Slashdot Mirror

>When will we see a working "cachedot"?

About 3 years ago. Yeah, I was here then. Yeah, it didn't cache any of the links. Yeah, it was called cachedot.slashdot.org. Oh, and yeah, it got taken down because it wasn't a very useful idea. :-)

I may have read it in one of Andreas Schroeder's highly entertaining books about outrageous scams and fraud artists.

I suggest you read one of them - this kind of "oh, we were all ready to prove it to the world, and then cruel fate stepped in oh no please send your financial support to..." stuff happens all the time with this kind of stuff. The only time stuff like this doesn't happen is when you aren't allowed to inspect the device afterwards. (ie, it's rigged).

(A side note, what kind of "stress" do banked turns put on a car, anyhow? Answer: None! It relieves stress perpendicular to the motion of travel! Just more crap from this guy).

But not nearly as apt as Neal Stephenson's vehicular analogy. See In the Beginning Was the Command Line.

Found here.

Intelectual property is a modern concept, invented by greedy bastards that ignore that ideas belongs to everyone.

As much as I disagree with the way the MPAA and the RIAA have handled this brave new world of technology, they are fundamentally right.

Consider great artists, like Mozart, or Leonardo. How did they get rewarded for their creative efforts? They had sponsors -- patrons -- who gave them a living allowance. (This tradition continues today. Richard Stallman and Tim Berners-Lee are two of the receipients of the MacArthur Foundation's "genius" grants .)

Isaac Asimov wrote a great book entitled "Asimov's Biographical Encyclopedia of Science". It consists of brief biographies of the 1,000 scientist Asimov considered the most important. One of the interesting things I learned from this book was that during the middle ages, when Greek and Roman thinkers from classical times were very highly respected, some mediavel scholars would attribute their work to classical thinkers. Some of these classical thinkers were hacks. And their reverse plagiarism was an annoying source of confusion for modern scholars. But sometimes their work was unique and valuable. One of these guys made Asimov's list of the 1,000 most important scientists. IIRC he is known only as "the False Jeder".

My point? Smart people, creative people, from different cultures, had no idea of "intellectual property".

You have apparently never had something that you put serious effort into creating taken without your consent. Intellectual property is a way of quantifying that a song, or video, or picture, or peice of software exists through the expenditure of someones resources (time, money, etc..) and that expenditure should be justly compensated.

Who are you to claim that a song should belong to you by right.

Tell me, where do rights come from? Do you believe that rights come from God? That is what the US constitution says. Well, I don't believe in God.

So far as I am concerned, what people call rights are merely conventions. If you can convince everyone else that the conventions you believe in have value to them, then you get to live in a society that respects your "rights".

If not, you have some very difficult decisions to make.

Now, I am sorry you had your ideas ripped off. I want to live in a society where people's contributions are appreciated. But it seems to me your arguments are circular. If I were to paraphrase your argument it seems to be you are entitled to own your ideas because you have a right to them. Circular.

Patents, copyright. They are inventions. There is a rationale for granting patents and copyrights to creators. Doing so is supposed to benefit society in general.

The idea behind a patent is that granting the patent holder a limited period of time when no one else can use their idea, without a liscense or other permission, ultimately benefits the public. The idea is that the patent holder grants some liscenses, or gets a limited period of time when they have a monopoly, and they make some money. The idea is that without that money they wouldn't have come up with the idea. Or they wouldn't have the cash to develop it. What does the public get out of it? Well, we get to use the mature creation for free, when the patent expires. If it is a good idea this should be good for us. And if it is a good enough idea it is worth it to us to pay the liscense fee prior to the patent running out.

Question: If the US Patent Office was keeping this idea in mind would they be granting patents to corporations with deep pockets who were cashing in on ideas that already existed. Did it really benefit the public when the compression algorithm used in the original GIF format was patented out from under us?

... Again, I'm not saying that the current actions of the RIAA are morally sound.

