Slashdot Mirror

The hard part is trying to figure out who are really independent studios. Miramax bills itself as an independent, but it's in bed with Disney. Castle Rock Entertainment does the same, but it's owned by Time/Warner.

So far Artisan, New Line, October, Republic Pictures, Lions Gate and Stratosphere all look MPAA-free. If anyone knows for sure and can provide links to the effect, please email me at findcss@usa.net. I want to get this list up as soon as possible.

Defendent #46

The hard part is trying to figure out who are really independent studios. Miramax bills itself as an independent, but it's in bed with Disney. Castle Rock Entertainment does the same, but it's owned by Time/Warner.

So far Artisan, New Line, October, Republic Pictures, Lions Gate and Stratosphere all look MPAA-free. If anyone knows for sure and can provide links to the effect, please email me at findcss@usa.net. I want to get this list up as soon as possible.

Defendent #46

I won't quote the Constitution for you, since that's about the easiest thing to look up on the internet. But 1. one of the things guaranteed to every American is the RIGHT to a trial by jury over any criminal proceedings, and more importantly to us, any dispute involving a sum of 20$ or more. (IANAL, so don't quote me, just read it yourself, thats what it says.) 2. That's not just any jury. Its a jury of peers. In other words, In a case like this DeCSS fiasco, a jury of folks who know how to at least code. Otherwise they could not be considered peers in context, now, could they?(And lets face it, if the least of the defendants' knowledge of information technology were equated to one of the Great Lakes, the judge's knowledge would have to equate to a thimbleful. So WHO SHOULD"VE DEMANDED A TRIAL BY JURY? Prejudiced/Paid For judges are the very reason juries exist. Just my humble opinion. (sorry, Flame Off.) 3. Any juror has the RIGHT and DUTY to vote "Not Guilty" if for any reason they feel that the defendant is not guilty, reguardless of any law on the books. What this means is that if there is a law in Turkeypoot, Arkansas that says you will be fined 20$ for spitting on the sidewalk and George spits on the sidewalk, if you are on the jury and you don't think george is guilty of a crime even if he did spit on the sidewalk, you are obligated to vote "Not Guilty". Doing so, George gets out of the fine, but more importantly, a major blow has been struck against the stupid blue law that prevents people from spitting on the sidewalk. Our Founding Fathers believed (rightly,) that it is better for a criminal to walk free than for an inocent man to be punished. Next time, it probably wouldn't even make it to court, because it will result in no fine again. Eventually the law gets striken dead. This is the forgotten beauty of the Justice System. It is the check that keeps judges and lawyers and bureaucrats in place. Now that you know, don't blame anyone but yourself if you don't stand up for your American Rights. This is a govornment of the people, for the people, BY THE PEOPLE! Do your part. Only the people (us) can shut these big corps down. To learn more about your duty as an American Citizen, read The Citizen's Rulebook and Jury Handbook. I am sure that you will enjoy the read, and it is right on topic. Don't worry about it being a geocity page, there's no popups. Fight the Good fight.

You're not legally entitled to videotape your favorite television program to watch later when you're home.

You're not legally entitled to encode your legally purchased CD's into .MP3 format for your own use.

You're not legally entitled to photocopy an article you find in the library about cancer, which you were collecting because a family member is dying.

You're not legally entitled to use a video capture card to capture a video frame from the Matrix VHS tape you just bought, to use as computer wallpaper for your own use.

Every DVD that rolls out has words to this effect:

"WARNING: The program contained in this DVD is authorized for private home use only. All other rights are retained by the copyright proprietor."

These words came from by "The Terminator" DVD. Even though the DVD case advises me to store the disk under cool, dry conditions, this doesn't seem to be a condition of copyright. So as long as the DVD is used in the privacy of my own home, who the hell are you or the MPAA to say exactly how I use it?

If I decide to watch it, that's my business. If I decide to decrypt it, compress it under a new system I've invented, and store four or five of them on my hard drive that's my business. If I want to burn these on Super-Duper-CD and view them on my laptop at work, that's my business. If I want to wipe my ass with it and tie it to my forehead, that's my business.

