Slashdot Mirror

It's a myth that it's a myth that Apache was named that. From their website, the FAQ originally said this:
http://apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name">http:// web.archive.org/web/19980128114236/http://apache.o rg/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name
And then said this:
http://www.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name">htt p://web.archive.org/web/20000815061003/http://www. apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name
Then they changed it to:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name">h ttp://web.archive.org/web/20021017033945/http://ht tpd.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name
Now they're trying to get rid of something they've perpetuated for years:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name">h ttp://web.archive.org/web/20030603200610/http://ht tpd.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name

and that seems to be the one that's remained until today. Who knows what it'll be tomorrow.

It's a myth that it's a myth that Apache was named that. From their website, the FAQ originally said this:
http://apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name">http:// web.archive.org/web/19980128114236/http://apache.o rg/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name
And then said this:
http://www.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name">htt p://web.archive.org/web/20000815061003/http://www. apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name
Then they changed it to:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name">h ttp://web.archive.org/web/20021017033945/http://ht tpd.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name
Now they're trying to get rid of something they've perpetuated for years:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name">h ttp://web.archive.org/web/20030603200610/http://ht tpd.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name

and that seems to be the one that's remained until today. Who knows what it'll be tomorrow.

It's a myth that it's a myth that Apache was named that. From their website, the FAQ originally said this:
http://apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name">http:// web.archive.org/web/19980128114236/http://apache.o rg/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name
And then said this:
http://www.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name">htt p://web.archive.org/web/20000815061003/http://www. apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name
Then they changed it to:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name">h ttp://web.archive.org/web/20021017033945/http://ht tpd.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name
Now they're trying to get rid of something they've perpetuated for years:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name">h ttp://web.archive.org/web/20030603200610/http://ht tpd.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#name

and that seems to be the one that's remained until today. Who knows what it'll be tomorrow.

Its all fun and games until... someone combines the two and makes a fun game. Here are from stats from a match in a wardriving game my friends and I ran a few years ago: http://web.archive.org/web/20040210184050/www.driv ebyctf.com/stats.php?game=6 Instructions here (archive.org, sorry, I'm poor). Required a strong hand at the wheel and a keen ear on the midi blips for signal -- four laptops in each car and a lot of fun.

Its all fun and games until... someone combines the two and makes a fun game. Here are from stats from a match in a wardriving game my friends and I ran a few years ago: http://web.archive.org/web/20040210184050/www.driv ebyctf.com/stats.php?game=6 Instructions here (archive.org, sorry, I'm poor). Required a strong hand at the wheel and a keen ear on the midi blips for signal -- four laptops in each car and a lot of fun.

What I hopping to see is lots of cheap old good obscure not mainstream movies. Those movies are hard to find in local video stores and expensive to buy. That situation sucks.

Absolutely on the mark. Problem is, the copyright extensions Disney keep getting will always keep a lot of good material away from the public domain. If you haven't found it yet, try here for a few interesting movies which haven't been locked away. http://www.archive.org/details/movies The biggest section by far is the open-source movies, which shows how much creativity is being stifled by over-restrictive copyright.

1998: Linux will be ready for the desktop next year!

No kidding. Fire up the wayback machine!
http://web.archive.org/web/19981111190256/http://s lashdot.org/
(Look at the second from bottom)

Meh.
I would say that the wayback machine disagrees with you. I could not find ANYTHING on the archived grokster site snapshots promoting illegal activites, and i went all the way back to the start of 2004.
Based on this, I hurl an ${INSULT} at your ${REVERED}, and an "Unfair" at your moderator.

I define art as a anything that is a form of self expression. Many years ago, as part of another discussion on the art of programming, I presented the following artpiece:

I have a special affinity for metaphor and work that hold multiple layers of meaning and interpretation. This was my interpretation of the program.

Here's some flashback to late 97 for ya'll. http://web.archive.org/web/19971221012817/http://s lashdot.org/ Rikki

Wrong.

That fake news article quotes a genuine ESR quote for comic effect (because it is very, very funny indeed). The original quote comes from an opinion piece that ESR wrote for American Prospect magazine. The original article is no longer on line, but you newbies can read it using the Wayback Machine... http://web.archive.org/web/20000510011639/http://w ww.prospect.org/controversy/open_source/raymond-e- 1.html

Now fuck off.