But having had a peice of software stolen from me in College and billed as somebody elses work woke me up to the fact that people pour a bit of their soul into the things they create and they at the very least deserve to be recognized and if they so desire, compensated for their effort. Recognize that the RIAA and MPAA are products of the industry itself. They are trying to work in an arena they had no hand in building and really don't have the option to just sit back and say, "fuck it, nobody get's paid anymore." Artists and studios make a ton of money because we the people are willing to pay it for the enjoyment of their product.

And then there are the not famous artists. If I had a young protege who wanted to be an artist, I would encourage them to do it because it gave them pleasure. I would encourage them to consider whether they loved creating enough that they were willing to go into debt to create, and if so, how deeply in debt. Most artists you or I are ever likely to make friends with are going to be lucky if they can manage to break even.

http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:j3fdAw53Hd4C:w ww.cappuccinopc.com/parts.asp+mocha+p4&hl=en&ie=UT F-8

Furthermore, we split the T1 out over a hub with two other tenants in the building. I'm coming through from behind that hub.

Hubs? You actually use hubs? No wonder it seems slow.

Here is a Google cache of the difference between hubs and switchs (basic).

If you're in charge of the network, you need to take some courses. No offence.

which one is it?
i bet it's the first one!!

Modern word processors are bloated messes. "Creeping featurism" has run rampant. How many of your average users ever learn more than a very small percentage of their word processors features? How many of those features would never have been added if the word processor's company's business model wasn't built on selling their customers an upgrade to a "new, improved" model every couple of years?

And if you really want to incarcerate someone, how hard would it be to get two doctors to sign off on him? Say: Two doctors who are known for prescribing extra narcotics to their patients turning a blind eye to multiple other prescriptions -- or a pediophile child psychologist?
-----

A number of years ago, there was a Lawyer in Vancouver by the name of Jack Cram. He was most famous for taking on the government for conspiracies (and winning in court).

One day he took on a case that was to undo him: It was a young lawyer (Renata Andreas-Auger) who claimed that she was being harrassed by the Law Society of BC (who control the lawyers).

It seemed like a reasonably straight-forward case to Cram, but after taking on her case, it seemed that the Law Society -- and even some of the judges of the Supreme court of BC (The SCBC handles primary trials for civil cases and serious criminal offences with appeals going to the court of appeal).

After suffering for a while at the hands of the Law Society and the Courts, Cram finally ended up in a legal fight with the court system itself (oops). In the middle of the trial (and a whole boatload of other shenanigans), He was suddenly declared, by two doctors, to be a mental health threat. They whisked him off to a mental hostpital where he was held for evaluation and 'treatment' for a week.

The "committal" was authorized by two doctors who had just happened (what a coincidence!) to be sitting in the courtroom and had declared on the certificates that they had examined Cram! Now it's committal by remote control!
-- from A tale of Two Lawyers

The doctors at the mental facility where he was held eventually gave him a clean bill of health, but he spent a good period of time heavily drugged, etc.

Even though he was declared mentally fit, he came out of the hospital essentially a broken man. He handed his case over to another lawyer, meekly accepted a suspension of his bar priveledges, and has since (from what I've heard) refused to talk about the cases.

I interviewed him on video, in the middle of the trial (just before he was comitted). He explained to me his case, the case of Renata Andreas-Auger and the case/comspiracy that was beneath the whole mess.

The case -- Delgamuukw was famous in it's own right. It was a landmark Native rights case. The trial Judge incensed the Canadien people by declaring that the native people of BC were, among other things "Savages whose lives were brutish and short". It eventually made it's way to the Supreme Court of Canada, where rights of the natives to unceeded lands were given at least some acknowledgement before ordering the case back to be retried under a new judge.

Renata had been an articling student doing research for the Delgamuukq legal team, and had found a basic block of constitutional law that would (should) have cemented the case for the natives. She felt that the lawyers had ignored her research, and effectively thrown the case.

