IsoNews Ostensibly Shut Down By The DOJ

US Gov't to Iso News: by mekkab · 2003-02-26 12:50 · Score: 5, Funny

All your base are belong to us!

--
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.

Re:US Gov't to Iso News: by Old+Uncle+Bill · 2003-02-26 15:49 · Score: 5, Interesting

They must have been terrorists. I'm sure they are in Cuba by now. Houses sold, assets frozen and confiscated. Or they violated the DMCA. Can that land you in Guantanamo these days? Or is violating the DMCA now the same as being a terrorist? It's so confusing, really. I guess I probably should not be writing this. I think they're coming for me now...

In Soviet Russia (no, this is not one of those jokes) they had a name for the person who turned you in. They called them a Stukatch (bad transcription from the Cyrillic, sorry). It was an offtake on the word Stuk, or "knock". If your neighbor did not like you, or disagreed with your "morals" they would turn you in, and soon enough you would get that knock.

--
Yes, I am an agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial.
Re:US Gov't to Iso News: by pmodern · 2003-02-26 23:39 · Score: 1

damn terrorists using technology in ways it wasn't intended, how dare they! what gives them the right to take apart the stuff they buy? why that would lead to anarchy and dissent among the consumers! I mean, what if our ancestors had taken things apart to figure out how they work, huh? then what manner of chaos would we be in... all joking aside, this makes me ill. And the worst part is that I almost expect this kind of behavior from the DOJ now. :(
Re:US Gov't to Iso News: by Dil+NaOH · 2003-02-27 03:52 · Score: 1

So, in Soviet Russia, you had to keep an eye out for big "knockers"?

Hm, quite like the US, then :)

"What Knockers!" "Thank you, Doctor."

--
Thank you for observing all safety precautions.

In the US by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 12:50 · Score: 5, Funny

you are all criminals.

Re:In the US by Lord+Ender · 2003-02-26 13:49 · Score: 1

I never bought a mod chip and never bought a bong. So, I guess you are wrong.

--
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
Re:In the US by Narcissus · 2003-02-26 13:54 · Score: 2, Interesting

And yet in Australia I could buy both and still not be a criminal...
Re:In the US by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 13:58 · Score: 2, Funny

The DOJ didn't shut them down complete. /. finished the job for the mirror site.
Re:In the US by 5foot2 · 2003-02-26 14:52 · Score: 2, Informative

yeah, but show up with an air rifle and your a terrorist.
Re:In the US by binney · 2003-02-26 15:13 · Score: 1

Not for long!
Wait until the FTA (free trade agreement) is in place. Au will be forced to adopt US IP laws. Then we're all fu(ked.
That's our reward for turning our armed forces over to the US.
Re:In the US by jc42 · 2003-02-26 15:46 · Score: 5, Interesting

you are all criminals.

Over the years, I've run across a number of articles explaining why, in most of the country, this is quite literally true. It turns out that in most of the US, it isn't logically possible to follow all the laws simultaneously. There are almost always logical contradictions in the various laws, so that following one law means breaking another.

Some of the examples get downright silly. For example, in one place that I lived, the law students dug out the anti-gambling laws, and verified that, under a literal interpretation, carrying cash was "being in posession of gambling devices". You know the various penny-matching games or serial-number games that can be played with money? They make money itself a gambling device.

OTOH, if you weren't carrying money, that was ipse facto evidence of vagrancy, for which you could be arrested and held in jail.

Then, of course, there are all the laws that you could follow if you knew about them, but you'd never suspect that such stupid laws exist. There are supposedly several states in which the legal speed limit is still 10 or 15 mph, dating from 100 years ago when that was fast enough to scare the horses.

Granted, such laws would probably be overturned, but first you have to be arrested and charged, so that you can defend yourself in court. This gives you an arrest record, which can be used against you.

This isn't entirely frivolous. Almost all urban black males have arrest records by age 18. The reason is that they can be and are routinely arrested on just this sort of violation. They have little or no defense, since they are in fact always in violation of some law, even if they're just standing on the corner watching the world go by. This arrest record is then used to deny them access to education and jobs. So much for decades of "equal opportunity" legislation.

Back to frivolity: I lived in Florida for a few years, and one of the fun laws there turns out to outlaw "nude bathing". The wording does not exclude a bath in the bathtub in your own bathroom. But if you shower nude (with or without a friend), you are apparently legal.

All in all, if you're in the US, you are usually in violation of some law at any time. You are at least a criminal part of the day, no matter what you do or don't do.

(I'd guess that this is also true in much of the rest of the world, but I've only read about it in US terms.)

--
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
Re:In the US by ahaning · 2003-02-26 15:57 · Score: 1

Have no fear! Jon Stewart is here!

--
Withdrawal before climax is very ineffective and those who try this are usually called "parents."
Re:In the US by jaavaaguru · 2003-02-26 18:07 · Score: 1

I never bought a mod chip and never bought a bong. So, I guess you are wrong.

Is all software on your PC properly licensed?

--
Follow me
Re:In the US by playagame · 2003-02-26 18:09 · Score: 2, Interesting

Slightly offtopic, here in Georgia there is a city called Kennesaw where it is ILLEGAL for any home to not possess some kind of firearm. I'm sure there is some contradiction here I just cannot think of it right now (luckily I got my bong a few weeks ago).
Re:In the US by fucksl4shd0t · 2003-02-26 18:24 · Score: 1

Is all software on your PC properly licensed?
Mine is. :) GPL, in fact.
I've never bought a mod chip either, but I have bought bongs before. I was firmly instructed by the hottie behind the counter that I fill up the bottom, put my tobacco in the bowl, cover up this little hole with my thumb, then inhale until the top chamber fills, move my thumb, and suck down the rest.
I couldn't get over her for days after that.
They also had a no-return policy. Once you smoke something in it, they don't even want to hear about it. :)
Man, that was years ago. I didn't know those things were still legal.... ;)

--
Like what I said? You might like my music
Re:In the US by vook · 2003-02-26 18:29 · Score: 1

Most states allow for the expungement of an arrest record, often regardless as to whether the arrest was legitimate or not. Of course probably many individuals that are victims of a frivolous arrest are unaware of that option.

It seems to be commonplace to hear individuals arguing their way around these topics by making ludicrous comparisons, such as breaking the law by selling MOD chips to breaking the law by not carrying cash. It's always interesting to listen to people talk in circles as they justify their behavior. There must be some guilt there.

Me? I'll gladly and readily break a piracy law, as I have countless times in the past. Not because it's right or justified, but because I want to.

I really think it's important that people not be delusional about these things.
I don't have the right, legally or morally, to rent or download a Playstation game, burn it, and then play it forever at home. That won't stop me from doing it, but at least I'll truly know in my heart what I have just done.

i.e. "I've just illegally and immorally acquired X and potentially deprived everyone involved in the creation of distribution of X of Y dollars. Ok, game on"
Re:In the US by jasonditz · 2003-02-26 18:58 · Score: 3, Insightful

How about "I just legally acquired X and it won't play in my system because of a region lockout, thereby denying me the use of a legally owned item. "

Too bad, you go to jail now
Re:In the US by I_redwolf · 2003-02-26 21:11 · Score: 1

Most states allow for the expungement of an arrest record, often regardless as to whether the arrest was legitimate or not. Of course probably many individuals that are victims of a frivolous arrest are unaware of that option.

That's not an option it's either automatic or doesn't exist at all. It's called an ACD (adjournment in contemplation of dismissal). It means that the case will be dismissed after a certain period of time whether it be 6 months, a year or whatever it is in that state. That is, so long as the person stays out of trouble.
Re:In the US by ratamacue · 2003-02-27 00:45 · Score: 1

As the saying goes, you can't rule a nation of innocents. The more criminals, the larger the government, and the more profit for those in power. Am I asserting that people of political power are driven by self-interest, just like any other rational human being? You bet I am.
Re:In the US by TarPitt · 2003-02-27 03:34 · Score: 1

The problem isn't thre record itself - the sole fact of being arrested is usually enough to lose your job.

By the time the record is purged, the damage to your life has already been done.

Besides, this only purges it from the PUBLIC records database. A reference check with prior roomates, the employer who fired you for getting arrested, talkative relatives, the ex who wants to see you rot - these will all turn up the arrest even if the public record says you are clean. I mean, how do you explain the absence from the labor market? An unexplained gap in your job history alone will get you deep-sixed from many employment offers.

--
If your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd murder you in your sleep
Re:In the US by The_K4 · 2003-02-27 04:20 · Score: 1

When they ASK you on your employment for if you've even been arrested (which they usually do) you say YES. I've never had to do this, but I would suspect that if you tell them you were, but that it was exponged from your record because you were innocent, that it wouldn't be a problem for most employeers. If it is, you file suit against them for discrimination.
Re:In the US by wastaz · 2003-02-27 05:50 · Score: 1

Of course.
Air rifles can hurt people.
I still can't believe how USA can motivate not having any decent gun control, australia is a perfect example on how good it is.

If people don't have guns, they don't shoot people (No? Really?! how strange...)

Now, I also think that modchips being illegal is bullshit. How the hell can they motivate that? What if I want to run linux on my xbox? It's my damned hardware, I paid for it. I can run it over with my car if I want, I can set fire to it if I want, I can throw it out of my window if I want, I can use it as a toaster if I want, but if I open it and put in an extra chip I'm a criminal. Bullshit.

Where's EFF when you need them?
Re:In the US by AnonymousCowheard · 2003-02-27 09:07 · Score: 1

How about "I just legally acquired X and it won't play in my system because of a region lockout, thereby denying me the use of a legally owned item. "

Too bad, you go to jail now

Maybe X will do that to you. Those people at X.org possibly enforce their license much more agressivly than say Gnu or MIT. I suggest using XFree86, available from www.xfree86.org. Wait a month and get their greatest yet, XFree86 2.3; It's da bomb!

OF COURSE THIS IS A JOKE, OR MY NAME IS MR. MAGOO!

--

But I'm sure you already Gnu that.
Re:In the US by TarPitt · 2003-02-27 10:51 · Score: 1

It shows you are an honest person, yes. This is good.

It also means the prospective employer does not have to go through the trouble of doing a background check before sending your resume to the circular file.

And if they don't ask, but the information comes out anyway?

--
If your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd murder you in your sleep
Re:In the US by Mike+Markley · 2003-02-27 12:07 · Score: 1

> If people don't have guns, they don't shoot people

So what you're saying is, the law-abiding people who aren't apt to kill people anyway won't have guns, because it's illegal. But it's already against the law to shoot someone. If someone is already planning to break the law that way, why will they have any qualms about illegally buying weapons? Or stealing them? Or are there no guns anywhere in Australia and no black market by which they could be obtained? Sure, there are crimes of passion, and it can be argued that guns make such crimes easier, but the interesting thing is that people can kill quite efficiently without a firearm -- or a weapon of any kind, for that matter. There are no shortage of documented cases of crimes of passion involving pocketknives, tire irons, dishes and tableware, cars used as large projectiles, etc. The old cliche, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." -- true. We're pretty damned good at it when we want to be, too.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think we should all be running around waving our handguns in the air. We should, however, be permitted to do what we want as long as we're making reasonable efforts to ensure that our actions don't harm others.

The problem isn't really with guns; it's with the irresponsibility and an unwillingness to be held accountable for one's own actions that permeates modern Western society. Witness the lawsuit from the overweight guy who feels that the fast food companies are to blame for his obesity. There are mountains of evidence supporting the conclusion that Western society has real problems with self-responsibility (and this post would be prohibitively long if I went down that path very far). As such, some guidelines should be laid down regarding gun ownership. If you own a gun which is stolen and used to commit a crime, and you did not take reasonable precautions to safeguard it from theft, then you should be held partially responsible. Same thing goes if your neighbor's kid shoots his sister after finding your gun while they're over playing with your own kids.

I'd go so far as to say that perhaps a firearm-ownership license is a possible answer. Screw up -- let the neighbor's kid steal it or leave it in your car overnight only for it to be stolen -- and you lose that license (along with whatever other penalties are imposed). Safes should be required. Proof of ownership of a gun safe should be a prerequisite to licensing, and maybe proof of an appropriate separate storage area for ammunition. Make people accountable. Make pentalties for irresponsibility.

It's been said before (paraphrased): "If guns are illegal, only criminals will have them." There are genuine problems related to the mere existence, to say nothing of the abuse, of firearms; the same statement can be made for many, many other things. Automobiles. Cellular phones. The RIAA tries to connect possession to unlawful use all the time. The MPAA does the same thing. "There can't possibly be a legitimate reason for any person to own an MP3 player," is a good example of what these guys are preaching. Substitute "gun" for "MP3 player" now. Next, try this phrase: "Guns must be made illegal for the protection of..." Subsitute "MP3 players" back in. Of course the argument can be made that guns can be fatal far more easily than MP3 players can. The real crux of it all, then, is where you draw the line. At what point do we decide that the potential risks of something outweigh any potential for usefulness? Perhaps I'd rather the guys in charge err on the side of personal freedoms. You might disagree with me, but that's my viewpoint. Seems I'm turning Libertarian...

> Now, I also think that modchips being illegal is bullshit.

This we can agree on :).
Re:In the US by MikeFM · 2003-02-27 12:17 · Score: 1

Morals belong to the individual. I have the moral right to do anything that doesn't cause me to feel evil. The original poster was right that damn near everything is illegal in some context but does it really matter?

I don't consider myself a citizen of any country so I feel no obligation to follow their laws. Of course I probably follow most of the ones people would worry about due to my own morals but it certainly doesn't keep me from pirating data.

I break laws constantly and what are they going to do about it? Sure they could arrest me but what good would it do them? I'd pirate stuff even from jail.

For that matter I'd probably break out of jail. It'd be my moral obligation to defend myself so I'd feel no wrong in killing and causing chaos if the government of a country attacked me first. So to keep me from ripping a few movies they'd make me kill.. just to take a guess of my own abilities I could kill a couple dozen people trying to break out.. then they'd kill me. To keep me from watching a DVD without the disc?

Piracy should be a civil issue not a legal issue. If company X wants to sue me for their imagined damages that would be reasonable. It wouldn't be reasonable to send me to jail. Sending people to jail often causes them to become more criminal. There is no benefit to society to take non-violent people and make them violent.

--
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
Re:In the US by MonkeyBoy · 2003-02-27 18:30 · Score: 1

They're asking if you've ever been arrested now?

Last time I filled out a job application (granted it has been a long time) they asked "have you ever been convicted of a felony?" As did the previous two or three dozen I'd filled out as a young'n (I've been employed by a grand total of 2 companies in the past 13 years or so).

Christ, arrests happen for all kinds of nonsensical crap that have no bearing on employment. You can almost always get arrested during a traffic stop if the cop is having a bad day.

Committing a felony, and getting convicted of it, is a whole other story. In theory they're more serious crimes and indicate a certain willingness to go out of your way to break the law. The trust is not there.

Of course, you can be arrested and charged on trumped up felony charges too, no shortage of suburban keystone cops out there looking to fit a square peg in a round hole (or bored and trying to create an opportunity for advancement).

--
Moof!

so make a bong from by SirSlud · 2003-02-26 12:51 · Score: 5, Interesting

- a carrot
- a can of coke
- a 2l pop bottle

Or just eat the weed.

Or smoke it in a joint.

I mean, poor american taxpayers, how much are you paying a year now to try and keep those dangerous stoners from running amok?

--
"Old man yells at systemd"

Re:so make a bong from by fishbowl · 2003-02-26 13:14 · Score: 5, Insightful

>I mean, poor american taxpayers, how much are
>you paying a year now to try and keep those
>dangerous stoners from running amok?

Eleven Billion Dollars.

I've decided that no "legalization" or "decriminialization" effort will ever work.
So I am seeking support for an effort to have Alcohol classified as a Schedule II narcotic, and Tobacco as Schedule I (tobacco has no known medical uses), and placed under DEA authority as Federally controlled substances.

Our society does not tolerate the use of dangerous drugs. Federal enforcement of drug control regulations is a success. Alcohol is a dangerous drug, and the people have consistently shown an inability to use it without causing death and destruction. If you have a medical reason for using alcohol, then you should be able to get a prescription for it. Otherwise, possession and sale should be treated exactly like the other dangerous drugs.

--
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Re:so make a bong from by dc2light · 2003-02-26 14:11 · Score: 5, Insightful

I hope that you are joking. Please tell me when, in the history of the United States (or any other nation), has prohibition served it's intended purpose (if it's true intended purpose is to dramatically reduce or elliminate the trade and use of the given subject of prohibition)?
Fiorella H. LaGuardia begs to differ with you:
http://prohibition.history.ohio-state.edu/la guardi .htm

People didn't start sticking needles in their arms until Heroin became illegal in 1914 thanks to The Harrison Narcotic Act. Once it was hard to get, and therefore much more expensive, people who were addicted to heroin needed to make the most of what they could get.

Prohibition only makes a bad situation worse. I don't think that any good comes out of the abuse of 'drugs/alcohol', however I think we should take heed of the lessons of history, instead of continually repeating them (at the expense of billions of dollars, not to mention the untold human suffering).

The addicts and their families aren't the only one's who suffer. The misery generated by the illegal drug traffic business touches all of our lives in some way. That doesn't begin to address the incredible horrors instigated in the countries of origin and trade of the prohibited materials. (Seen Columbia in the headlines lately?)

However noble your intentions might be, you ignore the element of greed (a sad element of human nature) at everyone's peril. If there is a demand for something, someone will find a way to supply it, priced according to the risks involved and the availabilty of the material in question.

I really can't believe anyone would advocate prohibition. You really must be joking. Right?
Re:so make a bong from by Minna+Kirai · 2003-02-26 14:14 · Score: 1

Proscribing alcohol is exactly what fishbowl asked the DEA to do.
Re:so make a bong from by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 14:14 · Score: 2, Insightful

As for me, I enjoy a nice cold beer, straight from the tap.

That's so cool. Here we only get water, and it's sort of chlorine-y at that. I'm moving to wherever YOU live.

btw, the poster you replied to was being ironic in order to make a point. You know, about the hypocrisy of stigmatising and prosecuting for marijuana to the point where certain art glass is probably illegal to make or own, while leaving other more harmful drugs alone. Next time read it twice and perhaps we'll be spared your pointless rant.
Re:so make a bong from by plague3106 · 2003-02-26 14:37 · Score: 1

With cigarettes, I absolutely agree. And that's from a smoker.

I really could care less what people do. Smoke, pay more insurance. Don't wear your seatbelt, insurance doesn't have to cover your injuries.

Prohibition gave rise to the mob, anti-drug laws created more problems then they ever solved.
Re:so make a bong from by plague3106 · 2003-02-26 14:42 · Score: 1

btw, the poster you replied to was being ironic in order to make a point. You know, about the hypocrisy of stigmatising and prosecuting for marijuana to the point where certain art glass is probably illegal to make or own, while leaving other more harmful drugs alone. Next time read it twice and perhaps we'll be spared your pointless rant.

All kidding aside, some people do have that attitude. They lead an empty life, and want to control the lives of others. People need to mind thier own buisness, and stop worrying that other people are having more fun then them.
Re:so make a bong from by fishbowl · 2003-02-26 14:55 · Score: 1, Troll

"Prohibition gave rise to the mob"

It is a specious argument at best, that a causal relationship exists between prohibition and organized crime. The government grossly underestimated the task of enforcing the prohibition of alcohol. Today, the DEA budget is 11 billion dollars. That would have been approximately 800 million 1930 dollars. Today, we understand the magnitude of such a task.

Mayor Laguardia was arguing in favor of a repeal of the 18th amendment when he said "It would take a police force of 250,000 to enforce the Prohibition Act". I wonder how he would respond to today's police force of 650,000?

"anti-drug laws created more problems then they ever solved."

There may be evidence to support that opinion, but the vast majority of the public adamantly disagrees. Federal drug policy has been a success. Drug use has been reduced by 50% since 1982, and cocaine use alone has declined by 75% since 1987.

My recommendation is for Alcohol to be placed under DEA control as a Schedule II narcotic, and Tobacco under Schedule I. By eliminating these two deadly exceptions to Federal anti-drug laws, the DEA can operate without being criticized for hypocrisy. Also, the ATF can concentrate on controlling explosives and firearms.

--
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Re:so make a bong from by elmegil · 2003-02-26 15:20 · Score: 1

You're right, the mob was not created by Prohibition. But you'd have to be willfully blind to not recognize that Prohibition fueled the mob's rise to prominence, obscene (for the time) wealth, and a certain amount of "rebel cool" (hey, this guy I know, he gets me the best canadian liquor....). And once the wealth was there, it was sure to find ways to propagate itself, even after Prohibition ended. They got enough money to really buy a lot of politicians and legal "professionals", and that let them leverage other things that have continued to be illegal but profitable.
As for the idea of treating tobacco and alcohol consistently with the other drugs, I'm with you there. I don't think there'd be hardly any public support for drug prohibition if it was actually consistent.

--
7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
Re:so make a bong from by dissy · 2003-02-26 15:21 · Score: 1

(quote)
As for me, I enjoy a nice cold beer, straight from the tap. I don't drink excessively, and I do it because I enjoy the taste. And no, you cannot make non-Alcoholic brew taste like the "real thing." So take your lack of personal accountability stance and go shove it up your ass.
(/quote)

Dude you missed the point.

There is no difference between drinking beer or smoking pot. They have similar level of effects and are equal in the danger department.
They should be treated the same.

The obvious answer is both should be legal, but that clearly isnt going to be allowed to happen.

You see, when its something the lawmakers do, its ok, but when they dont do it, its illegal.

I do aggree they should be held in the same legal sense. If they wont legalize them, criminalize it all! Its only fair.
Re:so make a bong from by fishbowl · 2003-02-26 15:24 · Score: 1

[health benefits of alcohol]

Note that my proposal is that Alcohol be Schedule II. It has known medical uses. Likewise, if tobacco has no medical uses, it belongs on Schedule I.

I believe the case against dangerous drugs has been made. Why are these drugs treated so fundamentally differently than say, heroin, marijuana, and cocaine?

The argument that there are huge amounts of money at stake in these industries will not sway me, nor should it be allowed to drive our national policy.

--
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Re:so make a bong from by fishbowl · 2003-02-26 15:32 · Score: 1

"Prohibition fueled the mob's rise to prominence"

No. They were already well on their way. One of the strongest arguments the prohibitionists had was that liquor establishments were already engaging in corrupt business practices, and that saloons were as much about gambling and prostitution (already crimes) as they were about liquor.

The proliferation of organized crime was one of the factors that led to prohibition, not something that directly resulted from it.

"Organized crime" rose from the government's inability to fight crime during the post-war depression of the 1920s. How convenient is it that the depression coincides so nicely with the Prohibition period!

--
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Re:so make a bong from by fishbowl · 2003-02-26 15:46 · Score: 2, Insightful

"It seems obvious to me that if alcohol were classified as Schedule II, restrictions on all drugs in that category would have to be reduced to avoid riots."

We have a winner! You saw right through my argument and came back from the other side.

I believe if my case could be made more thorougly, with sufficient logos, even the staunchest conservative would see there is
really no future for the current strategy.

So many people are arguing directly for reform, but they run up against the status quo, and an enormous problem of cognitive dissonance -- we spent $8 billion last year basically trying to stop people from smoking marijuana, and, somewhat collaterally managed to stop a relative few from using cocaine and heroin. This year we are spending $11 billion to accomplish the same goal.

It is precisely because we have so much invested in the strategy that the very idea of changing it will be rejected. Rejected so vehemently that even State laws are being ignored by Federal prosecutors. And protected so forcefully that the affected States do not even pretend to stand up for their authority.

A direct argument for reform will only be met with an even stricter interpretation of the current policy!

I propose that if by allowing the Federal government to strengthen the policy to its logical extent, simply by applying consistent reasoning to it, people will finally see that the direction the government has taken does not represent their interests or their will. I believe that will engender enormous changes for the greater good.

Despite what the millions in prison would say, the current government still manages to only oppress and disemfranchise a small fringe element. But if the erosion of rights represented in issues such as the "drug war" were applied to other areas that affected less of a minority, less of a fringe, the process of reform will gain the momentum it needs.

I believe it takes a minimum of 12 years for such changes to truly come about under the American system. Unfortunately, the American people lose interest in anything that does not render instant gratification.

--
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Re:so make a bong from by harveyswik · 2003-02-26 15:46 · Score: 1

Aye, and if you could somehow work EverCrack in there mayme I'll graduate from college...someday.
Re:so make a bong from by fishbowl · 2003-02-26 15:56 · Score: 1

>several hundred pub owners

So in other words, you favor mob rule over rational legislation?

Do the "pub owners" have rights that coca growers did not? (Cocaine was not only legal, it was one of the main ingredients of over-the-counter drugs until 1914, when a lot of producers were put out of business by the Harrison act).

Whether our not you can control your drug habit, the fact remains that half of all automotive fatalities are caused by people who cannot.

There are also people who can handle amphetimines, heroin, cocaine, and almost everything else on the list. Why is it so clear that alcohol must be an exception?

--
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Re:so make a bong from by weeboo0104 · 2003-02-26 16:03 · Score: 1

Damn, looks like I'll have to go back to drinking antifreeze!

--
It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
Re:so make a bong from by fishbowl · 2003-02-26 16:08 · Score: 1

>The population also grew, so...

Was Laguardia overestimating, underestimating, or making up numbers that he thought sounded outrageous? He was speaking against nationwide enforcement, but let us consider NYC.

Today, New York City has 11 million people, and supports 82,000 police officers.

In 1930, the population was almost 7 million. The population has indeed grown, but perhaps not by as high a factor as one might expect. I have not found a reliable source for the number of NYC police officers in 1930, but I expect that if one compares the extent of the crime problems they faced to the dearth of any real ability to fight crime, the issue will not boil down as simply as "prohibition caused organized crime."

--
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Re:so make a bong from by Ryan+Amos · 2003-02-26 16:23 · Score: 5, Interesting

And because of all this money we spend on fighting drug trafficking, the drug cartels make even more. Why are we losing the war on drugs? We're being outspent. The Feds spend about $17 billion a year on this war.. the cartels spend somewhere around $30 billion. Also, people seem to think that as Americans, we're smarter than everyone else out there. The cartels have some fucking SMART guys working for them; American trained chemists, guys churning out counterfeit bills so good the Secret Service can barely tell the difference, even rumors of drugs being smuggled by submarine. Not to mention the rumors of CIA involvement in drug traffcking, which I really wouldn't doubt, given the backass nature of the CIA in the past.

The US govt needs to learn the war on drugs is NOT one it can win unless it is prepared to enter into another Vietnam type conflict (albeit against a much better funded enemy.) All to enforce some racist laws enacted at the turn of the century (example: opium was outlawed because of anti-Chinese sentiments. White people didn't use the stuff.)

But all this is regardless of my objections to these type of raids. It is irrelevant that these pipes/bongs/whatever are often used to smoke marijuana. They CAN (and, at least in name, are intended to) be used to smoke tobacco and other legal substances. That in itself should be reason enough for the average American to start to fear. Because books that do not agree with this regime bring rise to terrorism, they should be banned. Because terrorists are muslim, the religion of islam should be banned.

I'll say this now, and probably have black helicopters landing on my roof in an hour: John Ashcroft needs to go away. I don't care how, but he's leading this country down a path towards certain self-destruction. Unless things head in a different direction soon, I'll find myself holding up my end of the bargain on the Socratian social contract and heading somewhere else. A ray of hope: In the year 2030 Hispanics are estimated to be 50% of the US' population. Perhaps then the religious right (aka the religious white) will be wrenched from power. Unless we revoke the Hispanics' voting rights.
Re:so make a bong from by Xerithane · 2003-02-26 16:28 · Score: 1

So in other words, you favor mob rule over rational legislation?

Uhm, this is what I was speaking against. Go back and re-read it. I was saying prohibition will cause otherwise complacent and wealthy people to become very aggressive and turn brewing into a criminal organization.

Whether our not you can control your drug habit, the fact remains that half of all automotive fatalities are caused by people who cannot.

So punish the people that do it, not the cause. It's the same thing as the Xbox mod'ers who are pissed off that it's illegal. It's my body, what I chose to put in it is my own fault. If you drink and kill someone, it's murder. End of story. That's just my philosophy, but it's how I feel.

There are also people who can handle amphetimines, heroin, cocaine, and almost everything else on the list. Why is it so clear that alcohol must be an exception?

Because one beer does not effect most peoples state, at all. I've not seen a person who can snort a line and remain perfectly in sorts.

--
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
Re:so make a bong from by buho · 2003-02-26 16:28 · Score: 1

You're assuming people would think intelligently about the subject, instead of just changing the status of what the majority were complaining about, instead of the whole category.
Re:so make a bong from by fishbowl · 2003-02-26 16:30 · Score: 1

>So punish the people that do it, not the cause.

There are severe penalties against drinking and driving in every State today. Obviously this is
far short of a solution.

--
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Re:so make a bong from by fishbowl · 2003-02-26 16:32 · Score: 1

"You're assuming people would think intelligently about the subject, instead of just changing the status of what the majority were complaining about, instead of the whole category."

If I'm wrong then why does Marijuana == Heroin today?

--
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Re:so make a bong from by Xerithane · 2003-02-26 16:36 · Score: 1

There are severe penalties against drinking and driving in every State today. Obviously this is far short of a solution.

Right, and I happen to know of a case where a girl was drunk, hit a cop on a motorcycle, permanently disfiguring him and he has to go through rounds of reconstructive and cosmetic surgery... and she got 2 years.

This happened about a year ago, if memory serves correctly. The bar that served her is getting hit harder than she is. So, when the punishments start getting real, let me know.

--
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
Re:so make a bong from by fishbowl · 2003-02-26 16:48 · Score: 1

>"Vietnam type conflict"

Are you saying, shooting wars in South America?
The difference between South America and Southeast Asia is that you couldn't drive to Vietnam and support the enemy :-) You could
WALK to Colombia...

>Because terrorists are muslim, the religion of
>islam should be banned.

Well, I'm not sure banning books would do much, because Americans do not really value literacy anymore. But banning "Islam" might actually affect more voters than banning "weed" did...
There is a limit to how much power a government can grab for itself before an opposition party takes it away from them (and uses the same power for different ends). I don't think the current Administration has quite found its floor, but it's feeling for it.

>Hispanics are estimated to be 50% of the US'
>population.

One thing I learned while working on the '92 campaign in Texas, was that many Latin people embrace systems of control. The Hispanic vote definitely helped Bush Sr. win Texas. Mexican Americans are not exactly known for their Libertarian views, and in Texas, they tend to vote Republican.

--
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Re:so make a bong from by stephanruby · 2003-02-26 17:26 · Score: 1

"Federal drug policy has been a success. Drug use has been reduced by 50% since 1982, and cocaine use alone has declined by 75% since 1987. "
Our tobacco policy has also been a success. A success without putting anyone in jail, I might add.
Re:so make a bong from by stephanruby · 2003-02-26 17:40 · Score: 1

"There are severe penalties against drinking and driving in every State today. Obviously this is far short of a solution. "
In California, I know a girl who was caught driving under the influence. Somehow, the judge gave her six months probation plus no driving for six months, but still in one month -- she got her drivers license back. Apparently, "the severe penalties" you're talking about only kick in when an innocent bystandard gets killed. By then, it's usually too late.
Re:so make a bong from by stephanruby · 2003-02-26 18:11 · Score: 1

"One of the strongest arguments the prohibitionists had was that liquor establishments were already engaging in corrupt business practices, and that saloons were as much about gambling and prostitution (already crimes) as they were about liquor. "
That's a good point. Let's not only legalize marijuana, but also prostitution and gambling in every State.
Re:so make a bong from by playagame · 2003-02-26 18:29 · Score: 1

There are some interesting theories floating around about the drug trade. One famous conspiracy guy, Mike Ruppurt [www.fromthewilderness.com], claims he caught the CIA dealing drugs when he was a narcotics officer for the LAPD. There is actually much evidence to back his assertions, including the fact that he was mysteriously and for no apparent reason fired. The basic jest of his theory is this: there is 500 billion in drug money all cash every year, it has to be laundered somewhere, banks and giant corporations in America and elsewhere are laundering this money for them (it is almost impossible to catch them) and in the meantime boosting up their stocks and book numbers trememndously with the drug money (gets complicated here), and that drug money is basically keeping the US economy alive. He contends the CIA smuggles most of the heroine (hence the increase in Afghan opium production) and some of the cocain and makes profit there for black operations while also helping the economy. Also he says that drug enforcement is only meant to raise the street prices for drugs and fool the unsuspecting public (and maybe oppress some minorities while we are at it?). Yeah I know it sounds really far-fetched but he has some interesting ideas and I would like to know where this 500 billion a year (1/4 of all hard money) ends up, I doubt under peoples mattresses. You also have to assume the CIA knows where this ends up and would be concered with this type of thing especially since they are so specialized in finances and monitary transactions.
Re:so make a bong from by fucksl4shd0t · 2003-02-26 18:37 · Score: 1

"Organized crime" rose from the government's inability to fight crime during the post-war depression of the 1920s. How convenient is it that the depression coincides so nicely with the Prohibition period!
You're on crack! the roaring twenties were a very prosperous time for the country, much like the '90s. Decadence, everybody had money, ending with a stock market crash. The depression started in 1929, dude, late at that.

--
Like what I said? You might like my music
Re:so make a bong from by fucksl4shd0t · 2003-02-26 18:40 · Score: 1

That's a good point. Let's not only legalize marijuana, but also prostitution and gambling in every State.
I'm with you on that. I'm sick of laws being passed purely for morality reasons, because they don't always jive with other people's morality. While I wouldn't pay a whore (married :) ), I don't see any reason why someone else shouldn't be able to. It's not like their predatory or anything... (Imagine Gates' wife having a monopoly in the prostitution industry)
In my opinion, for something to be criminal, there must be a victim. And I don't mean I'm my own victim. I make up my own mind on the matter, and do what I want. I can victimize you, you can victimize me, but I can't victimize me and you can't victimize you.

--
Like what I said? You might like my music
Re:so make a bong from by LordLucless · 2003-02-26 18:57 · Score: 1

Don't stop at alchohol and tobacco.

Sugar and fat are responsible for many of the diseases that claim the lives of people in the western world. High blood pressure, diabetes, hardening of the arteries, heart failure. Surely the government should restrict the use of these substances, in the same way as it restricts the use of cocaine and heroin, as people who abuse them are endangering their lives.

Motor cars too. Far more people die in car accidents than drug overdoses every year. Obviously car licences are far too permissive, and should only be granted in exceptional circumstances - to protect citizens lives.

Basically, what it boils down to is that everything can be abused. The government can't control everything, its just not possible. At some point, they have to let their citizens decide what to do with their own lives. If they wish to chance death through drug use, or gluttony, thats their own decision, not the governments.

What the government is doing when "protecting" its citizens this way, is essentially taking control of peoples' life away from them. If people are not in control of their lives, they are not responsible for their actions. I don't know about the US, but here in Australia there have been a whole lot of law suits lately about things like this.

Two kids jigged school, went to a construction site and chucked rocks at each other. One of them got hit and sued the school - successfully - for not stopping them from jigging.

Another guy was stoned off his head, dived into a stream, smashed his head on the low bottom, and sued the government for not having warning signs about water depth up.

The current policy of "protection" that seems to be pervading society at the moment totally justifies these otherwise stupid cases. If the government is taking responsibility for our lives upon themeselves, then they must protect us. If our lives are our own, then responsiblity for our actions lies squarely on our own shoulders.

--
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
Re:so make a bong from by fishbowl · 2003-02-26 19:26 · Score: 1

"everybody had money"

In the 20's? Just like the 90's, huh?

You are only regarding the stereotype that the media portrays to you. The period after WWI was quite rough for America, and we were still recovering from this when WWII started.

"Everybody" had money, my ass.

--
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Re:so make a bong from by quintessencesluglord · 2003-02-26 19:39 · Score: 1

Gosh, I was here trying to fix my X-box, smoking some tobacco (nicotine is found effective in treating Parkinson's type syndromes... all the antipsychotics I'm on... I think the government is out to get me) in my water-pipe (TM), and drinking a beer (heart problems you know... beef, it's what was for dinner) when... Wait. What's that knock at the door... Oh sure, and when they try to outlaw caffine, then you'll the geeks bitch. But those other druggies... Have you had your net fix today?
Re:so make a bong from by Mac+Degger · 2003-02-26 22:49 · Score: 1

So kick mariuana to schedule 2 aswell; known medical uses, and the only known bad effects are from heavy, long term use (as with just about anything you can consume). Pair that with the recreational use, and I'd say "legalise it".

The rotter there is, though, that you need tobacco to make it burn properly :)

--
-- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
Re:so make a bong from by Mprx · 2003-02-26 23:29 · Score: 1

You do not need to mix marijuana with tobacco to make it burn properly. I live in the UK where mixing them is a common practice, but I never do it myself. Smoke in a pipe or bong instead of joints if you have problems burning it.

http://www.ukcia.org/activism/tokepure.htm
Re:so make a bong from by plague3106 · 2003-02-27 00:27 · Score: 1

It is a specious argument at best, that a causal relationship exists between prohibition and organized crime.

Bull, try reading your history. i didn't say it created the mob, i said it gave rise to it; ie. made it much more powerful then it had been previously.

Mayor Laguardia was arguing in favor of a repeal of the 18th amendment when he said "It would take a police force of 250,000 to enforce the Prohibition Act". I wonder how he would respond to today's police force of 650,000?

Comparing 1930s numbers to 2003s numbers eh? The police force is larger mostly because the US population is so much larger. Are you one those people that wish they could live in the 60s because everything is so much cheaper?

There may be evidence to support that opinion, but the vast majority of the public adamantly disagrees. Federal drug policy has been a success. Drug use has been reduced by 50% since 1982, and cocaine use alone has declined by 75% since 1987.

56.3% of all statics are made up on the spot. I hear your numbers, and i see what goes on in the world around me. Your numbers are crap. In fact, besides the problems we had from drug abusers before, we now have murders and other crimes related to the import and sale of drugs.

My recommendation is for Alcohol to be placed under DEA control as a Schedule II narcotic, and Tobacco under Schedule I. By eliminating these two deadly exceptions to Federal anti-drug laws, the DEA can operate without being criticized for hypocrisy. Also, the ATF can concentrate on controlling explosives and firearms.