Archive.org has a great video on a "physically-based, deformable, 3D" virtual brush developed by the University of North Carolina that allows artists to paint as naturally on a computer as they would on a canvas.

Via the wayback machine:

http://web.archive.org/web/20041010162025/http://w ww.kurzweilai.net/meme/frame.html?main=/articles/a rt0588.html

Good thing the essays are 2yrs old: http://web.archive.org/web/20031002224057/http://w ww.kurzweilai.net/RayKurzweilReader.pdf

working link to video:
http://web.archive.org/web/20031009011950/http://s iroz.free.fr/vidz/dctf.wmv

Does anyone have links to the first 5 (if it is even still legal to download them from anywhere)?

Anyway, this sort of thing is very cool. I have not listened to much Beethoven (aside from bits and peices in movies and such), so something like this is an excellent opportunity. If anyone knows any places to legally download performances of other classics, please post them.

I love getting free, good music from the internet. The Internet Achive's Audio section is my very good friend, as is LegalTorrents. Granted, that is completely different music from this, but still it is awesome to be able to enjoy music being made by people who love making music more than making money.

Yeh, we did it years ago. The first non-IANA domain was the "dot" TLD.

Download it right here free and legal!
Plan 9 is public domain! I am watching it right now.

q

q

The majority of these titles are available at http://www.archive.org/details/feature_films . Additionally I've been distributing the MPEG2 format via Bittorrent at http://torrents.pdmdb.org/

too lazy to link. Hint: it's at atchive.org

Too lazy to proofread as well, apparently. Here: archive.org
:P

For a while there was a Bitpasss-enabled provider: 99 Cent Movies: http://www.ninety-nine-cent-movies.com/ but the URL doesn't workanymore.

The original site was flash based, so there's nothing to see at Archive.org from their spidering on May 13, 2004.

No. However, it is not even remotely clear it was joking. Examinating the Internet Archive shows that the comment about this being a "parody" was added within the last 8 months; it may well have been added since the verdict. While the "musings" section it was under before it was unlinked from the front of his homepage (in roughtly the middle of 2003) is hardly on par with his "serious writings", the other musings are not exactly lists of lightbulb jokes or StarTrek slashfic, but rather more abstract pieces of still reasonably serious thought.

Furthermore, the time between statement and action is far shorter than you pretend. Bit torrent was first released in 2001; Bram is claiming that this screed was first released in 1999. However, after checking Google (as the blogosphere rapidly pollutes), Google's Usenet archive, and the Wayback Machine, I see no independent evidence of publication prior to Bittorrent coming on the scene circa 2001.

Also are the writers at Wired psychic? Did they look into his head and know what his "intent" was?

He stated flat out that he "built systems to [...] commit digital piracy" himself. Whether his intent with the article was parody or whether it was an honest assessment of his purposes would be a question of fact, which ergo must be determined by a jury. It would also be worth noting that his other conduct has been consistent with this manefesto; EG, "I release my code and writings freely, and publish all of my ideas early to make them unpatentable."

Intent is extreemly difficult to prove without a trail of acts all leading in the same direction. One statement does not a trail make.

Oh, agreed. But "the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step". This isn't fatal, but it's bad. There may be further evidence; I haven't been able to find any archive of the early BitTorrent developement mailing lists, but I'm not being paid $35 an hour as a paralegal researcher to do so.

Even if he intended the software for illegal use, that doesn't make the act of writing or even distributing it illegal.

No; promoting it for such use does.

Held: One who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, going beyond mere distribution with knowledge of third-party action, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties using the device, regardless of the device's lawful uses. MGM v. Grokster.

Now, whether this constitutes evidence of promotion is a question that must be left to a jury. It does, however, seem a useful piece for the building of a case... although I am neither a Lawyer nor Judge to be certain.

A copyright violation did not occur until the first person transfered the first piece of copyrighted data. Then that person is PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE for the act.

True, and nothing will diminish that individual's personal responsibilty. However, this does not make Brad (arguably) ethically or (more important) legally immune from responsibility for his actions that led to this act. The concept of "accessory before the fact" exists in law and ethics alike; in which if these two disciplines are you arguing? (For details on the concept of contributory and vicarious copyright infringement, I suggest you refer to the milestone Fonovisa v. Cherry Auction case, along with the above cited MGM v. Grokster.)