When she finally convinced Jack to look at the Delgamuukw case (some time after he'd started to take flack for her persecution case), Jack concluded that -- yes the lawyers had sabotaged their case at law, and had proceded instead with a very weak argument -- But that shouldn't have been a big shock, because their biggest clients were essentially the people who would have been most hurt by a successful prosecution.

The affected parties? The Government and the resource industries. The conspiracy, according to Cram, was a consipircy of silence over native rights. Constitutional documents acknowledge native claim to the lands of North America until, and unless they sign those lands over in a public treaty. For over 95% of BC that's never been done and, for decades, it was actually illegal for natives to hire a lawyer over land claims.

According to Cram, the native claims are real, and laws on Fiduciary duty would call for penalties against the Canadien & BC governments in the range of 3 times the current value of any resources taken out of BC in the last century. Read: bankrupt the country.

Besides Cram and Auger, I've seen Two other lawyers willing to take on native claims using those constitutional laws. One had his license to practice revoked. The other was 'warned off' with a veiled threat that he took quite seriously.

No black copters, No trenchcoats. Just a bunch of paper and people in $1,200 suits. And it scares me to the bone.

(damn. I thought I had some stuff about the Cram case on my website.... Oh well.)

Correct me if I am wrong. Are you suggesting that the decision to design the P4 so it accomplished less per clock cycle, but was able to do them more quickly was purely a technical decision? Are you suggesting that it wasn't influenced at all being able to exploit a foolish confidence in megahertz?

You seem to know what you are talking about, so I would welcome learning how you came to have such confidence in Intel's ethical standards.

Isn't intel the company that tried to slip CPU serial numbers past us, on the Pentium III?

Isn't intel the company that told their customers they would have to prove to them they would have to prove they needed flawless floating point before they would replace defective CPUs? Let me quote from the Doctor Dobbs Journal article:

When this bug was first reported, Intel denied that it existed. After this bug was proven to exist, Intel denied that it was a problem. When customers wanted a replacement chip, Intel demanded that *THEY* (the customer) prove that they were affected by this bug. Yet to this very day, Intel refuses to acknowledge that this is a bug; instead they always refer to this as a flaw -- whatever the difference may be.

And how about the intel 487? Didn't they introduce an expensive 487 floating point co-processor, to augment the 486sx cpu, which was actually just a 486dx in disguise, that totally disabled and replaced the user's existing 486sx?

Correct me if I am wrong. Are you suggesting that the decision to design the P4 so it accomplished less per clock cycle, but was able to do them more quickly was purely a technical decision? Are you suggesting that it wasn't influenced at all being able to exploit a foolish confidence in megahertz?

You seem to know what you are talking about, so I would welcome learning how you came to have such confidence in Intel's ethical standards.

Isn't intel the company that tried to slip CPU serial numbers past us, on the Pentium III?

Isn't intel the company that told their customers they would have to prove to them they would have to prove they needed flawless floating point before they would replace defective CPUs? Let me quote from the Doctor Dobbs Journal article:

When this bug was first reported, Intel denied that it existed. After this bug was proven to exist, Intel denied that it was a problem. When customers wanted a replacement chip, Intel demanded that *THEY* (the customer) prove that they were affected by this bug. Yet to this very day, Intel refuses to acknowledge that this is a bug; instead they always refer to this as a flaw -- whatever the difference may be.

And how about the intel 487? Didn't they introduce an expensive 487 floating point co-processor, to augment the 486sx cpu, which was actually just a 486dx in disguise, that totally disabled and replaced the user's existing 486sx?

Take a look at the chart here: http://www.google.ca/press/zeitgeist.html

It was not Von Braun's decision to use concentration camp dwelling forced labor in the factory, and the historians doubt he was very enthused about it. But would YOU have spoken out against it in Nazi Germany? I didn't think so. When he did voice an opinion that he felt the rockets were being wasted as weapons and he'd rather work on space travel, he was tossed in prison for a while.