Ahh...you're a troll. I"m suprised you didn't include caffeinee in that list, its addictive too you know.
Re:so make a bong from by flink · 2003-02-27 01:03 · Score: 1

Hear hear! A woman's body is her own, and if she want's to rent it out, so be it. At least if it was legal it could be done in a clean, safe environment.
Re:so make a bong from by ChefPsyconaut · 2003-02-27 01:41 · Score: 1

Did anybody see "Bowling for Columbine"? They talk about America's 'culture of fear'. Seems the rest of us are cultivating a 'cuture of fear of Americans'... y'all better vote a bit differently, y'hear?
Re:so make a bong from by deadsaijinx* · 2003-02-27 01:59 · Score: 1

The point is not actually to ban alchohol but to point out the inconsistencies and hypocritical status of the laws as they are now. If you lost your precious alchohol and tobacco, maybe you'd rethink your policies and drugs.... maybe.

--
YOU SUCK BALLS!
Re:so make a bong from by TheMidget · 2003-02-27 02:25 · Score: 1

The last time I checked "america" wasn't spelled with a "k."
You're right. It's not spelled with one k. It's actually spelled with three k:
Amerikkka.
The country were being black is considered to be almost as bad as thinking independantly...
Btw, did you know why there are weapons inspections in Iraq, but none in North Korea?
Easy: North Korea does have weapons of mass destruction (nukes) while Iraq does not. And the last thing you want to do is to corner a country which has weapons of mass destruction, especially if you are a Coward such as Bush.
Re:so make a bong from by phastest · 2003-02-27 03:15 · Score: 1

"With cigarettes, I absolutely agree. And that's from a smoker. If the government ever bans tobacco, then we might just as well sign the title deed to the country over to organized crime." This country has a title deed? Are you aware how much money this country owes? I think there might be some creditors out there who'd LOVE to get their hands on such a deed. Back on topic, easiest-to-make water pipe can be constructed with a 2 liter soda bottle, a piece of metal screen (not copper), the end of your neighbor's garden hose (with about 6 inches of hose attached), and a few strips of duct tape. You might have trouble finding the duct tape. The brass fitting on your neighbor's hose will have a rubber or plastic washer in it; i strongly suggest you remove this unless you enjoy black smoke. 3 to 4 inches from the bottom of the bottle, make a hole roughly the diameter of the rubber portion of the garden hose. Insert hose into hole at such an angle as to have exit of this hose approximately contacting the bottom of the bottle. Seal your incision with duct tape. Add a second, smaller hole near the top of the bottle. This will be your carburetor. Wrap a small portion of the screen around your fingertip, creating a progressive cone. Insert this into the brass portion of the garden hose. Add water to the bottle (or whatever you want to filter the smoke) to a little below the incision line. You don't want that liquid spilling on your couch! Fill your "bowl" with smoking medium. If you cannot figure out the rest of the procedure, the previously described project is not for you.
Re:so make a bong from by bmud · 2003-02-27 03:17 · Score: 1

Please tell me when, in the history of the United States (or any other nation), has prohibition served it's intended purpose

Never. If you had answered your own rhetorical question, you would have understood the parent article's message.

Cannabis prohibition causes more harm to society via its enforcement than cannabis useage itself. The justification for prohibition, i.e. that it "has no known medical use," is little more than a smoke screen for the real reason for its continued criminalization - disinformation, moral interventionist zealots, and scapegoating.

No study which has not been discredited has shown any long-term harmful effect to cannabis. Sure, there's harm in smoking it like there's harm in inhaling any vaporized plant matter. Sure, there's psychological addicition, but this is a fancy way of stating "People will repeat what they enjoy." Marijuana's addictive potential is equivilant to rollar coasters and a quality TV rogram.

No, the US of A needs a group to scapegoat. It's become unfashionable to rage against African-American males. Recreational drug users have become our new national plague.

Thanks Ashcroft!
Re:so make a bong from by jweatherley · 2003-02-27 03:27 · Score: 1

This got in the news in the UK at the end of last year - a woman drunk antifreeze by mistake and got prescribed whisky when she went to the hospital. Two glasses immediately followed by one an hour for 24 hours. I'd imagine she was pretty rat-arsed after that (free) session!

--

--
Reverse outsourcing: it's the future
Re:so make a bong from by kableh · 2003-02-27 03:41 · Score: 1

Why are these drugs treated so fundamentally differently than say, heroin, marijuana, and cocaine?

Because, there is perfectly good money to be made. Gotta love capitalism!
Re:so make a bong from by kableh · 2003-02-27 03:46 · Score: 1

The argument that there are huge amounts of money at stake in these industries will not sway me

Then you are ignoring the facts. Tobacco is big business, has lots of lawyers, lots of lobbyists, and diversify themselves to the point that they can weather a few years of anti-tobacco sentiment and come out unscathed.

Likewise, law enforcement/imprisonment is big business. Tell me, if there is good money in imprisoning non-violent offenders of drug-related crimes, what incentive does the prison system have to reform anyone?

nor should it be allowed to drive our national policy.

Well no kidding, but it does. These companies have money, and money talks in Washington. There are a lot of things that shouldn't be allowed in politics, but that doesn't stop them from happening.
Re:so make a bong from by goon+america · 2003-02-27 03:51 · Score: 1

"Please tell me when, in the history of the United States (or any other nation), has prohibition served it's intended purpose (if it's true intended purpose is to dramatically reduce or elliminate the trade and use of the given subject of prohibition)?"
I'm probably going to get modded out of existence for this, but I am going to have to disagree with you. Let me go ahead and cite all the examples that people usually cite in support of this point: 1) Alcohol 2) Drugs 3) untaxed Tea in revolutionary America 4) that time in Florida when they banned a kind of wash detergent.
Now, we can agree all those examples were failures, right? They may have reduced the total quantity of the substance on the street, but produced external costs on society that exceeded that of the substance by itself.
Let me state some similarities between those substances, in order of importance: 1) Consumption goods (people need a regular supply of them) 2) High, inelastic demand (quantity demanded relatively constant despite changes in price) 3) No close substitute for the good.
This is why I think that any prohibition on products meeting those three requirements will probably fail. Bans against products not meeting these requirements will work a lot better:
1) Leaded gasoline engines: you only need one of them, you don't need a regular supply of them; can substitute with an unleaded gasoline engine
2) CFC-emitting refridgerators: you only need one; can substitute with a CFC-safe refridgerator.
3) Unsafe child safety seats: Can substitute for a real safety seat.
The idea that prohibition can produce some unexpected results is true. Sometimes, prohibition can even increase the quantity consumed by a society. That doesn't mean that prohibition _never_ works; I think that it seems to explode when those 3 requirements I listed are met. It seems to work a lot better for other, less exciting things.
Re:so make a bong from by kableh · 2003-02-27 03:56 · Score: 1

There is no difference between drinking beer or smoking pot

I'd beg to differ, and so would a few Brits. That is right, being TIRED has more adverse effects on driving.

I only bring it up because of all of the anti-marijuana ads in the papers these days. How come the Christian wrong can refuse to allow their tax dollars to aid countries that MIGHT educate people on family planning, yet it doesnt matter that I am strongly opposed to a racist war on my fellow citizens that is funded with my tax dollars?
Re:so make a bong from by (trb001) · 2003-02-27 04:08 · Score: 1

...another Vietnam type conflict

It would be such a different and more difficult fight than Vietnam. At least in Vietnam, we only had to deal with guerillas in one country. The 'War on Drugs' is a scam. I'm a friggin right wing Republican and I'll gladly admit that. It looked good on paper for the presidential campaigns of the 80's, but after having played around with a few controlled substances myself, I concluded there are two possible endings...

1) You learn to control your addiction
2) You die

Really, pretty simple. Why are we spending money trying to erradicate something we can never get rid of? As Chris Rock said, we'll never get rid of drugs...people would just go down in their basement and become scientists. If the US instead legalized the substances and purified them and gave out free needles, people would either die from overdoses or the drug lords, who cause a majority of the crime already either directly or indirectly, would go out of business.

Pretty simple conclusion, IMHO. You would still need to make it illegal to drive or be out in public on a controlled substance, just like alcohol is, in order to protect innocents. But in your house, hell! Shoot up, snort and smoke anything you want. Talk about getting rid of the national debt! I think my college roommates alone could have financed an inner city education with the amount of weed they bought.

--trb
Re:so make a bong from by 72beetle · 2003-02-27 04:18 · Score: 1

y'all better vote a bit differently, y'hear?

We did.

-72

--
-Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music.
Re:so make a bong from by stanmann · 2003-02-27 04:28 · Score: 1

Easy: North Korea does have weapons of mass destruction (nukes) while Iraq does not. And the last thing you want to do is to corner a country which has weapons of mass destruction, especially if you are a Coward such as Bush.
Actually, it has to do with NK has thus far abided by the cease fire agreement which put a hold on the war. They haven't shot at us, and we haven't shot back, so they have demonstrated a capability to follow agreements they have signed.
(sidenote, we are still technically at war with NK.)
Iraq hasn't... don't go looking for conspiracy when there is another logical answer.

--
Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
Re:so make a bong from by davebooth · 2003-02-27 05:56 · Score: 1

...a woman drunk antifreeze by mistake and got prescribed whisky when she went to the hospital...
Yep, makes perfect sense. The problem with methanol is that it gets into the same places in the body (specifically for some of the nastier toxic effects, in the liver and in nerve cells) that ethanol does - in nerve cells it tends to stick there rather than be released, in the liver it gets into the normal alcohol breakdown pathways and poisons 'em. Thats the same as ordinary alcohol poisoning, but it just takes a LOT less methanol for the same effect. The methanol is already in her system, only way to prevent the damage is to keep the ethanol levels high enough that the methanol cant get where it shouldnt. Get her completely drunk (as a pretty good measure of the ethanol content in her body) and keep her that way for long enough that the methanol has passed out of her system. Then you can let her sober up.

--
I had a .sig once. It got boring.
Re:so make a bong from by JimFromJersey · 2003-02-27 06:45 · Score: 1

> There is no difference between drinking beer or smoking pot.

not exactly. First, there is a physical limit as to the amount of beer you can consume, the belly can only hold so much. Second, consume enough alcohol and you will pass out and assuming you aren't already behind the wheel of a moving car, you only pose a danger to yourself.

that being said I really don't have any issues with people doing pot. It is no more a gateway drug then beer is. I do think that the 'legalize it' movement has to take the lead in educating people about the long term neurological issues involved with pot. Yes I know there are long term neurological issues with alcohol but I think those are beter known. I would like to see a nice 20 year, longitudinal study from a country where pot is legal to compare severity and time of onset of things like short term memory loss between moderate smokers (only), moderate drinkers(only), mixed moderate smoker/drinker, and non-smoker/driker control group.

My guess is that the issues are: A) the cotten cartel is terrified of hemp and b) if Joe Average can grow enough pot for his own consumption then there is nothing to tax.

--
between the greater and lesser infinities sleep the dreams undreamt
Re:so make a bong from by rworne · 2003-02-27 08:41 · Score: 1

Easy: North Korea does have weapons of mass destruction (nukes) while Iraq does not. And the last thing you want to do is to corner a country which has weapons of mass destruction, especially if you are a Coward such as Bush

Sorry, I feel massing troops for what seems to be an inevitable war hardly cowardly. The actions taken recently in Afghanistan are also hardly cowardly. Such comments are insulting to those who serve/have served in the armed forces. Sending troops to risk their lives and deal with the wrath of their families if they come home dead is not cowardly.

What's cowardly is lobbing hundreds of Tomahawk missiles into a country or blowing up a pharmaceutical factory. That's cowardly and a waste of good munitions.

There are no weapons inspections in North Korea simply because the North Koreans won't put up with them. They recently broke all their agreements with the international community and kicked out the IAEA inspectors. The main difference between them and Iraq is that Iraq agreed to the inspections and disarming as part of the end of the 90's Gulf War. Another major difference is Iraq is run by an intelligent and resourceful man while North Korea is run by a fruitcake. North Korea has a rather large standing army and doesn't seem like they'd put up with crap from anyone. All their posturing and threats now are just that of a regime dying on the vine, and I really think if push comes to shove, if they are gonna go out, they'll go out with a bang.

So North Korea scares me a hell of a lot more than Iraq does. Which makes me wonder what they'll do once the US is occupied with a war in the middle east.

So don't get me wrong. I'm not gung-ho about the current Iraq situation either. I served in the US Marines during the 1st Gulf War, and I really feel sorry for those poor bastards who have to go this time to clean up after a job that should have been finished the first time around.

--
I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
Re:so make a bong from by rworne · 2003-02-27 08:44 · Score: 1

Actually, NK, SK and the US have been shooting at each other for quite a while already. This has been going on ever since the cease fire agreement.

--
I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
Re:so make a bong from by dissy · 2003-02-27 09:49 · Score: 1

> My guess is that the issues are: A) the cotten
> cartel is terrified of hemp and b) if Joe Average
> can grow enough pot for his own consumption then
> there is nothing to tax.

No. A is your only valid point, and due to companys that is the only real reason its still illegal to this day.

As for taxing it. The same is true with tobaco. I can leagally grow that in my backyard and roll my own ciggeretts. How many people in the US do you know that do _that_ ?

Its cheaper and easier to buy packs at the store.
If pot was legalized, it would become the same thing.

As for your danger points, well, we KNOW how hardful tobaco is and alcohol is, yet both are very legal. What i kill myself with slowly is none of the governments concern or business.

I dont care if pot would make you die faster than alcohol or tobaco or not. It has nothing to do with the fact that if i want to slowly kill myself with any substance i want, thats my choice.

As for driving intoxicated, thats already illegal no matter how you are intoxicated. Keep that law and use it.
No one should be driving while intoxicated, be it drugs, alcohol, or too much cold medicine.

Hemp was the worlds most abundant renewable resource 2nd to water.
Its cheaper and cleaner to make paper from, it can be turned easily into cleaner fuel, even MORE so than corn oil can, it has MANY medical uses which have been proven (compared to tobaco's big zero)

But i do aggree with another point. Id like to see studies too. Its a shame its still illegal for no reason so we cant do them.
Re:so make a bong from by SUB7IME · 2003-02-27 09:53 · Score: 1

Hispanics are largely Catholic. Thus, they would probably support the 'religious right'. However, the politics about which you speak do not concern things within the religious right's purview.

It's important that the religious right does not become confused with 'conservatism' as a whole - they can be immensely separate!
Re:so make a bong from by Graspee_Leemoor · 2003-02-27 11:44 · Score: 1

"Aluminum ingestion has been linked to Alzheimer's,"

So don't eat the can!

Anyway, smoking in itself for some bizarre reason actually helps prevent Alzheimer's, so it all probably evens out.

graspee
Re:so make a bong from by Ryan+Amos · 2003-02-27 14:15 · Score: 1

Think again. The "religious right" is almost EXCLUSIVELY protestant. Catholics and Protestants agree on a few issues (abortion being one of them) but largely they are very very far apart. Hispanics also tend to swing far left. Look at a breakdown of the voting in Texas (I'd suggest California but you can see it better in Texas) and you'll see a solid line of hardcore democrat counties on the border with Mexico, where the population is almost 100% Hispanic.

As for the second point, yeah, I agree. There are two types of conservatives: moral conservatives and political conservatives. Political conservatives I have no real problem with; they're for a reduction in big government, etc. Moral conservatives are the ones behind these heavy-handed big brother initiatives. You can't legislate morality, no matter how hard you try.
Re:so make a bong from by fucksl4shd0t · 2003-02-27 15:12 · Score: 1

You are only regarding the stereotype that the media portrays to you. The period after WWI was quite rough for America, and we were still recovering from this when WWII started.
Actually, I'm basing my response on a fictional novel. :) Oops. Um, Sail into the Sunset? The one by Heinlein that tells Lazarus Long's mothers story. Heinlein has a tendency to distort facts and make shit up. That's why his work is classed as "fiction". Heh.

--
Like what I said? You might like my music
Re:so make a bong from by j-turkey · 2003-02-27 18:05 · Score: 1

It is a specious argument at best, that a causal relationship exists between prohibition and organized crime. The government grossly underestimated the task of enforcing the prohibition of alcohol. Today, the DEA budget is 11 billion dollars. That would have been approximately 800 million 1930 dollars. Today, we understand the magnitude of such a task.

Woah! Where should I start...A casual relationship?!? My friend, the two go hand-in-hand. You must have poor sources on this one. Further, we clearly do not understand the magnitude of the task of prohibition. "Druglords" are very smart businesspeople, and are clearly doing well enough to curb our 11 billion dollar effort.

Mayor Laguardia was arguing in favor of a repeal of the 18th amendment when he said "It would take a police force of 250,000 to enforce the Prohibition Act". I wonder how he would respond to today's police force of 650,000?

This is totally irrelevant. 250,000 was a seemingly outlandish number that he threw out as an as example. Further, as a civil libertarian, LaGuardia may have been apalled by the state of our nation and the abuse of the Rico statutes...not to mention the draconian Rockafeller drug laws which have been entirely abusive and ineffective.

Federal drug policy has been a success. Drug use has been reduced by 50% since 1982, and cocaine use alone has declined by 75% since 1987.

You must be smoking crack! Federal drug policy has been a failure since it's inception.

I'm not sure where you get your 50% reduction -- where are the data? If you are using Barry McCaffrey as a reference, the man is an outright liar.

I know of this claim about the drop in cocaine use. It's not the first time the fed has used it to parade their "results". Ronald Regan used it in his '84 campaign -- he claimed responsibility for a huge drop in cocaine. The Late 70's and early 80's were the heyday for cocaine. The reason behind the drop in usage was actually a social trend...this had nothing to do with federal enforcement efforts.

I have a perfect compromise...why don't you just not drink, smoke, or use any other substances that you choose not to use. In my house, I will smoke (and eat) the cannabis that I legally grow and drink beer that I legally brew...all in the privacy of my own home. Doesn't that sound like a reasonable compromise? If not -- please educate me on the harm that I'm doing to society...or, more importantly: Why, prey tell, it's any of your (or the fed's) business at all?

--Turkey

--

-Turkey
Re:so make a bong from by j-turkey · 2003-02-27 18:11 · Score: 1

I can leagally grow that in my backyard and roll my own ciggeretts. How many people in the US do you know that do _that_ ? Its cheaper and easier to buy packs at the store. If pot was legalized, it would become the same thing.

It's totally different than tobacco. Growing your own cannabis is far more akin to brewing your own beer, which is a widely appreciated and accepted hobby.

-Turkey

--

-Turkey
Re:so make a bong from by dissy · 2003-02-28 02:54 · Score: 1

> It's totally different than tobacco. Growing your
> own cannabis is far more akin to brewing your own
> beer, which is a widely appreciated and accepted
> hobby.

Actually I think all three are the same.
(I dont see how tobaco should be concidered different)

I did however totally forget one can brew their own beer/wine/etc however.

That still proves my point.
Lots of people do it, its not illegal, the govt still gets their money on the 99% of the people that still find it more convient to buy canned beer at a store or from a brewer, just as 99% of the populous that wants to smoke pot would go to the quick-e-mart and pay $10 per pack (or however it was to be sold in stores, id imagine it would be packaged similar to the many ways you can get tobaco, which is mainly cigerettes, but still in raw form for those into that kinda thing)

My point from the start was that taxing is NOT a reason in the govt's eyes for not allowing hemp/pot to be sold purely because you can grow it yourself.
The exact same situation holds true for alcohol and tobaco yet there are no problems there.
Re:so make a bong from by stanmann · 2003-02-28 06:33 · Score: 1

Great, so in the last 50 years, the NK, SK, and US have had 3-5 mild border violations annually, that is approximately the same number of times Iraq shoots at our aircraft patrolling the Northern/Southern Watch areas Weakly.

--
Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
Re:so make a bong from by rworne · 2003-02-28 07:55 · Score: 1

Naval engagements, sunk ships, and submarines combined with tunneling under the DMZ and the kidnapping of Japanese nationals for "spy training" hardly counts as minor border skirmishes. Yes, the war is still on, but on a very, very low simmer.

As for following agreements, kicking out the IAEA and firing up reactors to make plutonium, and backing out of nonpoliferation treaties hardly counts as a "capability of following agreements they have signed". The leader of NK is a total nutcase, that makes him much more dangerous than Saddam ever was.

--
I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
Re:so make a bong from by fishbowl · 2003-02-28 12:03 · Score: 1

>Your numbers are crap.

My statistics are taken directly from official reports of the DEA.

If you have a problem, take it up with them, not me.

--
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Re:so make a bong from by plague3106 · 2003-03-01 10:00 · Score: 1

I'm taking it up w/you b/c you're parroting thier numbers, without checking them. You think the DEA will really admit they aren't making a difference?
Re:so make a bong from by stephanruby · 2003-03-01 20:00 · Score: 1

"Drug use has been reduced by 50% since 1982, "
The drug supply, on the other hand, has never been stronger. So may be, we should stop focusing on limiting the drug supply, since that part of the War on Drugs hasn't been working, and we should start focusing on what has_been_working, whatever that may be.
"and cocaine use alone has declined by 75% since 1987."
What about ecstacy? I don't know anyone who takes cocaine anymore, it's not as trendy as it used to be.
Re:so make a bong from by CentrX · 2003-03-09 14:34 · Score: 1

For all practical purposes, it is impossible to die from using cannabis. In addition, cannabis does not prove addictive for most people--usually those that have addictive personalities. Minimal, infrequent usage of most other drugs is also not addictive. You're making a pretty blanket statement that's not quite true.

--

"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." - Thomas Jefferson
Re:so make a bong from by CentrX · 2003-03-09 17:53 · Score: 1

There have been several studies on neurological and cognitive effects of marijuana usage. There have been few credible studies that demonstrate harmful neurological effects of marijuana. In fact, several studies show that marijuana may be neuroprotective and anti-oxidative, and useful for treatment of several neurological disorders. Credible studies that do indicate that marijuana may have neurotoxic properties focus on administering marijuana to rats for extended periods of time (according to one review, 10% of their life) and the results of these studies are not reproduced when conducted on animals more related to us, such as monkeys.

As for cognitive effects (on IQ, memory, etc. rather than neurological effects such as changes in brain metabolism and neuronal changes), studies usually indicate that, in the long-term (10 years of abstinence for instance), marijuana has no negative effect on cognition when consumed lightly, moderately, or heavily. In the shorter term (a month of abstinence for instance), light or moderate consumption of marijuana has not proven to have negative cognitive effects. However, there has been shown to be decreases in cognitive performance after a month for heavy users of marijuana. However, in most of these studies, heavy is defined as the equivalent of more than 20 or 30 joints in one week, which far exceeds the amount usually consumed by most users and is very rare in extended periods of time.

My above comments are from memory of studies I have read in the past, but I went over to pubmed to have some URLs to post of such studies. I grew tired of this, however, but here are a few abstracts of studies and reviews.

Review of literature on neurotoxicity:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd= Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1666926&dopt=Abstract

Neuroprotective and anti-oxidative qualities:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd= Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12054093&dopt=Abstrac t
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd= Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11157423&dopt=Abstrac t
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd= Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9653176&dopt=Abstract

Long-term cognitive: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd= Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11949984&dopt=Abstrac t

--

"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." - Thomas Jefferson

DOJ doesn't own it by iCEBaLM · 2003-02-26 12:52 · Score: 5, Informative

Registrant:
The iSO News (ISONEWS-DOM)
Jacobus van 't Hoffstraat 69
Nijmegen, MR 6533
NL

Domain Name: ISONEWS.COM

Re:DOJ doesn't own it by leviramsey · 2003-02-26 12:59 · Score: 1

Basically, the DoJ took over the servers, presumably through a court order.
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by delta407 · 2003-02-26 12:59 · Score: 4, Informative

WHOIS data aside, I now get a "...is now the property of the United States government" page. But guess what?

<meta name="AUTHOR" content="USDOJ"> <meta name="GENERATOR" content="Mozilla/4.79 [en]C-CCK-MCD DOJ3jx7bf (Windows NT 5.0; U) [Netscape]">

The DOJ uses Mozilla! :-)
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by KnightStalker · 2003-02-26 13:01 · Score: 4, Funny

Nope... that's Netscape 4 :-)

Or :-( ... take your pick.

--
* And remember, it's spelled N-e-t-s-c-a-p-e, but it's pronounced "Mozilla."
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by /dev/trash · 2003-02-26 13:15 · Score: 1

They own it now.

I'm sure .NL will not even care one bit.
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by molo · 2003-02-26 13:17 · Score: 4, Informative

But it points to an IP in the DOJ's block:
> host www.isonews.com www.isonews.com has address 149.101.1.91 > whois 149.101.1.91 OrgName: US Dept of Justice OrgID: UDJ [...]

Also, in case you don't believe it, the press release is reproduced on the usdoj.gov webpage:

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2003/February/03_crm_1 18.htm

So its for real. Add another notch to the DMCA's belt.

-molo

--
Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by overbom · 2003-02-26 13:37 · Score: 1

ummm... no. mod parent down a bit.

Mozilla/4.79 is the key agent you should be looking at.

That's Netscape Communicator, v4.79.
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by en4ca · 2003-02-26 14:04 · Score: 1

Im in Australia, and when I visit the website, I can't see any message from the DOJ - the website looks exactly how I'd expect it to look (not having been there before, however). In fact, the forum statistics say there are 154 members, and 461 guests currently online...
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by h4x0r-3l337 · 2003-02-26 14:38 · Score: 1

Doing a reverse search quickly turned up that the person living at that address is one H.A. Berns.
Also, the zipcode listed above is wrong.

Full data:
Berns, H.A
Jacobus van 't Hoffstraat 69
6533MS Nijmegen
tel. 024-3556088
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by plague3106 · 2003-02-26 14:49 · Score: 1

Word on the street is that the gov't just took the DNS...you can still get to the site by IP.

Makes me wonder if this isn't just a scam by the DOJ to make people in the USA afraid they'll get caught.
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by HughsOnFirst · 2003-02-26 15:57 · Score: 1

isonews.com is 66.201.243.172
C:\WINDOWS>ping isonews.com

Pinging isonews.com [66.201.243.172] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 66.201.243.172: bytes=32 time=234ms TTL=241
Reply from 66.201.243.172: bytes=32 time=229ms TTL=241
Reply from 66.201.243.172: bytes=32 time=230ms TTL=241
Reply from 66.201.243.172: bytes=32 time=227ms TTL=241

but www.isonews.com is 149.101.1.91
C:\WINDOWS>ping www.isonews.com

Pinging www.isonews.com [149.101.1.91] with 32 bytes of data:

Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.

odd thing though is that http://66.201.243.172 gets you

HTTP Server Error 503
No available server to handle this request

but http://isonews.com or http://www.isonews.com or http:149.101.1.91 both all you the DOJ page
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by DrStrangeLoop · 2003-02-26 16:08 · Score: 1

would someone care to explain what kind of an entity bbnplanet is? they seem to own the 256th part of the internet, and they got a pretty low number, too: 4.0.0.0/8. and what is their connection to the DoJ or other governmental entities? after all, there are p2-0.washdc3-cr11.bbnplanet.net (4.24.10.22) and h0-0.usdeptjust2.bbnplanet.net (4.24.239.66) on my route to the new isonews host.

btw, i kinda like the hostname justice2.usdoj.gov (149.101.1.3). makes me wonder what kind of naming scheme the DoD uses :)

--strangeloop
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by antis0c · 2003-02-26 16:31 · Score: 1

And when has the WHOIS database been updated properly? Or quickly? Or even at all? I've had an organizational change request in place for a few of my domains for over a year now.

--

..There's a-dooin's a-transpirin'
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by tunah · 2003-02-26 17:48 · Score: 1

Add another notch to the DMCA's belt.
I'm sorry, in looking at the belt to notch it, you read the copyrighted branding information on it, thereby making a copy of it in your brain and circumventing the "too-embarrased-to-look-at-someone's-crotch" copy protection that these belts use. You have the right to remain silent, unless exercising that right would allow you to circumvent the copy protection of the list of rights I am now reading to you by the use of your "ears", a pirate hacker tool. This message was brought to you by the letters D, M, C and A. Have a nice day!

--
Free Java games for your phone: Tontie, Sokoban
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by Barbarian · 2003-02-26 18:02 · Score: 1

probably part of a plea agreement, he redirects the site, pays a huge-ass fine, and avoids pound-me-in-the-ass-prison.
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by BJH · 2003-02-26 18:28 · Score: 1

BBN is Bolt, Beranek and Newman, the consulting company that did the original networking implementation for ARPANET.

See this timeline for more info.
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by upt1me · 2003-02-26 21:30 · Score: 1

Domain servers in listed order:

NS1.ISONEWS.COM 149.101.1.3
NS2.ISONEWS.COM 149.101.1.6

3.1.101.149.in-addr.arpa. 86322 IN PTR justice2.usdoj.gov.

6.1.101.149.in-addr.arpa. 86400 IN PTR ns22.usdoj.gov.
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by Kaz+Riprock · 2003-02-26 22:37 · Score: 1

Notches in belts are for gunslingers.

This is more like another notch in the bedpost...because we all just got a little more fvcked.

--
Mordor...a magical, mythical land where women are more rare than dragons--but where every man would rather find a dragon
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by plague3106 · 2003-02-27 00:48 · Score: 1

Since it didn't have a .nl, i didn't know it was a netherlands site. So i'm sure that played a part in it.

Seems kinda pointless though...everyone that wants to can still get to it by IP, so they haven't really done anything except make it a little harder to get to.
Re:DOJ doesn't own it by samdu · 2003-02-27 19:20 · Score: 1

Ans under status, it says: Registrar Lock

More Links... by syr · 2003-02-26 12:53 · Score: 4, Informative

Story 1
Post article
TheRegister story

Quote:

---
Two Justice Department attorneys said Internet users would eventually be steered to the government's address as name servers across the Internet are updated over the next several hours.

"There is going to be some lag time between the domain-name switch-over," one attorney said. "But the domain name isonews.com now belongs to the federal government."

---

Enjoy...

GameTab

Re:More Links... by Pharmboy · 2003-02-26 13:58 · Score: 1

"There is going to be some lag time between the domain-name switch-over," one attorney said. "But the domain name isonews.com now belongs to the federal government."

Yea, we don't need no stinking "Due Process" Its theirs now, huh?

--
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
Re:More Links... by revscat · 2003-02-26 14:14 · Score: 1, Insightful

Yea, we don't need no stinking "Due Process" Its theirs now, huh?

You are kidding, right? You think in the post-9/11 world that anybody gives a rats ass about anachronistic political concepts like due process? Fuck no. We have Republicans in charge now. If there is one thing Republicans pride themselves on it is about getting criminals, getting them fast, and respecting "rights" later. Rights are what liberals complain about. Conservatives fucking take care of business.

You can whine all you want. Don't worry. There's a war coming. The boost in approval ratings will surely carry through '04. All your base, etc., etc.
Re:More Links... by bnenning · 2003-02-26 14:24 · Score: 1

We have Republicans in charge now. If there is one thing Republicans pride themselves on it is about getting criminals, getting them fast, and respecting "rights" later.

Right, that would be why Democrats opposed the Patriot Act, DMCA, export restrictions, and Clipper chip. Come on. Republicans aren't great on civil liberties, but Democrats have been just as bad or worse in recent years.

--
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
Re:More Links... by Pharmboy · 2003-02-26 14:32 · Score: 4, Interesting

Conservatives fucking take care of business.

Please dont confuse conservatives with republicans. As a conservative, my concern is the strict interpretation of the constitution. what Ashcroft is doing is not, by any standard, a scrict interpretation of the constitution.

REAL conservative believe that you should be able to do anything you want as long as it doesnt adversely affect others.

Republicanism is not the same as conservatism. No matter what the media tells you.

--
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
Re:More Links... by Iffy+Bonzoolie · 2003-02-26 14:49 · Score: 1

"REAL conservative believe that you should be able to do anything you want as long as it doesnt adversely affect others."

I thought that was Libertarianism?

-If

--
Run a pencil-and-paper RPG campaign with your far-off friends: Gametable!
Re:More Links... by TKinias · 2003-02-26 14:57 · Score: 2, Insightful

scripsit bnenning:

Right, that would be why Democrats opposed the Patriot Act, DMCA, export restrictions, and Clipper chip. Come on. Republicans aren't great on civil liberties, but Democrats have been just as bad or worse in recent years.

There's a (perhaps subtle, but nonetheless real) difference between cowardice in the face of evil and the active propagation of evil.

--
In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
Re:More Links... by Pharmboy · 2003-02-26 15:09 · Score: 4, Informative

I thought that was Libertarianism?

Libertarians are a political party. Like Republicans. Conservatism is a political philosophy.

Libratarians are conservative in many ways, but not in others. They are very isolationist, for instance, where the Conservative philosophy doesn't demand this. Many of us see the Conservative view as meaning a small but powerful central govt. whose only role is to do the things that 1) we cant do for ourselves, like national defense and highways, and 2) things that the states can't do, make treaties, international relations. I see conservatism as not isolationist, but more selective in who we "do business with".

ie: we do business with China, even tho they are terrible with human rights, its the only method to introduce rights to their people. We don't do business with Saudi Arabia because there is no hope of introducing human rights without going to war, so we go to war or dont do business. If you can't make a positive difference, you isolate yourself from that country. Not in anger, just as a choice. Thats my interpretation. One of the basic concepts of conservatism is "equality of opportunity", national or international. I could go on (and I am writing an article that does) but I won't here ;)

While I have plenty of respect for Libratarians (they are more bound to a philosophy than the other parties) they have been labeled as the party that simply wants pot legalized. While this is a worthwhile goal (read my definition: anything that doesnt affect other adversely is ok) it is one tiny effect of conservatism. Conservatism would also demand strong penalties for driving while stoned or drunk, because it affects others.

--
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
Re:More Links... by Jon+Chatow · 2003-02-26 16:15 · Score: 1

REAL conservative[s] believe that you should be able to do anything you want as long as it doesn[']t adversely affect others.

Hate to say this, but that's liberalism... You can be a conservative liberal, yes, but the two most certainly do not go hand-in-hand.

--
James F.
Re:More Links... by HiThere · 2003-02-26 16:47 · Score: 1

What about for driving while talking on a cell phone? Are you going to be consistent? (That's about as dangerous... depending on several circumstances.)

--

I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Re:More Links... by Kirijini · 2003-02-26 18:00 · Score: 1

"As a conservative, my concern is the strict interpretation of the constitution."

I do believe that that is Anti-Federalism, not conservativism. If you go all the way back in your American History textbooks, you'll see that "strict" interpretation of the constitution was held by the anti-federalists. Who were, by the way, considered liberal. Why? Because the Constitution was the conservative backlash or response to the original Articles of Confederation, which, since it decenteralized power, was considered liberal. Limiting (opposing, really) a conservative document is liberalism.

But thats irrelevant today, because conservativism and liberalism are today about economic policies and moral issues, not about interpreting the Constitution loosely or strictly.

Also:
"REAL conservative believe that you should be able to do anything you want as long as it doesnt adversely affect others."

Which is basically the American Civil Liberties Union's mission statement (minus the conservative part). The ALCU is usually considered liberal, although I believe a lot of conservatives have recently signed up, due to the invasive policies of the Justice Department. It sounds as though you are part of the movement ;)
Re:More Links... by Baki · 2003-02-26 19:51 · Score: 1

In many countries they do. For example in holland the liberal party is the most (mainstream) conservative country. Liberalism is about individual freedom and responsability, which is contrary to the socialist idea of a strong state that takes care for you.

OTOH the "as long as it doesn't adversely affect others" is the key point, the practical consequences of liberalism depend greatly on how to implement this. But it remains that the core value of liberalism is personal freedom and (thus) responsability, which is more politically right than left (b.t.w. the word liberal is used completely false in the US, and often is used synomymous with permissive or even leftist).
Re:More Links... by Pharmboy · 2003-02-27 00:40 · Score: 1

In many countries they do. For example in holland the liberal party is the most (mainstream) conservative country. Liberalism is about individual freedom and responsability, which is contrary to the socialist idea of a strong state that takes care for you.

OTOH the "as long as it doesn't adversely affect others" is the key point, the practical consequences of liberalism depend greatly on how to implement this. But it remains that the core value of liberalism is personal freedom and (thus) responsability, which is more politically right than left (b.t.w. the word liberal is used completely false in the US, and often is used synomymous with permissive or even leftist).

Thank you. Someone please mod the parent up. The concepts of personal liberty are both LIBERAL AND CONSERVATIVE, with the main difference is in implementation. So many of my fellow Americans are under the impression that the 'left' (liberals) have cornered the market on freedom.

Many people who are called Liberal in the US are actually Socialist (Hillary Clinton, for example), but the stigma of that name is so great, they allow themselves to be called "lefist" or "liberal". Many people think you can draw a line from left to right and name all the philosophies, but its not that simple. Socialists are liberal in some ways, conservative in others. All of the political philosophys can NOT be drawn on a piece of graph paper.

--
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
Re:More Links... by Pharmboy · 2003-02-27 00:48 · Score: 1

What about for driving while talking on a cell phone? Are you going to be consistent? (That's about as dangerous... depending on several circumstances.)

Good question. Recent studies have shown that people that talk on a cell phone are 4 times more likely to get in an accident, the same as people who are intoxicated. In my opinion, this would qualify as "affecting others". Pull over or get a hands free.

Whether an activity is socially taboo (drinking) or acceptable (on phone) should not be relevant. The most basic part of freedom is responsibility. You MUST be held respoonsible for your actions when you have this much freedom.

freedom = personal responsibility

socialism = state resonsibility

Other examples, IMHO: Suicide is legal. Abortion is not. Capital punishment is not. (Look, either life is precious or it isn't) Spam is not legal. (anything where the goal is to generate profit is not afforded the same protection as political speech, as the founders intended, just like you can't yell FIRE in a crowded theatre). Most drugs are legal. (may be regulated, and require a preprsciption). I could go on, but just giving people who want to disagree at any cost more fuel ;)

--
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
Re:More Links... by Pharmboy · 2003-02-27 00:55 · Score: 1

I do believe that that is Anti-Federalism, not conservativism.

I understand the similarities, but I am talking about conservatism as a philosophy, not as defined by popular media. Conservatism generally believes that the Feds SHOULD leave to the states everything that the states can do (10th amendment). As I stated in a different post, the concept of individual freedom is not unique to conservatism, it is a part of liberalism as well. One of the main differences is (some) liberals believe the State gives you this right, and conversatives believe it is inhearent to all human beings.

