files from the source in question, though the TOS said he was not authorized to do it automatically. He wasn't "stealing" anything, or even violating copyright.

The things is though, we all know he intended to violate copyright by distributing what he had downloaded to other people who did not have access to it. that was the point of what he was doing.

Read the following: http://archive.org/details/GuerillaOpenAccessManifesto

Now tell me you don't honestly believe that he had every intention of violating copyright law.

Whether you believe in what he was doing is one thing (I actually kind of do), but lets not bullshit about his intentions: He had no respect for a bullshit state of affairs that is enshrined in law and he had every intention of breaking the law to bypass it.

I too was subpoenaed (note I redacted two names) for evidence and to testify before the grand jury that indicted Aaron. They were certainly fishing for a lot of information relating to Guerrilla Open Access. I'm not sure there was much that either Quinn or I could do to prevent the indictment. Although, I can say that on an emotional level rationalizing about the situation doesn't make it suck any less knowing that the evidence and testimony I provided was probably bastardized and used against him. Maybe I'll write up more about the whole thing some time.

You're a clueless M$ apologist. To begin with, UEFI is not the problem but this Micro$oft's "secure boot" which should rather be called restricted boot as it has nothing to do with security and everything to do with vendor lock-in. When a convicted monopolist starts something like this, people tend to take notice.

Q: So, what's wrong with Micro$oft?
A: How long time did you say you have? Try reading http://wayback.archive.org/web/20120116153542/http://www.msversus.org/ And then about ooxml and this "secure boot". If you're not lobotomized, you'll start to see a pattern. And it's not pretty.

The hate is real. But it's well motivated.

I would hope that if this were WW2 then a lot of the rather eyebrow-raising stuff he leaked wouldn't have existed in the first place.

I'm pretty sure it did exist during WW2. It's just been deleted from the historical record by judicious consideration over what to commit to paper, or when certain papers happened to be destroyed in a mysterious fire. With today's technology, people just shoot off their immediate thoughts in a quick email which gets archived multiple times and survives in perpetuity. Even of the mundane stuff like friendly fire incidents, you rarely read about that happening in WW2 despite battlefield communication being much, much worse back then.

It happens outside of classified papers too. It's the reason people think everyone was polite and genteel and didn't swear during the 1700-1800s - because most writing which survives from back then was careful to edit out the vulgarities which really peppered society.

The Tulip chips gained a lot of their fame as being one of the fastest build a Beowulf cluster cards going back to August of 2000. 3c905B cards didn't work right under Linux until kernel 2.2.17 in September 2000. I believe the Tulip came out first, then the 3c905B, but it was very close in time. Exactly when the original 3c905 came out relative to those two is even harder to place.

In 2000 I could afford 3c905 cards but still preferred Tulip ones. Before Linksys started screwing up the market by releasing both Tulip and knock-off versions, the card to buy was the Kingston KNT40T or KNE100TX. Those were much cheaper than a 3c905, and on Linux they were faster and more reliable too. Eventually Netgear and Linksys replaced Kingston as the Tulip vendors of choice, and then they started racing toward lower quality/cost with clone chipsets.

Do Apple, IBM and god knows who else claim they have patents that cover the Linux kernel? Not that I know and they certainly don't collect rent for using it, unlike Micro$oft. That's what this piece of news is about.

Software patents suck generally but this BS sucks especially.

I see you don't know jack shit about M$ and their business practices. Do your homework. http://wayback.archive.org/web/20120116153542/http://www.msversus.org/

And that older collection of abuses doesn't contain the never gems ooxml and "secure boot". M$ is one disgusting company.

Everyone's been telling me (not here, just everyone else on the web) that Microsoft is better now

Sounds like everybody needs to do their homework http://wayback.archive.org/web/20120116153542/http://www.msversus.org/

And that doesn't contain their latest crimes, e.g. ooxml and "secure boot".