In other words he was willing to take a moral stand. And he felt it was more important to object to a waste of money, rather than the cruel waste of human life?

You suggest he had just two choices: a suicidal objection to slave labour, or continuing, full-speed ahead, with the rocket program?

How about waiting for the war to be over, before continuing his rocket research?

What about resigning? What about getting fired for incompetence? What about faking some experiments to make the program look like a waste of money? What about pretending to become a hopeless alcoholic, or pretending to have a nervous breakdown? Rudolph Hess was able to defect, in May 1941. Was this a possibility for von Braun?

Grownups make lots of compromises. Do you go to Hawaii for Xmas, or do you get braces for your kid's teeth? Grownups give up thing to respect their principles.

Do we let the President of ENRON or Worldcomm claim they "didn't know" what was done by those who answered to them?

Up here in Canada, AT&T is redirecting listen4ever.com to some lame site. To fix this problem, I recommend that everyone takes the time to contact the staff at their favorite ISP and ask them to investigate why they aren't being routed correctly.

To Mr. AT&T,

In recent days I have noticed inconsistencies in your routing of certain domain names. As a paying customer, I feel that the service level I have come to expect from you has been diminished. Could you please investigate why this domain (http://www.listen4ever.com) is not being routed correctly. If you compare it to the site in Google's cache (http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:1gGgIJXQZwkC: listen4ever.com/tapeview.asp%3Ftapeid%3D2123+%22li sten4ever.%2Bcom%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8) you will see that the information sent to the user (me) differs from what non AT&T customers see.

The routing errors discovered here makes me question the reliability of your service in regards to domain names such as yahoo.com, slashdot.com, and even your own, rogers.ca.

Thank you for your time,

Simple, now everyone do it and let the battle between customer and ISP begin.

The current laws do not protect security or privacy...

Well, there is a flaw in the laws regarding IP networks.

...nor do they allow law enforcement access for wiretaps

Again, I'd say this is a flaw in the law.

The article points out that older analog telephone lines are covered by laws that prevent people from tapping the lines unless it is someone with the authority and authorization to do so. The article makes it look like the laws regarding VoIP are less advanced, and desperately need updated.

Legal things aside, I would have thought that by now, in this day and age, people would consider security when providing a new service that runs over a computer network. I'm dissapointed in the comapnies who have disregarded security here.

Is there no easy way to make it all tunnel through SSH?

Here's a model of motherboard I own: MS5129. I was searching for a PDF manual for it (not much luck though).

Check the results. Are there _any_ relevant ones?

Pretty much nope.

You can get the same effect by posting links to your site on message boards.

In my school's web tech class, we had a competition to make "zxylition" pages (zxylition is a made-up word) and get them listed on Google. The first page up used this technique to get noticed by Google.

Hummmm,
Google search

In fact, KDENews appears on page one and page to, slashdot appears on apge 2 right after kdenews...

Woops that was the link to the interview with six KDE developers. The link to the interview with Guido Van Rossum is here.

Woops that was the link to the interview with six KDE developers. The link to the interview with Guido Van Rossum is here.

Google is our friend. It has a cached link here. The page will take a while to load, unless you turn off images, because they are slashdotted, or reasonable equivalent. But the text is there...

Or here

(Sorry about the delay in responding. My week hasn't allowed for slashdot time).

I have examined her logic carefully, and I have not found any faults with it.

Then I doubt anything I say will convince you otherwise. Ayn Rand has been the subject of many crtiques. There's a lot more there than I'd every be able to sum up. (Actually, it looks like some very interesting reading. It might be time to for me to bone up on this subject again. It's been a while). If I was to do something so potentially dangerous as sum up my rejection of Rand's philosophy in a sentence, it would be something like "Based too much on a priori assumptions, applied with too wide a brush and with too little considerations of the subtleties that make us human." That's a criticism that can be leveled at many thinkers, not just Rand. I tend to believe that dogmatic philosophies are essentially flawed. And, again, I'm not here to convince you. The basic thesis of my orignal post was that Rand was a better story teller than philosopher, and that her stories suffered because of the latter.