But thats irrelevant today, because conservativism and liberalism are today about economic policies and moral issues, not about interpreting the Constitution loosely or strictly.

Actually Republicans and Democrats are. But I see your point. This is the whole reason I made a point of saying to not confuse Republicanism with Conservatism in an earlier post.

Which is basically the American Civil Liberties Union's mission statement (minus the conservative part).

The problem being they select primarily leftist causes to protect. This is political based upon an agenda, rather than a philosophy. In theory, yes. In practice, no. I worked in law a few years, and its amazing how the rank and file liberal lawyers support "liberals only", with only the occasional conservative case. This is not part of liberalism, this is just their agenda.

--
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
Re:More Links... by Pharmboy · 2003-02-27 01:01 · Score: 1

Ahh I wish more people thought like you.

You make sense, go forth, convince others.

Thanks :) While I don't agree with alot of stuff that Rush says (hes a bit liberal, from my perspective) one thing he says IS right.

Speak up for what you believe. Conservatives should not be ashamed about what they believe. Be willing to debate it, know your beliefs enough to be willing to defend them. Everyone has within themselves abilities that are untapped, and a governmental system should allow that potential to be explored, with the guarantee of equally opportunity, but not outcome.

People who want you to believe that you can't do it without government help are attempting to enslave you.

--
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
Re:More Links... by Angry+Black+Man · 2003-02-27 01:10 · Score: 1

If we followed a strict interpretation of the constitution do you know how much different the world would be today?

--
the byproduct of years of oppression by the white man
Re:More Links... by dkf · 2003-02-27 01:25 · Score: 1

Stop being completely absurd. It is libertarianism and republicanism that are political philosophies. Conservativism relates to a political party.

Oh, you were referring to the US.

--
"Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
Re:More Links... by Havokmon · 2003-02-27 01:35 · Score: 1

REAL conservative believe that you should be able to do anything you want as long as it doesnt adversely affect others.
I thought that was Libertarianism?
I thought it was anarchy.. (seriously, I don't think anarchy is bad, you just can't tell me what to do - we're just not a responsible enough society to enjoy true anarchy :P..)

--
"I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
Re:More Links... by Pharmboy · 2003-02-27 01:40 · Score: 1

If we followed a strict interpretation of the constitution do you know how much different the world would be today?

sig:the byproduct of years of oppression by the white man

Amen. No time to start like the present. Now if we can just convince african-americans that many of the Democrats are not their friends, and they should vote their conscience rather than for a party who only makes promises, then we can start the healing.

I am of the belief that black america is no less capable than white america. The problem is too many white folks telling black folks that they can't succeed unless the deck is stacked in their favor. Unfortunately, many african americans fall into this trap, believing that Democrats will save them. Because black Americans vote for Democrats 90% of the time, Democrats don't feel the need to make real changes. After all, they will get the votes either way, right? Surely blacks will not vote for those rascally conservatives!

So they get talk, and occasionally legistlation that stacks the deck against whites. This is not reform. As a matter of fact, I find it insulting. It is as if some white liberals think so low of black americans, they treat african americans as if they are too stupid to succeed without white liberal help. You contantly see rhetoric that implies "Vote for us. We will help you. You can't make it, we understand, but we will share with you a piece of the white man's pie". This is a real bone with me. Granted, there is plenty of pure racism by people claiming to be conservatives as well, but this institutional racism by individual that are claiming to help is worse. If a redneck uses a racist statement, as least you know he is an idiot, and it reflects badly on him. When a liberal lies to you to get your vote, and then "throws a bone" every now and then, while working against your interests behind your back, it reflects badly on YOU, because you blindly trusted, and voted for them.

African Americans don't need to be "saved" by persons with alterior motives (white or black). They need equal access to education, to jobs and to other opportunities. I am convinced that when the playing field is level, success will be color blind.

--
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
Re:More Links... by RoboOp · 2003-02-27 02:56 · Score: 1

REAL conservative believe that you should be able to do anything you want as long as it doesnt adversely affect others.
No, that would be classical liberal or even libertarian stance. Go to mises.org for more information.
The guy had it right. Conservatives by definition - no matter what country or society are about protecting the status quo, and the worship of authority. Anything else is labeled as criminal and hammered back into place.
Republicanism is not the same as conservatism. No matter what the media tells you.
Just tracking the budget deficit would have revealed that fallacy.

--
"First you get the Linux, then you get the power, THEN you get the women"
Re:More Links... by Pharmboy · 2003-02-27 04:39 · Score: 1

I've always thought that anyone with a college degree should be a conservative. Any college that hasn't convinced a person that there is a long heritage of things worth conserving has failed.

There is an old expression, and I can't for the life of me remember where it came from, to give it proper credit, but it goes:

Those who are not Liberals when they are young just don't care.

Those who are not Conservatives when they are older just don't think.

--
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
Re:More Links... by cburley · 2003-02-27 05:21 · Score: 1

There's a (perhaps subtle, but nonetheless real) difference between cowardice in the face of evil and the active propagation of evil.

And rolling tanks into Waco, or sending men with guns to point them in Elian Gonzalez's face, counts as which case, in your opinion?
The difference being that while many Republicans and conservatives are complaining about the comparatively tiny amount of damage John Ashcroft has done since taking office, Democrats and liberals promoted, or at least ignored, Janet Reno (and Bill Clinton), in terms of their culpability in propagating evil, through Reno's nearly-successful bid for the Democrat nomination for governor in Florida.
Not that it's an easy choice, mind you (and there are more than just two choices, after all), but, personally, give me the party that arrests prematurely and possesses some degree of honest self-examination and reflection over the party the rolls in tanks, send in guns, then blames the results on Rush Limbaugh, the "Cuban mob", a lack of adequate gun control (wha??!), or whatever their excuse-du-jour happens to be.

--
Practice random senselessness and act kind of beautiful.
Re:More Links... by Snaller · 2003-02-27 05:38 · Score: 1

"There is going to be some lag time between the domain-name switch-over," one attorney said. "But the domain name isonews.com now belongs to the federal government."

Intersting... so the american government can hijack any domain name it likes? Intersting since it was owned and registered by a Dutch guy...

--
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Re:More Links... by Kirijini · 2003-02-27 05:47 · Score: 1

"Conservatism generally believes that the Feds SHOULD leave to the states everything that the states can do (10th amendment)."

That's exactly what I meant when I said that's anti-federalism. Thomas Jefferson and his friends believed that the diffusion of power (that is, giving the power to the many states rather than the single national government) was the best way to protect people's rights.

"One of the main differences is (some) liberals believe the State gives you this right, and conversatives believe it is inhearent to all human beings."

I totally believe that this is untrue. As a liberal, I believe that my rights are _mine_, not just something that the States or the government give to me. I've never talked to anyone who ever even hinted at believing that what we consider natural human rights are in fact not natural, but given to us artificially by th government. That includes conservatives and liberals. That our rights are natural and above the government is, I think, a universal American belief.

"The problem being they select primarily leftist causes to protect."

Because they're liberal! They are leftist! Thats why I said, minus the conservative part. My point is, based on what you've posted, you sound more like a liberal than a conservative ("you should be able to do anything you want as long as it doesnt adversely affect others."). As evidence of this, I point to the ACLU.

"This is political based upon an agenda, rather than a philosophy... This is not part of liberalism, this is just their agenda."

Thier agenda is to protect the civil liberties of Americans. It is based on their philosophy, that people's civil liberties must not be violated, and must be agressively protected. That is part of the liberal philosophy.

Furthermore, at it's core, politics is about philosophy. Politics is a stuggle between competing philosophies.

If you define yourself as a conservative because you believe in a strict interpretation of the constitution, in the way of State's rights, then you're correct in believing that Republicans have abandoned it. This is shown in the huge amounts of unfunded mandates (primarily education and homeland security) pushed by Bush. If you define yourself as a conservative because you believe people have natural rights that shouldn't be infridged by others, then you're confused, because that is a liberal belief... for instance, abortion rights is based on the belief you should be able to do what you want to your body, homosexual rights to marry and serve in the military, and be exactly like other normal people.
Re:More Links... by Pharmboy · 2003-02-27 06:58 · Score: 1

If you define yourself as a conservative because you believe in a strict interpretation of the constitution, in the way of State's rights, then you're correct in believing that Republicans have abandoned it. This is shown in the huge amounts of unfunded mandates (primarily education and homeland security) pushed by Bush. If you define yourself as a conservative because you believe people have natural rights that shouldn't be infridged by others, then you're confused, because that is a liberal belief... for instance, abortion rights is based on the belief you should be able to do what you want to your body, homosexual rights to marry and serve in the military, and be exactly like other normal people.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't see Personal Rights as exclusively conservative or liberal at all, both treasure it. I may bash people who call themselves Liberals, and are really Socialists (read: Hillary) but I have the utmost respect with true Liberals. I disagree with them alot, but I can at least understand their perspective, and respect them, knowing the difference is philosophical (and sometimes purely achedemic), not a selfish political grab.

As to abortion rights, I agree that you should be able to do what you want to your own body, but I believe that an unborn person is still a person (hense, falls under 'hurting someone else'). I also am against capital punishment for the same reason. Human life is precious, unborn or a criminal. I don't see how many so called conservatives can be pro-death penalty. Either all life is important, or it's not. The fact that you and I may disagree on when life begins is a seperate issue, that doesn't take away from our similarities in cherishing human life. We both believe that if someone commits crimes, we have the right to remove them from society for a (un)limited amount of time, depending upon the crime.

Your comparison with Jefferson's Anti-Federalism is very valid. _I_ consider conservatism to be the literal interpretation of the Constitution, including the spirit, not just the letter. There ARE alot of similarities. Just like there are a fair amount of similarities to conservatism and liberalism. They are not polar opposites, IMHO. To be fair, I should go back and read more of Jefferson's writings, the federalist, etc.

As to "(some)liberals believe the State gives you this right" I did qualify it, but perhaps did not make it clear enough. True liberalism doesn't see it this way, but many so called Liberals (read: Socialists) DO think that all power comes from the Govt. It was not meant to reflect on Liberal views, only on people claiming to have them, and not. You hear some politicians talk about "giving or granting rights" rather than "restoring or reaffirming rights". That is my first clue of how they view rights.

As I stated, all of this is just my opinion, my perspective. Your milage may vary.

On a side note: The people whom I mark as Friends here, fall into your camp. Disagree with key points of mine, but smart enough to challenge them in a dignified and intellegent manner.

--
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
Re:More Links... by Kirijini · 2003-02-27 07:40 · Score: 1

Now I agree with you, to an extent.

Remember, Jefferson didn't write the Federalist Papers - they were written by John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison. It's still worthy of reading, though, for insight of what the constitution is really about. The best writing by Jefferson is none other than the Declaration of Independance, but also look at the letters between he and John and Abigail Adams. Another great thing to check out is Washington's Farewell Address. And after that, look at Charles Beard's "An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States," for a drastically different interpretation of the motives behind the Consitution.

The absolute best understanding of the Constitution comes from "Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 Reported by James Madison." I think it's pretty self explanatory.
Re:More Links... by Iffy+Bonzoolie · 2003-02-27 11:54 · Score: 1

No, anarchy is doing whatever you want REGARDLESS of it's effect on others.

He's talking about being able to do what you want, except for things that hurt others, or infringe on their rights. Murder is legal in anarchy, it's up to vigilantes to protect against that, but Murder would be just as illegal as it is now under Libertairanism (or conservatism?)

-If

--
Run a pencil-and-paper RPG campaign with your far-off friends: Gametable!
Re:More Links... by alexo · 2003-02-28 03:16 · Score: 1

> IMHO: Suicide is legal. Abortion is not.

You are not a woman, I presume.

Link to more info by Captain+Beefheart · 2003-02-26 12:54 · Score: 4, Informative

More info HERE This links to the ISOnews forum Will prolly be Slashdotted soon.

Re:Link to more info by Mac+Degger · 2003-02-26 13:30 · Score: 1

Change that link to isonews.com...it's in the hands of the DOJ now, and I for one won't really mind if they get /.-ed :)

--
-- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?

You are all anti-american terrorist sympathizers by cmdr_shithead · 2003-02-26 12:54 · Score: 4, Funny

In these grave times of war, all freedom thinking Americans should stand behind our President. These America-hating criticisms only help Bin Laden and his Communist and Democrat and Woman allies. I hope John Ashcroft shuts down Slash-dot and imprisons the lot of you in cuba!

Just like with Kevin Mitnick.. by PovRayMan · 2003-02-26 12:54 · Score: 4, Insightful

They're going to make an example out of David Rocci.

--
----------
Check out my blackbox styles

Re:Just like with Kevin Mitnick.. by eyeball · 2003-02-26 13:56 · Score: 1

WHY YOU THROW CHIP!?!

--

_______
2B1ASK1
Re:Just like with Kevin Mitnick.. by Ledskof · 2003-02-26 16:55 · Score: 1

No, that's what they would do in the process of making an example. Their *reason* for making an example would be that the government doesn't have a grasp of computer technology and wants to scare people that it considers a threat in that sector; scaring them so they won't try anything. Too bad that doesn't do anything but hurt system security.

I think everyone involved with the screw up of the Mitnick situation should be charged.

--
This is my sig. The post is over.

Alternative NFO site ... by slagdogg · 2003-02-26 12:56 · Score: 4, Informative

Their 'competitor', NFOrce is seemingly still alive and kicking. I suppose the difference is in their strategy for collecting funds. As a note, both removed serial numbers from all posted NFO files.

--
(Score:-1, Wrong)

Re:Alternative NFO site ... by ArsonPerBuilding · 2003-02-26 13:02 · Score: 1

But that won't stop people from posting s#s in newsgroups.

--
1 tequila 2 tequila 3 tequila floor
Re:Alternative NFO site ... by ramzak2k · 2003-02-26 13:10 · Score: 4, Funny

Dear Mr.Slagdog with an extra g,

The information you provided is very informative.
Nforce shall feel our force soon.

Thank you for being a good citizen,
DOJ

--

Siggy Say, Siggy Do
Re:Alternative NFO site ... by Dark+Lord+Seth · 2003-02-26 14:09 · Score: 1

.nl domains are usually taken by dutch people, handled by the dutch domain name authority which is governed by the dutch goverment who take it up the read from the US goverment.

In other words, that site will be down too after some political lobbying/Bush feeding our prime minister another pretzel.

--
Hate me!

Link Directly To ISONews.com IP by jwbrown77 · 2003-02-26 12:56 · Score: 5, Interesting

You can access the site and it's forums (that have information on the takeover) here:

ISONews

--

-----
How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?

Law of the land by $beirdo · 2003-02-26 12:57 · Score: 5, Insightful

Let's change this law. I think I DO own my hardware, no matter how many lobbyists some corp, or the entertainment industry has.

Re:Law of the land by MSZ · 2003-02-26 13:06 · Score: 4, Funny

I think I DO own my hardware

So, you have publicly admitted to thinking? Specifically, non-approved thinking? Probably also not registered.

Expect our jackbooted thugs now. They should arrive shortly and take care of the problem.

--
The moon is not fully subjugated. I demand a second assault wave preceded by a massive nuclear bombardment.
Re:Law of the land by Mmmrky · 2003-02-26 14:17 · Score: 1

The situation regarding "new" technology is this country is atrocious. Parent is correct; I don't care what they say, I bought it, I own it.

Think if this sort of a mindset was applied to the automotive industry. Once sold, you wouldn't be able to open your hood. Work on you car? Better get a lawyer ready. Only, say Ford, parts would be allowed as replacements and your car could only be serviced by a Ford dealer.

Pretty scary, eh? It's very likely that becomes the case before long.
Re:Law of the land by the_brat_king · 2003-02-26 17:46 · Score: 1

Actually, in a way it IS applied to the auto industry... In my cars, I have Holley 750 carbs... these are "not street legal" ... and neithe are my single plenum intakes. Neither is my upgraded exhaust; although I've had both of them tested for emissions, and they both passed much better than factory specs!

"Modding" under the hood is often a federal violation, NOS systems on street cars violate pollution control laws, so do After Market Super/Turbo-Chargers, wider exhaust systems, boring/stroking engines -- the list goes on and on.

As for the "dealer only" that's not the way it is with these systems either... you just can't mod them to violate other laws (no matter how stupid those laws are -- DMCA, classic cars and emissions laws).

Funny that you mentioned cars though, all of that stuff that I have in my Camaro is illegal, but I get better emissions tests than a 1998 Chevy Impala... and, while I'm in my home state (MN), I tune it to run on 100 Octane E85 (Ethanol 85%) pump gas (sold at Holiday Blue Planet)! This is the fuel that you can get a 2K write-off on if you buy the new E85 Hondas, but, by putting it in my camaro, I violate pollution control laws.

What the big difference is, is packaging -- I buy all of my carbs from a local race dealer (3 of them, 2 on the Chrysler, and 1 on the camaro), they are listed as "off-road use only" parts, same as the intakes, exhaust systems, etc. Point is, it's packaging that has allowed us car "modders" to get away with what we do -- there are two uses for the carbs, etc. the first is track/off-roading, the second is "illegal" modding (unless you get exemption plates, then it becomes legal -- makes almost as little sense as the DMCA).
Re:Law of the land by Jeff+DeMaagd · 2003-02-27 03:38 · Score: 1

Let's change this law. I think I DO own my hardware, no matter how many lobbyists some corp, or the entertainment industry has.

No kidding. I certainly didn't sign a lease agreement or anything like that. So the company owns the design, I don't think that means I shouldn't legally be able reconfigure the device to operate my christmas tree lights.

So a regionalized game is legal to buy, own and operate in Europe or Japan but is illegal to own and operate in the US? I understand that there's a quite lot of bootlegging out there, but this is all rediculous.
Re:Law of the land by $beirdo · 2003-02-27 04:37 · Score: 1

We're living in a fucking prison. Vote for the libertarians, or anyone else who'd rather repeal laws than make new ones because lobbyists want them to.
Re:Law of the land by $beirdo · 2003-02-27 04:40 · Score: 1

I think that the basic natural right of ownership is being violated by these laws. Americans have other basic natural rights that were guaranteed us - but not this one?

I would wholeheartedly endorse and contribute money to any politician or legislation seeking to reinforce the basic natural right of property ownership.
Re:Law of the land by alexo · 2003-02-28 04:07 · Score: 1

> Sucks don't it, well never vote for a moral bastard and ALWAYS vote.

Voting does not accomplish anything. The system is set up such that an informed person's vote carries the same weight as the vote of a brain-washed sheep who believes the propaganda he or she is spoon fed by the media. Unfortunately, the sheep outnumber the people. The law of the pyramid applies.

You want to change something? Go out and persuade other people to join you in doing the right thing(TM). One vote is a joke, a thousand geek votes are a drop in the ocean, think BIG!

Unfortunately, if you're successful, one of two things will happen. You will either be perceived as a threat to the regime and dealt with faster than you can say "John Ashcroft" or you'll persuaded to join the system.

Speaking of the devil,

"The protections of the Fourth Amendment are clear. The right to protection from unlawful searches is an indivisible American value. Two hundred years of court decisions have stood in defense of this fundamental right."
John D. Ashcroft, Writing in The Washington Times in 1997 in opposition to Clinton administration plans to eavesdrop on international e-mail.

actually, its EXCEEDINGLY on topic... by mekkab · 2003-02-26 12:57 · Score: 1

If you go to the UPDATED website, it says " ISONEWS is now the property of the United States government. "

--
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.

Re:actually, its EXCEEDINGLY on topic... by The+Bungi · 2003-02-26 13:01 · Score: 1

Yes, but it was the first post. Ergo, automatic -1 score. Maybe it will be rectified, because it was actually funny.
Welcome to Slashdot =)
Re:actually, its EXCEEDINGLY on topic... by mekkab · 2003-02-27 04:34 · Score: 1

thanks!

Actually- I have a history of battling with my moderations.

Typically, I lose. But I have an awful lot of fun shouting about it! :)

--
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.

Department of Infinite Justice? by rolux · 2003-02-26 12:57 · Score: 5, Interesting

From the DoJ-defaced website:

The Department of Justice and federal law enforcement will continue to investigate and prosecute individuals and groups that violate the federal criminal copyright laws at home and abroad.

Eh... abroad? Isn't that the Department of Infinite Justice?

--
My next comment will be ready soon, but moderators can beat the rush and mod it up early.

Re:Department of Infinite Justice? by Tackhead · 2003-02-26 13:11 · Score: 4, Funny

> Eh... abroad? Isn't that the Department of Infinite Justice?
Naw, that's the Department of Great Justice. You know, the guys who don't just redirect web sites. They redirect ZIG!
Re:Department of Infinite Justice? by gl4ss · 2003-02-26 13:15 · Score: 4, Insightful

well i think that could explain pretty well why some people don't like usa and say they don't like them because they bully around the rest of the world.

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Re:Department of Infinite Justice? by Iffy+Bonzoolie · 2003-02-26 14:55 · Score: 1

"...the $1,371,546 mansion summer home..."

You left off a a digit at the end, there...

-If

--
Run a pencil-and-paper RPG campaign with your far-off friends: Gametable!
Re:Department of Infinite Justice? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 16:31 · Score: 2, Informative

why some people don't like usa and say they don't like them because they bully around the rest of the world.

Including Ramsey Clark, former US Attorney General:

Neighborhood Bully, an interview with Ramsey Clark by Derrick Jensen for The Sun magazine.

BTW, I don't normally post as AC, but in this case I am afraid of the US government. I'm currently applying for my Green Card, and don't want to have to live apart from my wife becuase I'm "undesirable.

I lived with IRA terrorism in the UK for thirty-odd years, and I'm not scared of terrorism, but Ashcroft scares the shit out of me...
Re:Department of Infinite Justice? by the+grace+of+R'hllor · 2003-02-27 01:19 · Score: 1

I assume Americans can be arrested for crimes committed abroad, within some restrictions. Hence, in the past, some arrests of people who'd been to the Phillipines for sex with children, who'd been arrested and thus sent to Federal Pound-me-in-the-ass prison, where they belong.

At least, that's what happened here in the Netherlands, and of course the prison wasn't Federal, then.

The crime was committed in the Phillipines, but they were arrested and convicted upon their return.

What are you smoking? by Caine · 2003-02-26 12:57 · Score: 1

I get the site fine just as it's always been.

Re:What are you smoking? by jcast · 2003-02-26 18:28 · Score: 2, Informative

Your DNS is stale or you're going to directly to the ip address. When the DNS updates, you'll get the DOJ site.

--
There are reasons why democracy does not work nearly as well as capitalism.
-- David D. Friedman

Mirrors by joebp · 2003-02-26 12:58 · Score: 2, Interesting

This kind of thing should not be tolerated. Isn't this against his constitutional rights?

I would have thought his website would have been protected speech.

Eitherway, there needs to be a huge network of foreign isonews mirrors set up.

Re:Mirrors by Brendan+Byrd · 2003-02-26 14:01 · Score: 1

There -IS- a huge network of foreign isonews mirrors set up. Eight to be exact.

--
Zodiac Survey

Seems weird by Jezza · 2003-02-26 12:58 · Score: 5, Insightful

I thought you guys (people living in the USA) could buy radar detectors to scan for speed traps, but some guy sells mod-chips for Xbox and he's done for it?! (I'm not familiar with this aspect of US law)

Seems to me that this is quite unfair - in what way does the mod chip help pirates? I thought it:

A) Allowed Linux to boot and run

or

B) Allowed to machine to play games from another region.

I see no piracy on either count here. Have I got this wrong? (Help me out - I don't own an Xbox so I'm a little lost)

Re:Seems weird by GrenDel+Fuego · 2003-02-26 13:05 · Score: 1

It could also allow people to play burned copies of games as well, which would count as piracy.

I'd be surprised if that's what most people used them for though.
Re:Seems weird by Moridineas · 2003-02-26 13:05 · Score: 1

Radar detectors are only legal in some states--it's in the domain of the state to decide.
Re:Seems weird by barzok · 2003-02-26 13:13 · Score: 1

While that's true, a better way to say it would be they're "legal in most states" - only a couple have outlawed them.
At some point, the federal gov't could conceivably ban them across the board.
Re:Seems weird by Jezza · 2003-02-26 13:18 · Score: 1

Oh okay - so why doesn't that normally work? Afterall if it's a binary copy how does the Xbox know?

Seems a little heavy handed to ban something that has a legitimate use.
Re:Seems weird by Student_Tech · 2003-02-26 13:34 · Score: 2, Informative

Not sure on the Xbox or PS2 but on the PS1 some sectors were marked with what appeared as errors on something that the burner generated and the rest of the computer wasn't invovled in. (From quick skims appears the PS2 has something similar, and the Xbox has that reverse DVD format or something, hardware copy protection)

The main thing they are dealing with is that is allows the consoles to boot copied discs and out of region discs (like region encoding with DVD players).

I also know that I have seen modchips (at least for PS1) that don't let you play copies but would let you play out-of-region disks (region free DVD player like).
Re:Seems weird by op00to · 2003-02-26 13:43 · Score: 1

Under what law? Remember that silly little thing called the constitution? I think i remember something saying that what it doesn't specifically give to the federal gov't the states or people can decide....
Re:Seems weird by Billly+Gates · 2003-02-26 13:52 · Score: 4, Insightful

Its called the DMCA

Region encoding is copyright protection and a mod chip is a copyright circumvention device which the dmca outlaws.

Fair use be dammed. You do not even have to violate a copyright to be tried for the dmca. Only bypassing the access method. So anything has patent like and other god like powers that are illegal to bypass.

So if I practice fair use and rip a dvd onto my hard drive and do not distribute it I get busted even though fair use laws say I can do this. I'm not busted for ripping the dvd just bypassing the copyright to the dvd.

DMCA is an attempt to lock out competition, bypass the 1992 home recording act, as well as make copyrights eternal to applease Hollywood and other big campaign contributers.

So because something can be used for a crime its all illegal.

Microsoft loves the dmca as it protects itself from competition and creates a monopoly on the xbox platform on who gets to sign games and other software.

--
http://saveie6.com/
Re:Seems weird by The+Evil+Couch · 2003-02-26 13:58 · Score: 1

well, from what I understand, the reasoning behind radar detectors being legal is that the air waves are public domain. granted, you've got to go through the FCC for a broadcasting liscense, but the air waves themselves are perfectly legal for the public to monitor. whether they're listening to the radio, watching TV, trying to find alien transmissions or locating speed traps, is all up to the person operating the reciever and legal virtually everywhere in the US.

technically a radar detector is just a reciever for electronic and optical signals. which is legal. it's just been bent to an "evil" purpose. it seems like a pretty grey area of the law to me.

--
The World's Worst Webcomic!
Re:Seems weird by eyeball · 2003-02-26 13:59 · Score: 1

I thought you guys (people living in the USA) could buy radar detectors to scan for speed traps, but some guy sells mod-chips for Xbox...

That's because cops haven't had the sense to pool their money into legislative bribes.

Shit, I oughta patent that business plan quick.

--

_______
2B1ASK1
Re:Seems weird by windex · 2003-02-26 14:04 · Score: 1

The federal communications act of 1924 enables the reception of radio waves on all frequencies by any device, including special frequencies used by telecommunications and government.

It's not legal to broadcast on them. It's not legal to decipher their contents if they are encrypted (DMCA).

Every state that has had a radar detector case go to the federal level has lost the case and been forced to invalidate the local law.
Re:Seems weird by AxelTorvalds · 2003-02-26 14:19 · Score: 1

So because something can be used for a crime its all illegal.
Not true. The spirit of the law is to prevent people from wholesale committing that crime. It's worded sloppily and there are holes but you know what they are trying to do. I don't know of anyone who has been busted for ripping a DVD, just selling tools to do it, and really not even that, they were busted for distributing copyrighted materials.
Seriously, how many xbox modchips were used for putting linux on xbox? How many do you think were used for piracy? How about PS2 modchips, what is the legitmate use for them?
I don't know a single person that has moded a PS2 or Xbox for some reason other than piracy. You have some points with the DMCA, it's sloppy, but this isn't the case that makes it. These people were selling tools with the sole intention being to pirate, that's illegal, that was illegal prior to the DMCA.
Re:Seems weird by SN74S181 · 2003-02-26 14:26 · Score: 1

I don't think the Federal government could ban them across the board. The Feds work in more devious ways to circumvent the US Constitution. They'd withdraw Federal funds to states that didn't ban them, if it was enough of a priority.

*******Offtopic Drift*******
(mods please note that the above part of my comment is ON topic)

Me, I have wondered almost forever why the government doesn't develop an inexpensive 'radar-band' emitter. It could be a simple transmitter that sends aproximately the same signal as a police radar. All it would need to do is transmit a signal that triggers Radar Detectors. It would be a significantly less expensive instrument than a real police radar, so they could have ten or one hundred for ever 'real' Police Radar. They could be built into traffic signals, etc.

These emitters could be placed at strategic locations where people speed unsafely. They could be intermittantly activated, and sometimes a real police officer with a radar gun could be there instead. 'Radar Detectors' would instantly be transformed from a 'fight back against the cops' device into a benign 'slow down' warning beacon.
Re:Seems weird by jdreed1024 · 2003-02-26 14:29 · Score: 1

I thought you guys (people living in the USA) could buy radar detectors to scan for speed traps,
There's no federal law prohibiting the user of radar detectors. There are plenty of state laws - they're illegal in a good number of states.

--
There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
Re:Seems weird by nekura · 2003-02-26 14:36 · Score: 2, Interesting

On the Xbox, each disc has a signature which the Xbox must verify before it'll allow it to boot. If you look back in last week's archives, the Xbox Linux team had written a letter to Microsoft asking them to sign Xbox Linux so it could boot without a modchip.

--

"Programming is like sex - one mistake and you'll have to support it for the rest of your life."
Re:Seems weird by frdmfghtr · 2003-02-26 14:39 · Score: 1

whether they're listening to the radio, watching TV, trying to find alien transmissions or locating speed traps, is all up to the person operating the reciever and legal virtually everywhere in the US.

This is not the case in Virginia or DC--at least two places in the "Land of the Free" where what is good for the goose isn't good for the gander. So while you did say "virtually", I didn't get the impression from the post that you were aware that there are places where they are illegal...so I offer a bit of gentle enlightenment.

As soon as you enter the District or Virginia you see a nice big sign (or in some cases a small sign) "Radar Detectors Illegal." Now, bear in mind that in Maryland (which surrounds DC on all sides) radar detectors are legal.

--
Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
Re:Seems weird by Wingnut64 · 2003-02-26 14:41 · Score: 1

Basically in America if it makes a large corp money, it's legal.

radar detectors/mod chips
tobacoo/marijuana

--
echo 'Header append X-HD-DVD "0x09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0"' >> /etc/apache2/httpd.conf
Re:Seems weird by Michael+Hunt · 2003-02-26 14:42 · Score: 2, Informative

Sorry, but this is plain wrong.

writable media does NOT have any flags which are accessible via standard read calls (ie on anything other than a burner) which indicates whether it's a burned copy or not. The PMA/ATIP area on a CD-R does have information regarding the kind of dye used on the disc, etc, but this is only accessible via CD-R(w) specific commands which you can't rely (as a copy protection manufacturer) on drives supporting.

Admittedly, DVD[+-]R(w) media DOES have no provision for burning to the keyspace, but I would doubt that that's accessible from userland either.

The way that PS(2) copy protection worked was to fudge the data in one of the subchannels which burners (to this day) can't burn to for some obscure reason. The problem with this scheme is that subchannel data is designed for things such as non-block-accurate positioning (think red book audio, accurate to within 75 sectors,) CD+text, etc, and was never designed to be reliably readable. The data in subchannels isn't reliably addressable or error corrected, which lead to a lot of borked PS discs which would (funnily enough) still play with a modchip....

Peace,

MH

--
You're doing it wrong.
Re:Seems weird by Jezza · 2003-02-26 14:42 · Score: 2, Interesting

Ohh - not that's not true! I've seen games consoles modded so they can play Japanese games - not even to save money, just because the games were released in Japan first.

I think you're too ready to shallow the hype - M$ seem to be forgetting fair use, and that the customer has bought the Xbox - if they want to mess with it, well I think they have the right. Sure if they rip off games then MS have a perfect right to stop that, but to say I can't mess with a machine I bought is not on. And there are legitimate reasons for modding an Xbox.
Re:Seems weird by cyberformer · 2003-02-26 14:52 · Score: 1

Not anymore. The evil CSEA makes it a felony to listen in to cell phone frequencies. (It's already a misdemeanor, as the guy that taped Newt Gingrich a few years ago found out.)
Re:Seems weird by k_187 · 2003-02-26 14:55 · Score: 1

Well fair use isn't outlawed by the DMCA, it just outlaws breaking encryption and other forms of protection to do anything that might have fair use umm uses. If you bought a book and wanted a back up copy and sat and wrote the whole thing down yourself with a pen, the DMCA couldn't touch you unless they want to call literacy a copyright circumvention device.

--
11 was a racehorse
12 was 12
1111 Race
12112
Re:Seems weird by mabinogi · 2003-02-26 15:08 · Score: 1

Region coding is NOT copyright protection, and I don't think anyone is claiming it is, either in the case of console games or DVDs.

The copyright protection is a separate piece of technology in both cases.

But modchips do get past the actual copyright protection, so the rest of your post is fairly acurate.

--
Advanced users are users too!
Re:Seems weird by Grishnakh · 2003-02-26 15:25 · Score: 1

Wrong. They're illegal in one state, and Washington D.C. (which isn't a state).

Don't make it out like they're commonly outlawed, when it's just one state out of 50.
Re:Seems weird by Grishnakh · 2003-02-26 15:28 · Score: 1

Wrong, region coding IS copyright protection. It protects the content producers' copywritten works against people who would do something evil, like lawfully purchase a movie in one country, and try to play it on a lawfully-purchased player in another country.
Re:Seems weird by jdreed1024 · 2003-02-26 15:35 · Score: 1

Wrong. They're illegal in one state, and Washington D.C. (which isn't a state).
And Virginia.
And parts of Connecticut.
And parts of New Hampshire.
Would you like me to continue?

--
There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
Re:Seems weird by Grishnakh · 2003-02-26 15:45 · Score: 1

"parts of" doesn't constitute a whole state. Sounds like some backwards counties passed some laws that the state has nothing to do with.

Any other states?
Re:Seems weird by Penguinoflight · 2003-02-26 15:47 · Score: 1

It's definatly not wrong. Why anyone can claim rights to a machine like this, and not allow modifications just because they say they're loosing money making them is a shame. The CDs/DVDs that are used in these machines are quite hard to replicate, and it is mainly for using games from another region, or using Linux or Netbsd.

The thing is, people who own Xbox's don't know anything about this either. If I walked up to any of my friends who own consoles, and asked them about a mod chip, they'd be clueless.

--
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14
Re:Seems weird by Gleef · 2003-02-26 15:57 · Score: 2, Insightful

AxelTorvalds wrote:

Not true. The spirit of the law is to prevent people from wholesale committing that crime. It's worded sloppily and there are holes but you know what they are trying to do. I don't know of anyone who has been busted for ripping a DVD
Don't interpret that as "they won't use the law against people who just rip a DVD", interpret that as "it's much harder to find someone who is just using the tools, so we bust the distrubutors, it's easier.

just selling tools to do it,
Or distributing the tools for free. Or linking to a site that distributes tools as a part of an online article if you are a "bad" journalist (eg. 2600), as opposed to a "good" journalist (eg. NYT) doing the same thing.

and really not even that, they were busted for distributing copyrighted materials.
No, nether Skylarov nor Elcomsoft nor 2600 were distributing unauthorized copies of copyrighted material when busted.

Seriously, how many xbox modchips were used for putting linux on xbox? How many do you think were used for piracy?
I have no idea, I don't think anyone does. The legal climate makes it very difficult to find such figures. I do know that a considerable number were used by the X-Box Linux developers.

How about PS2 modchips, what is the legitmate use for them?
To run GameShark2, so you can explore your legally purchased games in ways other than the original game manufacturer intended. Porting one of the BSDs or an actual Free distribution of Linux (as opposed to Sony's distribution) to the machine. Developing games or other software for the PS/2 without going through the expensive licensing process and purchasing the expensive development version of the console.

I don't know a single person that has moded a PS2 or Xbox for some reason other than piracy.
Personally, I don't know a single person that has modded a PS2 or XBox, period. The only people I know of who have modded their consoles are the people working on the various Linux port projects.

Both your experience and mine are unbalanced and anecdotal, neither represents accurate figures. Again, accurate figures of such things are impossible to come by.

--

----
Open mind, insert foot.
Re:Seems weird by prelelat · 2003-02-26 17:00 · Score: 1

I agree. Look at the guys over at Penny-Arcade.com I think they have all their consoles modded but none of there games are pirated. They get some imported before they are released in the US and then some times buy them again. This is not illegal in my books though the DMCA makes it so that it is. There are also some games that are only released in Japan(remember FF for nintendo that wasn't released in US/Canada) people still want to play these games. Note that the guy from isonews.com was advertising to the pirating community because of the nature of the website. But that does not mean that all mod chips(playstation included) are not used for pirating so they should be a little less cranky about it.
Re:Seems weird by Yottabyte84 · 2003-02-26 18:38 · Score: 1

I know a guy who has a modded X-Box. He uses it for playing anime fansubs.
Re:Seems weird by Trent_Alkaline · 2003-02-26 18:42 · Score: 1

http://www.ncsl.org/programs/esnr/radar.htm#table2 appears to be only a couple states according to this
Re:Seems weird by Trent_Alkaline · 2003-02-26 19:07 · Score: 1

http://www.afn.org/~afn09444/scanlaws/scanner5.htm l they are seemingly legal in most states
Re:Seems weird by Jezza · 2003-02-26 21:51 · Score: 1

Well if they built fair use into their consoles ...
Re:Seems weird by windex · 2003-02-27 01:19 · Score: 1

That's a federal law counteracting a federal law, though. It's not the same as a local law counteracting a federal law. It's like Milwaukee county saying you can start flogging people at will who look at your children. Federal law calls that assault. :)
Re:Seems weird by s.a.m · 2003-02-27 04:08 · Score: 1

Just to let you all know, TechTV's The Screen Savers, talked to people about modding the X-box and also stated that they are going to show you how to do it.