It's called fair use, and it works pretty well. The only real alternative - eliminating fair use, which the DMCA seems to do - takes us down a long slippery slope into a world where everything is pay-per-view. Is that what you want?

Defendent #46

Get The Stevenson Paper In Word 97/RTF Formats Here!

Under Kaplan's definition of "DeCSS", he mentioned the Distribution Contest from awhile back. He also mentions that the winner of the contest was awarded with "copies of DVD's". EXCUSE ME? This gives the impression that a group of hacker kids gave away burned copies of DVD's as prizes - not true, AFAIK. Especially since Eric Raymond was one of the judges.

Why hasn't the news hit Slashdot that Linus Torvalds blasted the DVD CCA in his LinuxWorld keynote yesterday? Linuxtoday.org has been carrying the news all day; I'm surprised it hasn't made it here.

The Word 97 and RTF versions of the Stevenson whitepaper are now online. You can grab them at this site.

Defendent #46

Look up the law yourself at The U.S. House of Representatives.

Defendent #46

I will post my mods sans my password :-) up on my website here when I get around to it. (Up to an hour after comment post). Meanwhile, you can still get the original ball right here.

Ken

I will post my mods sans my password :-) up on my website here when I get around to it. (Up to an hour after comment post). Meanwhile, you can still get the original ball right here.

Ken

Up at my website (err, here) is a mirror of some software written for Linux (err, Unix) to allow you to tunnel IP packets through the service. Yes, it's real. You may run into some trouble with using pthreads. I am actively working on the code. Does anyone know the issues with pthreads and glibc 2.1 (it compiles fine; it segfaults after running for about a minute; I've traced this to one specific function call)? By the way, it's written in C++ (yuck for me; one virtual function made it not work at all for a while).

Just because AOL is generally considered a "newbie's" "ISP" doesn't mean that all of its users are newbies. It also does not mean that none of them use Unix. I am not a newbie, I use Linux, and I happen to use AOL as an ISP for other reasons.

The great thing about this software is it is not at all intrusive on your system. Just one client program, maybe a shell script (haven't figured that much out yet), and a network interface. Maybe you might have to change your default route. Big deal. It doesn't mess with apmd. It'll leave cron alone. You can keep your dial-up settings for Quake. Very nice.

Kenneth

http://freshmeat.net/appindex/1999/12/19/945613594 .html
------------------------------------------------ --
Fork Bomb Defuser
Rohit Singh - December 19th 1999, 09:26 EST

Fork Bomb Defuser is an easily loadable kernel module for Linux which detects, logs, and disables "fork bombs". It allows you to configure max_forks_per_second and max_tasks_per_user parameters at module load time. Any possible fork bomb that attempts to spawn a huge number of processes simultaneously is detected in real time,
and the fork bomb is disabled.

http://www.geocitie s.com/SiliconValley/Software/9197/rexfbd.htm

You're the hero of my wet dreams. Naked and petrified , of course.

I guess another thing to consider,too, is why you're learning to code in the first place.

If you're completly new to coding, Pascal is a bloody good language to teach you fundamentals: loops, iteration, variables, functions etc.

Heaps of "learn x in 24 hours" book forget these fundamentals, and I have debugged a shitload of code written by finance geeks that could have been a lot more concise and efficient if they had known the benefits of using functions rather than retyping a whole bunch of code every time they wanted to add a few columns of numbers.

I'd have to say C++ is a horrible language to learn as a first language. There are sooo many "advancd features" like operator overloading, all sorts of class issues (try explaing friends to someone who just learned the difference between x++ and ++x.

In fact, even if you're an experienced coder learning OO techniques, C++ can be confusing. I remember my second year at university going from simple little MacPascal programs to C++ on DOS and Unix machines. It put me off coding for a long time.

I'm not sure what the design flaws in Java are, but it has been pretty easy to pick up for a guy who previously maintained code written in xBase, VB, Delphi and plain ol' procedural C.

I've also heard Python is a good language to learn good OO techniques.

I'd say unless you really, really, really need to learn C++, stay away!