That you say the vast majority of people cannot live up to their potential startles me.

That startles me, too. I think you may have misinterpretted this sentence:

Her compassion was very specific. It was the compassion for people unable to reach their full potential, for those held back by an incompetent majority.

What I meant was that her compassion was not for all of humanity, but only for those she considered to be held back by the views of the majority. One would be hard pressed to find any compassion for, say, a priest, in her writing.

For what it's worth, I'm as leary of other popular philosophies as I am of objectivism. "Philosophies" tend to want to shape all of humanity into a particular mold, with more regard for the mold than for the people. I'll confess to a strong humanist bent, but that's as close to an -ism as I'm likely to get.

I prefer to study the roll of women instead of the role of women, but i'm just annoying that way.

A similar donation was made in 1970 by Judith Merril to the Toronto Public Library. It's a reference library so they don't lend books(bastards).

A contemporary of Asimov, Leiber, Pohl and others she donated around 5000 items. The collection is now about 57000 items; Novels, Anthologies, Essays and more. What's really neat about the whole thing is that it's housed in a standard Toronto public library and anyone can use their services.

anyway...
J:)

*smack* you're stupid. (k works) will be true for every message the same length as the message you're trying to decrypt. Look up One Time Pad and think about it.

I believe your confusing public/private with symetric/asymetric. Public/Private terminology is used with asymetric enryption techinques like RSA, but not witrh symetric techniques like AES or DES.

I most certainly am not. Do a little research and you will find that the terms "public key cryptography" and "private key cryptography" are commonly used to refer to asymmetric and symmetric encryption respectively. E.g. see result of google search.

-a

At first I thought they were being a bit harsh until I took a closer look at the dates. He's accused of breaking into the network on the 8th, but not reporting it until the 18th.

I read the July 24th Houston Chronicle article and the March 21st article too. The Cheif County Clerk seems to be saying that one (1) pornographic picture found on one (1) of his department's poorly secured computers was the sole damage found. He claims it cost $5,000 to fix the damage he accuses Puffer (the whistleblower) of causing.

With a network as poorly secured as his practically anyone with a wifi card could have uploaded that picture.

If any repercussions should come anyone's way over this incident I don't understand why the first candidate isn't Charles Bacarisse, the County's District Clerk. Bacarisse claims that none of the computers under his administration could have been seriously damaged by the penetration of war-drivers. Okay, but am I mis-reading the Chronicles quotes from him? Doesn't he seem to have been completely oblivious to the vulnerability his insecure testing was opening to the rest of the computers on the County's system?

We have seen this before, with Randal Schwartz's ordeal at Intel. This comp.security article contains a contemporary account of his "crimes".

The lesson seems to be that no matter how well intentioned you are, the only safe way to report a security vulnerability is if you can find a way to do so anonymously.

Well, for those like myself who are forced to beat their heads against the wall that is Fortran, there's a great introduction over at the Queen's Universoty of Belfast. So far it's told me all the basic syntax stuff I need, so it makes a really handy reference.

As for Fortran 77 [shudder] (and yes, I have to work with it regularly...), a search for prof77 readily yields a relatively tiny document that contains pretty much all the F77 information you'll ever need -- it's shockingly complete considering its size. I recommend finding a .ps version.

Reading and Understanding Patent Claims

How to infringe a patent and get away with it

Patent Claim Interpretation

Reading and Understanding Patent Claims

How to infringe a patent and get away with it

Patent Claim Interpretation

Looking around the net with google I found this link that indicates 8 to 10% efficiency. This is fairly low when compared to standard solar cells ( see CNN article ) which indicates 40% efficiency. Although spheral solar cells aren't as efficient, since they can be used in places where regular solar cells can't, any efficiency is better than none at all.