Seems to me that there is no problem doing that, but that site is OBVIOUSLY a site for people who pirate things. IF the DOJ was really pissy don't you think they'd have already cracked down on the linux mod for the Xbox? Trust me, they read slashdot and know about these things. There's at least ONE geek working there and they'd be able to provide such information if it were in some sort of violation.

There's no need to sugar coat this situation, we all know why that site was there and quite frankly I'm surprised it stayed in operation as long as it did. The fact that they decided to sell the modchips put them over the edge because they just crossed the realm into interstate commerce which falls under the federal system. This allowed the DOJ, a federal agency, to be able to come down on them.
Re:Seems weird by CormacJ · 2003-02-27 07:14 · Score: 1

Actually it's perfectly legal to sell radar detectors, but in some states it's illegal to use them.

US law has a wierd way of dealing with things like this - they don't ban the sale of the item, but they make it illegal to use it
Re:Seems weird by Jezza · 2003-02-27 07:32 · Score: 1

I think that's the same here in the UK. I don't see why mod-chips are different! And even then (using it) unless you're copying software (you don't own) I don't see a problem.

Of course the whole "own" thing is open to some debate, do you own your software, or not?
Re:Seems weird by prelelat · 2003-02-27 09:13 · Score: 1

well according to the DMCA is actually against the law no matter if its fair use or not because it is circumventing the security measurs put in place for those consoles. Even though fairuse laws would fall into place DMCA surpasses it.

Mod chips legal in Australia by eggplantpasta · 2003-02-26 12:58 · Score: 2, Interesting

Sony took some people selling mod chips to court and lost.

--
"Don't forget the prunes." L. Francis Herreshoff

What the hell... by king_penguin_05 · 2003-02-26 12:58 · Score: 1, Redundant

Since when were modchips illegal?

--
"I can't drive 55. It only goes 38."

Re:What the hell... by LowneWulf · 2003-02-26 13:08 · Score: 1

DMCA, baby!
If a modchip can be used to circumvent copyright protections (and it can), then it's a circumvention device and therefore illegal in the States. Same as DeCSS and all that.

It didn't help that he was being quite blatant as to his perceived purpose of the modchips; hint: it wasn't to boot Linux.
Re:What the hell... by JBark · 2003-02-26 13:15 · Score: 1

They became illegal when they started selling them with copyrighted code already on them. Selling modchips themselves without code won't get you in trouble (though it might make some people unhappy), but selling them with a BIOS already on them makes it illegal.
Re:What the hell... by king_penguin_05 · 2003-02-26 13:45 · Score: 1

I didn't know he was blatently selling them for illegal purposes. In that case this isn't as bad. I thought it was saying that modchips were illegal in general, and technically they might be, but unless it's something like this, I didn't think they usually did anything.

--
"I can't drive 55. It only goes 38."
Re:What the hell... by bwt · 2003-02-26 13:55 · Score: 1

Since when is changing a piece of hardware to enable it to work with additional 3rd party software copyright infringment? The DMCA regulates circumventing protection measures that control access to copyrighted works, not that prevent access to copyrighted works of others.

The DMCA does (legitimately) stop you from removing the authentication on the game. Copyright already stops you from copying it. Nobody has ever suggested that the DMCA forces you to ONLY access works of a specific copyright owner.
Re:What the hell... by ubugly2 · 2003-02-26 14:18 · Score: 1

Damn good thing you didn't say Xerox
Re:What the hell... by SN74S181 · 2003-02-26 14:29 · Score: 1

I wonder when they are going to start confiscating the 'collectors item' Copy II PC hardware cards that vintage computer enthusiasts buy and sell on forums like eBay.
Re:What the hell... by shogun · 2003-02-26 15:10 · Score: 1

Oh no, someone is using pencils to duplicate copyright works! We had better throw all the pencil users in jail and burn down the factory's producing them.

Thats what the current news item equates to.

Write Proper english! by Lothar · 2003-02-26 12:59 · Score: 1, Offtopic

I know I'm trolling but it seems the language skills of the slashdot crew are going even further downhill. Take your time guys and proofread before posting.

Just couldn't help myself commenting.
Byebye karma.

( Now did I spell everything right ;-)

Re:Write Proper english! by attobyte · 2003-02-26 13:52 · Score: 1

Well then "Proper" should not be captilized.

--
I didn't use the preview button, so get over it!!!!
Mike
Re:Write Proper english! by ender's_shadow · 2003-02-26 14:40 · Score: 1

hey dumbass -- close your parentheticals. (know what I mean?

Similair to DEA takeover of domainnames. by MavEtJu · 2003-02-26 12:59 · Score: 2, Interesting

When I read the article first I was reminded on this one I saw yesterday: DRUG ENFORCEMENT TAKES CONTROL OF DOMAIN NAMES, THREATENS PRIVACY.

Seems that the war on [drugs, terrorism, general stupidity etc] has moved on to a level higher.

--
bash$ :(){ :|:&};:

Re:Similair to DEA takeover of domainnames. by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 22:06 · Score: 1, Interesting

Something similar, the SPA took over the e-xoops.com site for having made an 'unauthorised' modification to the GPL'ed xoops.org.

If you try to go to www.e-xoops.com you will get redirected to SPA's anti-piracy division. I asked them how I could download the e-xoops GPL program and they told me they were not aware of the redirection....

Mod chips by blincoln · 2003-02-26 12:59 · Score: 4, Interesting

As much as I dislike the console pirating scene, this is a really bad turn of events.

I have my PS2 chipped, and I'm going to do the same to my XBox. Not so I can pirate games, but so I can play imports, access savegame files on the hard drive, and so on. If I *can't* add that capability to a console with a mod chip, I'm much less likely to buy them in the first place.

--
"...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman

Re:Mod chips by Nakanai_de · 2003-02-26 13:19 · Score: 1

It's called "substantial non-infringing use." The question is whether the courts will buy that argument.

--
Sono koro, bokura wa, sore ga sekai no shinjitsu da to shinjite ita.
Re:Mod chips by AvantLegion · 2003-02-26 18:56 · Score: 1

If you use Xbox Live, you might want to avoid chipping your Xbox. Modchip users are unable to log onto Xbox Live.

The Bong Show... by Anonvmous+Coward · 2003-02-26 12:59 · Score: 5, Insightful

"Cannabis News released this article about how the DEA is seeking to redirect indicted businesses that sell glass bongs and pipes to the DEA's website."

At first, I thought this was sarcastic. Doesn't sound like it is. Is it illegal to have a bong? Can they really do that?

This comment really bothered me:

"In effect, the defunct Web sites become electronic flypaper for those looking for illegal drug paraphernalia, reporters covering the story, and people who have trouble spelling in Google."

There's absolutely no way that they know anybody's intentions when they go to a site like that. The internet is a source of INFORMATION. At some point, information's going to be accessed. It's not like you can call me a pirate just for visiting a site about piracy. Heck, you can't even call me a pirate if I download an ISO. How do they know I'm not replacing a scratched disk?

Blah blah blah I know, it's all been said before by lots of people. The difference for me today is that I now understand why privacy nuts are so fanatical about it. Out of context, data can be used in horrible ways.

Re:The Bong Show... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 13:17 · Score: 1, Insightful

"It's not a bong. It's a tobacco waterpipe." That is what they will tell you if you use that word in a head shop.
Re:The Bong Show... by SecretAsianMan · 2003-02-26 13:36 · Score: 1

Heck, you can't even call me a pirate if I download an ISO. How do they know I'm not replacing a scratched disk?
Or maybe you're installing FreeBSD. They make ISOs available for download. So do a bunch of other free OS projects.

--
Washington, DC: It's like Hollywood for ugly people.
Re:The Bong Show... by Xerithane · 2003-02-26 13:38 · Score: 1

There's absolutely no way that they know anybody's intentions when they go to a site like that. The internet is a source of INFORMATION. At some point, information's going to be accessed. It's not like you can call me a pirate just for visiting a site about piracy. Heck, you can't even call me a pirate if I download an ISO. How do they know I'm not replacing a scratched disk?

Exactly. Collect my information. Visit isonews, and every head-shop website, along with terrorist website that you can think of. Choke on the deluge of people giving a big collective middle finger to anybody attempting to pin them down for the crime of reading a website.

Blah blah blah I know, it's all been said before by lots of people. The difference for me today is that I now understand why privacy nuts are so fanatical about it. Out of context, data can be used in horrible ways.

I think we should just flood them with bogus info. Go buy 30 galons of bleach and 50 pounds of fertilizer. The donate it to local farmers, just to throw them off.

--
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
Re:The Bong Show... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 13:49 · Score: 1, Informative

It's partly illegal to own one and partly not. The headshops I've been in, if you stray from "water pipes" and "pipes" and call stuff "bongs" or "bowls" they'll kick you out. And there's signs posted everywhere saying this. Basically it's a gray area where it's legal to use a bong or pipe to smoke tobacco or any of the herbal smoke stuff you can get, but if you use it for marijuana it's illegal. The thing with head shops is it's kinda obvious what you're gonna do after you walk out with a bag with wraps, a new bong, a tshirt and stickers and shit with marijuana slogans and pictures on them, and the latest copy of high times. But they're legal as far as I know as long as there's no marijuana residue in them. Also, there's a lot of really nice pipes out there that could be considered works of art, and last I knew you can't censor art. As long as they don't shut down my supplier of salvia I'll be happy.
Re:The Bong Show... by BWJones · 2003-02-26 14:00 · Score: 1

At first, I thought this was sarcastic. Doesn't sound like it is. Is it illegal to have a bong? Can they really do that?

I had the same question when I heard this on NPR a couple of days ago. Granted I've not visited a head shop or smoked pot since junior high, but this really struck me as completely over the top. I thought that they were only illegal if they were found with "residue" of controlled substances in them and only then were they considered paraphernalia and subject to criminal law.

--
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Re:The Bong Show... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 14:09 · Score: 1, Informative

It's partly illegal to own one and partly not. The headshops I've been in, if you stray from "water pipes" and "pipes" and call stuff "bongs" or "bowls" they'll kick you out.

Correct. We sell tobacoo products. And the cops know we do, and give us no grief. We have signs that say its for tobacco only, and anyone making any reference to illegal use will be asked to leave. Its not all we sell, but its a part of what we sell. Notice I am posting as AC tho :)
Re:The Bong Show... by kfg · 2003-02-26 14:50 · Score: 5, Informative

*Possesion* of a pipe *assumed* to be for smoking an illegal substance is a federal offense.

Ain't it grand?

One of my tobacconists also sells glass pipes. It's no accident that they sell tobacco. It removes the question of assumption.

According to the DoJ *rolling papers* are also now considered "drug paraphenalia" and a federal offense to possess, which will surprise the hell out of a lot of "roll your own" tobacco smokers I know.

KFG
Re:The Bong Show... by mrFur · 2003-02-26 14:54 · Score: 1

Actually... it is sort of illegal to own a bong. Just ask the people who have had their cars and all other belongings siezed at the border. Under the "Zero Tolerance" policy, if you were caught with drug paraphenalia coming across the border, everything was siezed and sold by Uncle Sam. There were a number of high-profile cases where people had cars, cash, motorhomes, boats et al siezed because they had a bong ,a roach clip, or "Traces of cannabis" in their car. Seems the constitution only protects Americans.

--
My $0.05 (AUD - we don't have pennies any more)
Re:The Bong Show... by jimmcq · 2003-02-26 14:55 · Score: 1

"Cannabis News released this article about how the DEA is seeking to redirect indicted businesses that sell glass bongs and pipes to the DEA's website."
At first, I thought this was sarcastic. Doesn't sound like it is. Is it illegal to have a bong? Can they really do that?

In some states it is illegal to own/sell a bong... its consider drug paraphernalia. In other states it is perfectly legal and there are head shops all over the place.
Re:The Bong Show... by fishbowl · 2003-02-26 15:00 · Score: 1

"In some states it is illegal to own/sell a bong... its consider drug paraphernalia. In other states it is perfectly legal and there are head shops all over the place."

Correct, and irrelevant. The problem is that online merchants are doing interstate commerce. The government's position is that even selling between states where the items are legal, the interstate commerce is not. Therefore it falls under Federal jurisdiction to prosecute.

Either through action or inaction, we have all been part of the process that put the current government in power. It didn't happen overnight, or with a single botched election, or any other one thing. I'm worried at the thought that the current government just might actually represent the will of the people... My God, what if it does?

--
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Re:The Bong Show... by Tokerat · 2003-02-26 15:40 · Score: 1

Here in Mass, water bottles, cigarettes, and plastic jewlery have all been considered "drug paraphenalia" by police breaking up *legal* raves.

They've been better about it lately, but c'mon, a bottle of water? Cigarettes? I can almost see that, if they check and find that it's not water or the cigs are dippies or something... but how do you get high off plastic jewlery???

Oh well, kandy ravers get annoying after a while anyways ;-)

--
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
Re:The Bong Show... by ripewithdecay · 2003-02-26 15:54 · Score: 1

In some states it is illegal to own/sell a bong... its consider drug paraphernalia. In other states it is perfectly legal and there are head shops all over the place.

And in some states, drug paraphernalia is illegal, but there are still head shops. They don't sell bongs per se, however. The bongs (they are referred to as "water pipes") can also be used to smoke tobacco. That's how they can legally sell them.
Re:The Bong Show... by kfg · 2003-02-26 16:01 · Score: 1

Children's pacifiers are "drug paraphenalia."

You dip the pacifier in acid and then suck on it. The pacifier itself looks innocent.

That would because it *is,* but tell that to the cop.

I imagine the plastic jewelry is being used similarly.

Anything can drug paraphenalia.

It's doofey. (That's my word of the month, but if this keeps up it may well become the word of my lifetime)

KFG
Re:The Bong Show... by OneEyedApe · 2003-02-26 16:12 · Score: 1

I would think that the plastic jewelry would only become drug paraphenalia once it had been dipped in acid.

--
Life sucks, but death doesn't put out at all....
--Thomas J. Kopp
Re:The Bong Show... by guacamolefoo · 2003-02-26 16:29 · Score: 1

Pennsylvania provides that possession of a bong is per se possession of drug paraphernalia. The State Police have been busting head shops around the state lately for possession of drug paraphernalia. The charges have been sticking, despite good defense counsel. It's the law in PA despite any potential claim about "for tobacco" or "no residue" or any of that hokum. (or hookah-um).

GF.

--
Lots of petrified grits
Re:The Bong Show... by kfg · 2003-02-26 16:33 · Score: 2, Informative

The use of the pacifier predates the existence of extasy.

By decades. In fact, it predates the internet, on which you will not yet find the sum total of human knowledge.

The use of the pacifier by those who take extasy does not constitute drug parapenalia. Nor does it's use have anything to do with it's being an upper per se. People who take dexedrin for example don't use a pacifier.

The use of a pacifier or other suckable items as a method of delivery for LSD does constitute drug paraphenalia. People were doing this before you were born, and if you are as young as you appear perhaps before your mom was born.

Jewelry itself can be made out of pure illegal suckable drugs, but that's another subject.

KFG
Re:The Bong Show... by Ungrounded+Lightning · 2003-02-26 18:29 · Score: 1

According to the DoJ *rolling papers* are also now considered "drug paraphenalia" and a federal offense to possess, which will surprise the hell out of a lot of "roll your own" tobacco smokers I know.

So is aluminum foil. Since the '60s.

It was used to make hashish pipes - by lining the bowl of any pipe-like object (or a hole punched near one end of a toilet-paper roll), then puncturin the foil a few times with the point of a pin.

This made it interesting when you bought some to wrap a sandwich or meat for your freezer. B-) So of course the law was selectively enforced.

--
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Re:The Bong Show... by forkboy · 2003-02-26 20:37 · Score: 1

That's not what started the pacifier trend....it's because when you're rolling (high on Ecstasy) you get all cracked out (no better way to describe it) and grind your teeth. It's basically something to chew on that you can't swallow that appeases that weird mouth feeling.

I agree it looks stupid though...out of all the drug countercultures, the ravers are the biggest fucking retards fashion-wise. The first raver I ever met was wearing a big fuzzy jacket (like Chewbacca fuzzy) with blinking red lights, a propeller-beanie and a pacifier. Oh, and pink shoes. All I could think was "wow dude what the fuck is wrong with you." I mean, I'm all about fun with hallucinogens but some of these people dress like that all the time and it just makes them look stupid. I'd never tell em to stop, but I'll be first in line to tell em that they look like douchebags.

A couple more interesting pieces of paraphenlia at raves....filter masks (like the kind you wear working with drywall or something) and Vic's Vapor-Rub. (another rolling thing...never tried it but I guess the vapor gives you a nice head buzz while you're rolling)

--
This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
Re:The Bong Show... by Tokerat · 2003-02-26 21:14 · Score: 1

If you dipped a whole pacifier in acid, you'd probably die, espeically if you where doing E. Candyflipping == heart attack. Back in my kandy kid days (*sigh* yes yes *hangs head*) we just used them while on Ecstacy so we wouldn't bite our damn lips off.

Anways,it's unnessisary, I can still get away with taking acid. I can wipe acid on the underside of my hat, and wear it in. Worked for Hendrix. Or I can just not be a retard and take my drugs just after I park my car. 25 minutes in line and it's just hitting me when I'm inside and free.

--
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
Re:The Bong Show... by Tokerat · 2003-02-26 21:27 · Score: 1

Again the mask trend is exagerated. masks are often worn by people who can't stand the smokey, poor ventalated venues that raves originated in and are being forced back too. Some people just cna't dance and breathe heavy in all that smoke. I know sometimes I get home from a party and blow my nose and it comes out black - the "rave soot" phenomenon. Yuck.

Of course, then, someone who was all about the fucking drugs came up with putting vicks in a mask and walking around with it on while rolling, for a constant menthol buzz. Same reason you can't stop smoking Newports when you're rolling, anything stimulating like lights, smells, touch, or sound (read: lasers, vicks, bass, and more bass) makes the trip all that much beter. That's why it so popular at raves.

PS Not all ravers have the whole douchebag kandy look. I usually go in (huge) baggy kakhis and a white hoodie, myself. Plenty of jungle kids will give you shit for wearing kandy. I dont' mind it a little bit but overall, kandy is about drugs, anyone who tells you different is a hypocryte and anyone who tries to make it different is wasting their time on a lost cause. It's cute kiddies, but sorry, I've been there, deeper than you think, and I know. ;-)

--
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
Re:The Bong Show... by forkboy · 2003-02-27 04:22 · Score: 1

kandy is about drugs

For most of the people I know, raves in general are all about the drugs, even though they aren't the kandy types. They're about the rolling or tripping, the rave is just something fun to do while they're fucked up. Maybe since I know many of this type of person my opinion on raves is a little biased as to thinking that most of the people there are about the drug usage. (Not that there's anything wrong with it, imo...I don't go to raves just because crowds of people in buildings freak me out)

--
This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
Re:The Bong Show... by Tokerat · 2003-02-27 14:44 · Score: 1

Unfortunately, you speak the truth. True "sceners" are starting to crop up, though, I've seen alot of "Music is my drug." t-shirts lately, but, what are ya gonna do...

--
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?

On the upside... by breon.halling · 2003-02-26 13:01 · Score: 1

...it would appear we've slashdotted the Department of Justice. =)

--
"Yeah, well, Dracula called and he's coming over tonight for you and I said okay."

ISONEWS is 'shut down' by MisterFancypants · 2003-02-26 13:02 · Score: 4, Informative

The issue with ISONEWS.com is that it was really 8 different servers spread throughout the country. The DOJ did arrest the site owner for selling 'mod chips', not for the site itself.

Since shutting down 8 servers at once (some of them being out of the US) is hard, the DOJ took control of the DNS for the isonews.com domain and pointed it to their own site, which is what many people get when they go to http://www.isonews.com now.

Some people still get redirected to the existing servers, but this will happen less and less as the DNS changes propagate out to leaf nodes.

cnn.com is the next one. by eille-la · 2003-02-26 13:02 · Score: 1

I really think he got arrested only because he sold illegally imported modchips. Because why not take down CNN.com too, they report 0sec worldwide illegal activities too.

greedy ? by ramzak2k · 2003-02-26 13:02 · Score: 1

isonews has been degrading in quality for quite sometime now. Other release sites have taken its place partly because of ventures like modchip selling.

I doubt if it will stop them. Wonder how long it will be before a domain/server is running in remote parts of the world for the business.. oh wait

--

Siggy Say, Siggy Do

Truth by Darkwatcher · 2003-02-26 13:03 · Score: 5, Interesting

Ok here is the official word straight from one of the ISOnews staff

"Yes its true. The DOJ has taken control of the isonews.com DNS which now points to 149.101.1.91

If you link directly to http://66.201.243.170 you can still reach the site. This is a good interim solution as the official DNS may be gone for good.

If you can still reach isonews.com from the old dns its only because your ISP has not updated its cache. Take note of the ip now if you still want to be able to reach isonews
Http://66.201.243.170

Hop into efnet #isonews for updates as they arrive. We'll try to keep things running here until the situation becomes clearer.

in the meantime , i wanna make some things clear.

1.theres about 8 isonews servers.
2.they are currently not being touched by anyone except isonews staff.
3.theres no need to back anything up.

In the meantime theres little need to specualte as we will keep you updated , in the meantime just use the forum as normal and pass the ip on to any friends who use the site till we sort this out."

Re:Truth by SN74S181 · 2003-02-26 14:44 · Score: 1

Don't we need to do somesuch trickery with DNS, i.e. stick it in a line in the static host file on our machines, in order to do more than load the initial HTML file pointed to? Any hrefs, etc., on that initial page are gonna jump to the new IP.
Re:Truth by WarWizard · 2003-02-26 19:26 · Score: 1

No. Its called relative links. From what I can tell the site uses them. How about you try the URL and click on stuff :)

Re:info by wo1verin3 · 2003-02-26 13:04 · Score: 1

Hey, if you start posting info we can get /. siezed and I'd love to see them handle the load from slashdot front page

SLASHDOT THE DOJ :P

just kidding. :P

from the #isonews channel by Tyrian · 2003-02-26 13:05 · Score: 1

[20:11] a) it's a website hack, similar to the riaa.org hack, someone ****ed with the server and put whatever tey wanted there
[20:12] <C0ffeeMan> don't login to the site without going to the real site first... the real site in the topic
[20:12] <flipmo> nope
[20:12] <C0ffeeMan> c) loggin into the other site will prolly compromise your password
[20:12] <flipmo> the actual isonews server is still intact
[20:12] <C0ffeeMan> d) the doj prolly hasn't taken it down cuase they are idiots
[20:13] <C0ffeeMan> d) no i haven't talked to k8 in a wile, but others have.... hence the fake website, it's not really something to give a **** about
[20:13] <C0ffeeMan> e) nobody else has been charged with selling modchips ,why should he... use common sense
[20:13] <C0ffeeMan> f) it was a good hack, and a good joke... good job (whoever) ... i hope you're listening good hsit.
[20:13] <flipmo> amen

Re:from the #isonews channel by 2MuchC0ffeeMan · 2003-02-26 14:07 · Score: 1

re-read my new post... that log is baed upon old info... (and i was relaying wrong info)

--
Runnin' On Empty .... I'm Still Alive

Bong courtesy of the Dept of Transportation by Aexia · 2003-02-26 13:07 · Score: 1

Near the University of Washington, there's an unfinished exit ramp that goes over part of Lake Washington. It's become a fun spot to jump off from into the water.

Someone drilled holes into the concrete sides to make a bong. Pretty nifty.

Re:Bong courtesy of the Dept of Transportation by BHearsum · 2003-02-26 13:26 · Score: 1

LOL. You reminded me of a Denis Leary bit.

"And then they graduate to those giant bongs where you have to start up a motorcyle...Kids driving their bongs down FDR Drive, 'comon' man! pull the bong over, i wanna take a hit'".
Re:Bong courtesy of the Dept of Transportation by SN74S181 · 2003-02-26 14:04 · Score: 1

Don't tell me, I'll guess: The construction crew went off and got stoned and never got around to finishing the exit ramp...
Re:Bong courtesy of the Dept of Transportation by infonography · 2003-02-26 14:12 · Score: 1

Lame jest, no they didn't.
I've jumped off it, hurts like hell even thru shoes if you don't hit right. Back when I had an 'art student' account at the UW's ACC (Academic Computing Center / Apocalyptic Cyber Coven) and the long lemented 'Last Exit on Brooklyn'.

--
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
Re:Bong courtesy of the Dept of Transportation by BHearsum · 2003-02-27 07:25 · Score: 1

Wow. Someone's got some hostility in them. Ever considered anger managment training?

C'mon Now! by Snagle · 2003-02-26 13:07 · Score: 1

It's not like they were offering game ISOs for download, there just providing information. If it is being shut down because it can help people commit illegal acts then the government has alot of work to do, seeing that i have found enough information in my school library to create different forms of cocaine, and how each is to be used. I guess the government now just selects what they want the first ammendment to apply to without going to the supreme court, not like that's an important part of the process or anything.

Re:C'mon Now! by JBark · 2003-02-26 13:22 · Score: 1

Read the article.

They've been selling modchips. Probably ones with a BIOS already on them. Pure Genious.

This looks very fake by bluntmanspam · 2003-02-26 13:08 · Score: 1, Troll

OK, I am not sure why everyone seems to be falling for this, but it looks to me to be very fake. The page doesn't even look official. For one thing, the DOJ probably wouldn't steal the old ISONews logo and put it at the top of the page. They also probably have a better copy of their own logo than the crappy clip-art one at the top as well. (Although, maybe not if you take cybercrime.gov as any indication)

Another good thing to notice would be that there don't seem to be any specific laws or statutes mentioned. It's pretty standard practice to cite those when you can recite them in your sleep like the guys at the DOJ.

Seems much more likely that someone just hijacked the domain or hax0red the server to me.

Re:This looks very fake by zapf · 2003-02-26 13:19 · Score: 1

You're wrong, chief.
Re:This looks very fake by Phork · 2003-02-26 13:22 · Score: 3, Insightful

ok, it might look fakes, but the authorative server for isonews.com is now listed as ns22.usdoj.gov, and that server has an A record for www.isonews.com which points to 149.101.1.91, which is in a USDOJ netblock, so it seems to be pretty real.

--
-- free as in swatantryam - not soujanyam.
Re:This looks very fake by Sp4rtikuz · 2003-02-26 13:46 · Score: 1

In addition, all the pages made by the DOJ have their author qouted, the page at isonews.com only lists US DOJ as the author.

And I agree, the DOJ would NEVER use the logo of the site on their own page.

Simple, actually by The+Bungi · 2003-02-26 13:08 · Score: 2, Insightful

You run a warez site, you'll get screwed. I can't see how that's surprising - other than the fact they're actually prosecuting it now, and that it's obviously very high-profile with the redirection and whatnot.

Modchips are illegal. Yes, illegal. No matter how much we want to bitch and moan about how "I bought the boxen, I want to run Plan9 on it, wahhH!!!". The reasons companies do this goes much farther than that.

Now, reverse-engineering a console and using it in the comfort of your own basement - that's another thing. But selling them? Well, expect to pay the consecuences.

Now, people who for some reason need a modchip can be pissed off, and that's OK. So don't buy the console, right? Buy a PC and do whatever you want with it. Vote with your money. If Sony (PS2) or Microsoft (XBox) won't let you be 1337 with their consoles, don't buy them. period.

Sorry, but that's how the real world works. It has nothing to do with privacy or human rights or global warming or the habitat of the monitor lizard.

Re:Simple, actually by Dougthebug · 2003-02-26 13:30 · Score: 1

Thats the thing though. isonews was not a warez site. They post .nfo files without serial numbers. Nothing wrong with that is there?
Re:Simple, actually by zapf · 2003-02-26 13:32 · Score: 5, Insightful

Vote with your money.

I never voted on the DMCA. Why can't I vote with my votes?

The DMCA is a good example of representative democracy at its worst: the public should be voting on things like this, not a group of old, white, men who are told by their party to vote a certain way. That isn't democracy, that's two parties vying for campaign dollars from special interests.
Re:Simple, actually by Wraithlyn · 2003-02-26 13:35 · Score: 2, Insightful

"You run a warez site, you'll get screwed."

Do you mean it should be illegal to have any web site concerning (NOT distributing) warez?

Yeah, MOD chips are against the DMCA, but other than that, ISONews wasn't doing anything wrong. They even removed serial numbers from the NFO files. They were just a news site.

If Slashdot (or CNN for that matter) runs a story about how there are pirated copies of Two Towers on the net, they are doing the exact same thing. ISONews was just specialized.

--
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
Re:Simple, actually by doce · 2003-02-26 14:12 · Score: 1

this isn't and never was a democracy. many of the founding fathers even despised the very word.

the US is a Democratic Republic, not a democracy.

if you don't like the 2-party system, vote for a third or fourth and convince others to do so too.

--
woof!
Re:Simple, actually by k_187 · 2003-02-26 14:52 · Score: 1

Then create your own special intrest. complaining that your money can't do anything is one thing, but supporting or creating organizations that have the same position as you is a very different one. Do some research find those special intrests that do ally with you, don't sit and complain that you can't do anything when tons of information and paths exist out there just waiting to be taken.

--
11 was a racehorse
12 was 12
1111 Race
12112
Re:Simple, actually by RestiffBard · 2003-02-26 14:56 · Score: 1

newsflash junior. Citizens of the USA do not live in a democracy. There is nothing about US government that is remotely democratic as far as the people are concerned. This is not a political argument. This is fact. Citizens of the USA live in a Republic. We always have, we always will...until the revolution, comrade. I really wish people would get their heads out of their asses on this point.

--
- /* dead coders leave no comments */
Re:Simple, actually by blah-Hipo · 2003-02-26 15:02 · Score: 1

you're a fucking dumbass, dude.
Re:Simple, actually by tekunokurato · 2003-02-26 15:10 · Score: 1

Once again, nobody [who knows jack about politics] ever said the US was a democracy. It's a democratic republic, and those old white men are the ones the average person in this country elected to represent them. My genuine suggestion for you is to leave the country. I certainly plan to.

--
Read jack phelps dot net
Re:Simple, actually by timster · 2003-02-26 15:13 · Score: 2, Insightful

You're trying to oversimplify the issue by using a stark word like "illegal". But the *truth* is that it isn't illegal, because the "laws" they violate are in violation of the Constitution. An unconstitutional law never holds force in the first place. The Supreme Court hasn't ruled on this yet, but even if they claim that these laws are valid, they are still wrong -- anyone can read the Constitution and decide for themselves. Even if people are put in jail and stay there, the actions of the government are still unconstitutional and therefore illegal in the philosophical absolute truth sense, if that makes them feel any better anyway. And even if the Supreme Court makes an incorrect ruling, it's still possible (though rare) for it to be corrected by the court at a later date. So don't get on your horse saying these things are "illegal" because Ashcroft says so -- I wouldn't believe what Ashcroft said if he told me water was wet, and neither should anyone else.

--
I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
Re:Simple, actually by zapf · 2003-02-26 15:38 · Score: 1

What I meant was not that we live in a true democratic system, but that we consider ourselves the model of democracy. Despite this, we are very far from being democratic. We call ourselves a democracy, and our foreign policy tries to spread democracy throughout the world... why don't we practice it here?
Re:Simple, actually by bigstupid · 2003-02-26 15:43 · Score: 1

The DMCA is a good example of representative democracy at its worst: the public should be voting on things like this, not a group of old, white, men who are told by their party to vote a certain way. That isn't democracy, that's two parties vying for campaign dollars from special interests.

Yeah, and this is different from the rest of U.S. politics how?
Re:Simple, actually by The+Bungi · 2003-02-26 15:53 · Score: 1

you're a fucking dumbass, dude.
Well, well. And you're logged in, wonder of wonders.
So Hipo, enlighten me. Why am I a "fucking dumbass"?
Re:Simple, actually by aeoo · 2003-02-26 18:35 · Score: 1

Now, people who for some reason need a modchip can be pissed off, and that's OK. So don't buy the console, right? Buy a PC and do whatever you want with it.

So how long until we can no longer buy a generic computing device known as 'PC'?
Re:Simple, actually by Builder · 2003-02-26 20:47 · Score: 1

Crap argument. Compaq got into business by reverse engineering someone else's IP in their basement (the IBM BIOS) and selling it.

Their actions, which you are condemming here in another context, are what started and fueled what has become the booming IT industry of today. If no-one had broken the IBM stranglehold, we would not be anywhere near where we are today.
Re:Simple, actually by NigelJohnstone · 2003-02-26 23:19 · Score: 1

"You run a warez site, you'll get screwed."

He didn't run a warez site, he ran a modchip site. He wasn't accused of breach of copyright, he was accused of selling devices which *might* be used to breach copyright.
Re:Simple, actually by the+grace+of+R'hllor · 2003-02-27 01:37 · Score: 1

Being a smalltime garage, modifying a customer's gasoline car so it runs on natural gas is illegal, too.

Oh wait, no it isn't. Nor should it be. Nor should modchips be.

Modchips have legitimate uses (running backups, turning xbox into cheap linux box, etc), which is more than you can say for some other legal devices.

Why Pittsburgh? by JonMisurda · 2003-02-26 13:09 · Score: 1

As a student of the University of Pittsbugh, I'm really curious as to why this raid is all based out of this city. I've lived here all my life and I have never heard of it being a headquarters for any DEA action in the past.

That said, this article and this follow up tell of a raid locally on a shop for selling "paraphenalia".

As to the websites, I guess they are treating them as impounded property. Sets an interesting precident for anything that might be considered inappropriate on the web. What about countries without such laws?

Watch out kidnapping and bankrobbing websites! by toupsie · 2003-02-26 13:09 · Score: 1

This is a wake-up call to all US-based websites that advocate the violation of US State and Federal Law and profit from the sale of the tools that assist in that advocation. With so many people involved in the use of these sort of websites, its easy to prove conspiracy bringing out major penalties. The law is the law. Even if you weasel your way out, its going to cost you. The best way not to be eaten by a Tiger is not to stand in front of it and debate your right to exist unharmed at the top of your lungs. If you are going to do something illegal, its best not publishing it for public consumption on the Internet. Common sense -- which appears to be in short supply on the web.

No matter the politics, its one thing to advocate illegal activity, its another to assist and profit in that advocation. Think people...

--
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.

Re:Watch out kidnapping and bankrobbing websites! by Demidog · 2003-02-26 13:41 · Score: 1

The law is the law.

"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void."
Marbury vs. Madison 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176 (1803)"

Not if it violates the supreme law of the land it isn't.
Re:Watch out kidnapping and bankrobbing websites! by toupsie · 2003-02-26 16:14 · Score: 1

Not if it violates the supreme law of the land it isn't.
Yea, Cops like to hear that one. It always changes their mind. "Oh, you know, you're right! Sorry to bother you. Have a nice day."

--
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
Re:Watch out kidnapping and bankrobbing websites! by toupsie · 2003-02-27 12:13 · Score: 1

Then why don't the police, FBI, and John Ashcroft go and pick up Snoop Dogg and all of the others in the entertainment industry who obviously advocate the usage of illegal drugs blatently in their songs and movies?
I have no problem from advocation, just the profit from that advocation. Fight the law but keep your nose clean.

--
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
Re:Watch out kidnapping and bankrobbing websites! by Demidog · 2003-02-27 12:57 · Score: 1

It always changes their mind.

Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't and sometimes it takes a judge to change their minds.

But you never know until you assert your rights.

damn. by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 13:09 · Score: 1, Insightful

With each passing day, I'm loath being an American citizen more and more.

Land of the free? PFFT!

My ass.

More like land of the fucked (thanks bush)

it's all about $$ and not about the people.

the fact that you cant buy smoking apparatus doesnt bother me at all, it's the fact that the government thinks that is going to somehow curb the use of marijuna.

That's just plain ignorance.

Aside from everything else that you can make a bong or pipe from, how about TABACCO related products, such as the infamous blunt, and rolling papers aplenty.

But the government is more than happy to reap the benefits (profits) from tabacco sales. Think they realize that nicotine is more addictive than heroin? I'm sure they do, and they count on that.

Maybe that's what is keeping them from legalizing pot...it doesn't have the same addictive properties as tabacco, so they dont view it as a viable revenue generator

Somewhat along the lines of alcohol. It's addictive, causes cancer, kills brain cells, destroys families and takes lives.

I'm really fed up with this shit.

Sad to see it go... by Alien+Venom · 2003-02-26 13:10 · Score: 1

Even though there are some other sites (NFOrce, and VCDQuality) that appear to be doing what ISONews does not, it is sad to see a good site go.

ISONews sets the standards a few years back and I'm sure it wont be forgotten. I still have and wear my ISONews.com, REPRESENT!

Rant: John Ashcroft causes mental defficiencies. by Jahf · 2003-02-26 13:10 · Score: 3, Interesting

It's sad. John Ashcroft is the first person I've ever had spawn the words "Fascist Fuck" spontaneously in my head when seeing his image on sites like this. Normally I am a pretty level-headed guy. I think if you measured my autonomic responses, I would register more of a reaction to Ashcroft for than Saddam.

Between things like this and the Patriot Act parts I and the soon to be released part II, this administration has been the most un-American in office since the anti-communist folks in the 50's.

I fully believe that unless the modchip affects someone -elses- hardware, modifying hardware I own should be legal, especially if my use is to do something like run Linux ... if I then do something illegal like piracy or service theft with the modchip, punish that action, not the ownership of the modchip ... it should be no more illegal than having IP connectivity (which also enables software piracy if you want to take it to one possible logical conclusion).

And before some idiot tries to subpoena my IP address to come search my house, my PS2 is not modified and I long ago (4-5 years) killed my software piracy habit in favor of free software. Just because I'm abiding by the law doesn't mean I agree with the way our current government tries to enforce the law and pass new (unconstitional in some cases) ones.

--
It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.

Next Up, DoJ Arrests Red Green by tepp · 2003-02-26 13:12 · Score: 2, Funny

So if modchipping your own xbox is illegal....

Does that mean Red Green is going to get arrested for "modding" that dryer into a bread maker?

Or what about the time he "modded" the ducts from his basement into a pontoon boat.... ;)

--
Tepp

Re:Next Up, DoJ Arrests Red Green by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 14:03 · Score: 1, Funny

Red Green is Canadian. Up here in the Great White North (TM), use of duct tape is still legal.

the real isonews.com: by gl4ss · 2003-02-26 13:13 · Score: 4, Informative

http://66.201.243.170/

the real isonews.com with working forums

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.