Apparently companies don't pay taxes (ref) in the sense that anything they do pay someone else gets to pay -- the employees, the customers, the shareholders, you name it.

Even without that caveat I'd be strongly in favour of a simple tax code, one that simply isn't complicated enough to have much in the way of loopholes. Perhaps a flat-fee on income, or a VAT if that really is a cheaper* tax overall to levy, tied to the yearly budget in a straight-forward way so that politician stupidity gives fairly direct feedback in your wallet, and then hopefully influences your voting.

Assuming that indeed, companies would shove off any taxes paid anyway, well, let them not pay taxes, let the people who receive income from the company do. The upside of that is that since more tax is coming from employees, it's now harder to hide taxables on other sides of borders.

The problem with that sort of thing, though, is that simplicity is a two-edged sword: The politicians no longer can hide their shenanigans either. Look at the debt rate. Eventually that's going to have to be paid back from taxes. And suddenly you're keenly aware of that fact.

* Where "cheaper" means less inefficiencies due to collecting and side effects.

Apples do naturally have vitamin C see http://web.archive.org/web/20051023040512/http://www.nafex.org/jansonfiles/JansonJan68.htm

As for fortified Mountain Dew, that would certainly be preferable to ordinary Mountain Dew healthwise, although there may be some issues with bioavailabilty. However, while fortified Apple Juice is almost the only option, while fortified mountain doesn't exist.

Step 0 - never do anything that's put on the wayback machine.
http://archive.org/web/web.php

Idiot, I own my OWN home @ that address & have for ages - did I give you or anyone else permission to post my home address here?

No.

The FBI are LOOKING for me? Yea, right... I'm one of the guys that helps them & their colleagues AGAINST online scumbags ala malwarebytes hosting my application here:

---

APK Hosts File Engine 5.0++ 32/64-bit:

http://www.start64.com/index.php?option=com_content&id=5851:apk-hosts-file-engine-64bit-version&Itemid=74

---

Which SECURES folks vs. known online threats of MANY kinds, and I've done security guides that do the same for Windows users since 1997! To wit:

To "immunize" a Windows system, I effectively use the principles in "layered security" possibles!

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE

I.E./E.G.-> I have done so since 1997-1998 with the most viewed, highly rated guide online for Windows security there really is which came from the fact I also created the 1st guide for securing Windows, highly rated @ NEOWIN (as far back as 1998-2001) here:

http://www.neowin.net/news/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text

& from as far back as 1997 -> http://web.archive.org/web/20020205091023/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml which Neowin above picked up on & rated very highly.

That has evolved more currently, into the MOST viewed & highly rated one there is for years now since 2008 online in the 1st URL link above...

Which has well over 500,000++ views online (actually MORE, but 1 site with 75,000 views of it went offline/out-of-business) & it's been made either:

---

1.) An Essential Guide
2.) 5-5 star rated
3.) A "sticky-pinned" thread
4.) Most viewed in the category it's in (usually security)
5.) Got me PAID by winning a contest @ PCPitStop (quite unexpectedly - I was only posting it for the good of all, & yes, "the Lord works in mysterious ways", it even got me PAID -> http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2007/09/04/pc-pitstop-winners/ (see January 2008))

---

Across 15-20 or so sites I posted it on back in 2008... & here is the IMPORTANT part, in some sample testimonials to the "layered security" methodology efficacy:

---

SOME QUOTED TESTIMONIALS TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SAID LAYERED SECURITY GUIDE I AUTHORED:

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=2

"I recently, months ago when you finally got this guide done, had authorization to try this on simple work station for kids. My client, who paid me an ungodly amount of money to do this, has been PROBLEM FREE FOR MONTHS! I haven't even had a follow up call which is unusual." - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

"APK, thanks for such a great guide. This would, and should, be an inspiration to such security measures. Also, the pc that has "tweaks": IS STILL GOING! NO PROBLEMS!" - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral

AND

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=3

"Its 2009 - still trouble free

This is absurd. It clearly looks like the Reputation Firm hired by this guy works with some nameless organization in India. For WordPress to honor this DMCA take down request blindly makes me more reluctant to ever use them. Sure I see blog posts hosted by them all the time but seriously why would a reputable organization (if you can call WordPress that) would remove the content without first checking with the blog owners or verifying the claims, then they are truly the bad guys here.