Based on what you have written, if a person says, "I want to rob a bank." and they even post a few sec

A Torturer's Account I like the Isolation torture technique best. It crushes 'em every time. I stand in a big open field. The girl's flown in with a helicopter. It's big and noisy in there, so she's real scared. Or maybe she likes it. She's getting fucked anyway. A couple guys drag her out of the helicopter and get back in and take off. I take out a legal book like I'm all official. So I start talking. "It says here that you are to be subdued and violated. I don't like fucking bitches like you so don't count on not getting seriously hurt. I do what it says right here, and it doesn't matter if I like it." Of course that's total bullshit. I'm the best, so I can fuck up any captured bitch I want. I pick 'em out of a list and do whatever I want to 'em. Sometimes my weiner boss wants me to mess with some girl I don't like. I've had to nail some seriously nasty ass bitches. I don't care. Shit happens. So anyhow, I finish talking. "Now we both know what's gonna happen here, so you can make this easy or you can make this hard. I'm gonna count to ten, and whether you're standing right here or halfway out there, I'm gonna catch you and fuck you." Sometimes she runs and I get to fight her. Sometimes she stands there and makes it easy. "One. "Two ..." Life is good. by Bram Cohen April 1998

It's on the same site. Surely it's a no-brainer that this is all fiction.

Unfortunately, if you look at the Internet Archive of the website, and make your way though the various broken links to find the different vesions of the agenda, you'll see that this "parody" is not labeled as such until recently.... more recently than the archive shows, in fact. Perhaps changed after the ruling came down? Furthermore, it has been delinked from his current home page, although it used to reside under "Musings."

This leaves judging the intent problematic. While the other "musings" are not so serious as the "serious writings", they're not complete fluff either. This isn't going to be a laughing matter if it goes to court.

What becomes more important for the BitTorrent project is the extent to which Brad's demonstrated intentions may be taken as evidence for the intentions of other developers who worked with him on the project, a point which I was discussing in the followup to the case with someone.

Unfortunately, if you look at the Internet Archive of the website, and make your way though the various broken links to find the different vesions of the agenda, you'll see that this "parody" is not labeled as such until recently.... more recently than the archive shows, in fact. Perhaps changed after the ruling came down? Furthermore, it has been delinked from his current home page, although it used to reside under "Musings."

This leaves judging the intent problematic. While the other "musings" are not so serious as the "serious writings", they're not complete fluff either. This isn't going to be a laughing matter if it goes to court.

What becomes more important for the BitTorrent project is the extent to which Brad's demonstrated intentions may be taken as evidence for the intentions of other developers who worked with him on the project, a point which I was discussing in the followup to the case with someone.

http://web.archive.org/web/20010710021853/bitconju rer.org/a_torturers_account.html

He also wrote that. He was pretty fucked up. But that doesn't make his software bad.

From Bram's archive.org site:
http://web.archive.org/web/20010812035637/bitconju rer.org/a_torturers_account.html

"I like the Isolation torture technique best. It crushes 'em every time.

I stand in a big open field. The girl's flown in with a helicopter. It's big and noisy in there, so she's real scared. Or maybe she likes it. She's getting fucked anyway. ...

Sometimes she runs and I get to fight her. Sometimes she stands there and makes it easy.

One.

Two ...

Life is good."

Could stories like this one be used as proof that his website was all "fantasy" and he wasn't expressing ideas he truely would act upon?

Of course if you RTFA and follow the link Bram's Page http://web.archive.org/web/20010710021553/http://b itconjurer.org/index.html> then you will see that this Technological Activist's manifesto is under the heading Musings, an obvious joke...

"Robots.txt Query Exclusion.

We're sorry, access to http://www.healthmarketscience.com/customers/custo mers.html has been blocked by the site owner via robots.txt"

If you read http://geeksunite.net/outrage.pdf, his letter to the company, robots.txt is NOT used by their software. It IS on their site, so yes, they know about it.