Re:the real isonews.com: by jdreed1024 · 2003-02-26 14:22 · Score: 4, Funny

http://66.201.243.170/
You must have haxx0red the Internet in order to get that IP address. You have circumvented the U.S. Dept of Justice's webpage claiming that ISONEWS is now their property. You have allowed thousands to access the former iSONEWS site, and thus helped many hundreds of software pirates. Please stand by for prosecution under the DMCA. Have a nice day.

--
There is no sig, there is only Zuul.

Arrested for Selling Mod-Chips? by cranos · 2003-02-26 13:14 · Score: 1

I would just like to point out that Mod-Chips are legal here in Australia. Sony took a bloke to court for selling pirated games and mod-chips, on the games he got busted but on the chips it was declared that they are perfectly legal.

Re:Arrested for Selling Mod-Chips? by JBark · 2003-02-26 13:25 · Score: 2, Informative

Selling modchips is legal here in the US also. Selling modchips with copyrighted code (i.e. BIOSes) is not.
Re:Arrested for Selling Mod-Chips? by mrpooh · 2003-02-27 04:47 · Score: 1

I'm not sure of the laws surrounding mod-chipping here in Canada.. but companies like.. ModChip Cnaada (modchip.ca or javex.ca) have been around since the original PSX.. with 2 - 3 day shipping COD :) convenient! ModChip.ca even advertised in the Computer Paper.. for a long while.. (perhaps they still do!). bah!

Making Money Off Of The Scene by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 13:14 · Score: 4, Interesting

krazy8 got busted because he tried to do something that the elite of the scene rightfully frown upon: making money off of the scene. At one point iSONEWS (formerly orm.nu, after it's founder) was basically run and hosted by DEVIANCE (a game release group) and offered analysis of group's releases each month. However, when orm began to step back from the site and krazy8 took over it more, it became more commercialized and the real scene members backed away from it. There were popup ads, special deals with businesses, and worst of all... increased traffic. The elite of the scene stopped visiting and posting on isonews and it degenerated into a place for newbies to flame each other and talk about how elite they were.

krazy8 got busted because he tried to make the site more popular and profit off of it. Instead of catering to the elite of the scene, taking security precautions, and keeping the site 100% legal he appealed to the lowest common demonenator and payed the price. Sites like checkpoint cater to the elite of the scene, deny access to the public, and take security precautions.

The lesson? Don't try to make money off of piracy and don't try to expose the scene to the public.

IP by gearheadsmp · 2003-02-26 13:16 · Score: 1

IP the DoJ hijacked

Netcraft confirms... by 11223 · 2003-02-26 13:17 · Score: 1

The IP address that's returned from the site is the property of the US Department of Justice: http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.isone ws.com&submit=Examine

Putting words in their mouths . . . by SanLouBlues · 2003-02-26 13:19 · Score: 1

This type of action (redirecting, rather than disconnecting websites) could be viewed as deceptive. It implies to an uninformed visitor that the previous owner currently accepts the opinions of their former opponents as valid. This is an orwellian distortion of message up with which I would not put. If my site were bluntly pointed at some hypothetical pro-death penalty site against which I may or may not have committed hypothetical libel and slander, I would go berserk.

doj.usuck.com by dimer0 · 2003-02-26 13:19 · Score: 1

You can also access:

doj.usuck.com

Just Like Al Capone by MBCook · 2003-02-26 13:22 · Score: 3, Insightful

I don't know about the rest of you, but I get the idea that this is alot like busting Al Capone on tax evasion. They can't make a case on the REAL charge (pirating) so they use something else to make sure the site gets closed. They're just getting the site closed.

That said, I agree that modchips aren't (or at least shouldn't be) illegal.

--
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.

Re:Just Like Al Capone by Microlith · 2003-02-26 14:16 · Score: 1

Too bad they couldn't find something less questionable to bust him on.

I don't agree with getting busted for modchips, but I'm far from sad to see ISONews disappear.

ISONews is (was!) one of those sites that gave the BSA, RIAA, and MPAA ammunition to fire back at us, and get laws like the DMCA in the first place.

If you're gonna violate copyright, don't fucking put up a site that says "Here are the latest copyright violations committed en-masse, ask people here where to get 'em!"
Re:Just Like Al Capone by Spazntwich · 2003-02-26 14:55 · Score: 1

So you're saying the site got Al Capowned?

Not Hoax by OctaneZ · 2003-02-26 13:22 · Score: 4, Informative

You can read more info about the plea bargain and case at: http://www.cybercrime.gov/rocciPlea.htm
-OctaneZ

Ugh by Demidog · 2003-02-26 13:22 · Score: 2, Interesting

This whole thing just bothers me. How is it that aftermarket chip mods for cars is OK but chip mods for XBoxes or other types of computers isn't?

Seems to me that this is a matter of offering features that somebody else refuses to offer. Ford isn't going to put a chip that offers you more performance due to government meddling in auto manufacturing. But obviously the public demands these features and somebody is bridging the gap. How is this harming anyone? Isn't it actually expanding the market?

What do you expect from Ashcroft though? It wouldn't surprise me if this fellow is indicted on charges of "terrorism."

Re:Ugh by cfulmer · 2003-02-26 14:28 · Score: 1

So, I believe he's accused of distributing a device for circumventing technological means for protecting copywritten works, which (rightly or wrongly) is illegal under the DMCA. Car mod chips don't do that.

If the allegation is true -- that he used isonews to sell mod chips, then he's a moron. ISONEWS, it seems to me, has always stayed just on the legal side of the line. It was possible, for example, to go to ISONEWS and find out what new pirated works were being distributed, but any information about keys/serial number or where to find the works was omitted. It was actually a pretty good way for the legit software industry to track when their software was being distributed illegal.

He should have been aware that the site was being monitored, either by the Feds or by copyright owners who wanted it shut down. Selling mod-chips on it was just asking to be caught.

Now, IANAL, but I'm reasonably certain that you're allowed to own a mod-chip. You're just not allowed to use it to play games you've copied from somebody else -- that would be copyright infringement. In fact, even possessing the copies would probably be infrigement.

In answer to your question, it may be expanding the market for the consoles themselves, because it allows people who otherwise wouldn't have bought the console due to the restrictions to buy it and mod the restrictions away. But, the copyright owners would argue that if joe 15-year-old kid has a mod chip and is downloading all his games from the 'net instead of buying them, then the people who wrote the game originally are being deprived of the money from that sale.

Mind you, I'm no big fan of the DMCA -- it's overreaching and unbalanced. But, I'm also not a big fan of copyright infrigement -- if somebody spends a lot of time creating something, they deserve the profits from that work, at least for a little while.
Re:Ugh by SN74S181 · 2003-02-26 14:51 · Score: 1

Don't some of those mod chips for cars render the car no longer street-legal?

I know there are agencies of the government who frown on people using those mod chips. Screwing with the engine's algorhythms often increases the pollution the car emits. It definitely does an end-run around the regulatory boys at the EPA.
Re:Ugh by Demidog · 2003-02-27 12:59 · Score: 1

Screwing with the engine's algorhythms often increases the pollution the car emits. It definitely does an end-run around the regulatory boys at the EPA.

I don't consider the EPA as having any jurisdiction over any free citizen but be that as it may, there has been no call to outlaw the chips.
Re:Ugh by Demidog · 2003-02-27 13:13 · Score: 1

So, I believe he's accused of distributing a device for circumventing technological means for protecting copywritten works, which (rightly or wrongly) is illegal under the DMCA. Car mod chips don't do that.

Does it do anything else? How is he responsible for the way that somebody else might use the device?

To put the same logic into play regarding the auto chips, perhaps those manufacturers could be shut down because they make it possible for drivers to further exceed the speed limit.

Seems to me that the simplest thing to infringe upon regarding copyrights is the written word and yet we don't have a huge campaign to shut down Xerox and Cannon.

A copyright protects the author against others making a profit off of their work. And his work has to (according to the constitution anyway) advance the "usefull arts and sciences", Berne convention treaty not withstanding. Congress may have signed onto the Berne convention but they didn't offer a constitutional amendment in order to modify the copyright clause. The courts have ruled time and time again that copyrights should be limited to information not already in the public domain.

I personally don't think that software falls into the category of promoting the useful arts and sciences. Especially given the fact that it is transient in nature and a new version is generally released on a regular interval rendering the last version obsolute (for a myriad of reasons).

Docket for USA v. ROCCI by CaptainAx · 2003-02-26 13:24 · Score: 1

This is the docket sheet as of today in the case. The formatting is mangled to get thru the filters...

12/10/02 -- Plea Agreement Hearing as to David M. Rocci set for 10:00
12/19/02 before Judge James C. Cacheris (dper)

12/19/02 1 CRIMINAL INFORMATION as to David M. Rocci (1) count 1. (dper)

12/19/02 -- Initial appearance as to David M. Rocci before Judge James
C. Cacheris held (r: D. McCoy) USA appeared through: Robert
Wiechering. Dft appeared with: Jon Lienhard. (Defendant
informed of rights.) (dper) [Entry date 12/20/02]

12/19/02 2 WAIVER OF INDICTMENT by David M. Rocci (dper)

12/19/02 -- Plea Agreement Hearing as to David M. Rocci held (r: D.
McCoy) USA appeared through: Robert Wiechering. Dft
appeared with: Jon Lienhard before Judge James C. Cacheris.
Deft FA and plea of guilty entered and accepted to Count 1
of Criminal Information filed. Case referred to PO for PSI
and cont'd to 03/07/03 @ 9:00 a.m. for G/L sentencing. Deft
released on $50,000 PR bond w/conditions: 1) travel
restricted to Blacksburg, VA area, and to see family in
Massachusetts during Christmas holidays; 2) PTS supv; 3)
refrain from excessive use of alcohol or drugs; 4)
surrender passport to Clerk; 5) substance abuse testing and
treatment as dir by PTS. Release Order ent. & filed in open
court. Passport surrendered. (dper) [Entry date 12/20/02]

12/19/02 3 Plea Agreement as to David M. Rocci (dper)

12/19/02 -- PLEA entered by David M. Rocci. Court accepts plea by
David M. Rocci. Guilty: count 1. (dper)

12/19/02 4 STATEMENT OF FACTS as to David M. Rocci (dper)

12/19/02 5 ORDER Setting Conditions of Release as to David M. Rocci
(Signed by Judge James C. Cacheris) Copies Mailed: yes (dper)

12/19/02 -- Sentencing before Judge James C. Cacheris set for 9:00
3/7/03 David M. Rocci (1) count 1. (dper)

12/19/02 6 Receipt for Surrender of Passport as to David M. Rocci
Passport # 400531972 Country: U.S. (dper)
END OF DOCKET: 1:02cr634-0

Re:Docket for USA v. ROCCI by trapvector · 2003-02-26 15:45 · Score: 1

Wait a second.

3)refrain from excessive use of alcohol or drugs; 5) substance abuse testing and treatment as dir(ected) by PTS

He pleads guilty to selling mod chips, and now he's subject to substance abuse evaluation?

WTF?
Re:Docket for USA v. ROCCI by CaptainAx · 2003-02-26 16:35 · Score: 1

This is typical if you answer to even saying "I drink once a week with friends" or any use at all. Rocci probably said something just like this and they are throwing it there.

--To the prosecutor, everyone is an unindicted felon

What the? by Trejkaz · 2003-02-26 13:24 · Score: 1

I thought mod chips mostly just provided a way to 'jump over' the logic which blocked certain kinds of media from running on the hardware. Most people use them to get around the US/Japan game system blockade, which in my opinion is the dumbest thing in the universe, with the possible exception of DVD region codes. Piracy? Do they want the receipts?

--
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!

bleh by 2MuchC0ffeeMan · 2003-02-26 13:24 · Score: 4, Interesting

some of you may know me from there.

all i can confirm that, krazy8 has not been seen in a long, long time... and that he was busted FOR selling modchips.

the details of his plea bargain are not out, and nobody is speaking about anything.

i would suspect anyone not speaking openly about it, to be part of the plea bargain.

--
Runnin' On Empty .... I'm Still Alive

Re:bleh by CaptainAx · 2003-02-26 16:42 · Score: 1

The details of his plea agreement are a matter of public record. This particular court doesn't have criminal images online so I'm not able to get it.

If there is someone near Alexandria, VA, they can just go to the clerk and ask for the case file for 02cr634 document #3. You can see it for free but they will charge you 25 cents a page to copy it on their copiers.
Re:bleh by karlm · 2003-02-26 17:37 · Score: 1

all i can confirm that, krazy8 has not been seen in a long, long time... and that he was busted FOR selling modchips.
the details of his plea bargain are not out, and nobody is speaking about anything.

Oh No! Camp X-ray! I knew it! Poor poor krazy8.
A Taliban general once used heroin money to buy a pack of cigarettes from a guy whose grand-nephwey once shined the shoes of an executive of the company that manufactured the chips. Now he's in prison for having Al Qaeda links. SSL online constitute the use of encryption in conjuction with a crime. Poor poor stupid krazy8.

--
Copyright Violation:"theft, piracy"::Anti-Trust Violation:"thermonuclear price terrorism"<-Overly dramatic language.

at home and abroad by the-build-chicken · 2003-02-26 13:26 · Score: 1

The Department of Justice and federal law enforcement will continue to investigate and prosecute individuals and groups that violate the federal criminal copyright laws at home and abroad

How about the U.S. goes and f#$%s itself and stops believing that because it's law in the U.S., it's law everywhere...guess what fellas...there's other governments and legal systems in the world besides yours. Hands up who things the biggest threat to global stability is U.S. arrogance!

Re:at home and abroad by CausticWindow · 2003-02-26 13:42 · Score: 1

While I agree with you that the US is a menace to the rest of the world, I can guarantee you that, unless you live in a very remote part of the world, your local government have signed agreements with the US regarding harmonization of laws like these, and will continue to do so in the future.

What we need now is for the EU to start building a massive military force, throw out US forces, making them take their lousy food and subpar culture with them.

--
How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life

modchips? by j1mmy · 2003-02-26 13:27 · Score: 2, Informative

I used to be a regular on isonews back in 98-99. krazy8 was making bucketloads of cash off banner ads. The trick was that you never actually saw them -- the ads were in invisible frames that automatically refreshed every so often. It's sad that he's had to resort to making money by selling actual product.

Re:modchips? by j1mmy · 2003-02-26 14:22 · Score: 1

I'm also a massive loser with no friends and no future.

oh my! by Coocha · 2003-02-26 13:27 · Score: 1

The modchip soap-opera has been going on for a little while now, and I think the whole thing stinks. I own a Dreamcast for one reason, and one reason only!

The funny part is: this krazy8 guy apparently lives in my town. He drives a canary yellow lexus, and flaunts it by parking on sidewalks. Never did have much sympathy for assholes. He owns a cell-phone retail shop too. I KNEW holding those things up to your ear too long would make you stupid.

--
May the threads progress competently.

Scary, well sinister-looking, anyway by Sgs-Cruz · 2003-02-26 13:27 · Score: 2, Insightful

Even though redirecting the site to the DOJ is no more sinister than just the normal taking down of the offending site, it just looks so... sinister.

Kind of like, you can't fight us. This belongs to us now. Don't even try to oppose us... Of course, that's the point of doing it, isn't it :S ...

--

Karma: pi (Mostly due to circular reasoning in posts).

Looks like another one by t0ny · 2003-02-26 13:28 · Score: 1

It appears the entire world got fooled. The address is back to the normal page, and apparently there is no mention of any of this.

If you look in their message base, this prank has happened in the past.

--

Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.

Re:Looks like another one by Michael+Hunt · 2003-02-26 14:15 · Score: 1

ns1.isonews.com and ns2.isonews.com resolve to 140.101.1.3 and .1.6 respectively.

whois 140.101.1.3@whois.arin.net returns
NetName: USDOJ
amongst other things.

I suspect that whichever DNS server you're looking at hasn't expired www.isonews.com from its cache yet (presumably it had a fairly long TTL set on it.)

Additionally, does the DOJ realise how stupid it is to have two DNS servers on the same physical subnet? It's possible that they're both on their own discrete /30 subnets, but they're still behind the same border router (at the very least) due to TLA length rules enforced across the internet backbone.

If I was the DOJ, i'd seriously consider hiring some semi-intelligent contractors to overhaul their network. And maybe hire some web designers with a clue - that 'ownz0red' page was written in netscape 4.79.

MH.

--
You're doing it wrong.
Re:Looks like another one by Graspee_Leemoor · 2003-02-27 12:06 · Score: 1

"If I was the DOJ, i'd seriously consider hiring some semi-intelligent contractors to overhaul their network."

If I were the DOJ I'd do 2 chicks at the same time.

graspee

Not own our own hardware? by Sephiro444 · 2003-02-26 13:29 · Score: 1

Is that statement from chrisd true, that we don't own the hardware we buy anymore? As I had come to understand, under the DMCA we are not allowed to create/distribute methods of circumventing copy protection, but I had never heard that we are not allowed to use & abuse the hardware we buy how ever we please. This would also include modchips, which despite their reputation CAN be used for legitimate purposes (importing games from other regions, not making backups. No one really does that :)

If this is the case, could we potentially see individuals getting busted for attempting to purchase modchips, or even for having installing them installed, regardless of their intention?

This is rather troubling, I'd say. I don't support ISOnews.com or the acts it promoted, which were far from legitimate. I'm primarily concerned with the notion of being unable to do what I wish with my own hardware.

Note To Government: by Snagle · 2003-02-26 13:31 · Score: 3, Insightful

People will always mod their systems. People want to play import games that they would otherwise not be able to play. People want to watch divx movies on their Xboxes. and BELIEVE IT OR NOT, some of us do want to legitimately back up the games we purchased. PS2 discs do scratch easily, little brothers arent always careful with that shiny new $50 piece of plastic. Oh, by the way, shutting down websites will not stop piracy.

Re:Note To Government: by poot_rootbeer · 2003-02-27 05:03 · Score: 1

People will always kill other people too, so don't bother creating or enforcing any laws that make murder illegal.
Re:Note To Government: by Snagle · 2003-02-27 10:35 · Score: 1

Im not saying there shouldn't be laws against pirating, just that shutting down websites like ISOnews isn't the solution. They should be going after groups of people distributing large quantities of illegaly copied games and gettting to the source of piracy, which ISOnews definetly is not. Besides, if game companies are so pissed off about piracy, they should consider adopting proprietary media like Nintendo has with their gamecube discs. Nintendo has succesfully prevented anyone from pirating their console games even after the system has been out for over a year.

Excuse me... by djkitsch · 2003-02-26 13:32 · Score: 2, Insightful

Doesn't this seem like the biggest waste of DOJ time? There are people out there guilty of *actual crimes* like murder, assault, carjacking etc, and they seem to be just as happy to track down and stop the sale of bloody XBox mod-chips, which to be frank probably has very little effect on Microsoft's sales figures, as they are finding the real baddies.

Let's face it, if anything, Microsoft will be making more money out of modchips than anything else - it's not like they've got an original brand Microsoft mod-chip for sale, is it? What damn difference does it make to them if I'm also choosing to run Linux as well as Tony Hawk 4?

Plus, how many more Slashdotters are likely to buy an XBox on the grounds of mod-chip, and thus Linux, support? Quite a few, I'd guess.

--
sig:- (wit >= sarcasm)

Re:Excuse me... by TheCeltic · 2003-02-26 15:26 · Score: 1

Almost the biggest waste of DOJ money... Purchasing Microsoft Software is THE BIGGEST.

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - The Celtic - =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

I can hear it screaming.... by DonFinch · 2003-02-26 13:37 · Score: 1

If you listen really closely, you can hear the Bill of Rights screaming under Ashcroft's jackboot...

--
-- Insert wisdom here:

We asked for it!!! by attobyte · 2003-02-26 13:41 · Score: 1

This will just get worse. I hope everyone is happy with them selves letting the government own your life.

Like George Carlin says "I love chaos"...

Atto

--
I didn't use the preview button, so get over it!!!!

Mike

Re:We asked for it!!! by DonFinch · 2003-02-26 16:44 · Score: 1

OK, lets all grab our guns and march around blaring RATM in Washington DC. You first, go ahead, we're all behind ya!

--
-- Insert wisdom here:
Re:We asked for it!!! by attobyte · 2003-02-27 01:15 · Score: 1

Your an idiot. I would bet that you have never written a letter to your congressman. That is why we deserve it because people like you can't think (The US will never have another revolt). All you need to do is speak up, you seem to open your mouth here.

--
I didn't use the preview button, so get over it!!!!
Mike

What's gone wrong with the USA? by NewtonsLaw · 2003-02-26 13:44 · Score: 1, Interesting

Hell, first of all GW Bush unilaterally appoints the US as the world's international police force, stepping into the internal politics of other soverign nations and fostering the widespread hatred of Americans amongst some of the world's most populous countries.

Then, in the name of the "war against terrorism", the government usurps the very constitutional rights of its own citizens to legal representation and the presumption of inocence.

And now it seems that the US government is set on forcing its own laws upon all citizens of the world.

It strikes me that the American people need to wake up and realize that those in power are starting to run amok and need to be reigned in -- for the benefit of *everybody* on the planet.

The USA is a great nation and I have lots of really nice American friends -- but hasn't anyone over there noticed that there's a bunch of crazies driving your wagon?

Re:What's gone wrong with the USA? by Maul · 2003-02-26 14:30 · Score: 1

Yes, a few small number of us have noticed this, and know what our government is doing to be wrong.

The problem is that Bush, Ashcroft, etc., along with the media over here have managed to do a great job into scaring the public that terrorists, drug dealers, and hackers are out to get them personally, and that only "Big Brother" can protect them.

God help this country.

--
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
Re:What's gone wrong with the USA? by moogyboog · 2003-02-26 14:45 · Score: 1

We already kill our own. How many people on death row have been wrongly convicted and later released through DNA testing? How many sit in a jail cell at this moment for some minor drug use violation...or glass bong seller violation?
Re:What's gone wrong with the USA? by DarkBlack · 2003-02-26 14:46 · Score: 1

You are so on the money. I really wish that people would realize what is going on around them instead of just ignoring the issues because it doesn't directly affect them at that moment. People don't use their rights to make change because they keep themselves so uninformed about the world around them.
Re:What's gone wrong with the USA? by HeghmoH · 2003-02-26 15:00 · Score: 1

fostering the widespread hatred of Americans amongst some of the world's most populous countries.

I think you mean "amongst some of the world's loudest countries."

According to this page, the ten largest countries in the world by population are China, India, United States, Indonesia, Brazil, Pakistan, Russia, Bangladesh, Nigeria, and Japan.

My impression is that the people of these countries are either relatively cool with us (US obviously, Russia, Japan) or couldn't really care much less (the others). France and Germany may be good at making noise, but they don't have a lot of people.

Ok, I'm done with this pointless little rant.

--
Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
Re:What's gone wrong with the USA? by NullProg · 2003-02-26 15:57 · Score: 1

(Sigh)

GW Bush unilaterally appoints the US as the world's international police force
Nobody seems to mind when we help out thier cause. But when it comes to "our" soverign state we are just a bunch of bullies.

Then, in the name of the "war against terrorism", the government usurps the very constitutional rights of its own citizens to legal representation and the presumption of inocence.
No where in the article did it mention terrorism. What constitutional right do I have that allows me to sell other peoples property without payment? The owner pleaded guilty, what are you defending?
No one has taken away any of my constitutional rights. If I don't like the way my congressman/senator votes, then he/she won't be in office the next term (from my vote) reguardless of how much money he/she has.

And now it seems that the US government is set on forcing its own laws upon all citizens of the world.
The last time I was in Germany, France, and England, the laws were different for pretty much everything. I was in all three countries last year.

It strikes me that the American people need to wake up and realize that those in power are starting to run amok and need to be reigned in -- for the benefit of *everybody* on the planet.
How would your country react if it was attacked on it's own soil? Would the citizens demand of the powers in office for revenge? Would you care if your Mother/Father/Sister/Son/Daughter died? Would your country try to prevent future attacks. What would you do if your country found out another country aided or supported those attacks?

The USA is a great nation and I have lots of really nice American friends -- but hasn't anyone over there noticed that there's a bunch of crazies driving your wagon?

No, we don't have any more crazies than the rest of the elected officials in the world. Are they stupid, maybe. Can they be taught, yes.
And yes we like you too. There is 280 million people here to make friends with.

Enjoy,

--
It's just the normal noises in here.

Hell, You've never owned a TV or Radio either! by sielwolf · 2003-02-26 13:46 · Score: 1

Look on the back or the bottom of your radios and televisions and you get the FCC warning that you cannot modify it to listen on non-stantdards signals AND it must accept any outside interference. To do so is a federal crime. This is nothing new.

Hell, if I stick a pre-ban 30 round magazine in my post-ban AK-47, that is a federal crime. And if I decided to "mod" it... let's just say the ATF would go Branch Davidian on my ass.

--
What is music when you despise all sound?

Re:Hell, You've never owned a TV or Radio either! by pi_rules · 2003-02-26 13:56 · Score: 1

Hell, if I stick a pre-ban 30 round magazine in my post-ban AK-47, that is a federal crime. And if I decided to "mod" it... let's just say the ATF would go Branch Davidian on my ass.

I'm not sure I follow this one. IIRC there's nothing keep you from putting a pre-ban mag into a post-ban receiver. Zero, nadda -- I've read through the 1994 "Crime Bill" against "Assault" weapons and it's not in there.

However, if you've got one of those "single stack" ak-47 contraptions that only take a post-ban 10rnd mag and mod it to accept a 30 round double-stack mag (you know, like they made 'em for the last 50+ years) you could be into some shit... but I don't know for sure. It's of little concern as there's no way in hell I'm buying a single-stack ak-47 anytime soon.

Now, if by "mod" it you meant put it into fully auto mode.. yes the ATF would be on your ass with 10,000 USD in fine and 10 years in prison.

What part of "shall not infringe" is so friggen confusing to people these days, eh?

This is a joke, right? by GenericAccount · 2003-02-26 13:49 · Score: 1

The replacement page's wording seems a little off. Doesn't it sound like too little legalize for a DEA post?

-Some Guy

let them have their cake by ChildrenOfBodom · 2003-02-26 13:49 · Score: 1

My whois doesnt show isonews.org being taken yet: Whois Server Version 1.3 Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net for detailed information. No match for "ISONEWS.ORG". >>> Last update of whois database: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 17:29:04 EST If somebody has got a few $$ to waste, why not register isonews.org and point it to the appropriate place(s), life can go on, and the yank DOJ can be the proud owner(s) of their new domain. Maybe they could set up a competing 'service' for us :) Probably be a good idea to find out a way to do this outside U.S jurisdiction (if there is such a thing).

Back Up by JeffM2001 · 2003-02-26 13:50 · Score: 1

The site is apparently back up as of 8:45 EST. The site loads and there is no mention of the DOJ or any dowrtime.

Re:Back Up by JeffM2001 · 2003-02-26 13:56 · Score: 1

Nevermind that. From Isonews's forum: If you can still reach isonews.com from the old dns its only because your ISP has not updated its cache. Take note of the ip now if you still want to be able to reach isonews

It's easy to show it's legal and proper... by dfenstrate · 2003-02-26 13:50 · Score: 1

If you can afford a lawyer, that is. Beyond that, it would seem to me that backing up your games to cd's or dvd's to preserve them, and then playing these copies, is a legitimate need for modchipping. (I know I'm preaching to the choir here)

THere's a market for items such as this Game doctor , but these only restored scratched copies. They do no good if the originals get stolen, are run over by your roommate on inline skates, etc. I think that protecting your investment with a $0.50 blank and a $50 mod chip (or however much it costs) is the only intelligent thing to do. Notwithstanding that you actually own the bloody hardware and can do what you like with it, this is an easy, direct argument that shows modchips aren't only used for piracy.

Of course, I'm not sure how much this line of reasoning jives with the DMCA, which should just plain be repealed.

--
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.

Re:Did you help? by be-fan · 2003-02-26 13:51 · Score: 1

Unfortunately, the big third candidate last election was from the "don't run with scissors" party. The "consumer's are so dumb they need to be protected from their own stupidity" party. The "let's do all sorts of communistic things so stupid people don't kill themselves" party. And I'm a freaking liberal!

--
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...

A quick look at the DEA's little redirect page.... by ainsoph · 2003-02-26 13:52 · Score: 1

Proves they got a few backwoods idjits working in the html department. MICROSOFT WORD??????

DEA redirect as given by 2600 online(not goatse :)

sample code:

v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}

Notice

2
27
2003-02-19T19:41:00Z
2003-02-19T19:41:00Z
1
42
240
Home
2
1
281
10.3501

Clean
Clean

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

OOOOO.. Icky!!!!!

I'm not living in US by jsse · 2003-02-26 13:53 · Score: 1

and found it absolutely incredible.

In our sense we bought the goods and we own it. Of course, it's still illegal to make profit out of others' proprietary intellectual properties; beside that, you can do whatever you like to the things you buy and nobody would give you trouble.

Mod chips can be found everywhere here, and we even have whole streets dedicated to this hobbist. I think you can still remember the case of Lik Sang who got into trouble selling modchips on US goods. We've never seen similar case for goods from Japanese, Korean, etc.

If selling modchips is a crime, why don't they ban screwdriver as well? I'm not kidding, there's more crimes with screwdrivers than with modchips. :)

Re:I'm not living in US by jsse · 2003-02-26 14:00 · Score: 3, Informative

The case of Lik Sang are covered below. Sorry for the wrong link given above.

Microsoft Shuts Down Lik Sang
More on Microsoft vs. Lik Sang
Lik-Sang Back Online, Minus Modchips
Lik-Sang Back Online
Lik-Sang To Take On The Big 3?
The Lik-Sang Saga Continues

Stoners at the DEA? by Cheap+Imitation · 2003-02-26 13:55 · Score: 1

..the DEA is seeking to redirect indicted businesses that sell glass bongs and pipes to the DEA's website.

Did I read that right?

The DEA website is buying glass bongs and pipes?

My tax dollars at work, and they're bogarting the goods!

The Big Picture by Planck0 · 2003-02-26 13:56 · Score: 4, Insightful

I'd like to take a step back from the specifics of who was selling mod chips for which game system and look at the big picture of what's happening here.

Microsoft doesn't want mod-chips to be sold for probably one basic reason: they lose money on the sale of the X-Box unit itself. If someone uses a mod-chip to use the box to run, for example, Linux, then they get a very cheap PC and Microsoft doesn't make any money back on game sales. If someone uses the mod chip to play pirated/burned games, then, again, they lose money on pirated game sales. This is *why* they don't want people using mod-chips. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm just giving their motivation.

If all anyone ever did with mod chips was to run linux, then I doubt Microsoft/DoJ would really care; the small number of people that do this wouldn't make it worth their time to track them down.

However, probably the majority of people using mod chips are also playing pirated games, and this is worth Microsoft/DoJ trying to stop. Everyone knows that it's really not possible to do this. Someone overseas can sell the mod chips and there's not much that Microsoft/DoJ can do about it.

In the long run, I think most games are going to move to more a subscription-based architechture (like Everquest or something similar) where you pay a small fee (or nothing at all) to get the game itself, but you have to pay to actually play it by connecting to a company's servers. I think this is actually a good model because it would encourage companies to constantly provide new content (new quests in role-playing games, new race tracks in racing games, new landscape flight games, etc.). It would also save consumers from paying $70 for the latest uber-game only to play it for 10 hours and put it aside, never to be touched again. If you got bored with a game, you could just cancel your subscription.

This is actually a trend caused by software/music/movie piracy in general. When all music becomes trivial to copy for free, then the producers of music will have to charge for services (i.e. rock concerts). Movie producers will have to provide movie theatres with large screens and great sound systems (they already do this). Game producers will have to provide a live and changing gamescape.

Re:The Big Picture by Reziac · 2003-02-26 17:01 · Score: 1

In that case -- why in the hell doesn't M$ get into the business of selling modchips? obviously there's a market, and ISTM it would be easier (and more profitable) to partner with whoever has stuff that would run on a modded X-box than to fight what people are doing anyway.

(Disclaimer: I don't own any consoles or games for same.)

--
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?

Yes, you are! To confirm this... by StupidKatz · 2003-02-26 14:00 · Score: 1

... watch this 21MB video where Mr. Ashcroft tells you himelf!

Outraged, not Really by Herkum01 · 2003-02-26 14:01 · Score: 1, Insightful

The yahoo article is little more than fluff, with the Cybercrime getting to the meat of what was occuring. I normally don't believe that selling mod chips is a crime, but the way that it seems that he was marketing his product he intent on sell those mod-chips who were intending to commit crimes, ie. play pirated games.

I mean, really what could he have expected. If I was advertising and selling the "date rape" drug, they would have strung me up. Yeah, I did not commit the crime but I certainly helped someone else do so and presented it as doing such. This is the same thing.

Ridiculous by southpolesammy · 2003-02-26 14:01 · Score: 3, Interesting

This is getting way out of hand. Pretty soon, I won't be able to make modifications to my PC or my car, not because it would void the warranty (don't care), but because I'M NOT FREAKING ALLOWED TO IN THE FIRST PLACE!

Of course, by this logic, all of NASCAR should be banned and taken over by the DOJ. Perhaps we can get a few of those judges to try driving those cars too. Sounds like Darwinism in action to me....

--
Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.

Re:Ridiculous by smart.id · 2003-02-26 15:53 · Score: 1

That would be emigrating out, foolish coward.

--
blog & fiction: jd87
Re:Ridiculous by gillbates · 2003-02-27 02:43 · Score: 1

Pretty soon, I won't be able to make modifications to my PC or my car...

Too Late.

According to the clean air act, it is illegal to modify any part of a vehicle's emission control system. Given that just about every part of a modern engine is some part of the vehicle's emission control system, it is technically illegal to modify your engine to produce more horsepower.

This was a battle lost a long time ago among hotrodders. Hotrodders were buying pre-1975 vehicles in the 90's, simply because they had no emission controls (to speak of), and could be modified for high-performance without breaking any laws. But now that these cars are getting harder to find, less people are hot rodding. Sure, you can find the guys who will put a high-performance exhaust system on a Civic, and get another 10 horsepower, but the days of building 400 and 500 horsepower (legal) hot rods are long gone.

Give it up, folks. The days of white box systems are coming to an end. It won't be long before it will be illegal to buy a computer without TCPA and DRM. Your hobby of programming computers will be lumped into the category of hacking and piracy, and will become implicitly illegal. Sure, programming won't be illegal per se, but buying a machine that can run an unregistered, unsigned executable program will be. And who do you think will hold the keys to registration and signing?

Yes, we can whine about how our liberties are being taken away from us, but we're the minority in a democracy. As it's been said before, democracy is three wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner. And so in the same manner, as computers become more commonplace, the majority of computer users will be using the machine not as a general computing plaform, but as a multimedia appliance. The problem with making the PC a multimedia appliance is that in doing so, it becomes a "circumvention device" in regards to the DMCA; it won't be long before selling an "unsecured" (read non-DRM, no TCPA) PC will be regarded in the same light as selling mod chips for the XBOX. Obviously, the average person would never want a non-copy restricted PC for anything but piracy. It is inconceivable to the DOJ that mod chips would ever be used for something legal, such as actually running a different OS on the XBOX, or playing imported games. And so, in the same manner, TCPA and DRM will become part of the PC, and what was once an innocent hobby will become a federal crime.

--
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
Re:Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-27 06:56 · Score: 1, Insightful

Sure, you can find the guys who will put a high-performance exhaust system on a Civic, and get another 10 horsepower

Heh, those 'fart cannon' exhaust systems you see on econoboxes won't even get you 10 HP, at least not without other modifications. Maybe 2 or 3 horsepower, tops. In fact a lot of them actually lose torque compared to the stock system, especially on the bottom end. And no, a K&N filter won't get you 10 HP either, especially not if you run it bare instead of with the factory outside cool air ducts. A lot of the 'high performance' intake systems I've seen advertised for the small cars look cool, but actually lose power compared to stock. The people who put ridiculously oversized mufflers and exhaust tips on do it only for looks. It isn't for sound, because they sound exactly like my brothers POS Corolla did when the muffler fell off due to rust. And believe me, that car certainly wasn't fast even with no muffler at all. Frankly I haven't heard many 4 cylinders that didn't sound like crap that weren't on a motorcycle.

Still there by en4ca · 2003-02-26 14:02 · Score: 1

Im in Australia, and when I visit the website, I can't see any message from the DOJ - the website looks exactly how I'd expect it to look (not having been there before, however). In fact, the forum statistics say there are 154 members, and 461 guests currently online...

pled guilty by bwt · 2003-02-26 14:02 · Score: 4, Interesting

Why on earth did this guy plead guilty? It seems to me he is accused of a non-crime, at least the way the web-site reads. He should appeal and the EFF should help him.

This is extremely revolting that the selling of mod chips would be viewed in and of itself as illegal. All you people out there who think the DMCA covers this are very confused. The DMCA violation occurs when you strip a client game program of its authentication key (and this is copyright infringement anyway). All this guy did was sell parts that turned the game console into a general purpose computer. This is NO different than selling general purpose computer parts.

Re:pled guilty by Maul · 2003-02-26 14:18 · Score: 4, Interesting

My guess as to why he plead guilty:

The Department of Gestapo... err Justice goons threatened to hold him without a bail hearing or a trial for a long time (much like the government did to Kevin Mitnick), and told him it'd be a lot easier in the long run to plead guilty rather than fight.

--
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
Re:pled guilty by necrognome · 2003-02-26 17:31 · Score: 1

Mod parent up some more, because this is exactly what happens in situations like these. The Feds have near infinite resources, at least in relation to yours. While you take out a second mortgage on your house to pay bail, legal fees, etc., all the Feds have to do is deficit spend.

Unless you have wads of cash, can defend yourself (not sure if you can even do this anymore in certain circumstances), or have a fetish for prison life, you would take the deal too.

They know that they can take your property (computers, domains, etc.) without your doing anything about it, because the power relations are so heavily in their favor. This is, of course, before your guilt or innocence has been determined. The sad (and frightening) part is that such practices constitute only the first wave of the fun and games to come (i.e. Patriot II and its successors).