Is this something where the wayback machine could help?

From the article:

We simply don't have an alternative to fossil fuels that can be rapidly scaled up, doesn't require a daunting input of raw materials and energy, and has a relatively low output of air-polluting emissions.

To which I say malarkey, bologna, and BS. This is an opinion, backed by no data. Here is a counter opinion. Which has data, which we like.

From that article:

NREL's research showed that one quad (7.5 billion gallons) of biodiesel could be produced from 200,000 hectares of desert land (200,000 hectares is equivalent to 780 square miles, roughly 500,000 acres), if the remaining challenges are solved (as they will be, with several research groups and companies working towards it, including ours at UNH). In the previous section, we found that to replace all transportation fuels in the US, we would need 140.8 billion gallons of biodiesel, or roughly 19 quads (one quad is roughly 7.5 billion gallons of biodiesel). To produce that amount would require a land mass of almost 15,000 square miles. To put that in perspective, consider that the Sonora desert in the southwestern US comprises 120,000 square miles. Enough biodiesel to replace all petroleum transportation fuels could be grown in 15,000 square miles, or roughly 12.5 percent of the area of the Sonora desert (note for clarification - I am not advocating putting 15,000 square miles of algae ponds in the Sonora desert. This hypothetical example is used strictly for the purpose of showing the scale of land required). That 15,000 square miles works out to roughly 9.5 million acres - far less than the 450 million acres currently used for crop farming in the US, and the over 500 million acres used as grazing land for farm animals.

The TL;DR version is that we could replace all car gasoline consumption in the United States with farms equivalent to 15% the size of the Sonora Desert, using land that you can't farm on anyways, which would be a 100% carbon neutral 100% solar solution.

The article also says:

Never mind the infrastructure required for transmitting solar electricity to all who need it, and storing some for a rainy day.

Biodiesel stores nicely even in the dark. See? Not a problem.

The person who wrote this article is simply unimaginative.

You don't disprove or dispute them -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3417867&cid=42736287 fully or even EFFECTIVELY (this may not be YOUR fault due to less know-how, since guys like me DO build what you merely 'use', user)... but then again: YOU limited yourself, not I!

PLUS:

Do the math on 2++ million records in a hosts with my fav sites I only keep 20 favorites in a custom hosts file cached in RAM for speed with those favs @ the top, beating DNS indexing or even btree seeks too... do the math!

(Plus the VERY thing that cures this is hardcoding in hosts files, as to the issue in this article, by BYPASSING THE NEED TO CALL OUT TO THESE UNPATCHED MAJORITY OF VULNERABLE DNS SERVERS OUT THERE! Period!)

Plus, again a fact per that math I outlined:

I resolve FASTER locally from disk than remote DNS servers do, especially if NXDOMAIN happens!

(Especially how I load it from a TRUE SSD based on DDR2 ram, the gigabyte IRAM by redirecting my hosts file sort of like how *NIX etc shadow passwords work in fact), once loaded thus (faster, zero seek access almost) & cached into RAM (1 of 2 ways I noted, 1 of which I use to overcome the limited faulty DNS clientside cache service in Windows with no less)).

I merely state facts that mathematics prove & yes, again, computers DO use that type of math in code and hardware too...

Yes, and? Yes:

Due to my 'tricks' as you called them?

Yes, know-how you clearly do NOT possess as a 'techie' or even "mighty admin" type Lol...

Honestly?

I shit on guys like you, everyday, because you LIMITED YOURSELVES, not I, by only being that - I've been brought into corporate Fortune 100/500 for consultation or on the job vs. contractors trying to take payroll away from my staff to SHOOT YOU DOWN on grounds like these (I am VERY good @ it & this post shows it also)... & by the way?