OT:Anyone using Java with MPW on a Mac? Mail me and tell me what you think.

Tristrom Cooke has been collecting votes for the top sci-fi/fantasy novels for years. Over 2500 voters later, Tristrom has a weekly-updated, weighted average list of the most popular books. See the latest list at THE INTERNET TOP 100 SF/FANTASY LIST. I've been reading my way down this list and have found a lot of winners (as well as a few duds).

I have discovered a whole slew of secrets that have been uncovered here involving IBM.

Yes, but these are not the people who concern themselves with decisions regarding space exploration, are they? You also need to be careful how you define poverty - as one might expect, the definition varies from place to place. US$3000 might not sound like much, but for someone in a middle-income nation with such an income, it is plenty for survival and possibly a good deal more. Yes, most people in the world are far too poor to live in New York City or London. But then, most Europeans and Americans would fall into that category as well. Your view demonstrates exactly the narrowness you accuse me of.

You are trying to shift the argument towards the better off. Considering the subject matter and the plight of the victims this is nothing less than a crime against humanity.

When I said poverty I was talking about real poverty. Not about relative poverty, and not about relative purchasing power. I was most certainly not talking about "most Europeans and Americans". I was not talking about people with US$3000. Most people in the developing countries don't have anywhere near that amount of money.

For example, according to 1995 statistics (the most recent I have to hand)...65% - near as dammit two-thirds - of the worlds population lives in countries where the average annual income is less than US$1000. Lets focus this a little more sharply, shall we? 54% of the world's population - more than half - live in countries where the average annual income is less than US$500. This comprises 36 countries with a combined population of almost 3 billion souls. And the average annual income of this three billion is just US$380. That's just over a dollar a day.

You are clearly talking out of your ass. You can't manage more than a hand-to-mouth existence on that sum, in any country. And remember that the poorest of these are considerably worse off even than that.

They are welcome to industrialize. Of course, industrialization works best under a stable government, something most of the world has never seen fit to provide for itself.

This puts me in mind of Marie Antionette's famous social remedy: "Let them eat cake". "Let them industrialize" you say. With what? It takes money to fund the building of factories, an adequate transportation and communications infrastructure etc. Those that were able to industrialize with the available outside help have already done so. (The others can't attract sufficient aid because they don't have anything the West wants that the West isn't already taking).

But for those who have industrialized, guess where the bulk of the profits goes? Let me give you a clue. It doesn't go to the country hosting the industry.

And before you try to argue that this is impossible, think back 200-250 years to industrialization in Europe. Where did the foreign aid come from?

It's obvious that you don't know the answer to this question or you wouldn't have mentioned it. European industrialization was funded by the surplus already present in the booming European economies. Now where did that surplus come from? It came from overseas "trade" which was in fact almost universally, the centuries-long robbing of raw materials from less developed countries in Africa, India, the Far East, and latterly the Americas and Australasia. Not to mention kidnapped slave labour from the West coast of Africa. The biggest employer in Great Britain for two hundred years was the East India Company, whose sole purpose was the transfer of wealth from the Asian subcontinent to England.

This has been basic high-school geography in most civilised countries for decades now. Did you even go to school?

What industrial nation's universities trained the Europeans? Hmmm...nobody!!! They did it on their own. Not because they are better human beings but because they decided to stop the bullshit and do something useful.

You talk as if the Europeans were doing the rest of the world a favour by robbing them, enslaving them etc. The remark about universities is a red herring. At the time of the agrarian and industrial revolutions, there were no practical subjects being taught in universities. In fact there was very little formal science involved in the development of the key technologies. It was trial-and-error engineering performed by enthusiasts, funded by rich aristocratic sponsors.

I'd also remind you that the industrial revolution could only take place in countries which already had adequate transportation infrastructure (roads, an overseas shipping network), abundant cheap access to a wide range of raw materials and established overseas markets. But most of these things came from the exploitation of less developed countries.