--

Let's get drunk and delete production data!
Re:pled guilty by Sycraft-fu · 2003-02-26 18:10 · Score: 1

No, what he did was a crime. The DMCA makes circuvention devices, which mod chips are, illegal. Yes, it's retarded, the DMCA is retarded. Retarded or not, it's still the law so what he did was illegal. Should it be? No, but it is. Hence he is legally guilty. Since they probably have him pretty good on this, it is in his best intrests to plead.
Re:pled guilty by Scarblac · 2003-02-26 20:36 · Score: 2, Informative

My guess as to why he plead guilty: The Department of Gestapo... err Justice goons threatened to hold him without a bail hearing or a trial for a long time (much like the government did to Kevin Mitnick), and told him it'd be a lot easier in the long run to plead guilty rather than fight.

This is one of the reasons why it'll soon be illegal for Dutch courts to extradite people to the US. There is so much pressure on accepting a plea bargain that basically nobody gets a fair trial anymore.

The other reason is that agreements for extraditions of Dutch citizens to the US always state that they will be allowed to sit out their jail time in a Dutch prison - but this never actually happened in the last ten years.

--
I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
Re:pled guilty by Tweakmeister · 2003-02-27 04:58 · Score: 1

From the site... "He attempted to profit by marketing circumvention devices to that community *knowing they would be used to play pirated games*," said Assistant Attorney General Michael Chertoff. *stars added All things aside, if you MARKET your mod chips for illegal (warez) use then you deserve to be arrested. I know what many will say about what exactly is "warez" and "illegal." All I'm saying is, you know who you are...and most people buying these are using them for copied CD's. As many people who visit this site are programmers themselves, I have to wonder why more aren't for protecting their work and getting paid on it?

--
Colossians 2:8
Re:pled guilty by poot_rootbeer · 2003-02-27 05:05 · Score: 1

So he's planning to retract his plea and claim that it was coerced out of him?
Re:pled guilty by bwt · 2003-02-27 10:08 · Score: 1

The DMCA makes circuvention devices, which mod chips are, illegal.

Wrong and Wrong.

The DMCA does not make "circumvention devices" illegal. It makes circumvention devices that control access to copyrighted works without the authority of the copyright holder illegal, and only if the device "has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title".

A mod chip does not provide access to a copyrighted work at all. It might allow access to an already circumvented work, but only because it provides general purpose functionality. It certainly has very "significant purpose or use" other than accessing already circumvented works, namely creating a general purpose computing device that can, for example, run Linux on XBox.
Re:pled guilty by Sycraft-fu · 2003-02-27 10:41 · Score: 1

Well, apparently the DOJ interprets it differently. You are free to sell modchips, get arrested and then challenge the issue in court and see if you can convince 12 people of that.
Re:pled guilty by bwt · 2003-02-27 12:53 · Score: 1

The only Court that has considered this precise issue (whether mod chips violate anticircumvention copyright laws) is an Austrailian Court that adopted the position I am refering to in interpreting the Austrailian equivalent to the DMCA, which is extremely similar in wording.

google cache??? by atarione · 2003-02-26 14:03 · Score: 1

If ISOnews is in google cache w/ the pre DOJ site, does that mean google will be prosecuted by the gov for engaging in copyright infringement?

--
actually I am happy to see you, however that is in fact a banana in my pocket.

DOJ vs. Microsoft? by eyeball · 2003-02-26 14:04 · Score: 1

Unless I missed it, nobody pointed out the irony of the DoJ protecting the very company it has been 'going after' for years.

--

_______
2B1ASK1

Children by Poeir · 2003-02-26 14:07 · Score: 1

This sounds more like a child than a government. The logic appears to be, "It's mine because I want it."

And notice how often they say "illegal." Three times in the first paragraph.

This is incoherent because I'm outraged. All I can think of is these words, and the lizards. Outraging the citizens is not a good way to maintain a stable government.

Of course, don't be too surprised if you meet this page trying to follow any of these links. It's theirs, because they want it.

--
Sigs are like bumper stickers.

Re:Children by idontgno · 2003-02-26 17:57 · Score: 1

Odd, though...
Customs Service logo? That's not a DOJ agency. That's Treasury. Now, if Customs' logo is there because of the importation angle, great, that makes some sense, but I'm in U.S. government service and I find it a hint strange that a subordinate service of one cabinet department would get co-billing with another cabinet department.
Yes, bureaucracies are like showbiz in how they manage their public appearance. They're just phenomenally more annoying in their performance.

--
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.

Well at least... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 14:08 · Score: 1, Insightful

... they were ostensible about it. I hate when people don't have the common decency to show ostension towards others.

With the way things are going... by blitzoid · 2003-02-26 14:16 · Score: 1

You know, with the way things are going, the old illustration of 'the car with the hood welded shut' may come true.

Go to a car dealership, ask to see the engine, get yelled at and/or arrested!

--
I am a filthy pirate.

Watch out... by Zrane · 2003-02-26 14:18 · Score: 2, Funny

They're going to hijack Sony, Toshiba and all the other manufacturers out there that make CD-RWs and DVD-R/RWs for creating hardware that is used to pirate software!

Does anyone know.. by chrispycreeme · 2003-02-26 14:21 · Score: 1

how this law works? Could i start selling these chips encased in cheap plastic as "geek paperweights"? If so, I have just found a new business. $48,000 in mod chips from one website! Wow!
I do feel sorry for the poor bastard who got busted tho..

Alternate root DNS? by wytcld · 2003-02-26 14:25 · Score: 1

Anyone setting up alternate root servers that will negate this and future Ashcroft thefts from the public commons?

Or would that be circumventing their technological lockout, and itself be in violation?

--
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton

Does anyone.... by MeatMan · 2003-02-26 14:31 · Score: 2, Funny

remember the old Saturday Night Live sketches based on the "Mattress Police"? They went around arresting people for removing the mattress tags from their mattresses that said..."Do Not Remove This Tag Under Penalty Of Law"... It seems to me as the years go by, the U.S. Government Law Enforcement agencies are being empowered and assuming the rolls of "Mattress Police" more and more. Where once we sought out to destroy, with great vigor, communism and dictatorial governments, we are slowly becoming what we once so heartily endeavored to destroy and set "the people" free from... *sigh*

--

"It is essential that justice be done

LEGAL MODCHIPPING by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 14:31 · Score: 3, Informative

In Australia mod chipping is legal. The Federal Court held last year that the owner of a Sony Playstation can buy a mod chip from a supplier to permit him play region locked games,etc. The decision in essence starts that if you own a machine (Xbox, Playstation whatever) and buy software for it from overseas that have been crippled by region locking or the like you can fiddle with your machine to get your property (eg games) working. By implication this extends to all similar modding. The case was supported by the A.C.C.C, which enforces the Australian equivalent of the Clayton and Sherman Acts (ie US anti-trust laws)and Federal Government. The ACCC has commenced and supported similar litigation in the past.Region free DVDs are the norm here, maybe because we are lumped into a region with Latin America and we see a trickle of "legit" DVDs from the US.

Microsoft's reaction was to threaten to withdraw Xboxes from the Australian market. Xboxes aren't sold in Australia's largest electrical chain stores because M$ won't sell Xboxes to them unless they dropped Playstation and M$ was told to get lost.

Re:LEGAL MODCHIPPING by tunah · 2003-02-26 18:28 · Score: 1

Xboxes aren't sold in Australia's largest electrical chain stores because M$ won't sell Xboxes to them unless they dropped Playstation and M$ was told to get lost.
Wow. Not wow because they got told to get lost, wow because they had the gall to ask in the first place. If MS is selling these for less than cost, how much can the dealer be making? And add that to the fact that XBoxen aren't selling nearly as many as PS2s. Here in NZ I haven't seen any shops selling XBoxen that don't sell PS2s, so maybe microsoft backed down?

--
Free Java games for your phone: Tontie, Sokoban
Re:LEGAL MODCHIPPING by marko123 · 2003-02-27 03:57 · Score: 1

Xboxes aren't sold in Australia's largest electrical chain stores?

These guys have them:

Myer
Harvey Norman
Dick Smith
Toys'R'Us

Have I left any out? Maybe Tandy, but they are kinda beholden to their own product line (Radio Shack).

Oops. Forgot to take AC's word with a grain of salt. Hey, there! take off your cloak and drop some names. No-one will get done here for defamation before it's a site of opinions, and not facts.

--
http://pcblues.com - Digits and Wood
Re:LEGAL MODCHIPPING by vekotin · 2003-02-27 05:12 · Score: 1

In Finland, the law allows one to make personal copies of media for personal and family use. As I understand, this law exists in quite a few countries. The problem and debate seems to be "methods used to circumvent copy protection" such as this.

Still, highly intelligent thinking on the part of lawmakers. Their new proposal would allow personal copies, without allowing the methods required to make such copies. Fortunately EFFI is making a noise of it.

There's a very good chance NOW to make a noise about methods that can be used to circumvent copy protection for personal use, such as modchips. In countries where there's still debate, it seems like a healthy time to speak for this matter.

Another good idea is to check the opinions of local consumer agencies. Over here, they're favoring the customer, especially now that copy protected almost-cd's are sold more and more.

So - here's your free mansion on this nice looking island. Problem is, crossing the bridge will put you to jail and swimming with sharks is none too fun.

--
/v\

Legality/Illegality. by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 14:37 · Score: 2, Interesting

Are mod chips illegal? Should they be? Let's look at the facts.

Fact #1: Mod chips have to be utilized for modern console game theft to exist. Theft of games is illegal. Without modchips, burnt copies of games are set up the bomb.

Fact #2: Mod chips circumvent regional protections, allowing users to buy and play games from foreign markets - games which are often not sold in their home markets. AFAIK, there is no law saying the idiocy of regional encoding must exist. Nor is there a law preventing people from circumventing it.

Fact #3: Mod chips allow people to utilize their hardware in legal ways. Such as, running Linux on an X-Box.

Fact #4: Hitting someone in the head with a hammer, repeatedly, may cause death. At the least, such an act most certainly qualifies as battery. Without hammers, the act of bludgeoning someone to death with a hammer is set up the bomb.

Fact #5: Hammers can be used to drive nails into pieces of wood that are various lengths and shapes. This is totally legal.

Fact #6: You can buy a hammer in any Home Despot.

Thus, the High Court of Sanity finds that mod chips, provided that they do not contain proprietary code of which the chip maker is not owner of, are legal.

(Sadly, the High Court of Sanity's jurisdiction only extends in a foot-long radius about me.)

Washington D.C. too. by geniusj · 2003-02-26 14:38 · Score: 1

Although it's not a state :)

Industry vs easy to arrest 22 yo by gad_zuki! · 2003-02-26 14:38 · Score: 3, Insightful

Why are mod chips even illegal? They give equipment owners the ability to play whatever the hell they want on their machines. Go after the "pirates" not the guys who sell you the means to control your device. The game industry, along with the content industry, expect you to buy the equipment and the games/music but consider backing up the software or music to be a crime and thanks to the DMCA it is.

Sure, the mod chips can be used to play games that aren't officially released yet (overseas releases) just like multi-region DVD players and they let you play a copied game if you choose. They have legitimate uses and hell this is my equipment I'll do as I please with it. It blows my mind that this 22 year old will be in debt for the rest of his days to pay off his legal fees on his deal AND the fine he's going to get AND serve time in prison (probably) because hardware manufacturers don't want you touching the inside of their magic black boxes.

On top of it all, they're seizing domain names (who game then that right?) to point to their absurd pro-industry propaganda. Lets sum up their message.

1. Piracy is copying/selling stuff you dont own.

2. Mod chips let you do anything you want with your machine.

These things have nothing in common but an easy to arrest 22 year old.

host and dig oddity by sbwoodside · 2003-02-26 14:41 · Score: 2, Interesting

I still get the site from lynx when I use www.isonews.com and I get this info from host and dig. But I don't get the site when I use the DNS number given below. Odd. The error from lynx is at the bottom.

% host www.isonews.com www.isonews.com is a nickname for isonews.com isonews.com has address 66.201.243.172 % dig www.isonews.com ; <<>> DiG 8.3 <<>> www.isonews.com ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch ;; got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 2 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2 ;; QUERY SECTION: ;; www.isonews.com, type = A, class = IN ;; ANSWER SECTION: www.isonews.com. 7h15m29s IN CNAME isonews.com. isonews.com. 7h15m29s IN A 66.201.243.172 ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: isonews.com. 1d23h20m47s IN NS NS1.isonews.com. isonews.com. 1d23h20m47s IN NS NS2.isonews.com. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: NS1.isonews.com. 1d23h20m47s IN A 149.101.1.3 NS2.isonews.com. 1d23h20m47s IN A 149.101.1.6 ;; Total query time: 44 msec ;; FROM: Simons-TiBook.local. to SERVER: default -- 207.236.176.28 ;; WHEN: Wed Feb 26 21:31:56 2003 ;; MSG SIZE sent: 33 rcvd: 131 % lynx 66.201.243.172 Looking up 66.201.243.172 first Looking up 66.201.243.172 Making HTTP connection to 66.201.243.172 Sending HTTP request. HTTP request sent; waiting for response. Alert!: HTTP/1.0 503 Service Unavailable Retrying as HTTP0 request. Looking up 66.201.243.172 Making HTTP connection to 66.201.243.172 Sending HTTP request. HTTP request sent; waiting for response. Alert!: HTTP/1.0 503 Service Unavailable Data transfer complete lynx: Start file could not be found or is not text/html or text/plain Exiting...

--
home page

Re:"EFF??" Oh, Please...! by squared99 · 2003-02-26 14:50 · Score: 5, Informative

Are you for real? pull you head out of the sand. I love these naysayers that try to pull something down without even offering any alternatives, examples or evidence to support their opinion, other than 'oh please...'.

The EFF has been one of the most high profile and active organizations out there. See the list of cases below, easily available from their website and newsletter, though I'm sure you are aware of these since you've been following them since the early 90's.

Recent cases
Active cases

At worst, at the very worst, they have made an extremely large number of people aware of these issues, which in turn has led to many more people getting involved. And even if they dont have the same clout(meaning cash to burn) as the tobacco lobbyists or hollywood, your suggestion is to stop supporting them now so they never do? sh'yeah.

P.S. their address is in San Francisco, they left DC sometime ago.

Selling or Marketing? by mledet · 2003-02-26 14:52 · Score: 1

Was he actually selling the chips? I was just told by someone that visited the site that there were banners (ala affiliate marketing). Certainly doesn't seem likely that he'd plea if his "selling" was actually affiliate marketing, but who knows!

Taco better keep a close eye one what Slashdot is selling via its banners..

Yeah and what happened then? by Greyfox · 2003-02-26 14:57 · Score: 1

Organized crime got filthy rich, the trade was so profitable that the crime families were willing to kill and risk being killed to remain in the trade and futile millions were spent enforcing the ban. Hmm. Sounds familiar.

Oh yeah, and a lot of "Old Money" republican families were so much trailer trash until they made their millions running alcohol during prohibition. Funny how you never hear about that...

--

I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

Bad seeds ruining it for everyone. by Viewsonic · 2003-02-26 14:57 · Score: 1

Unfortunately, the majority of people who are using the mod chips, especially on the Microsoft XBox, are using it for illegal content. They are running non-licensed software, and pirated software (Emulators, Rips of rented games, etc). This really isn't any different than buying illegal cable descramblers and getting illegal TV channels, even though it still allows you to watch legit TV still.

The bad seeds are costing developers too much money. If it isn't taken care of, then you wont even have a choice of buying a console "in the first place".

Help weeds out the bad seeds, and report piracy to the SPA. If people all used them legit, and actually bought all the software, this wouldn't be an issue.

Re:Bad seeds ruining it for everyone. by elmegil · 2003-02-26 15:33 · Score: 1

So why exactly aren't the feds out their spending their oh-so-important time on busting cable descramblers, dishTV pirates, etc?

--
7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001

Profer FAX number by Hao+Wu · 2003-02-26 14:58 · Score: 1

I rather would use the FAX number. Mail takes forever. Email is discarded or ignored, and frequently killed by filter systems. (Phone number is useless too, I am sure not paying for that!) If you find a FAX to suit then please provide it to us, --thank you in advance.

--
I suggest you read Slashdot

I am realizing the Net cannot be private again by almound · 2003-02-26 15:03 · Score: 4, Insightful

The honeymoon is over, people. Unfortunately, I am coming to the realization that the battle is lost already. I now understand that I will never again enjoy privacy on the Net. Mega-corporations have got there first, and the piecemeal approach of fire walls, anonymizers, proxy server kludges, and spam eliminators is just not going to protect me.

I foresee that I have to plan for the fact that I will not be able to use the Internet ever again unrestrictedly, and have been preparing for a complete break of private Internet use for about a year now. Shortly, I will be discontinuing my cable modem service forever, and will only use the Internet in a public forum such as at work, in a college, or in a Cybercafe, wherein I will obey every single law applicable (and will refrain from doing ANYTHING that may potentially break some law). However paranoid that may make me, it is worth it. We haven't even seen the beginning of how savage the witch hunts are about to become.

Yes, this is a boycot. Boycotting the Internet in this fashion may sound extreme, but then again I think the Patriot Act is a bit extreme ... particularly the enhancement that the Justice Department is planning to shortly introduce to the Patriot Act.

http://www.public-i.org/dtaweb/home.asp

Look for the icon the reads, "Patriot Act II"

One way to fight such rabid facism is to disconnect from the system. (This works because the Internet is a closed system. Without Internet users, there will be no commercial use for the Interent and no inherent need for vigorous policing of it.) I believe alternative networks will spring up out of the void so created, and, if those information avenues appears safe, I will surely take advantage of them. In the meantime, I plan to concentrate on fully utilizing the plentiful software already available which computing has afforded me.

I was a fairly well-paid computer professional from 1994 through 2000. But a sickness overtook the computer industry. It is a sickness imposed by forces which during the same time period tried to impose similar types of maladies on the health care and legal professions. Unfortunately, the computer industry (being in its infancy) was more susceptible than the others. Without strong professional organization and fraught by endemic sabotage by mega-corporations from within, the computer industry was doomed to succumb.

Currently, I am enrolled in a mathematics course of study which will degree me in Statistics, and am changing my profession out of the computer technology field altogether. For those still brave enough to tough it out under the current conditions:

May God have mercy on your souls.

Re:I am realizing the Net cannot be private again by forkboy · 2003-02-26 20:58 · Score: 1

True that brother.....the Internet and computer technology lost its magic around the time of the DMCA and the Amazon 1-click patent. Working in the IT field lost its charm the 3rd or 4th time I got laid off.

I used to be a network engineer. (7 years) I'm now a chemist (well, almost) and would not give it up for any other career...except perhaps porn star.

Geeks of the world, my advice to you is get back to real science, let the dumbasses of the world run the mega-corps' networks...they're all using Windows anyway. Any reasonably smart person can learn a real science and learn how to develop applications for it without a computer science degree. C++ aint rocket science...but I bet you many rocket scientists know C++.

I don't know that I could disconnect from the net entirely though....as much as I've lost interest in the technology for the sake of itself, I still save tons of money by buying my text books online, save time by taking care of shit like taxes and banking online (potential dangers aside, the reward is worth the risk) and would rather read slashdot than the newspaper. I can live without email though...all I ever get is spam and forwarded jokes anyway.

--
This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
Re:I am realizing the Net cannot be private again by FecklessGorgon · 2003-03-02 19:14 · Score: 1

Any alternative to the Internet that attracts users will also attract buying and selling. Relationships rarely exist without commerce. Instead of abandoning the Net, join Lawrence Lessig's fight against privatized content.
Re:I am realizing the Net cannot be private again by rickwood · 2003-03-04 07:19 · Score: 1

I know this is two right ons in the same thread, but...

Right on, Man. My little voice keeps telling me to get out of the computer biz altogether. As someone else pointed out in a similar discussion, if you're going to take all the fun out of working in computing, what's the point?

Power to the People!

This was illegal before the DMCA. by Viewsonic · 2003-02-26 15:03 · Score: 1

Look at cable descramblers as proof. ..The original Playstation chips were illegal as hell also. You simply cannot allow illegal content to be shown/played on a licensed system. Just buy something else.

still available by Squigley · 2003-02-26 15:03 · Score: 1

as everyone has said, you can still get to it at 66.201.243.170

So I just setup:
http://isonews.dnsalias.com/

The Modchips... by NetJunkie · 2003-02-26 15:07 · Score: 3, Interesting

It looks like the modchips were illegal because they contain a BIOS. Most chips are shipped without a BIOS, but the Enigmahs are pre-flashed.

A modchip without a bios isn't a usable device.

Re:The Modchips... by phastest · 2003-02-27 04:44 · Score: 1

now here is an interesting question.

how could the government PROVE that the chips were flashed with this bios?

there are several devices that can be used illegally. many of these have no reporting feature to indicate they have been used illegally. one would have to CATCH the user of the device actually controlling the device in order to prove guilt.

case in point. i drove my car today at 140mph in a 55mph zone. this was a gross violation of the law. since i was not observed actually making the infraction, all the enforcers (cops) can do after the fact is look at my vehicle, which appears to be made for no other purpose than speeding, and growl.

so, i say, _prove_ the devices had software on them. most customers they attempt to contact would likely have the cloo needed to say that they received the chip 'blank'.
Re:The Modchips... by NetJunkie · 2003-02-27 10:34 · Score: 1

Just order one. They probably did. When it comes in look at the BIOS.

Some new chips have totally new BIOSes on them. No original MS code. The X2 chip is like this.

Will isonews return? by Databass · 2003-02-26 15:07 · Score: 1

Wonder how long it will be before a domain/server is running in remote parts of the world for the business

I dunno if it will be popping up anytime soon. Mandarin, the main geek who runs their server and code setup, has told me he's getting tired of this kind of thing. You're right about the quality degradation too, slower updates, things late that, and one reason for the degradation is mandarin stopped caring. Weird to think about how one person can affect things like that.

Krazy8 supposedly "offered control of isonews to the government", but by that point I think isonews was already owned by some other company, EZ Buy maybe. Krazy8 could have offered control of Sony and Microsoft as part of his plea bargain, but that wouldn't make it so. But I think what it comes down to is possession is 9/10ths of the law, and the US.gov now possesses isonews.com DNS.

Land of the Free? by Cbs228 · 2003-02-26 15:10 · Score: 2, Insightful

Free? Do you call this "free?" People imprisoned for exercising their rights specifically guaranteed to them-- rights designed to protect people from persecution by those in power.

Have we become so corrupt, so blinded, and so degraded by the pursuit of avarice that we must punish our fellow Man for innovation? For creativity? Or for simply posting information? Do we value an increased profit margin more than the lives of countless individuals? Just how far are we willing to go to protect our exclusive, absolute, and non-expiring right to "intellectual property?"

This blatant abuse of power does not affect the Mod-Chip community. Nor does it affect Slashdotters. It does affect the free world, and the meaning of freedom as we know it.

"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied-- chains us all, irrevocably" (Captain Picard, The Drumhead).

We have lost control of our internet. It was once a free community, one of the freest to be found. It was subject to no outside control, no censorship. Now look at us. We can't even keep the DNS system we designed from the control of tyrants, nor can we evade the constant digital surveillance we are each under.

--
At our school, we don't earn a degree when we graduate—we earn pi/180 radians

Get your illegal modchips here... by tarquin_fim_bim · 2003-02-26 15:13 · Score: 1

Well here actually.

Shutdown Radio Shack!! by TheCeltic · 2003-02-26 15:20 · Score: 3, Insightful

Next it will be radio shack... without them, most home electronic enthusiasts,phone phreakers,ham radio junkies and hardware tweakers would have trouble getting the tools they want.

While at it, they should shutdown any store that sells blank cd's, video tapes or casettes since they can also be used for illegal purposes. I'm just glad they leave the head shops,online gambling and online porn places alone since they are so moral and legal....

Once again, we have closed down a business because it offered a product that COULD be used for illegal purposes. Napster had similiar problems (how was it illegal for a company to allow users to share music? they simply offered a means to share music. music that was open to share or not could be posted on napster..even songs written by "home artists" - the USERS were the ones breaking the law. Does that mean that if someone uses a Bicycle to flee from a crime that all bike shops should be shut down?)

This is truly a sad sad sad day for America! Hopefully over time we will grow up and realize that the world is changing.

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - The Celtic - =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

1984 by Egekrusher2K · 2003-02-26 15:25 · Score: 1

Sigh. 1984 anyone? I hate the US government with a passion. I hope they're reading this. They can .... off and die.

--
Listen to my experimental-industrial-techno!

Re:1984 by Lethyos · 2003-02-26 15:38 · Score: 1, Informative

Given that /. harbors a high number of dissidents, you can be pretty sure that they are.

--
Why bother.

For those of us who import by Daetrin · 2003-02-26 15:30 · Score: 1

Can we make a class-action lawsuit against the DoJ in order to get them to buy us Japanese PS2s, since they seem intent on stopping us from using cheaper modchips for no good legal reason? :)

--
This Space Intentionally Left Blank

Makes too much sense by TopShelf · 2003-02-26 15:31 · Score: 1

Of course, the DEA or anybody else in government doesn't care about criticizms of hypocrisy - the easy response is that the critic is either a dope fiend or a radical teetotaler who wants to trample on the rights of Joe Six Pack, Average American. It's really a shame, because the war on drugs, while successful in some statistical senses, has basically criminalized an entire generation of young minority men. Here's a highly acclaimed appraisal of our drug policy, which tries to draw some objective comparisons to other countries and other times.

--
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more

Re:Rant: John Ashcroft causes mental defficiencies by schon · 2003-02-26 15:34 · Score: 1

It's illegal to sell them (and I'm not even sure that's true).

This is true.

It's not illegal to own mod chips

True. However -

Under the DMCA, it's illegal to make modchips - 1201 (2) `(2) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that-- `(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;

So, it's (apparently) legal to own them, but it's not legal to make them or to import them, and it's illegal for someone to sell or give one to you.

So it makes ownership pretty pointless, as there's no legal way for you to obtain one.

If you could cook up your own mod chip, for your own use, you'd be all set.

Nope. As I mentioned above, that's illegal too.

re: radar detectors by KalvinB · 2003-02-26 15:36 · Score: 1

They're legal to sell as general purpose radar detectors but not legal to use to try to evade police radar. If you're caught with one you'll be, at the least, fined for it.

When I worked at RadioShack I wasn't able to talk about it as a device to detect police radar. Simply as a radar detector. You're better off obeying the law than pretending some device is going to warn you when to start obeying it.

Ben

--
Work Safe Porn

http://back.to/isonews by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 15:36 · Score: 1, Informative

Enjoy.

Uh... by autopr0n · 2003-02-26 15:43 · Score: 3, Funny

Oh yeah, and a lot of "Old Money" republican families were so much trailer trash until they made their millions running alcohol during prohibition. Funny how you never hear about that...

You mean, like the Kennedys?

--
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.

Re:Uh... by Iguanaphobic · 2003-02-26 16:45 · Score: 1

Better liquor that selling steel to the Nazis. Like the Bushes.

--
Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power.
Re:Uh... by Speed+Racer · 2003-02-26 16:58 · Score: 1

Better liquor that selling steel to the Nazis. Like the Bushes.

Nobody puts the smack down like Cecil.

--
Free Mac Mini. Yes, I'm
Re:Uh... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 17:12 · Score: 1, Insightful

>Nobody puts the smack down like Cecil.

Actually, he substantiates the most important fact of the claim. He diminishes the importance, but:

Saith the Cecil:

"The central charge against Prescott Bush has a basis in fact. In 1942, under the Trading With the Enemy Act, the U.S. government seized several companies in which he had an interest."

Why did it take an act of Congress to stop an American from trading with Germans a year after we entered the war? I fail to see how this is so easy to downplay or dismiss. Of course, I also fail to see how the grandson is responsible.

You're wrong by CaptainSuperBoy · 2003-02-26 15:45 · Score: 1

PSX modchips were not illegal until after the DMCA took effect. The DMCA was the first law that took aim at so-called circumvention devices. I'm not sure how cable descramblers are proof, they weren't illegal before the DMCA either.

Re:Did you help? by tyroney · 2003-02-26 15:49 · Score: 1

As long as our elections are winner-take-all instead of something that makes sense like proportional election, many of our "winning" candidates will continue to not be elected by significant amounts of the populace.

Personally, I didn't vote, so I definitely didn't elect any of said idiots. Give me whatever grief you may, but the main reason I don't vote is that a "losing" vote is a wasted vote. Granted, no excuse for, say, the presedential election...

Best website defacement yet by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 15:50 · Score: 1, Funny

d0j 0wns j00 !!

wrongo by autopr0n · 2003-02-26 15:51 · Score: 1

REAL conservative believe that you should be able to do anything you want as long as it doesnt adversely affect others.

Those people are called libertarians.

--
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.

Terrible arguments! by Loundry · 2003-02-26 15:52 · Score: 4, Insightful

I've decided that no "legalization" or "decriminialization" effort will ever work.

Why not? Because the people don't want it, or because the Imperial Federal Government won't allow it?

Our society does not tolerate the use of dangerous drugs.

False! Alcohol use and abuse is tolerated. Furthermore, marijuana is not a dangerous drug.

Federal enforcement of drug control regulations is a success.

False! The government can't keep drugs out of prisons. What makes you think they do a good job keeping it out of the hands of non-inamtes?

Alcohol is a dangerous drug, and the people have consistently shown an inability to use it without causing death and destruction.

True for some people. I'll point out here that "the people" have consistently shown a stellar ability to use marijuana with no ill side effects.

If you have a medical reason for using alcohol, then you should be able to get a prescription for it. Otherwise, possession and sale should be treated exactly like the other dangerous drugs.

The purpose of this is to persecute people who use alcohol and tobacco, for there is no evidence that anything outside of education is any more than marginally effective at getting people to not use some drugs.

--
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.

It's the *airwaves* we don't own by danaris · 2003-02-26 15:52 · Score: 1

We're not allowed to mod the TV so it doesn't interfere with radio waves of other frequencies. We *do* own our hardware, and as far as I know, though I'm hardly a lawyer, there's nothing inherently illegal about modchips. It's just the government's new policy of considering any electronic device that could be used to commit a crime as an illegal thing. Dunno about you, but it makes me really mad. I just hope that when W leaves office, we'll get our rights back.

Dan Aris

--
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.

Re:For sale, $100 each or best offer... by smart.id · 2003-02-26 15:55 · Score: 1

I'll do it. E-mail me. By selling these, please note that you are making money off of the very systems that you protest. But hey, I get a cheap PS2!

--
blog & fiction: jd87

Re:Actually by pHsHsTK · 2003-02-26 15:56 · Score: 1

As a note.... they never posted cdkeys/serials on the nfos, they didn't JUST remove them from their sites.

This WHOLE THING is a FAKE! by Penguinoflight · 2003-02-26 15:58 · Score: 1, Informative

The whole thing is actually a fake, not only are there rumors of sites running on other ips, the site is really just where it was before on http://66.201.243.170 and it's not just a fake, it's the real site. Either the DOJ is just a bunch of numb-skulled idiotic... or the whole thing wasn't done by the DOJ. From December to Feb 26 is a long time, and there is nothing on the DOJ site about David M. Rocci.

--
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14

Re:This WHOLE THING is a FAKE! by geekmedia · 2003-02-26 16:47 · Score: 1

Get a clue. http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2003/February/03_crm_1 18.htm
Re:This WHOLE THING is a FAKE! by AngusSF · 2003-02-27 02:09 · Score: 1

FWIW the website at that IP address has a "news" link which shows nothing newer than 25 Dec 2002. Is the site that dead or is the IP site an old mirror?

--
"A gun is a tool, Marian. No better, no worse than any other tool. An axe, a shovel, or anything." Shane (1953)
Re:This WHOLE THING is a FAKE! by lcsjk · 2003-02-27 03:39 · Score: 1

The website has other links that were updated just this week.
Re:This WHOLE THING is a FAKE! by fliplap · 2003-02-27 05:50 · Score: 2, Insightful

Just another justification for -1 (Wrong)
Re:This WHOLE THING is a FAKE! by xgeoff · 2003-02-28 01:37 · Score: 1

I think it is pretty obvious it is a fake. The DOJ may shut down sites, but I've never seen them take the time to put up a lengthy explanation page. C'mon.
And then when they direct you someplace for more info, it's not to the DOJ site, it's to another page on the isonews site.
Finally, there are tons of modchips for sale for the xbox, and simply selling the modchips is not a crime. It seems there are legal ramifications for selling the modchips preflashed with a BIOS, but otherwise these guys should have been able to sell the chips without a problem.
Hell, I'm going to buy a mod chip for MY xbox and I have a plethora of sites and chips to choose from.

Rights? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 16:00 · Score: 1, Insightful

Last I checked, you don't have the RIGHT to buy ANYTHING.

You are given the choice of buying something under the terms and conditions of the individual or company selling the item. If you do not agree to the conditions, the individual or company does not have to allow you to purchase the product.

Conversely, the company or individual doing the selling does not have the right to force you to buy the product.

That's the way capitalism works. It's about contracts and consent. If you don't like it, don't agree to the terms of the deal, and don't purchase the product.

It has absolutely nothing to do with liberty, or freedom, or any of that baloney you people throw about so "freely".

Re:Rights? by Lurkingrue · 2003-02-26 17:42 · Score: 1

Except that when you BUY something, you OWN it, and the seller does not really have the right to tell you how and where and when you can use it, since it is no longer theirs.
Re:Rights? by quintessencesluglord · 2003-02-26 19:04 · Score: 1

Hmm, last time I checked, if the terms of the contract are illegal...

And if I choose not to sell a life-saving medication to you because you are asian...

On second thought, you are right. And when companies abide by the same laws as you or I, I guess it doesn't have anything to do with freedom or liberty.

Everyone seems to be missing the point... by malelder · 2003-02-26 16:02 · Score: 1

This is great! Now I can get my smoking accessories and modchips from one central .gov site!

right...?

--

Yuma, AZ...You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.

i just wrote my senator by dougnaka · 2003-02-26 16:03 · Score: 1

go write yours...(link)

I told mine I'm against the DMCA, it makes me a criminal and if all David Rocci did was sell mod chips allowing people to use devices they BOUGHT in whatever way they wanted then he should be released. I mentioned that piracy is WRONG and should be ILLEGAL. But doing what I want with things I pay for (eg. fair use) is MORAL, and should be LEGAL.
The only way you're going to keep the guys with guns from hauling you off for your Linux DVD player is to get the bad laws changed.

--
My Linux Command of the Day site : LCOD

don't believe everything you read on Yahoo... by darkphyber · 2003-02-26 16:04 · Score: 1

Aparently this was all due to DNS hijacking. Plain and simple folks.. here's the discussion on iSONEWS.com:

http://www.isonews.com/forums/showthread.php?s=8 26 f153aca799e283cc5b566361560c1&threadid=100834

Hurry! by grishnav · 2003-02-26 16:08 · Score: 1

Before they grab this too!

There must be some violation of copyright going on their...

*sigh*

Privacy Concerns... by supof2001 · 2003-02-26 16:13 · Score: 1

We are all computer geeks. Does anyone remember that the Patriot Act allowed the DoJ to begin demanding information from libraries covertly in order to determine who is trying to find information related to terrorism (or whatever else the DoJ pleases, there is no check on this)? Okay, so the DoJ has redirected the DNS for this website ISOnews ya? Effectively, they can now recognize and potentially track people who visit this site. It's an evidence gathering tactic, just like the library. It looks to me that the DoJ continues to carry out actions then tend to restrict the free flow of information. Sadness!

In other news by jesser · 2003-02-26 16:15 · Score: 2, Funny

Slashdot uses the word "ostensibly" in a headline.

--
The shareholder is always right.

Re:In other news by tunah · 2003-02-26 18:32 · Score: 1

Better double check that, this may be a false alarm, like the "Otensibly" of '98 and the "Ostensibly" of 2001.

--
Free Java games for your phone: Tontie, Sokoban

Link to iSONEWS Fourm Talking About This by jpsowin · 2003-02-26 16:16 · Score: 1

Interesting chat about all of this in their fourm, including some talk about the DNS being changed back and forth. Worth a read..

http://66.201.243.170/forums/showthread.php?s=0e 8c bb6a68adfc1536a94f42a167b062&threadid=100834

It's not a fake. by Artifex · 2003-02-26 16:18 · Score: 5, Informative

The press release is right here.

They probably just made an A record change to the DNS.
This buys them time to go seize the server physically, or copy all the user records off if it's a virtual colo.

If leaving the IP alone for a while prompts some clueless users to continue to log in or attempt to order more stuff, it's a smart move.

--
Get off my launchpad!

Re:It's not a fake. by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 21:06 · Score: 4, Informative

You don't order stuff there anymore. The modchips were sold last summer and it was a bit of a fiasco IIRC. They got plenty of orders but only managed to get a few hundred of them out before that particular venture collapsed. Quite a few of those whose orders hadn't been filled yet didn't get their money back either so if the DOJ bust krazy8, it should be fraud or something.

(Allegdely)

Also, this only has to do with one of the isonews staff who sold these chips through the website that was already there. The 'krazy8 set up a website to sell illegal mod chips' statements are (as usual) a bit off the mark.

Yes, the news on isonews is about copyright infringement related activities, but you only get info about which groups released which title and so on, and discussion about the so called scene. You get no cracks, no serials, no software nothing that lets you actually 'pirate' the games. Giving out or asking for such info on the forums is not allowed. Go there and ask 'where can I download sim city 4?!?!?' and see how long you last, for example. Isonews is harmless and (apart from krazy8's little scheme ;)) hardly illegal (though I suppose in the new Bush/Ashcroft America, talking about illegal activites will get you thrown in jail as well)
Re:It's not a fake. by Old+Uncle+Bill · 2003-02-27 05:59 · Score: 1

Uh, no. It is illegal here, and called entrapment. At least it used to be until they started making up the laws as they go. And any decent lawyer will get you out of that drug house sting any day of the week. Not that the cops care, their job is just to scare people.

--
Yes, I am an agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial.