I'm a VERY proficient security pro & admin myself - I wrote THE VERY FIRST SECURITY GUIDE FOR WINDOWS:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbo=d&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000/XP%22&btnG=Submit&gbv=1&sei=1VoJUbXKMbCC0QHKg4GQAg

To "immunize" a Windows system, I effectively use the principles in "layered security" possibles!

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE

I.E./E.G.-> I have done so since 1997-1998 with the most viewed, highly rated guide online for Windows security there really is which came from the fact I also created the 1st guide for securing Windows, highly rated @ NEOWIN (as far back as 1998-2001) here:

http://www.neowin.net/news/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text

& from as far back as 1997 -> http://web.archive.org/web/20020205091023/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml which Neowin above picked up on & rated very highly.

That has evolved more currently, into the MOST viewed & highly rated one there is for years now since 2008 online in the 1st URL link above...

Which has well over 500,000++ views online (actually MORE, but 1 site with 75,000 views of it went offline/out-of-business) & it's been made either:

---

1.) An Essential Guide
2.) 5-5 star rated
3.) A "sticky-pinned" thread
4.) Most viewed in the category it's in (usually security)
5.) Got me PAID by winning a con

I followed the links through to a Guardian review of the book about Shin, only to find "This content has been removed as our copyright has expired." WTF?

Fortunately, the Wayback Machine is a bit more sane and has the full story: http://web.archive.org/web/20120320021739/http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/mar/16/escape-north-korea-prison-camp

Steven Hassan on the lack of any mention about undue influence in Scientology
As for this:

The book observes that compared with other religions, the published literature on Scientology is improvised and clouded by bogus assertions.

It's quite evident that Larry didn't actually read all the literature.

Try the install disks here, http://support.lenovo.com/en_US/downloads/detail.page?DocID=DS002748. They say they're for Thinkpads but work on most newer hardware. IIRC they're self-extracting zip files.
Here is a site with lots of links, some don't exist anymore but it'll give you a start for googling. http://web.archive.org/web/20060926004818/www.warpupdates.mynetcologne.de/english/site_contents.html

TUTOR (also known as PLATO Author Language) is a programming language developed for use on the PLATO system at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign around 1965. TUTOR was initially designed by Paul Tenczar for use in computer assisted instruction (CAI) and computer managed instruction (CMI) (in computer programs called "lessons") and has many features for that purpose. For example, TUTOR has powerful answer-parsing and answer-judging commands, graphics, and features to simplify handling student records and statistics by instructors. TUTOR's flexibility, in combination with PLATO's computational power (running on what was considered a supercomputer in 1972), also made it suitable for the creation of many non-educational lessons - that is, games - including flight simulators, war games, dungeon style multiplayer role-playing games, card games, word games, and Medical lesson games such as Bugs and Drugs (BND).

1994 Message from CS Prof Daniel Sleator to Tim Berners-Lee: It would be possible for one person to write a new game (such as double bughouse chess) without having to write a half dozen graphics interfaces. Many really cool things change from being impossible to being quite feasible. (The PLATO system developed in the 70s at the University of Illinois had some of these properties: simple graphics available to all users, fast interaction among a large pool of users. The result was the development of a number of very popular and engrossing interactive games.)

Years ago I was fortunate enough to find a paperback of "Man of High Fidelity:Edwin Howard Armstrong", by Lawrence Lessing at a newstand, and highly recommend it.

Apparently it's common domain now.

http://www.archive.org/stream/manofhighfidelit002474mbp/manofhighfidelit002474mbp_djvu.txt

He wasn't the first to stick a control grid into a vacuum tube diode, but he figured out how to make it work, and pretty much came up with the superheterodyne and later FM as we know it.

http://archive.org/details/WarIsARacket

Kinda old, yet still so very current.