Without funding there can be no progress. How can you develop an industry if you have no access to transportation, lack most of the raw materials, the world's markets are protected by colonial powers with large armies and navies to enforce their dominance, and you are too busy anyway trying to scrape a living off the land you tenant, while you are forced to pay 75% of what you can make to your white landlord?

What did we do after we'd secured our head start, then? Did we share? Did we hand back what we'd taken? Did we hell. We colonized those countries and governed them ourselves. Any blame for their lack of progress up to the middle of the 20th century therefore lies squarely with the colonial powers. The countries of the third world were denied even the opportunity to take control of their own destiny until they began demanding their freedom after the second world war.

Yes, the foundations came from the Greeks, Arabs, and Chinese (among others). But everyone started on equal footing - after all, somewhere, sometime there had to be a first set of humans, all others descended from them. So anyone anywhere can make the same decision.

Maybe we did all start on an equal footing but that soon changed when Europeans decided to take what they wanted from other less greedy countries by force.

But they'd rather fight each other over a few square kilometers of worthless desert somewhere (no specific reference intended).

When resources are limited, societies fight amongst themselves for dominion over what little there is. This is not a feature of skin colour or climate. It is a feature of being poor.

You completely astound me. Not only with the profundity of your ignorance, but with the amazing stupidity it must take to make such sweeping and critical statements without any knowledge of the subject whatever. I only hope this exchange will serve as a lesson to those of similar education who have so far prudently remained silent.

Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction

Read this article from Tape/Disc Magazine, October 1996. It discusses the issues surrounding the forthcoming DVD format and the technology used to protect it - what would later be known as CSS.

We all know that the reason weak encryption was put into place was to comply with U.S. export restrictions. But what you might not know it that the DVD industry knew full well that the encryption would be cracked. They knew it three years before it happened.

Read the quote yourself:

'While the second proposal may not pass the test of import/export regulation concerning encryption technology, Matsushita's documentation says "It is extremely difficult to gain access to the data scramble/key encryption algorithm." However, a member of the CPTWG says "The Matsushita method would be easy to break. Legislation and licensing would be necessary to enforce the inclusion of copy protection and to criminalize the manufacture of circumvention devices."'

There's a bigger issue here, folks - it's about whether we want to allow corporations to pass legislation. The DMCA was passed for one reason and one reason only - to give the DVD industry a legal safety net when the CSS encryption was inevitably broken.

In short, Title 17 of the U.S. Code was rewritten in order to rush DVD's to market. The DVD industry couldn't wait until export restrictions loosened, and they refused to consider other protection methods. They chose instead to lobby Congress to rewrite the laws to suit short term financial priorities.

It's a war now, and we need to be out in the streets. Print flyers and distribute them. Write letters to editors. Talk to people. Set the facts straight. Let the people know that we're not a bunch of teenage thieves doing this for the thrill of it. Show them that most of us are IT professionals.

We're not going to win this by going up against Valenti directly, and frankly, we're not going to win this in court if the DMCA holds. The MPAA helped design this bat - they know how to swing it, and they've been practicing for over three years. We need to create such public discussion over the constitutionality of the DMCA that the focus of the debate is shifted.

Repeal the DMCA. Tattoo it on your forehead - Repeal the DMCA. Mutter it in your sleep - REPEAL THE DMCA. Scream it from the rooftops - REPEAL THE DMCA.

http://www.geocities.com/SiliconVa lley/Port/3224

Hi! I would like to be turned to stone!

My name is Jessica Alba, and I'm a hot young actress!

Please mail me your free booklet so that I may take advantage of your 60-day, money back guarantee!

There's a picture in Hal Layer's collection, or check out Deep Space Tech if you want to buy one.

And of course, we have to have the obligatory Linux on NeXT link.

You can hear it in wav format as well (from this page).

Alex Bischoff
---

I'm his greatest fan, and every night I dream of Signal 11 naked and petrified . So don't go calling him a dork!

The only way, I'd say, to mobilize public support needed for 'going outer space' the old-fashioned, exploring way, is when there's another war or semi-war were 'we' need to get 'there' before 'they' do (whoever and where-ever).

That's the politicians' view of Americans and it is biased. Americans are pioneers, not politicians.