I found Robocode to be pretty boring, actually..

A more interesting game, IMHO was SSI's Omega.. you build the tanks in addition to simply programming them; (so there are trade-offs, where different weapons fire at different speeds, and do different damages.)

There's also much more depth, because the tanks have to find each other, instead of being placed in a simple 'arena'..

It seems that Microsoft does not use Visual Source Safe for Windows source code.

So, in the futur, we could see the Googles pigeon ranking system
running on chicken feather CPU, using RFC 1149 in conjunction with the BIRD Internet Routing Daemon for communications...

Now, this could help all those rednecks to enter the new millenium!
Anyway, they are already on the move, learning from all the successfull IT companies out there...

But this is a link to a search page, which you may then click on "cached" to get some desired output. Better than nothing... but turning images off is still recommended.

If you've already gotten coffe and made a sandwich and the slides still haven't loaded, here's something to keep you occupied in the meantime:

Google cache of a list of talks the same authour has done

Turn off images before loading this page, as they're taken from the same server that we melted down with slides requests.

http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:i0o-8GH0AcQC:m etku.net/cryo/+&hl=en&ie=UTF-8. Enjoy. =)

The description from the Google cache is just plain bizzare. Of course, it could just be that I'm used to using regular time.

You're new, aren't you?

Or try This.

JdV!!

You're new, aren't you?

Or try This.

JdV!!

For what values of sense are we talking about? Take a look at GoogleGroups search of news.admin.net-abuse.sightings, and let me know how to your legitimate mystery shopper offer from all the others: URL from Hell Quite a lot of it, isn't there?

Google stores the text of pages (but not the graphics) when it spiders a site, and makes them available to you, in case, uh, "the site is down". Yeah, that's it.

It's pretty handy to use when someone has yanked a page that turned out to be embarrassing.

Unfortunately the page with the announcement at 2600 was just put up and is apparently not yet available in Google's cache, but will be at some point.

Another alternative is to use The Anonymizer. Here is 2600's announcement of Ford's surrender, which you should be able to read unless your firewall blocks the anonymizer too.

Google stores the text of pages (but not the graphics) when it spiders a site, and makes them available to you, in case, uh, "the site is down". Yeah, that's it.

It's pretty handy to use when someone has yanked a page that turned out to be embarrassing.

Unfortunately the page with the announcement at 2600 was just put up and is apparently not yet available in Google's cache, but will be at some point.

Another alternative is to use The Anonymizer. Here is 2600's announcement of Ford's surrender, which you should be able to read unless your firewall blocks the anonymizer too.

But adopters of Linux still face hurdles living in a Microsoft world. High on the list of headaches is incompatibilities with files created with Microsoft products like Word. Small software makers like Lindows are trying to help desktop users bridge that divide.

UFOs have already been seen elsewhere in Scotland and could help explain how prehistoric creatures like the Loch Ness Monster have managed to survive for thousands of years.

So obviously aliens abducted Nessie(s) thousands of years ago and because their planet is thousands of light years away (and their UFOs travel at light speed) it only relatively recently returned her to the lock. This also means that Nessie didn't age because she was traveling at light speed.

I'm also sure that the reason there are so many UFO sighting in Scotland is because everytime some research expeditions sets out to try and find Nessie the aliens come back and help her hide. If people would just stop trying to find Nessie there wouldn't be any where near as many UFO sightings in Scotland.

Er, which capital city are you thinking of?

There isn't even a city where the G8 is officially being held (Kananaskis) and Calgary is neither a federal nor a provincial capital.

Toronto, is not Canada's capital either.

Ottawa holds that dubious honour. Toronto just thinks it's the captial of Canada and, of course, many people around the world get fooled.

For good time, you can always check what our southern neighbours think about us.

Other than that, what's new about this?

I wonder if they can build on this?
-F1F2F3

Well, at least they haven't included klingon in their translator. That'll be the day...