Her name is Slave. After I created her I started by hitting her constantly for about 5 minutes. Then I taught her all the words(using the SST) so it would be easier to make her scared of her surroundings. After she knew all the words, I placed her in a small area, surrounded by the FF Cob, with 5 Grendels. I left her there for about 20 minutes, beating her when she attempted to defend herself from the Grendels. After she was sufficiently traumatized, I put her back in the garden. In the Garden I forced her to Get, Look, Push and Pull everything around her, all the time, constantly beating her. I made her fear running so I wouldn't have to deal with that little problem(you fellow torturers out there know how annoying it is to chase them down once they get away). I also forced her to eat weeds, rewarding her when she did so. At the time I exported her, she's a quivering mass of fear. She might eat, if you're lucky, but she probably won't survive long enough for food to do any good.

To Wright, one of the most memorable albums told the story of a woman's abusive relationship and how she eventually got out of it. But a search on the Sims Exchange of the word "abuse" reveals that Sims albums have become a common therapeutic tool. All told, 63 albums deal with abuse issues.

Her name is Slave. After I created her I started by hitting her constantly for about 5 minutes. Then I taught her all the words(using the SST) so it would be easier to make her scared of her surroundings. After she knew all the words, I placed her in a small area, surrounded by the FF Cob, with 5 Grendels. I left her there for about 20 minutes, beating her when she attempted to defend herself from the Grendels. After she was sufficiently traumatized, I put her back in the garden. In the Garden I forced her to Get, Look, Push and Pull everything around her, all the time, constantly beating her. I made her fear running so I wouldn't have to deal with that little problem(you fellow torturers out there know how annoying it is to chase them down once they get away). I also forced her to eat weeds, rewarding her when she did so. At the time I exported her, she's a quivering mass of fear. She might eat, if you're lucky, but she probably won't survive long enough for food to do any good.

To Wright, one of the most memorable albums told the story of a woman's abusive relationship and how she eventually got out of it. But a search on the Sims Exchange of the word "abuse" reveals that Sims albums have become a common therapeutic tool. All told, 63 albums deal with abuse issues.

a) Java was DESIGNED for embedded systems, first and foremost. That's why it is hardware-agnostic; because it allows the hardware makers to throw in whatever chips are cheap in bulk at the time, change on a whim, and still push out the same upgrade to everyone. Being cross-platform in the MacOS/Linux/Windows way was just sort of a side-effect. Think about how much this will benefit set-top manufacturers!!

You can argue it was designed for embedded, but I won't. That was its original intention- I don't know about saying it was designed for embedded. Because Java is not open, "your slap Java on any chip" sounds great until you need a VM. Sure, there are nice free attempts, but you still have problems without your slow, memory hogging VM. Might as well screw deterministic memory- something more than necessary with realtime embedded systems. There are some nice attempts though- I've seen a theoretical maximum of 300 ms in some places for "sitting around" which isn't half bad. Show me a embedded device with a Java device driver. What about an unlaughable scheduler? Directly interfacing with interrupts? Anyhow, it's fun to go back and see how Sun at least had an embedded link compared to now. Where's it going?

b) Java isn't interpreted anymore... its just-in-time compiled and then executed as native code. A bit of a start-up pause while the classes compile, that's all.

Maybe JIT moved Java from being fully interpreted, but it's still interpreted and "compiled" at runtime making it theoretically (a.k.a Javaly) and realistically on average always slower and more of a memory hog than unnamed alternatives, that's all. But, sometimes that's ok right? Look at how Java has taken over the desktop application market where that least matters. How many Java desktop applications do you run? Can you tell it's Java? If programming will always be hard, one might wonder what skeletons in the closets Java fanatics have at the price of conformity to an interface. Java version incompatibilities, buggy VMs, oh my.

The key word in the term "prior art" is prior. Amazon has claimed that they were the first to implement this system. There is an easy way to prove them wrong.

Wasn't Amazon actually the first to come up with this system? If not, head over to the internet archive and show us the prior art! Everything is obvious once someone has shown it to you.