Side note: If you look back in the Congressional Record, you'll find a lot more support for NASA funding from the Congress than was coming from the Executive during the post Apollo 11 era. This is something that rarely gets mentioned, but it does say something about what "the people" wanted vs what "the government" wanted.

That, not the spinning off romance, was the reason for the Apollo Project in the first place

You're right that government, as pointed out in my congressional testimony, pursued the Apollo project for those reasons.

However, you're dead wrong that pursuing frontiers is merely "spinning off romance". For many Americans, perhaps even most of the first generation immigrants, coming to the American frontier was a matter of life and death.

The only way, I'd say, to mobilize public support needed for 'going outer space' the old-fashioned, exploring way, is when there's another war or semi-war were 'we' need to get 'there' before 'they' do (whoever and where-ever).

That's the politicians' view of Americans and it is biased. Americans are pioneers, not politicians.

Side note: If you look back in the Congressional Record, you'll find a lot more support for NASA funding from the Congress than was coming from the Executive during the post Apollo 11 era. This is something that rarely gets mentioned, but it does say something about what "the people" wanted vs what "the government" wanted.

That, not the spinning off romance, was the reason for the Apollo Project in the first place

You're right that government, as pointed out in my congressional testimony, pursued the Apollo project for those reasons.

However, you're dead wrong that pursuing frontiers is merely "spinning off romance". For many Americans, perhaps even most of the first generation immigrants, coming to the American frontier was a matter of life and death.

The only way, I'd say, to mobilize public support needed for 'going outer space' the old-fashioned, exploring way, is when there's another war or semi-war were 'we' need to get 'there' before 'they' do (whoever and where-ever).

That's the politicians' view of Americans and it is biased. Americans are pioneers, not politicians.

Side note: If you look back in the Congressional Record, you'll find a lot more support for NASA funding from the Congress than was coming from the Executive during the post Apollo 11 era. This is something that rarely gets mentioned, but it does say something about what "the people" wanted vs what "the government" wanted.

That, not the spinning off romance, was the reason for the Apollo Project in the first place

You're right that government, as pointed out in my congressional testimony, pursued the Apollo project for those reasons.

However, you're dead wrong that pursuing frontiers is merely "spinning off romance". For many Americans, perhaps even most of the first generation immigrants, coming to the American frontier was a matter of life and death.

And again, I don't like it. I want him naked and petrified .

And I don't like it. I want him naked and petrified .

we're winning the war, mother fucker

Hey, there's a beginning QT player/library at
QT stuff. Has it's own
codecs though (motion-JPEG and others). It might be a start
for others. I've written a player that uses it,
but my player is evil and doesn't work well.
Dunno if this helps.

Also FWIW, a system to handle binary codecs would
be a goodness. I'm working on one now. There's one in
xanim but IMHO it's too xanim-specific.... Ciao!

The link I posted in the first message is rather outdated. Please use this address instead to visit the list as of 1/27/00:

http://www.geocities.com/Ar ea51/Cavern/6113/t100196.txt

I have been trying to read my way down this list:

http://www.geocities.com/Ar ea51/Cavern/6113/t100189.txt

The Internet Top 100 SF/Fantasy list as ranked by 2,641 voters. It also ranks some of the more popular series and the individual books WITHIN that series.

I can't say that I agree with all the choices, but it is a good place to look for inspiration before visiting a bookstore.

The California case is moot. It's a trade secret case that doesn't have impact outside of California. It's the federal DMCA case we really need to be watching; that's the scary one.

What's extremely interesting is that Judge Kaplan in New York is applying the DMCA only against executable code; he's making the distinction between machine-readable executable code and "non-executable programmer's comments", which can be argued to be a fair description of source code. He's essentially saying that machine-readable code is not covered as free speech and that no one is asking to crack down on "comments".

The line he seems to be drawing (page 77-78 of transcript ) is at direct executability. If that holds, it's even another ace for open source - source code will be considered free speech (i.e., not a "device") under the DMCA.