Why they really shut them down... by DrStrangeLoop · 2003-02-26 16:25 · Score: 1

...invalid use of their trademark doj(tm):

Search results: found 8 releases in 1 sections. Anime (8): 01/06/2002 DIVX SUB+DUB Ranma 1/2 TV Season1 Digital Dojo Eps 07 - 09 BBXViDZ [xx/50] 01/06/2002 DIVX SUB+DUB Ranma 1/2 TV Season1 Digital Dojo Eps 10 - 12 BBXViDZ [xx/50] 01/06/2002 DIVX SUB+DUB Ranma 1/2 TV Season1 Digital Dojo Eps 13 - 15 BBXViDZ [xx/50] 01/06/2002 DIVX SUB+DUB Ranma 1/2 TV Season1 Digital Dojo Eps 16 - 18 BBXViDZ [xx/50] 11/27/2001 SVCD DUB Urotsukidoji IV - Inferno Road ANiGT [3CDs] 11/22/2001 SVCD SUB Urotsukidoji III - Return Of The Overfiend ANiGT [3CDs] 08/04/2001 SVCD DUB Urotsukidoji I Legend of the Overfiend *Hentai* ANiGT [2CDs] 08/04/2001 SVCD DUB Urotsukidoji II Legend of the Demon Womb *Hentai* ANiGT [2CDs] Search criteria Title: doj

after all, i would be quite angry too if all the search results for my name turned out to be gender-questioning, tentacle-sporting anime porn ;)

-strangeloop

So I can Use my Gun to KILL?? by aSiTiC · 2003-02-26 16:28 · Score: 1

I know this isn't popular with SlashDot users but...

Everyone is arguing that modchips allow people to use their machines as they see fit. Can anyone argue that the use of guns should be unrestricted? Arguing that if you own a machine/device entitles you to use it however you wish is ludicrous at best!

--

Where the Music Matters

Re:So I can Use my Gun to KILL?? by veddermatic · 2003-02-26 16:35 · Score: 1

one the one hand, you have apples. On the other hand, you have oranges.

You have just compared the two.

If I mod my PS2, who can I kill or maim other than myself (don't modchip while plugged in! =) I then can use my PS2 to do what I want... and as long as I do not use it to comit a porperty crime or bodily injury, it's nobody's fucking business what I do with it. That is the definition of Fair Use.

By your analogy, if using a gun to kill people is wrong, then adding one of those stupid spoilers to your Honda Civic is illegal. If I buy an audio CD, glue some felt to the silver side and use it as a coaster, that's illegal.

Using your property the way YOU want is a RIGHT... unless again, you use it to hurt / kill / comit property crime.

Modding your PS2 is legal. Using your PS2 to break a window to gain access to a jewelry store, then to bash the guard over the head is not.

--
Department of Homeland Security: Removing the rights real patriots fought and died for since 2001
Re:So I can Use my Gun to KILL?? by Dyolf+Knip · 2003-02-26 17:53 · Score: 1

Uh, not quite. According to the DMGCA (Digital Millenium Gun Control Act), simply selling guns is illegal as they _could_ be used to commit crimes. And since the raison d'être for firearms is to put large holes in people (and occasionally wild animals), there is no good reason for having them. Fair use? You mean like self defense? Not important.

--
Dyolf Knip
Re:So I can Use my Gun to KILL?? by jsnorman · 2003-02-27 05:54 · Score: 1

Here are several reasons why you are wrong:

1. No one (at least not me) is arguing that the "use of modchips" should be unrestricted in some quasi-Libretarian mecca fantasy world. Problem is, the DMCA BANS modchips -- it does not merely restrict their use. Few people would have a problem with a law that said that if you use a circumvention device as a tool to intentionally commit copyright infringement, you have committed a crime. But that would have been a crime BEFORE the DMCA. The DMCA was created specifically to MAKE IT A CRIME to use access circumvention devices -- EVEN IF THE UNDERLYING ACTIVITY WOULD NOT qualify as copyright infringement (for example, backups of CDs, time shifting, etc.)

2. The DMCA makes modchips illegal without regard to the actual purpose or even predominent use of the access circumvention device. It would be like (to stretch an already stupid analogy) banning not only M16 rifles, but also the popgun rifles used in the Olympics which have very little utility beyond sporting, and antique muskets.

3. Worst of all, the DMCA bans ideas. Banning a gun or even all guns would not bother me that much. I could still talk about guns, teach courses in gun construction, read about gun history, talk about wars and weapons used in wars, etc. But the DMCA as applied to mod chips bans discussion as well as the chips themselves.

alternitive domain name root's by luminus_one · 2003-02-26 16:31 · Score: 1

http://www.opennic.unrated.net/ is looking to be a better alternative everyday anything that is not controlled by the US goverment or guarded by their attack dog(john asscroft)

Down Under by droyad · 2003-02-26 16:36 · Score: 1

Buy them over the internet from Australia. A court ruled that they were legal! Suck on that corporation!!

funny. by geekmedia · 2003-02-26 16:44 · Score: 1

all the stories i've read have said he only made a $24,000 profit.

Re:"EFF??" Oh, Please...! by puppet10 · 2003-02-26 16:52 · Score: 1

Unfortunately trying cases is not the same as an effective lobby. By the time a case has to be tried that means the law you didn't want has already been passed and you are using the least effective means of fighting it.

Their San Fransisco address spells this out, all effective lobbiests are in DC since to lobby effectively they have to be there.

This isn't to say that the EFF isn't a well intentioned organization, only that its effectveness is limited by its methodology, not that I know of any other organization with similar goals but organized as a lobby/PAC.

--
-------- This space intentionally left blank --------

Isn't progress wonderfull by Crashmarik · 2003-02-26 16:54 · Score: 1

Russia finally has a democratic government. Wouldn't it be nice if we could have one too. How much did you pay for your politician today ?

What on god's fucking green Earth by TheOnlyCoolTim · 2003-02-26 16:54 · Score: 1

The fucking potheads could design a website better. It doesn't take 7 KB of HTML for a background image and a paragraph of centered blue text.

Great background image too - I guess the flag now stands for censorship; making sure you don't see pictures of bongs.

Tim

--
Omnia vestra castrorum habetur nobis.

Standard terms by D1rtbag · 2003-02-26 16:55 · Score: 1

Most places have standard terms that the judge wants to see for probation. Where I am, even misdemeanor pleas have as a condition that you can't use drugs, associate with bad people, you must maintain steady employment, etc. The drug and alcohol testing/evaluation are present in most types of pleas also. We don't assume people are evil; I just want the probation officer to be able to check on this sort of thing, in case the person has a problem.

I think it also makes the probation a little more "real" for people who are in trouble for the first time. Of course, "excessive" is a very subjective term, so I'm not exactly sure how you prove that up at the Motion to Revoke hearing.

Moderators on crack by mudshark · 2003-02-26 16:59 · Score: 1

OK, which DOJ employees are moderating this thread? Parent post is not a troll.

Fuck Ashcroft. Fuck Bush. These guys were not legitimately elected and they don't have the consent of the governed. Democracy was a nifty experiment, but now it's over.

--
In other news, astrophysicists have announced that they now know what all that dark matter is: it's stupidity.

Something to think about (DOJ going after surfers) by slakdrgn · 2003-02-26 17:02 · Score: 1

Just something to think about, but how do you think DOJ will react to slashdot? Expecially after the ./ effect. Possiably all slashdot viewers labeled as terrorists?? ;-)

All crime is not murder by aSiTiC · 2003-02-26 17:04 · Score: 1

I'm worried that I must point this out to you but for a crime to be a crime is not a prerequisite that the crime involves killing.

I just pointed out using a gun to kill as an extreme example. Another relevant example would be theft of property which can involve software.

--

Where the Music Matters

And to druggies by FatalTourist · 2003-02-26 17:04 · Score: 1

All your freebase are belong to us!

--

Escape Pod Films: Sketch Comedy and Web Series

Re:And to druggies by mekkab · 2003-02-27 04:36 · Score: 1

actually,I was thinking "all your bong are belong to us" but yours is much better!

--
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.

Still Incorrect by aSiTiC · 2003-02-26 17:09 · Score: 1

I'm sorry but is not correct in other situations to always use your property in whatever way you wish, excluding killing/committing property crime.

I cannot use a newspaper to defame your name/person for utterly no reason. This is also against the law. To single out one example because Slashdot users wish it to be so is hypocritical. Why not look at other cases of such discrimination?

--

Where the Music Matters

I have the perfect solution....... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 17:29 · Score: 1, Insightful

I have the perfect solution, don't buy hardware that needs mod chips in the first place.

Everyone here knows that you can't legally make backup copies, so why would you buy something that restricts your fair use rights.

DVDs and CDs are fragile items, and unless I can make copies of them, I don't buy them.

So I still buy CDs as I can make copies and mp3 them for my car stereo, but I don't purchase dvds, dvd players or any other copy controlled media , I do own a dvd-rom for my SuSE installation, I will probably purchase a DVD burner for backups soon and a dv cam to try my hand at video editing, but not if it's copy controlled.

Please, really think about it, do you need the stuff? Is it necessary?

A night out on the town is always a whole lot more fun. Imagine actually interacting with other human beings instead of vegging out on the couch.

Re:I have the perfect solution....... by jsnorman · 2003-02-27 05:42 · Score: 1

Exactly. And by the way, a Linux box makes an outstanding game machine.

I took it back... by timdorr · 2003-02-26 17:46 · Score: 1

I set stolemy.com to point to the isonews servers. If they aren't able to get isonews.com back, i'll donate the domain :)

(btw, if it doesn't resolve for you yet, try back tommorrow...)

--
Tim Dorr
Owner/Manger
A Small Orange

"Pirates" should come out of the closet! by QuantumG · 2003-02-26 17:53 · Score: 1

Rather than slinking around and trying not to get caught, people who like to copy software, movies, music and other copyright works should come out of the closet and declare themselves persecuted. I don't care how much money the big companies stand to lose or how many people's business plans are destroyed overnight, copyright law has got to go, simple because the people don't want it.

--
How we know is more important than what we know.

Re:"Pirates" should come out of the closet! by aiyo · 2003-02-26 18:50 · Score: 1

thanks for your opinion. we are coming for you
Re:"Pirates" should come out of the closet! by mzo23 · 2003-02-26 20:12 · Score: 1

He's coming out of the closet, if your a fellow man he might actually be the one COMING for you. /me kills self for horrible joke thank you, drive thru

--
I don't have a sig, can I borrow yours?

In other news... by otisgusting · 2003-02-26 18:15 · Score: 1

The DOJ seems to have 0wn3d part of the Iraq Daily's website. Click the TV link.

The Western Samoan (?!) website for Iraqi satellite television now broadcasts rather odd propaganda.

Re:Mah... still overrated.... by fucksl4shd0t · 2003-02-26 18:20 · Score: 1

It wasn't funny. The all your base thing ceased to be funny on its own about 2 years ago.... Then the variations on it.... even saying stuff like "All your funny are belong to 2 years ago" and "Someone set up us the dead horse" stopped being funny about a year ago....

This stuff is good shit, dude! It's some of the funniest stuff I've seen in a while.

lol

Thanks, I needed that. :)

--
Like what I said? You might like my music

Ashcroft squishy-soft on corporate crime by Animats · 2003-02-26 18:26 · Score: 1

Why isn't this kind of energy going into prosecuting Andrew Fastow (architect of Enron's scams), Ken Lay (Enron CEO), and the WorldCom crowd? Lay hasn't even been indicted yet. Enron has dropped out of the news. And Ashcroft claims to be tough on crime.

Those people stole more money than anybody else in the history of the world.

Re:Rant: John Ashcroft causes mental defficiencies by superyooser · 2003-02-26 18:28 · Score: 2, Interesting

Fascism? :-D He he, it really does make me laugh out loud trying to imagine Mussolini or Hitler sending gamers to the gulags for hacking game consoles. I've heard lots of horrific stories from Iraqi refugees about torture with electric drills and acid, but not even Saddam Hussein has outlawed modchips! What a tyrant Ashcroft is! But seriously...

It's just video games! Get a grip!

You can legallly play any game on the planet if you pay for the games and the systems they were made to be played on. It won't kill you to shell out a few more bucks. Video games are NOT a necessity! We're not talking about important issues like access to public water reservoirs or voting booths. Believe or not, billions of people today have lived their whole lives without playing video games, and are no worse off for it.

IMHO, this is utterly trivial. But since many of you think it's a critical, life-or-death, the-sky-is-falling, Constitutional abrogation, I will continue...

We are a nation of laws, not chaos. Just because Joe Citizen doesn't like a law doesn't mean he gets to be self-appointed dictator. The law does not bow to prima donnas, post-modernists, or cry babies. Although you yourself can't make or repeal laws, you do get to choose the people who do that. The laws were created by representatives that the people have voted into office. That's the way a democracy (or, "representative republic," for the nitpickers) works.

With over 280 million American citizens, there will always be major disagreement over the merit of particular legislation. Notwithstanding, you must obey the laws or freely accept the punishment for breaking them, even if they aren't written like YOU would want them to be. You may practice civil disobedience, but in doing so, you still must face the consequences until the other people in your movement have been effective in lobbying for the amendment or repeal of the contested laws.

DoJ as Hired Thugs by edward.virtually@pob · 2003-02-26 18:29 · Score: 1

Gee, how nice to know our taxes are now going to pay for thugs to carry out the bidding of giant corporations. The DMCA not withstanding (being unconstitutional), the bypassing of region encoding (which is a violation of anti-trust and free trade laws and agreements) is not a crime and it is a moral outrage that the DoJ is abusing US citizens for the "crime" of wanting to play imported games. Also annoying is the inaccurate press coverage that fails to mention this justifiable use. Disgusting. "Land of the Free" my ass.

No, you are totaly wrong by autopr0n · 2003-02-26 18:38 · Score: 1

DVD region coding is not a copyright control mechanism. It's a control mechanism, and it's to the benifit of the copyright holders, but it's just so they can make money, and does not have legal force.

--
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.

Re:No, you are totaly wrong by Grishnakh · 2003-02-26 18:59 · Score: 1

Um, turn on your "sarcasm" switch, and reread my post.

Uh, no... by autopr0n · 2003-02-26 18:41 · Score: 1

Well, in iowa at leat you don't get an extra ticket, but I've heard that the cops are much more linent with you if you don't have one.

--
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.

This makes no sense ! by bushboy · 2003-02-26 18:49 · Score: 1

Bubba: "So, Rocci, what you inside for ?"

Rocci: "I sold some Enigmah mod-chips, they gave me 5 years"

Bubba: "Heck, I murdered some guy and I only got 10, now pick up that soap over there !"

What a wierd world we live in - this guy is going to get 5 years for a silly "crime" which is a very debatable case - why don't the Enigmah mod-chip manuafacturers have legal actions taken against them ?

Surely you can do what you want with your own hardware ?
Hmm, apparently not anymore !

--
A slashdotting - you get the stick first and then the carrot !

Irony rules! by gnovos · 2003-02-26 19:43 · Score: 1

http://www.isonews.com/top2.gif looks an aweful lot like something that would automatically fall under copyright by it's designer... I wonder who made it? IF it isn't the owner of the site who plea bargined, there may be a copyrite infringement case against the DoJ!

--
"Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"

Re:Mah... still overrated.... by ramzak2k · 2003-02-26 19:43 · Score: 1

how dare you say that its overrated. Jokes like
"All your base.."
"Bewolf cluster..."

are timeless slashdot classics !
Now sit there and picture a bewolf cluster of all the "All your base.." jokes.

Btw, your post was offtopic. This one derives from all the base of the jokes - still on topic.

--

Siggy Say, Siggy Do

Oh come on by The+Tyro · 2003-02-26 19:59 · Score: 4, Insightful

I can't believe you just made a racial thing out of that...

Take a look at those arrest records on those urban black males you state are frivolously arrested. I'm going to go out on a limb here, and say that there'd be a variety of different crimes, including a few violent felonies, not just BS speeding tickets based on 100-year-old laws.

Now, I'm not implying that crime is genetic in black males or any of that National Alliance racist crap... it has a lot to do with being young urban males, making poor choices (as we all tend to do when young and stupid), and being surrounded by criminal subcultures, which young people tend to emulate. For instance, the "Gansta" style of dress... that whole thing simply escapes me. Why would anyone emulate a bunch of thugs, who largely prey on their own people? Boggles the mind...

OK... sorry, end of tangent. What I was trying to say is that people often get arrest records BECAUSE they commit crimes, not because "the man" is keeping them down.

I can see your point if we are simply talking about public nuisance-type crimes... but an armed robbery rap usually requires active participation.

--
Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.

Re:Oh come on by I_redwolf · 2003-02-26 20:51 · Score: 5, Informative

I live in Brooklyn, NYC; I'm a black male. I was arrested outside the front of my house.. ON my steps for no reason. The reason on paper says "disorderly conduct". You watch too much TV.. Those males, who emulate a bunch of thugs, who largely prey on their own people are already in jail for entirely different reasons. I bet you also didn't know that out of every 8 black males you see during the day; 1 is in jail. While I was in central bookings in Downtown Brooklyn about 100% of the people in the cells were black so I asked what the hell is everyone in here for. "Jay walking", "Had no id on me", "Told a cop to fucking stop following me", "Didn't have my license".. Most of the things ran off were ticket offenses. One guy was caught racing his car down by Hunts Point and ended all the way in Brooklyn? Wtf is that? (I'd also like to point out that discon; disorderly conduct is a ticket offense). Surely some of these guys had to be lying but as I waited in the court room; they weren't.

I'd also like to point out that up until that point I never had a problem with the "law". Infact until my honorable discharge on Dec 5th 2002 I was an intel analyst for a Military Police Battalion and knew a truck load of police officers. The difference I realize is that I used to live in Suburbia.. Moving to Brooklyn changed the ideologies. Says alot about white people huh?

That incident, however, hasn't gone without challenge and the officers of the 79th precint who did this are being raked over the coals. The difference here is that my parents have money and my dad is in a position where he can make calls. Alot of the other black males out there don't have that. The contempt passes just the cops to their skin colors and this is why you sit there at your keyboard and make such assumptions about the social character of a black male in an urban area? You know nothing about it until you see it or experience it. So please, keep your ideas to yourself.
Re:Oh come on by ch-chuck · 2003-02-27 00:30 · Score: 4, Interesting

So please, keep your ideas to yourself.

[don't be afraid to say what you want

I look at the two lines above, one right after the other, shake head, blink eyes and conclude: it's just, utterly bizarre.

--
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
Re:Oh come on by SegaVegas · 2003-02-27 00:41 · Score: 1

i think it's no good if a military police dude knows lots of real police people! military should be distinctly seperated from the real police!
Re:Oh come on by qoncept · 2003-02-27 01:29 · Score: 3, Insightful

Says alot about white people huh?
Yes, all white people. I was reading your post hoping to gain some insite, but then I realized you're as racist as Jesse Jackson.
That aside... A common theme in jail is that, regardless of one's race, they are in for some bullshit reason. And it tends to happen over and over again, not just to random people. Perhaps you should remember when asking people what they are "in for" that they are in a place where dishonest people go and you're asking them something it's not in their best interest to be honest about.

--
Whale
Re:Oh come on by Blue+Stone · 2003-02-27 02:28 · Score: 2, Insightful

You don't have to be black to be picked on by the police..... but it helps.

You frequently just have to be young, and male.
Here in the UK, I was picked up one night by the police. I was a little drunk and a little depressed. I walked down the local industrial estate (open to the public, public thouroughfare and all that) and saw a car coming.
I thought it was security and I didn't want to be hassled, I just wanted to find somewhere to sit, alone, and sigh. So I hid under the truck standing beside me, and waited until the car had passed.
Next thing I know, three pairs of police boots surround me and one of them says, "Are you tampering with that vehicle, Sir?"

I come out, and then am bundled into their police van, intimidated with threats of violence for the duration of the journey unless I tell them who I am (in the mood I'm in they can go fsck themselves) and I remain silent.
They take me to the police station an d order me out of the van, wherupon I say I'm leaving unless they arrest me. And while this PIG is manhandling me into the police station, and I repeat my demand that he either arrest me, or let me go, he says, "Right, you're fucking under arrest."

In the police station I'm told to empty my pockets, they take an ID card from me and phone my father, who, dipshit that he is, on the way home, tells me not to make a fuss about it. Dipshit that I am, I listen to him and don't do anything about the false imprisonment, physical and verbal assault, threats and intimidation and false arrest.

That's in the UK in a nice middle-class area of a small country town, and I'm a nice middle-class-looking white male.
Being young and male is enough to get treated like shit by the pigs.

--
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
Re:Oh come on by kmellis · 2003-02-27 02:34 · Score: 1

"Yes, all white people. I was reading your post hoping to gain some insite, but then I realized you're as racist as Jesse Jackson."
Whether he is or not, do you also think he's lying about his experience? I don't. Regarldess of how truthful the other people he talked to were, there still is the data point of a young black man being arrested in front of his house for no good reason. He also mentions that he didn't encounter this sort of bias when he lived in suburbia, nor when he was in the military. (Which would seem to contradict your assumption that he's racist and generalizing about all white people in all situations.)
How likely do you think it is that you would be arrested in the same situation?
Your response is an example of disregarding what someone says on an ad hominem pretext because you just plain don't want to hear what they have to say and dismiss it out-of-hand. It's irresponsible.
Almost all of my encounters with the police have been extremely fair and pleasant. With one exception: I was at a party in an hispanic ghetto where I was the only anglo person among more than a hundred people. The cops came because it was a big party (as I've seen the cops come to many other big parties I've been at in my life). In this case, though, they acted completely differently than I'd ever seen them act. They didn't knock politely, they just came marching in and yelling at people and threatening them. All my life until then I'd been very skeptical of all those stories about the police abusing their powers (or just disregarding civil liberties). Suddenly, it was like I was in some movie where the police were the bad guys, not the good guys.
This is the sort of relationship that young minority urban males have with the police from as far back as they can remember. From before they ever even thought about breaking the law. They grew up where they were assumed to be criminals or potential criminals from the earliest ages. Isn't it possible that this creates a culture where there's a vicious cycle of self-fulfilling prophecy? And isn't it possible that you, like so many white people, don't have a freaking clue about what it's like living in that world?
Re:Oh come on by kableh · 2003-02-27 02:43 · Score: 2, Interesting

The racial "thing" is completely justified. Look at mandatory minimum sentences for crack cocaine versus regular cocaine. It is a vicious cycle, and there is no one thing to blame, but blatently racist drug laws perpetuate this cycle.
Re:Oh come on by kableh · 2003-02-27 02:47 · Score: 1

Right...
Re:Oh come on by Dr.+Manhattan · 2003-02-27 03:06 · Score: 1

You don't have to be black to be picked on by the police..... but it helps. You frequently just have to be young, and male.
We lived in the suburbs outside Detriot. My brother, a white male, used to work as a cook in a restaurant in his teens. He'd be there late on the weekends, frequently as late as 2am cleaning up. Then he'd walk home... approximately 100 yards, down a main street, turn a corner, and then two houses down.
He was twice stopped by police on our front lawn, demanding ID.
"Where do you live?"
"Here. This is my front lawn."
"Give me a break, where do you live?"
"You're holding my ID, read it."
[Pause] "Okay, where are you coming from?"
"I'm coming from work. I'm a cook at a restaurant."
"Where?"
[Points] "Right there."
[Pause, hands ID back] "Well, don't do it again."
Yeah, the cops really said that. Twice. Two different cops.
Later, during college, there was the time he and I were roller-blading late one night, and got stopped by the cops because someone had grafitti'd a school nearby. The cop showed us the markings and said, "What does that mean to you?" The lettering said, "ICP".
My brother said, "Inductively Coupled Plasma?"
The cop stares.
"We use it at work. I work for an environmental chemistry assay company. You heat a sample up to..."
[Breaks in] "So you've never heard of the Insane Clown Posse?"

--
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
Re:Oh come on by qoncept · 2003-02-27 03:29 · Score: 1

We're talking about how "the man" treats not minorities, now how minorities treat each other. If you'll notice, the cop that shot that guy was hispanic.
I'm stuck in Montgomery, Alabama for the next 3 years. I went to pick up a pizza the other day and passed a banner urging people to protest a low income housing project. A marine was shot while running after his stolen car. My friend's house was robbed and his wife was held at gunpoint on an Air Force base with razor wire topped 8 foot brick walls. Churches audit to make sure their members are paying enough of their income. Confederate flags are everywhere. My Trinidadian friend was coldcocked by some asshole who has no idea what his race actually was. When someone makes a racist comment, people don't even turn their heads.
I know people get treated unfairly. But people aren't routinely arrested for no reason.

--
Whale
Re:Oh come on by Tombstone-f · 2003-02-27 03:32 · Score: 1

"Being young and male is enough to get treated like shit by the pigs."

No, hiding under a car, and looking suspiciously like you're trying to steal this car, is what got you arrested. I'm sure the fact that you gave them a hard time, by not identifying yourself or giving them any reason why you were there, didn't help.

Try cooperating with them, and not getting drunk and crawling under cars, and your future run ins with the law should go a little smoother.
Re:Oh come on by beanball75 · 2003-02-27 03:46 · Score: 1

I wish I had some mod points. I find it hilarious that you're being modded down as 'flamebait' while the parent post is modded up as 'insightful'. This is another good example of otherwise good people being caught in the "subtle racism" that still exists in today's America Utopia.
Re:Oh come on by (trb001) · 2003-02-27 03:54 · Score: 3, Interesting

And isn't it possible that you, like so many white people, don't have a freaking clue about what it's like living in that world?

Great cop-out. No matter whether we're white, black, asian, etc, we all live in the same world, with the same laws. Black people get picked up more, you're right, but black people commit more crimes. Him pointing to the fact that the people were waiting in jail with him were there for bullshit reasons doesn't dispute the fact that 1 in 4 black males are in jail (for more than a night) on a serious charge.

I've been called a racist before, it doesn't bother me and I'll admit it. I also wouldn't think to turn my back if a fellow human needed help (money, a lift, overwhelmed in a fight, etc). I'm just not going to close my eyes and pretend that minotirites are SO unfairly treated because of their race. If anything, minorities in general ARE treated fairly because of their race.

--trb
Re:Oh come on by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-27 03:59 · Score: 1, Interesting

A black guy calling in to a talk radio station said it very clearly for me:

">I'm afraid of a group of kids approaching me in $200 sneakers. It's incumbent upon white people to make the correct distinctions and conclusions."

Part of what I extrapolated from that is that white people can never come off their pedestal by thinking that "there are many black people I admire" -- because they can always to categorized as exceptions. You have to start in your own back yard and see that, "Gosh there are a lot of thuggish white trash running around." Then, magically, the universe comes into balance. And, to stay on topic, good black people can get together with good white people and we can work together to do something about Nazis like Ashcroft.
Re:Oh come on by kableh · 2003-02-27 04:25 · Score: 1

We're talking about how "the man" treats not minorities

Hint: police == The Man®

If you'll notice, the cop that shot that guy was hispanic

If you'll notice, the man was UNARMED, and was SHOT, because he had a disagreement with some cocksuckers who tried to get him to sell them some dope. I don't see why it matters that the cop was hispanic. Oh yea, because if he was white, it would be a "hate crime"?

I know people get treated unfairly. But people aren't routinely arrested for no reason.

Then you don't know a black man who isn't from suburbia. I don't see how a high crime rate where you live, which happens to be home to a lot of minorities, causes you to draw that conclusion.
Re:Oh come on by Blue+Stone · 2003-02-27 04:38 · Score: 1

First, it was an articulated truck.
Second, I could not have been even remotely construed to have been trying to steal it.
Third, I wasn't arrested, I was effectively kidnapped, and assaulted. My rights were not read to me, I was also not given a reason for "arrest."
Fourth, I am under no obligation to identify myself, and whether I do or not, is hardly justification to be threatened, intimidated, and physically assaulted.
Fifth, all of what I've just said is included in the post you replied to.
Sixth, co-operating with what? "Tell us your name or we'll take you to the station and do an internal search for drugs," etc.

You can co-operate with that sort of thing if you want, and you are most welcome to the world of shit you'll have created for yourself, in your eagerness to be treated without common courtesy or respect.

--
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
Re:Oh come on by TJamieson · 2003-02-27 04:40 · Score: 1

I ... the two lines above, one right after the other, shake head, blink eyes

So you're a cokehead then? It's amazing what happens when you when you take a quote out of context.
Seriously though, the entire line reads [don't be afraid to say what you want -- your slashdot karma isn't that important]. I doubt the author was purposely being contradictive. And no, I do not really think ch-chuck is a cokehead ;-) )

--
For the last time, PIN Number and ATM Machine are redundancies!
Re:Oh come on by rick-o · 2003-02-27 04:46 · Score: 1

> not because "the man" is keeping them down.
I used to live in central Indiana, where the minority ethnic groups make up a startlingly low percentage of the population. Yet, more than three out of four cars you'd see pulled over were being driven by black people. I hear this is documented somewhere with actual figures, but it got absurd enough that the practice was commonly known as being pulled over for "DWB,"
Driving While Black.
Don't laugh, it's not funny. How many of you can say that if you were regularly pulled over, or meticulously watched while you were driving, a police officer couldn't eventually legally arrest you? How many of you always obey every single traffic law? Obviously, there are other factors involved here, but saying the white man isn't trying to keep everyone else down just isn't true.
Re:Oh come on by Abcd1234 · 2003-02-27 04:51 · Score: 1

"we all live in the same world"

And that is the mistake in your logic. Like it or not, we don't all live in the same world, and we certainly don't live under the same laws (or, more accurately, the same enforcement of those laws).

Do you think your comfortable suburban lifestyle is anything at all like your average ghetto? Somehow, I don't think so. So it's entirely likely that many other things are also different... for example, the way cops behave toward minority groups. The example of the large party being broken up is an excellent one... in suburbia, the cops would knock politely and ask people to quiet down. But in the ghetto, they barge in, completely disregarding people's rights. This is discrimination, plain and simple... feel free to rationalize it, but that's what it is.
Re:Oh come on by qoncept · 2003-02-27 05:12 · Score: 1

I don't see how a high crime rate where you live, which happens to be home to a lot of minorities, causes you to draw that conclusion.
The fact that Montgomery, Alabama is the racist city EVER, perhaps.
Then you don't know a black man who isn't from suburbia.
I've never known a black man that WAS from suburbia. Make up your mind. Are we talking about racism or police brutality?

--
Whale
Re:Oh come on by kableh · 2003-02-27 05:26 · Score: 1

We're talking about people getting arrested for no reason. And that if you are black, it seems to happen a lot more often.

I come from a middle class area, and went to school in an area that was much wealthier, and so I now a few black guys from suburbia, as it were. I've also known a few black guys from the dirt poor part of town.

I still dont see how living in a racist town, with a lot of minorities, and a high crime rate, relates to people getting arrested for no reason. Not trying to be argumentative here, just curious =).
Re:Oh come on by Genjurosan · 2003-02-27 05:55 · Score: 1

-SARCASM

WTF are you talking about? Yeah. All the parties my white ass went to that gut busted always had the cops politely knock on the door and kindly ask me to lower the noise level. Are you out of your damn mind? I, white male, as a teenager have been stopped so many times and harrassed by the police it's not even funny. Let's see, the two k-9 units that were brought in to jump up on my car and scratch it for no reason other than I was parked in a fire lane with the car running and me in it (I was picking up someone). Or when I was pulled over going to speed limit at 2 am and accused of speeding. Or when I was arrested when my X girlfriend lied to the magistrate that I had harrassed her. Or when I was pulled over for having my windows half-way down in winter by a 'black' cop who called me a punk ass white boy. /sarcasm

Want out fo the ghetto? Take a bus, get a job, get a new apartment.
Re:Oh come on by EZmagz · 2003-02-27 06:08 · Score: 1

The parent post may be viewed as being OT or somewhat of a tangent, but it's the truth as any of us who live in the Urban US can attest to. I live in Minneapolis, MN. One of my best friends from college is a black male. His father is a high-ranking military official who lives in an affluent suburb. When my friend lived with his father the summer after we graduated from college, I asked him how many times he was pulled over for seemingly bullshit claims. In the 12 weeks my friend lived with his father, he was pulled over 13 times.
Granted, my friend probably was speeding once or twice in that 12-week period. However, that's still a rediculous ratio. At least he knew what to expect...his father told him to insist on giving his college student ID, his father's military ID, and some other IDs along with his license. Because he stressed the fact that he wasn't a straggler, my friend never even received a ticket. Just the typical "Move along, sir...", crap from cops.
I hate to say it, but sometimes it "pays" to be white in the US.

--
"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for SEGA. ..."
Re:Oh come on by qoncept · 2003-02-27 07:50 · Score: 1

My point is, if people were getting arrested for no reason, it'd most definately happen here more than most other places, because the forces people are saying cause it are at work here tenfold.

--
Whale
Re:Oh come on by Theaetetus · 2003-02-27 08:26 · Score: 1

It's amazing what happens when you when you take a quote out of context...
For the last time, PIN Number and ATM Machine
You're trying to rob me of my PIN Number and card?! ;)
-T
Re:Oh come on by BasharTeg · 2003-02-27 08:39 · Score: 2, Insightful

I was reading your point with as open mind as possible until you dropped this statement:

"Says alot about white people huh?"

Fuck you. "White" people as a whole are composed of people of hundreds of races with thousands of different backgrounds. If you want to say there's some kind of genetic or racial based racist behavior in "white people" then I guess it follows that it is in our nature to enslave you and stick your ass in a cotton field. If this is the appropriate scenario in your mind, please report to the cotton fields immediately. I will be along shortly to beat and otherwise oppress you.

I would also note that many affluent black people don't give a shit about african-american mistreatment in the ghettos. Says a lot about black people huh?

The moral of this stupid little story is: racism against "white people" is still racism. Don't heap the crimes of whomever you feel your "white oppressors" are on the rest of us, because honestly, we don't want to hear you cry about it.
Re:Oh come on by kableh · 2003-02-27 08:45 · Score: 1

Well, racism is just one of those forces. My roommate got arrested in downtown here, simply for walking through the wrong part of downtown on the way to his car. He spent a night in jail, had to pay a lawyer $3K so he didnt get charged with anything serious, and pay a fine of a few hundred bucks. All this because a group of cops were bored one night.

It does happen, despite your experiences. It is in the news all the time, though apparently people dismiss it in a similar manner to you.

The link I provided earlier, which you first responded to, drives this point home. An unarmed man was shot, for no reason whatsoever, and died. The cops say he was the antagonist, but the eyewitnesses said that was bullshit. It can, and does, happen.
Re:Oh come on by LeSexyLemur · 2003-02-27 09:09 · Score: 1

Inappropriate use of power/corruption is a pet peeve of mine. I'm glad you have the resources to deal with the inappropriate actions of those cops. Good Hunting.

-n0b

ps-not a cop hater, but being harassed & arrested on your own front porch really hits a nerve.
Re:Oh come on by AnonymousCowheard · 2003-02-27 09:21 · Score: 1

This doesn't amaze me. The California "Police Officers" are corrupt, as well. I was in the southern area of California, walking to the beach at about 7:55pm, and was pulled over for "suspicion". There is no law that requires identification with the Department of Motor Vehicles, and so I did not immediatly identify myself because:

NO LAW WAS CITED WICH I WAS IN VIOLATION.

Just because I look "suspicious" walking to the beach is not grounds for interrogation. The Police Officer said he will take me to the Police Station, should I not show him identification. I don't subscribe to "Driver's License" or "Picture Identification" from the DMV, and there is no law that requires such. I pulled out my Notarized Constitution of the United States of 1867, as recorded by the Colorado Recorder/Archives. Why the Constitution, you ask? Because I have been accused of a crime, have had not been shown the charges thus warranting me to indentify myself, and I was about to be ussurped into an Institution of the "state of California" organization and with extreme pre-judice and durressly compelled into a contractual agreement regardless of me honoring the Constitution.

The "Police Officer" neither honored my request to provide the law I violated; the United States corporation knows this act as citing the "Bill of Particulars". 30 minutes of kindness later, citing various laws and beliefs, and exposing my nature as being a CORPORATE SOLE, the three "Police Officers" were commanded by their "Chief" to "LET THIS MAN WALK!"

America, WAKE UP!

--

But I'm sure you already Gnu that.
Re:Oh come on by LaCosaNostradamus · 2003-02-27 22:42 · Score: 1

Why would anyone emulate a bunch of thugs, who largely prey on their own people?

Because it is so lucrative to be an executive, lawyer, or policeman.

Oh, wait, you weren't talking about those thugs ....

You have a really, really skewed view of things that any amount of TV viewing will only support. The urban areas are war zones and those growing up in them -- surprise! -- end up warriors instead of citizens. And this is fair enough, since people like you undoubtedly from your environment end up consumers and are not citizens either.

So, keep consuming, fella ... it'll keep you off the street and diminish your chances of coming into contact with a law enforcement officer.

'Nuff said.

--
[You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
Re:Oh come on by Blue+Stone · 2003-02-28 01:19 · Score: 1

Actualy you haven't cleared anything up.

I wasn't "laying drunkenly" under a truck, I was just crouched, waiting for a car to pass. Not drooling, singing loudly, or swearing at frightened passers-by. I only had a little to drink, and wasn't sloshed.

False imprisonment and false arrest it most definitely was. I was not given a reason for my arrest, which is required by law. I was not told my accompanying them was mandatory (it isn't unless you've been arrested,) and I wasn't doing anything unlawful.

There are certain standards by which the police in my country have to abide, in order that they remain within the law. They did none of these things.

I know I don't have it anywhere near as bad as the average Mexican might have it with his "law" enforcement officials, but fuck me, that's not really an excuse, is it?

--
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
Re:Oh come on by Evil+Adrian · 2003-03-02 20:17 · Score: 1

We are all products of our environments.

White people are raised to fear/hate black people in the USA.

Says a lot about how much you know, huh?

By the way, I'M WHITE.

--
evil adrian

the government redirected domains by gh0ul · 2003-02-26 20:17 · Score: 2, Funny

Will our tax dollars pay to renew the domains which have been taken over by the government?

I surely didn't vote for that.. OH WAIT! I have no rights! I'm just another tax payer..

More of the picture. by PotatoHead · 2003-02-26 20:25 · Score: 5, Insightful

I agree with your analysis about the motivations behind this move. I also mostly agree on the subscription model for games. I am still mulling over the movie and music thing mostly because I believe that subscriptions lessen the incentive to produce quality content instead of just new content, but that is another discussion.

The problem I have with the whole thing is simple.

I don't like being treated like a 5 year old kid. It is totally ok to know how to pick locks, copy media and modify hardware. What one does with that information has consequences of course, but the sharing of this type of knowledge is not the source of the problems.