347 petabytes = ? Libraries of Congress

The Library of Congress (20 million books, not counting pictures) - 20 terabytes - (http://web.archive.org/web/20001101043610/http:// archive.org/14terabytes.html)

347 petabytes = 355 328 terabytes

355 328/ 20 = 371.4 Libraries of Congress

From archive.org: Experiments in the Revival of Organisms 1940 Producer: Techfilm Studio, Moscow Sponsor: Soviet Film Agency This disturbing film records the successful experiments in the resuscitation of life to dead animals (dogs), as conducted by Dr. S.S. Bryukhonenko at the Institute of Experimental Physiology and Therapy, Voronezh, U.S.S.R. Director: D.I. Yashin. Camera: E.V. Kashina. Narrator: Professor Walter B. Cannon. Introduced by Professor J.B.S. Haldane. Descriptors: Animals: Dogs; Medicine: Veterinary: Experiments; Life extension Run time: 19:31 Color/B&W: B&W Silent/Sound: Sd Download: DivX 4.11 http://ftp.archive.org/movies/divx/19635.avi (67.8 MB) MPEG-2 http://ftp.archive.org/movies/mpeg2/19635.mpg (541.2 MB) Streaming: DSL/Cable http://barbra-public.alexa.com:8080/ramgen/net/mov ie1/0/pub/movies/realbb/19635.rm Dialup http://barbra-public.alexa.com:8080/ramgen/net/mov ie1/0/pub/movies/reallb/19635.rm

From archive.org: Experiments in the Revival of Organisms 1940 Producer: Techfilm Studio, Moscow Sponsor: Soviet Film Agency This disturbing film records the successful experiments in the resuscitation of life to dead animals (dogs), as conducted by Dr. S.S. Bryukhonenko at the Institute of Experimental Physiology and Therapy, Voronezh, U.S.S.R. Director: D.I. Yashin. Camera: E.V. Kashina. Narrator: Professor Walter B. Cannon. Introduced by Professor J.B.S. Haldane. Descriptors: Animals: Dogs; Medicine: Veterinary: Experiments; Life extension Run time: 19:31 Color/B&W: B&W Silent/Sound: Sd Download: DivX 4.11 http://ftp.archive.org/movies/divx/19635.avi (67.8 MB) MPEG-2 http://ftp.archive.org/movies/mpeg2/19635.mpg (541.2 MB) Streaming: DSL/Cable http://barbra-public.alexa.com:8080/ramgen/net/mov ie1/0/pub/movies/realbb/19635.rm Dialup http://barbra-public.alexa.com:8080/ramgen/net/mov ie1/0/pub/movies/reallb/19635.rm

The Soviets did this in the 40s. http://movies02.archive.org/2/movies/Experime1940/

As posted above:

http://www.archive.org/details/Experime1940

Here is a link to the Prelinger Archives which shows "the successful experiments in the resuscitation of life to dead animals (dogs), as conducted by Dr. S.S. Bryukhonenko at the Institute of Experimental Physiology and Therapy, Voronezh, U.S.S.R." It is probably fake, but it is old (circa 1940's), wierd and applicable to the the topic. movie link http://www.archive.org/details/Experime1940

The Russians did the same thing in 1940.

Ad the list below to your hosts file
Windows host file
C:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts
C:\wi nnt\system32\drivers\etc\hosts
Unix like: /etc/hosts

The comment filter blocks me from listing them all..
http://web.archive.org/web/20040602203242/someonew hocares.org/hosts/

is a link to a host file that will block all doublecraps ads ;)

Check out The PetaBox page at The Internet Archive.
That page has been around for years, and their forum talks about many of the things they went through. They custom-built the cases, and they couple nodes together, and they are mirrors of each other. If one fails, the other copy is still there. Not to mention the copies in other geographic locations. This also isn't just "one large file system". Each drive is a separate filesystem, and they serve the files up via standard means such as FTP and HTTP. (There is a UDP-based locator protocol they wrote as well, to find data in the massive amount of storage.)

It shouldn't! But if it tried, it wouldn't, unless they forgot to deny themselves in their robot.txt file. Which they did.

An archived copy. I don't see why it's so offensive. God Angrily Clarifies 'Don't Kill' Rule is particularly good.

An archived copy. I don't see why it's so offensive. God Angrily Clarifies 'Don't Kill' Rule is particularly good.

From what I have read, it would appear that they are using the fair use exclusion along with (possibly) the DMCA's network-provider loophole. I would guess that they're using the network-provider loophole based on the text of their copyright policy here (scroll to the bottom). The way the DMCA exclusion works is that they have to fix copyright infringement as soon as they're notified, and that looks like what they're asking for (and making it as difficult as they're legally allowed to, I might add).