Wouldn't it be ironic if it turns out that the most-hated DMCA actually becomes the best friend the free software community ever had?

Defendent #46

www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Po rt/3224

Read the transcript and look at page 77, lines 7 to 25.

This case is not about css-auth, but about DeCSS, a Windows binary executable. Kaplan makes the firm distinction between "programmer's comments" and "machine instructions". The distinction he makes is that one is directly executable - and therefore is closer to a "device" than an intellectual expression - and the other is not. His point is that a set of machine instructions has limited expressiveness, as it is primarily meant to be interpreted by a machine and not a human being. It is therefore not, in his opinion, necessarily protected as free speech.

The important distinction here is that source code is not directly executable by a machine. It must be compiled; until then it is no different from a written mathematical formula. Source code is not directly discussed in this hearing transcript - the debate is between executable code and "programmer's comments". But even if Kaplan's reading of the DMCA holds, and direct executability is the critical factor, then source-only distribution is protected as free speech and the rest is paperwork.

Just something to think about.

Defendent #46

www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Po rt/3224

The only people claiming that the "other side" (i.e., us) are pirateers are the MPAA/DVD-CCA lawyers. You actually have two camps here, and for the most part they're completely separate.

The first one are the pirates. They're the kiddies with their "warez" sites and the "stick it to the man" attitude. They're the ones mirroring the DeCSS binaries; there aren't too many of them taking an active interest in the legal proceedings. Many of them are outright advocating breaking the law.

The second group are the Linux-DVD people, which make up a much larger group. For the most part they have no interest in pirating DVDs; they just want the "fair use" rights that they are entitled to under U.S. law. They simply believe that if they pay $35 for a DVD, then they should be able to play it whereever they want to without paying an additional licensing fee. They're the ones who are showing up in court and are mirroring the css-auth and LiVid source code. They realize the binaries don't mean anything; it's the source code that matters.

The strategy of the MPAA/DVD-CCA seems to be to paint all of us with the same broad brush - "they're all warez kiddies, every last one of them, they all want to rip us off". They want you to believe that we're all in the first group, because if the public begins to see that there are real consumer issues here, they'll never win this.

Get informed on this. Be smart enough to realize when you're being manipulated. Just because you're popping open the hood of a car, doesn't mean you're hotwiring it.

Defendent #46

www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Po rt/3224

Yes and no. No one who knows anything about this issue is denying that it is the DVD CCA's exclusive right to decide to whom they license CSS decryption. If they don't want a license issued for a Linux DVD player (and that's not the case - it seems that no one has applied for one) then there isn't an issue. They're completely in their legal rights to say so.

That doesn't mean that someone who has bought a DVD is without rights. According to U.S. law the consumer has "fair use" rights in regard to copyrighted material; there are limits to the rights the owner has. For example, if you buy a software package, it is considered "fair use" to make backup copies for your own use. That is not a right given to you from the benevolence of the copyright owner - that is considered fair use under U.S. law.

This entire issue has to do with fair use. Do you have the right to watch a DVD you legally purchased on your Linux system, even though you have not bought a license to do so?

Or, even more to the point: you have legally paid $35 for a DVD. The physical media is considered to be your property - if someone broke into your home and stole it, the police would regard it as your property. Should you have to pay a license fee in order to watch it? That is effectively (albiet indirectly - the player manufacturer pays the fee, which is most assuredly passed along to the consumer) what you are currently doing with this DVD CSS licensing scheme.

This is not only a copyright issue, it is also a consumer issue. People need to start realizing that.

Defendent #46

www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Po rt/3224

There were plenty of tyrants, its just that they varied greatly in the degree to which relied on hypocritical moral indoctrination of their subjects.

Tell me how is evolution politically correct.

On the contrary, the open and honest study of evolution is almost the definition of what is politically INcorrect. Reread what I said.

Most of what I have seen in the world in terms of political correctness has essentially been groups whom they think are under represented are suddently in a position to exploit a government or a faction for their own self interest.

Exactly, and this is within a society that has, as a cultural norm, placed examination and open dialogue of the genetic drivers of such groups in about the same class of moral bankruptcy as child molestation. Hence, hypocrisy and self-deception is the goal of the current eugenics progrom conducted by the Politically Correct Empire as it is with all heterogenous empires built primarily on moral control of their subjects.

What exactly is a "genetic self-interest".

The behavior of organisms that appears to place propagation of their genes above their individual well-being -- such as a male frequently engaging in sex without a condom with lots of partners of the opposite sex, as one minor but graphic example. Cynics might try to give such a character a "Darwin Award" but the laugh would be on those cynics -- evolution doesn't always select for intelligence.

See Dawkins The Extended Phenotype.

Tell me why nationalism is hypocritical

Nationalism is certainly is less hypocritical than JudeoChristianity, Marxism and Political Correctness, but a very good example is the difference between pre-unification Prussia (attacked by Marx) and post-unification Germany (that spawned National Socialism):

Prussia represented a smaller set of tribal groups (root word of demography) that had a lot more in common than did Hitler's unified Germany, so it was less hypocritical to be a Prussian Nationalist than a Nazi just as it is less hypocritical to be a Nazi than a Marxist. These days, we have this "european identity" hypocrisy in the form of the European Community, the Euro, etc. which is bound to get worse as it takes hold.

The last part of that sentence translates (again correct me if I'm wrong) says:

"The people who don't agree with the program and feel united are then enslaved by the people who don't get with it."

That is a bad translation.

The Prisoner's Dilemma is about people having a choice to cooperate and share big winnings, vs one exploiting the other, in which case the exploiter wins bigger than he would if he had cooperated and the exploited loses big, or, in the ultimate degeneration, they both try to exploit the other, and everyone loses big.

Real life is a lot like that, which is why that particular scenario is studied so heavily in game theory.

By the same token, since real life is a lot like that, there many who would rather not study the genetic evolutionary implications of the Prisoner's Dilemma. One exception to that rule is Michael Oliphant, and I strongly suggest reading his stuff.

Now I am a little confused about what you mean by "morality" in this case.

I mean the capacity to take on a system of morals and abide by it with fidelity, even when it runs counter to one's self interest or the self interest of one's genes.

So are you saying that anarchy is the best form of government

No. I'm saying tribal/clan/kindred identities are rooted in evolutionary history more than are national identities and national identities are more rooted in evolutionary history than are universalist ideologies. If you want to see how I would handle governance, please read what I have to say about the nature of money and government.

There are many, many more free webpage providers out there.. Geocities is obviously not your only
choice.

Here are a few in case you need
one to post material:


acmecity.com
chattownusa.com
50megs.com
geocities.com
angelfire.com
tripod.com
cybercities.com
hypermart.com
talkcity.com
ivillage.com
webhostme.com
xoom.com
intercosmos.com
darksites.com
webjump.com
digiweb.com
homepad.com


.. and more.

Overreaction. They're working okay now. :)

God, this whole issue makes me twitchy.

www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Po rt/3224

Yeah, I head about this program...

The Mule doesn't seem like it was created as a tool for warez trading, but I could see how it could easily be abused for this purpose.

Regardless, Napster seems to be getting away from its creators.

The sealed files we obtained from Jeffrey Toobin in the Paula Jones lawsuit are back on-line at:

http://www.geocities.com/registered2000/

• First and most important of all, it has a good mechanism for exposing C functions to scripts. This is crucial.
• You can strip out just about EVERYTHING, even text functions if you want. Great if you have to target a PSX or N64.
• Similarly, you can save memory since you're able to compile script text, then throw the text away and keep the bytecodes.
• A flexible syntax that could be used like C or as a line-based language, in scripts, on a command line, or in a config file.
• Garbage collection and a fixed heap size.
• Debugging support, which is often forgotten but important.

I also checked out ICI (cool), saw whether Perl could be cut down to size (not easily, but it would be worthwhile), TinyScheme (sure is!), and Small (very cool!). Now that there's more attention to large-scale, reusable game scripting (take a look at a new project, GODL) I think we should expect that good games will have a good scripting language behind them.

Visit the Signal 11 Shrine to see Signal 11 naked and petrified.

Visit the Signal 11 Shrine to see Signal 11 naked and petrified.

Visit the Signal 11 Shrine to see Signal 11 naked and petrified.

Visit the Signal 11 Shrine to see Signal 11 naked and petrified.

the fact that shit movie was released shows how much contempt lucas has for his fans. that movie was pathetic. i can't believe i waited 20 years to see that shit! it's even more insulting that you can't even find the original versions without that annoying stupid eyecandy!!! what self-indulgent arrogant ass he is! personally, i don't see what the fuss is over this. this movie should be buried along with all the kiddie crap he ruined the other movies with.

"The lie, Mr. Mulder, is most convincingly hidden between two truths."

• You've already taken the first and most important step - you've taken an interest. Get informed. Get all the facts about the case, read the court cases. This is probably the most important thing you could do.

• Grab the most complete DeCSS/LiVid packages you can find and get them up on a mirror. Make sure other people know where the mirror is (i.e., post it at Slashdot). Foreign mirrors so far are the best bet; for now, look for jurisdictions outside the U.S. and Norway.

• If you're not a member of the EFF now, become one. They're our legal defense; they need our support.

• Buy a CSS T-Shirt at CopyLeft. It costs $15, and $4 goes to the EFF.

• Start talking about this to people you know; give them the source code. We geeks tend to think sometimes that online dissemination is the only way to travel - we forget how much we can do by simply getting out and talking to people.

• If you're a programmer, start developing software in expectation that this code will stand free. This will help create a framework of legitimacy.

• For God's sake, don't rant about boycotting DVD yet. Go out and start buying them. The MPAA claims that the release of this code will destroy the DVD market; if a boycott is successful, and the DVD market depresses, guess who the public blames? And then guess what happens with CSS-2 is cracked? This format is now free - the code can't be hidden again. Don't force them to implement strong encryption in a new format. Buy DVD.

• Host a list of mirrors on your website. The California injunction explicitly states that you are free to link to DeCSS-hosting sites. Take advantage of that.

Defendent #46

> much as driving a car without a license is illegal.

Travelling is a RIGHT, Driving is a privilege. You DON'T need a license to travel.
I travel without one, and have yet to be given a ticket for speeding or for driving without a license.

Here is a list of DOCUMENTED rulings.
Driver Licensing vs. the Right to Travel

WHERE do the police get the jurisdiction to give you a ticket in the first place since the roads ARE PUBLIC!?

Probably because you don't have the Manufactor's Statement of Origin for your automobile:

Vehicle Manufacturer's Certificate/Statement of Origin
Manufacturer's Statement of Origin - Key To ownership

My automobile is NOT registered by the government, since it is MY property.

When you buy a new autmobile, WHY does the goverment want you to surrender the MSO?
Title transfer
Licensing your new vehicle in Washington

LOUISIANA OFFICE OF MOTOR VEHICLES VEHICLE REGISTRATION & TITLE
Massachusetts Title Law

Speeding is NOT a crime, UNLESS you went to the government asking for permission (DRIVER'S LICENSE) to use their property (REGISTERED VEHICLE.) Remember Speeding != reckless driving.

If you don't want to be harassed by the good law officers, you can get an International Driver's Permit, which is valid in over 200 countries. No Socialist Slave Number is required.

Research the above links and see for yourself.

Cheers

http://www.geocities.com/dvd_decss

check out the cool name i got for my page! :)

That is the point! There are problems you want to solve, but they are unsolvable beforehand.

Some of them you can not probe that are unsolvable, so basicaly you could be wasting your time trying to solve it in the first place.

I just read a novel about this, very good and even easy. Godel and Turing (I think, it does not matter now) showed that.

The Ultimate AOL Disk use page. 100 and one fun things to do with your AOL 3.5" disks. And while we're laughing at AOL, read a "journal" of an AOL newbie : )

The Ultimate AOL Disk use page. 100 and one fun things to do with your AOL 3.5" disks. And while we're laughing at AOL, read a "journal" of an AOL newbie : )