As a kid, I was shown how locks worked and was given some old locks to open for a challenge. The intent at the time was to keep an eager brain busy and learn some basic mechanical skills at the same time, plus it was fun!

Later I took apart almost everything I have ever owned. Why? To understand how it worked and to learn how it could work better for me. The good karma I have earned from this is hard not to notice. Opening locked cars, fixing broken electronics, building creative solutions to solve problems all have earned me many favors in return. Who have I harmed exactly? Maybe a few local locksmiths have lost some revenue along with the electronics shops, but the people I helped sure found something to do with their money. Maybe they purchased a coupla more movies and music titles. heh heh...

The technology I sell and service today benefits those who produce it. Maybe a few schools lost some revenue because I actually bothered to pick up a book and learn something without having someone hold my hand. Isn't this what we are supposed to be doing anyway? Helping ourselves as much as possible?

80 percent of what I know today comes from this sort of learning. Those that mentored me early on were also teaching right from wrong. It also happens to be how I continue to make my living.

Today, my very nature is being slowly criminalized for no good reason and I resent it! This is wrong no matter what the motivation and everyone here knows it. It is also not good for society in general. Don't you want to see what the upcoming talent will create in their garage when you get old. Wouldn't it be nice to say, "Wow! Nobody saw that coming!" The way things are now, you can plot your future on the corporate roadmaps.

What we don't know is what to do about it (yet).

IsoNews is a source of a lot of hard to find information that can be put to as many good uses as bad. There are many other sites that provide the same forum. Will Asscroft shut them all down? Why?

I can understand the legal reason why some mod chips are illegal along with distributing pirated media, but I cannot understand the action against this site in general because it does not address the problem.

The problem is behaviour, not knowing how or why one would bother to use or construct modchips or copy media. These things are legal and ethical no matter what anyone says. If you cannot learn how, who does that really benefit?

The problem, as I see it, is the combination of education and maturity being modeled by many technically inclined people today. I can't say I blame them. It sucks to know you are being wronged.

Understanding this is a part of the big picture that also needs to be considered if we are ever to come to any sort of humane solutions.

Back to when I was young for a moment. Hacking things was encouraged! You could go to the supermarket and get magazines that actually documented this process in some detail. Teachers encouraged the activity as well. I remember a group of us changing one of the instructional disks to tell jokes. We learned a lot and harmed nobody because THE SCHOOL COULD EASILY MAKE BACKUPS! Know what the teacher did? He had us pick something we wanted to do and helped us do it. Guess what? WE LEARNED A LOT MORE!

Having an opinion was valued and encouraged. Many a teacher challenged me as to why I believed something instead of just telling me it was not politically correct. Some of these same teachers had the freedom to nurture and channel this into good constructive growth.

I might add that the schools had more flexibility in how they dealt with problem kids and a lot fewer lawyers. Maybe this was not as bad as we make it out to be today.

I had considerable freedom in school provided that I towed the line on the basics; namely, maturity, ethics and citizenship.

Today, things are very different. We are encouraged to know what to buy to solve our problems. I know that is a very general statement, but look around. You will see it in just about everything. In my state (oregon) education is being standardized and achievment is valued over creativity. Schools are sharply limited in what they can do to correct and control kids. They also exert far more subtle control than they used to because of this.

At the same time, that standardized education does not include strong citizenship and ethics material probably because of the additional lawyers on staff today combined with their strain on the budget and the stiff education requirements leave little room. Of course the lawyers will say this material just might offend somebody as well. (Too f-ing bad I say.) Could the state find a generation of task oriented citizens easier to control as well? Hmmm...

A lot of the technical education I see my kids getting is focused on performing tasks within the technology. Big mistake because understanding the ideas behind the tech is where the better tech comes from.

Kids today have less freedom and higher demands all at the same time while teachers have less room to do what they should be doing; namely, building society one kid at a time.

The level of control our society is experiencing is at an all time high. Is it any wonder that people are acting out?

Consider our precious Xbox. (Other products have similar problems, I just want to use the Xbox as an example.) The money god says make as much as you can. That means keeping people paying which means control and limited device function designed to facillitate payment. Instead of paying a ton of lawyers, who consume a fair chunk of the profit themselves, why not actually understand what people want to do and encourage it?

They could try marketing the Xbox Plus pack. Bundle it with a free game and code book! Sell the imports at a premium to those that want them. Funny, the 'Imports' are actually made here in Microsofts case so they just get to make more money.

Go ahead and run Linux, but pay 50.00 first and remember that you still can play all the online games with no worries.

Seems to me lots of kids would enjoy a home computer that could also play hot games. Why not let them do it? You just might find your next game developer that way.

Dump some of those legal dollars into some marketing designed to distinguish and reward the right kinds of creativity from blatent self-serving piracy.

Use the law to bust those doing real damage.

Sure the hardcore crowd will see all of that for what it is and will continue to go against the business model, but lots of people will just buy the thing because it does what they want. Price it right and mix in a couple of nice features and you can make money off the whole thing and look reasonably cool at the same time.

The rest of them will be numbered too small to worry about. Besides, you can spend what you want and the hardcore crowd will still do what they want. You just make less that way.

As it stands now, the stigma of the Xbox is so great for me, I will never ever own one and I make sure and tell others why. Wonder how much annuity revenue that will end up costing?

The core of the problem here is control. Here in the land of the free, we are increasingly under the thumb of large corporations driven by shareholder demand to make money every single quarter or cease to exist. Our free market has taught us the fewer options people have, the easier it is to make money. This same market makes it hard for companies to actually try new things. Invest in a new business model, but lose money for a quarter or two? Watch your stock become worthless. Better to not even try it, it is cheaper to pay the lawyers to beat away your potential competition while limiting your customers options in ways that maximize revenue.

Is this really American? Is this sort of power what our founders intended? Will these actions and others like them really benefit society, or will they benefit governments and corporations who seek control?

I for one see this for what it is. A lame attempt to drive information underground because it does not align well with some business model and that sucks and is wrong.

For anyone that actually gets to the bottom of this comment, take note this year and next of who does what and why. Remember that when it comes time to buy something, or vote. Be sure and tell them why and tell them often.

It matters.

--
Blogging because I can...

Re:More of the picture. by rickwood · 2003-03-04 07:12 · Score: 1

Right on, Man. Well said.

Power to the people!

and we all know by LittleBigLui · 2003-02-26 20:45 · Score: 1

that guns don't kill people, people with modchips and bongs do!

--
Free as in mason.

Re:and we all know by numark · 2003-02-26 21:43 · Score: 4, Funny

You know we'll be seeing commercials now saying "Use mod chips and your daughter will become pregnant and your son will run over a kid on a trike." It's the logical next step, right?

--
Want Slashdot headlines on your site? Try SlashHead

Re:Mah... still overrated.... by bluephone · 2003-02-26 20:52 · Score: 2, Funny

In Soviet Russia, bad jokes post YOU!

--
jX [ Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler. - Einstein ]

Re:Mah... still overrated.... by mcrbids · 2003-02-26 21:10 · Score: 2, Insightful

The all your base thing ceased to be funny on its own about 2 years ago...

Yeah, that's why a new need has arisen at slashdot...

-1 cliche

--
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.

The irony by forkboy · 2003-02-26 21:13 · Score: 1, Offtopic

The sad part is, marijuana is going to be decriminalized before the DMCA or Patriot Act ever get repealed. No one is losing money on the decriminalization of pot except for drug dealers...and we all know how the goverment treats THEM. Once a few more of the crotchety old fucks in congress die and the crowd is younger and more enlightened, you'll see decriminalization...you bet on it. A very large portion of younger politicians are pretty open about their feelings on it now, as are many state governments.

IP and terrorists though are the kind of thing you can't even argue against without getting accusations of treason thrown at you. "You don't want terrorists killing your children do you? We need full access to your credit cards and phone records then. Thanks, citizen." And IP..well...IP has lobbyists...what more can you ask for. There's more and more money going into the marijuana lobby every year.

The only reason it hasn't been decriminalized yet is because the administration will then have to admit that all the money put into the War on Drugs was a big waste, and I don't think they're prepared to do that.

Hey, Gee Dubya....drop that $19.2 Billion you're dumping into the Drug War this year and apply it to public drug education/treatment, schools, transitional housing, tuition assistance programs, and other social services and watch national drug use drop to a fraction of its current level. Allow harmless recreational drugs to run their course...smoking pot isn't going to hurt anyone despite what the Drug Czar tells you. Provide treatment programs for those that develop a problem with harder drugs. You'll still spend less money. Prisons will have more room for the REAL criminals now. Come on, Prez, I know you blew coke back into the 70s...shit, you probably still do. You know what's up...be a man.

--
This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.

probably already covered but... by ohzero · 2003-02-26 21:16 · Score: 2, Insightful

but I couldn't disagree more with Chris' statement. You -do- own your own hardware and you can paint it blue and throw it against the wall if that's your gig. As a matter of fact, you could probably make your own mod chip, install it, run it, and call the DoJ to tell them that you did. The guy who got arrested was the one making a profit off of selling the chips, not a chip user. As a matter of fact, I have a chip that I made in between typing this and slamming my console against the wall, so... if the DoJ asks slashdot for my user info, please feel free to give it to them, because I don't intend on selling it.

--
-- http://www.criticalassets.com

The exemption by nsayer · 2003-02-26 21:16 · Score: 1

Ironically, I believe (and could be wrong) that licensed Amateur Radio operators are exempt. Part of the reason for this is that the Amateur service is co-secondary in those bands, so they can be used as Amateur receivers.

Re:The exemption by will_die · 2003-02-27 00:54 · Score: 1

Back a few years ago that was the way it was in virginia. If you had a amateur radio license you could legally use a radar dectector.

FUCK THAT. by Wolfier · 2003-02-26 21:21 · Score: 1

All we need is a mod chip that ONLY does away the Region protection. And I'll be happy to let them bring it up to the court.

Google Cached by upt1me · 2003-02-26 21:38 · Score: 1

Google has several pages from ISONEWS cached, so if you wanna check out what the DOJ doesn't want you to see.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe =UTF-8&q=+site:www.isonews.com+isonews

This will find all the pages listed on google, click on the cached option to see the old site.

DOJ don't like Mod Chips....Scotty do! by MrFreshly · 2003-02-26 21:42 · Score: 1

DOJ, would you like a schmoke and a pancake?
You know, flap-jack and a cigarette?
Hm, alright. Cigar and a waffle? No?
Pipe and a crepe? No?
Bong and a blintz?
Perhaps (pinky in the corner of his sinister pirate grin:o) Mod chip and a Warez site?

don't do it...DO it!

Mod Chips are *NOT* illegal. by Anubis333 · 2003-02-26 21:49 · Score: 5, Informative

Many people like to mod their consoles, allowing them to make "fair use" copies of games they have purchased, in case their children destroy or scratch the disk, or allow them to play import games from other countries (that they purchase online) that are unplayable in their own country. Many people also make their own games for consoles or handhelds, especially the Game Boy Advance, which has hundreds of cool demos and games, free, for people who have moded, or "flashable" cartridges. Last Christmas, siting the DMCA, Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony filed against Lik-Sang.com (my favorite game hardware site) for selling such mod chips, because they could also be used to play downloaded copies of games, which would be an illegal use under the DMCA. One of the largest issues at hand with the mod chip craze, is that most consoles are now sold at a loss, and the companies have locked themselves into a dangerous game where they primarily make money off of game sales, and these mega corporations only want you to be playing (and buying) their games, not freely downloadable games online, or booting LINUX.

A console that plays MP3s or DIVX over a network (or off its 100gb drive) as an entertainment center, or runs LINUX, is USELESS monetarily to Microsoft. This, like everything in the world, is about money.

The edited BIOS of the mod chip is the illegal thing under the DMCA. Almost all mod chip sites do *NOT SELL CHIPS WITH A BIOS*, you must download the bios from someone online. This is perfectly LEGAL (buying the mod with no BIOS), though it is illegal (under the DMCA) to download that BIOS. If he's being prosecuted and plead guilty, it was because he was selling mods preflashed with a bios. There are hundreds of MOD chip sites online, and they aren't being taken over by the DMCA.

CE

What About Modding Cars? by 1stflight · 2003-02-26 22:11 · Score: 1

Is it me or isn't there an entire industry that's sprang up offering 3rd party modifciations for cars? With that if modding my car is legal, then why not any other device I own, I worst I shouldn't be able to exact any warranty support, not arrest.

--
3000 dead over past 2 years, still no free Palestinians, still

http://iSONEWS.R0OT-SERVERS.NET by iocc · 2003-02-26 22:16 · Score: 1

I have pointed to the right IP with this hostname: iSONEWS.R0OT-SERVERS.NET and I like my hostname better than the others that have pointed some domain or hostname to isonews :P

Re:Bad seeds MAKING it for everyone. by shepd · 2003-02-26 22:39 · Score: 1

I have some news for you:

The only current, popular console that remains relatively uncracked (GameCube) has rental stores panties in a bunch. For some reason they not only can't rent the damn games, but they can't even sell the things!

My local shop has taken to selling off their remaining used inventory at half price in a hope to recoup their losses. They haven't been successful.

It just goes to show that, just as before, no electronic media system with uncracked protection (if it has any) has ever been popular in North America (usually the world). Witness other heavily copy-protected schemes, such as DAT tapes and MD and you'll see I'm right.

Beats me exactly why it works that way. The best explanation I can come up with is the majority of first buyers are the types that want their stuff modded/cracked/whatever. And without the first time buyers telling all their less technically inclined friends just how kick-ass the equipment is, those next tier buyers hardly even hear about the item, and therefore don't buy it.

--
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC

hmm, interesting. by La+Camiseta · 2003-02-26 22:52 · Score: 1

I clicked on the link and it took me right to the isonews webpage. I wonder if they didn't like their servers getting slashdotted or something?

What crummy websites by Fweeky · 2003-02-26 23:02 · Score: 1

Are all US government sites so badly done? After seeing the isonews DOJ page that looked like it was done by a colourblind 8 year old with minimal HTML clue, I looked at a few other .gov sites and found that pretty much all of them were up to similar standards, especially the joke that is cybercrime.gov.

Not only do they look bad, they're written badly, with practically zero concession to accessibility; whatever happened to Section 508?

Methinks the DoJ should be investigated on suspicion of child labour ;)

You forgot: by ebyrob · 2003-02-26 23:09 · Score: 1

C) Allowed back up copies of game discs to be played. Oh wait, this is the same feature that allows piracy isn't it... but it still has a valid use!

You're an idiot. by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-26 23:27 · Score: 1, Insightful

So all cops and all white people are racist... Is that it? You accuse me of over-generalizing about social character of black males in an urban area, and then you tar all cops and all white people with an even broader brush? I never said that all black males were violent criminals, simply that some are, and that not all criminal charges are a result of racism. You seem to believe otherwise, based on your N=1 night in jail.

This is a comprehensive demonstration on how to misread what someone else has written. If I didn't think that you genuinely meant what you said, I'd call this a troll.

Re:You're an idiot. by stanmann · 2003-02-27 04:16 · Score: 1

Who ran from the police, and then while standing in a dark hallway/alleyway, turned around and pulled out his wallet.

--
Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed

Re:Rant: John Ashcroft causes mental defficiencies by The+Smith · 2003-02-26 23:34 · Score: 1

"it's (apparently) legal to own them, but it's not legal to make them or to import them, and it's illegal for someone to sell or give one to you.

- "But that's OK, because get this: if a cop stops you on the street, it's illegal for them to search you if you're encrypted."

- "Man, that's it, I'm going there, that's all there is to it..."

Section 508 compliance by slashd'oh · 2003-02-27 00:07 · Score: 1

If the DoJ is going to replace a web site, they ought to ensure it adheres to federal regulations, namely the Section 508 Accessibility guidelines. In this case, they left out the ALT attributes of the two images they included from the old IsoNews site; the images comprise the IsoNews logo. For these reasons, the page does not meet the 508 requirements.

This error might seem trivial, but the first line of text relies on the image to convey the name of the site (IsoNews) and therefore it violates the mandate of accessibility.

Furthermore, the ALT tags provided for the two logos do nothing more than reproduce the text in those images - the name of each agency. Those ALT tags don't even attempt to convey the visual information contained in those images, such as an eagle clutching an olive branch, the latin motto of the DoJ, or the scales and key within the Customs Service seal.

ps - The name "Lissard" for school admin s/w reminds me of a particular school admin: Police Academy Cmndt. Eric Lassard. :)

Freedom to arrest by t_allardyce · 2003-02-27 00:34 · Score: 1

I thought that free speech had been proven from the DVD CSS trial? When people start printing t-shirts and making music and pictures to spread information then you cant do much.. well unless your the US government that is. As i understand mod chips are just PIC's or AVR's etc which are programmed and sold. What happens if you just distribute the source code - isnt that protected speech? Maybe the DOJ should go after microchip.com for their evil? Or, what about just arresting the people that mod their consoles? what about the people that actually pirate games? Well if your going down that road then your going to have to arrest the people who build/sell the cd/dvd copying equipment and software. Also while your at it your really gonna have to put a stop to these "home made" PIC programmers. You cant just make laws that break protected freedoms and then choose to enforce them on only a few people. That would be like targeting a country for war because they had a really bad dictator in power, when declaring the war would be illigal and there were several other dictators around that were even worse anyway.

--
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.

VeriSign at work for the DoJ or plea-bargain ? by Koos · 2003-02-27 00:54 · Score: 1

Checking the whois-record for isonews.com gives some interesting results:

Registrant:
The iSO News (ISONEWS-DOM)
Jacobus van 't Hoffstraat 69
Nijmegen, MR 6533
NL

Domain Name: ISONEWS.COM

Administrative Contact, Technical Contact:
The iSO News (20726749O) mraskolnikov@hotmail.com
The iSO News
Jacobus van 't Hoffstraat 69
Nijmegen, MR 6533
NL
555 555 1212 fax: 555 555 1212

Record expires on 01-Mar-2004.
Record created on 01-Mar-1999.
Database last updated on 27-Feb-2003 07:39:05 EST.

Domain servers in listed order:

NS1.ISONEWS.COM 149.101.1.3
NS2.ISONEWS.COM 149.101.1.6

But.. check the owner of IP's 149.101.1.3..

OrgName: US Dept of Justice
OrgID: UDJ
Address: 1151D Seven Locks Rd
City: Rockville
StateProv: MD
PostalCode: 20854
Country: US
NetRange: 149.101.0.0 - 149.101.255.255
CIDR: 149.101.0.0/16

This looks a lot like the same tactics used in the drug enforcement cases noted by 2600 magazine.

As pointed out to me by someone this could be part of a plea-bargain. But it's at least interesting from a privacy-view since all visits to the new isonews site will now probably be logged very thoroughly.

--
The Virtual Bookcase: book reviews

Re:Terrible arguments! Troll response.. by Havokmon · 2003-02-27 01:27 · Score: 1

>>>Federal enforcement of drug control regulations
>>>is a success.
>>
>>False! The government can't keep drugs out of
>>prisons. What makes you think they do a good job
>>keeping it out of the hands of non-inamtes?
>
>Your opinions are not shared by your representatives in
>Washington, nor by the majority of your countrymen. I
>take it you have personally tried to obtain narcotics in
>prison and succeeded? While I am sure that there are
>ways to get whatever you want in prison if you try hard
>enough, I would also suggest that you not count on it
>yourself if you happen to find yourself there.

FYI, opinions aren't fact. My brother-in-law was in prison, and it's a fucking resort. He was in everything from minimum jail to medium prison. He could get anything he wanted, whenever he wanted.
Washington reps, and the average Joe don't have experience with the prison system. Why would their opinions on how well it operates matter at all?

Do you weigh heavily the VP of Finance's opinion on the network topology?

--
"I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)

back on topic... by x-guru · 2003-02-27 01:27 · Score: 1

It's fascinating to me that the DOJ does a shakedown on an obscure site like isonews, however truly obvious ones (like www.m-dc--p.com) go completely unnoticed.

If anyone has any idea what criteria the Federal Fuzz uses to decide what vectors to pursue (in tracking down mod-chipping terrorists or otherwise), I'd be interested to know.

x-

Re:It is a dark age.. by st0rmcold · 2003-02-27 01:27 · Score: 1

Great post man, this is exactly what is going on, the US is stripping away people's right before their eyes and nobody wants to do anything about it. I am canadian and I actually feel like driving down there to start a rally.

In Canada this type of thing wouldn't pass as laws, it's citizens wouldn't allow it.

At least I don't think....if the US mentality (it's to protect ourselves from terrorism, modchips are made by them and we feed their economy) dosen't rub off on us, not me for sure, I will fight for my rights till death, I am damn proud to be where I am and nobody is gonna take away my democracy!!

--
Posting useless rant since 2003.

Let's not jump to conclusions by salesgeek · 2003-02-27 01:29 · Score: 1

I suspect this guy will get off the hook either at trial or on appeal. The restriction on mod chips is unconstitutional in every way it can be, and the redirect tactic is bad, too. The only way he won't get off is if this is a plea bargain where they are allowing him to plead guilty to this charge instead of a more severe one.

BTW - I'd stay off related websites... Unless you want to get a formal realtionship with federal athorities. This is like your bookie getting busted.

--
-- $G

I do not think that this is legal by Badmovies · 2003-02-27 01:39 · Score: 1

From what I understand, they are seizing these after being given a standing "Good to Go" (on any such sites) from a judge.

I keep having to point this out lately, but here is part of the Bill of Rights again:

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized

--

Andrew Borntreger
Champion of cinematic disasters

Website by st0rmcold · 2003-02-27 01:43 · Score: 1

First, the website has no direct effect upon the world of pirated software, it mearly advertises it, so unless there is something illegal about that(which there isen't) they have no right to take the site down, they can only take k8's domain which is isonews.com, the site can be moved and restarted....Remember, he was convicted for selling modchips.

Now here is my $0.02, every year, DOJ tries to make a hit on pirated software by making a few arrests, scaring the people deep down. This year, they lacked the possibility of this, so the went after what they thought would actually scare the members of the "scene". I know for a fact it didn't, because most of the scene did not agree to this type of publication of the works.

So DOJ, you can put your thumbs back in your asses, you lost this one :P, I'm sure the "scene" appreciates you arresting people that take advantage of the scene to make profit.

As it is frowned upon to sell any type of pirated software in that world, k8 was taking advantage of the fact peiople liked to read isonews and he made profit from it, so basically made money out of somebody elses work.

Have a nice day!

--
Posting useless rant since 2003.

Am I missing something? by the9thbit · 2003-02-27 01:43 · Score: 1

This reads:
... illegally imported from the United Kingdom ... The mod chips contained software code ...

If I'm not mistaken aren't mod chips sent with no code at all, I know my Matrix chip was, it was set to FF on every byte.

I can see how it was illegal to import them with code, thanks to DMCA, however if they where without code does this case really stand to hold?

--
Put your money where your mouth is -

Remap chip? by spydir31 · 2003-02-27 02:02 · Score: 1

How about a memory remapping chip?
ie, does an in place memory patch, or remaps some ranges to itself when placed in front of original chip.
this way the chip won't have any original BIOS code on it and still be effective.

Re:Mod Chips are *NOT* illegal. -like razorblades. by Havokmon · 2003-02-27 02:16 · Score: 2, Interesting

One of the largest issues at hand with the mod chip craze, is that most consoles are now sold at a loss, and the companies have locked themselves into a dangerous game where they primarily make money off of game sales, and these mega corporations only want you to be playing (and buying) their games, not freely downloadable games online, or booting LINUX.

I wonder what would happen if I created a razor blade that fit the Mach 3 razor, was equivalent to the Mach 3 blades, and sold it for half the price of the Mach 3 blades...

What happened to 'generic' stuff? You never see plain old black and white "CEREAL" boxes anymore..

--
"I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)

Drug law insanity by Karl+Cocknozzle · 2003-02-27 02:18 · Score: 1

Man, that was years ago. I didn't know those things were still legal.... ;)

#include IANAL.h

A former roommate of mine used to work at the neighborhood head shop in college. She explained the law to me like this: A bong is only parphenelia (thus, illegal) when used for smoking something illegal out of it. If they profess to use it for tobacco, or don't tell you WHAT they'll be using it for, then its (at least, used to be) technically legal.

I didn't hear about any new "anti-bong" laws, so I'm assuming John "NaziBoy" Ashcroft is "enforcing" the old laws. So then the issue becomes, did the sites mention smoking buds, or did it refer to the items as "tobacco accessories?"

Regardless, the best bong I ever had was home made from a water cooler tank... Made it into a giant 6 -man hookah. And peopls say pot smokers never accomplish anything.

Quite satisfying to use too, because we made it ourselves.

--
Who did what now?

Re:Drug law insanity by Erik+Hollensbe · 2003-02-27 14:36 · Score: 1

There aren't any new laws, but if you read the old law....

What defines something as paraphenilia is if it's MOST COMMON USE is that for consuming an illegal drug.

Ashcroft is using a loophole in the law to arrest these people.

He's, at least, from the articles that I read (I don't know if it's the /. one or not) he's arresting those with hide-a-pipe stuff, IE, credit card pipes, stealth pipes, etc. This is really stretching the boundaries of the law, but I think it could be argued that they serve a purpose for smoking illegal goods by the way that they're designed.

Also, the fact that a lot of headshops nowadays have been getting QUITE in-your-face about what the product is used for is not making things any better.

Myself, I was going to have a 40k LOC E-Commerce site for a headshop (professional glass blower, haven't smoked in nearly a year but his stuff I'd put on my mantle just for show) up this weekend.

I think we're delaying the project for a little while. :)
Re:Drug law insanity by fucksl4shd0t · 2003-02-27 15:08 · Score: 1

A former roommate of mine used to work at the neighborhood head shop in college. She explained the law to me like this: A bong is only parphenelia (thus, illegal) when used for smoking something illegal out of it. If they profess to use it for tobacco, or don't tell you WHAT they'll be using it for, then its (at least, used to be) technically legal.
Now that you mention it, I had a buddy who bought a pipe and walked to catch the bus. A cop stopped to harass him, managed to get a search on him, and found the pipe. Since he didn't find anything else, and the pipe had never been used, he had to let my buddy go.
Personally, I got arrested once and charged with possession of paraphernelia, and they called the pipe and the bag paraphernelia. The weed itself, though, was a separate charge. So I got a class C misdemeanor, a $50 fine (laid out in the hole, 30 hours), and was set free. They never charged me for the weed itself. I wonder if it actually made it back to the cop shop..... ;)

--
Like what I said? You might like my music

How to get to the old site by tweakt · 2003-02-27 02:37 · Score: 1

It's still alive and well on it's original IP address. Unfortunately they only support HTTP/1.1 so you need to send a Host: header or you will get an error. That's why just http://66.201.243.172 wont work :

[root@wired Web root]# telnet 66.201.243.172 80
Trying 66.201.243.172...
Connected to 66.201.243.172.
Escape character is '^]'.
GET / HTTP/1.1
Host: www.isonews.com

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 14:32:46 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) mod_throttle/3.1.2 PHP/4.2.3
X-Powered-By: PHP/4.2.3
X-Accelerated-By: PHPA/1.3.3r1
Expires: Mon, 26 Jul 1997 05:00:00 GMT
Last-Modified: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 14:32:46 GMT
Cache-Control: no-cache, must-revalidate
Pragma: no-cache
Connection: close
Transfer-Encoding: chunked
Content-Type: text/html

cd
<html>
<head>
<title>
[iSONEWS]
</title>
</head>

<frameset rows="100%,*" frameborder=0 border=0 noresize>
<frame src="portal.php3?t=2" name="main"
scrolling="auto" noresize>
</frameset>
</html>

Ashcroft sucks...invading my house my ass by j-turkey · 2003-02-27 02:52 · Score: 1

Quite simply, the illegal drug paraphernalia industry has invaded the homes of families across the country without their knowledge

WTF is he thinking? Doesn't he have something better to do? Like persuing the further revocation of our constitutionally guaranteed civil liberties. Now, as for the above quote -- it's not like there's a couple of shady guys selling a cases of glass bongs in my mom's living room that she doesn't know about. These are people who are simply trading their wares on the internet -- those wares, in and of themselves, are completely benign. Where the hell does he get this crap? Ashcroft runs the most abusive DOJ that we've had in decades.

Eat my ass, Mr. Ashcroft! Now...anyone wanna buy a glass piece?

-Turkey

--

-Turkey

Replacement by st0rmcold · 2003-02-27 02:52 · Score: 1

www.nforce.nl

--
Posting useless rant since 2003.

Google Cache... Archive.org by tweakt · 2003-02-27 02:57 · Score: 1

Oh yeah, I forgot about:

http://www.google.com/search?q=%2Bcache%3Awww.ison ews.com%2Fportal.php3%3Ft%3D2

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.isonews.co m

Re:Rant: John Ashcroft causes mental defficiencies by JeThR0 · 2003-02-27 03:01 · Score: 1

Don't forget - the Clinton Administration was in power when the DMCA was inacted. It was the LIBERALS that created the laws that were are dealing with now. I don't understand why people have to blame or praise the current administration when if was the previous administration that made the effect. We had three terms of a republican president - the economy was great. We had two terms of slick and we have a mess. John Ashcroft has to enforce the laws - and as much as I don't like some of them he doing his job.

Re:Nobody read the actual news item by st0rmcold · 2003-02-27 03:01 · Score: 1

You obviously have no idea whatsoever what this thread is about, how about you go that gay pr0n site and masturbate.

What are we fucking talking about is the fact that the governement is taking over people's right you dumbass, it's because of ignorants like you that there are such laws.

If you had been paying attention, this "mod chip" allows you run alot of legal things on an xbox that have absolutly nothing to do with pirating, but because it allows pirating as well, people are not allowed to have it.

Now in your stupid comment, how about you replace the modchip with a steak knife, you can kill someone with a steak knife, do you want the governement taking away your right to own a knife or have one in your home??

Go sit in a corner

--
Posting useless rant since 2003.

Not quite by overunderunderdone · 2003-02-27 03:05 · Score: 1

I have to sort of disagree with your terms. Libertarianism IS the name of a political philosophy which is being used by a political party (just as there is a conservative party in NY). What you are describing IS NOT conservatism but is in fact libertarianism (or "classical liberalism" or even "liberalism" though that term has come to mean something quite different). It is a political philosophy that elevates "liberty".

Conservatism is talking about something different, something orthogonal to liberalism (using the old meaning of that word) - it is a political philosophy of "conserving" what is good (in their view). It elevates continuity, it is a belief that the "tried and true" is preferable to the untried and possibly risky. Conservatives don't necessarily oppose change & reform but are extrememly cautious about it and are very aware of the law of unintended consequences. They are uninterested in an ideologically pure utopia (I think it was Russell Kirk that called it the negation of ideology) but believe that society is organic and that it's inconsistancies and idiosyncrocies reflect the balance of competing legitimate interests. They believe that trying to shoehorn society to fit some perfectly consistent and pure ideology will unbalance those interests and will lead to all sorts of evils. In many ways it is helpful to think of conservatism as a temperment rather than an all encompasing political philosophy.

As it happens we live in a liberal democracy - a conservative here will be generally libertarian because the society whose institutions & reigning political philosophy they seek to conserve are liberal ones. In each individual conservative/libertarian the precise mix of motives either a conservative temperment or a liberal philosophy will be mixed. Those that are more truly conservative shy away from the hardcore libertarians because they distrust such an all encompasing utopian philosophy - I remember one conservative writing that he viewed libertarians the way the British Empire viewed the Gurkhas, "You want them to fight your battles but you wouldn't want them in charge". This definition encompases both "classical liberals" and religious and social conservatives that are generally less libertarian - though to be fair to them they are not usually statists and are much more liberal in their view of government than their critics fear. (to illustrate this point: I saw a catalog from about the most strictly fundamentalist publisher I am aware of and the book on government he endorsed as his ideal understanding of political philosophy was Frederic Bastiat's "The Law" - you CAN'T get any more hyper-libertarian than that! I'm sure it's not representative of all fundamentalists but that libertarian world view is more prominant in the religious right political philosophy than people realise.)

"Liberalism" is a word that in it's popular usage has come to mean almost the opposite of it's original meaning. It originally meant political philosophy that elevates the individuals liberty against the state. The political battles of the previous couple of centuries were between progressive liberals (called liberals) and conservative authoritarians (called conservatives) and progressive or radical statists/authoritarians (called radicals or socialists) - liberalism has won the day and in America at least most of those called conservatives are now liberal conservatives (they seek to conserve our existing liberal society) they are opposed by "liberals" who are largely progressive socialists (they seek gradual change in a socialist direction - they are unaware, or in denial about the authoritarian implications).

Re:Not quite by Iffy+Bonzoolie · 2003-02-27 12:19 · Score: 1

So how do these philosophies fit into the political parties of today? Both democrats and republicans seem happy to endorse removal of civil liberties (as anyone who reads slashdot is constantly reminded), but you said that most of America is pro-liberty.

I've never cared much for politics, being an engineer-type and focused on that. But now I find myself (and most people I know) pretty upset with what's going on these days in the political realm, specifically with regard to personal freedom.

-If

--
Run a pencil-and-paper RPG campaign with your far-off friends: Gametable!
Re:Not quite by overunderunderdone · 2003-02-27 15:03 · Score: 1

So how do these philosophies fit into the political parties of today?

In general the Republicans are a coalition of pro-business pragmatists, conservative libertarians and social conservatives. The Democrats are a coalition of minority interest groups, labor unions & progressive socialists.

Both democrats and republicans seem happy to endorse removal of civil liberties (as anyone who reads slashdot is constantly reminded)

First off it is important to realise that /. tends to be focussed on only a few specific areas of liberty and tends to be dogmatic and prone to hyperbole. Secondly the dogmatic libertarian believes that the ONLY legitimate purpose of government is defense and law enforcement (the law is the collective exercise of the individual's right to defend his life, liberty and property). I assume the removal of civil liberties you are concerned about have to do with various expediencies taken in the "war on terror" - again libertarians believe that defense is the ONE legitimate purpose of government and those that are more conservative than libertarian are quite willing to give the government a lot of latitude in pursuing that end - especially when the powers granted are ones that have existed in the past and which were taken away in what many conservatives saw as softheaded and foolish reforms that they saw more as "soft on crime" or "soft on defense" than as expansions of liberty. Still the hardcore libertarians and far-right "paleoconservatives" are vehemently opposed to the current expansions of federal power.

but you said that most of America is pro-liberty.

No I said that it *is* a liberal democracy. Simply compare our institutions (honestly) to those of most other nations around the world to see the degree to which this is true. There are other liberal democracies in the world, particularly in Europe but even there those that would critique our society and compare it unfavorably to Europe tend to be arguing from a socialist or equality perspective rather than libertarian/personal freedom perspective. Much of what conservatives are conserving are those institutions that make the US a liberal democracy and some of what they are conserving are those elements at odds with a libertarian ideal. By the same token much of what is "progressive" in our politics is "progressing" away from liberty. The centralised state control that is inherant in socialism is diametrically at odds with individual liberty.

It's not just isonews that down! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-27 03:07 · Score: 1, Informative

The following piracy related sites are also either down or not quite up to their usual tricks.

xboxhacker.net
x-ecuter.com
BST-secure.com
vc dquality.com

Anyone got any idea what's going on here?

Luke

Re:Mah... still overrated.... by Mignon · 2003-02-27 03:12 · Score: 2, Insightful

It seems "internet time" causes stuff to get played out faster than ever, but it doesn't seem to speed up the rate at which stuff gets a second life as nostalgia.

So it'll still take about 20 years or so before "All your base" is hip again.

Re:More Links... - not really by caveat · 2003-02-27 03:19 · Score: 1

There's a (perhaps subtle, but nonetheless real) difference between cowardice in the face of evil and the active propagation of evil.

maybe if i see something evil going on on the street, and i hide out in my house, there's a difference, but in this case i'd say there is no difference. the entire purpose of the demmicans is to oppose what they see as evil; their job is to stand up to it, so cowardice in its face in their position is really just actively propagating it - they allow it to exist just as much as the republicrats do.

--

Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley

hmm.. by vraddict · 2003-02-27 03:20 · Score: 1

Is it a coincidence that this just happens to be MICROSOFT's Xbox. Playstation mod chips have been around almost since the Playstation went on sale, and if I remember correctly that was before the DMCA came into effect.

Which sounds better?
Free Rocci!
or
Free krazy8!

Also... by tweakt · 2003-02-27 03:21 · Score: 1

The DoJ did not "confiscate" the site:

http://networks.org/?src=upi:20030226-011544-2856r :
"As a condition of his plea, Rocci agreed to surrender to the government his public website, .iSONEWS.com."

Easiest way -- hosts file hack by tweakt · 2003-02-27 03:25 · Score: 1

add:

www.isonews.com 66.201.243.172

to /etc/hosts
or /windows/system32/drivers/etc/HOSTS

They did NOT take the site down, just hijacked the DNS.

Another Mitnick by st0rmcold · 2003-02-27 03:34 · Score: 1

General Michael Chertoff. "He thought that there were no risks associated with his actions. He was wrong and everyone engaged in the warez scene should take note."

Take note eh?

He's just another martyr! Reminds me of the KKK, making examples of certain people to scare off the rest.

I'm glad I'm not American, because they really have some losers in their security dept.

No wonder they can't find Bin Laden.

--
Posting useless rant since 2003.

It's sad when by crivens · 2003-02-27 03:38 · Score: 1

It's sad when a person can get a harsher sentence for theft than for taking someone's life.

Didn't that Indian guy who was convicted of assisting in a plane bombing get 15 years for helping to kill 300 people?

*sigh* what is the world coming to.

Motorcycles by snowlick · 2003-02-27 04:07 · Score: 1

Here is an interesting comparison. Think of motorcycles. People customize them all the time. You buy one, then you are free to do whatever you want to it. The aftermarket is huge as a consequence - everybody wins. Imagine going to jail for putting a Japanese-made seat on your bike, because the original manufacturer only wants you to use AMERICAN seats.

It stands to reason that we should be able to cutomize our products once we buy them. Of course we might not want weapons of mass destruction to be legal just because their builder 'customized' the original materials...

I don't see how mod chips are any different than the X-Box itself as a circumvention device. Even a brick could be considered as such. It could be used to smash open those little single-cd players, but still have legitimate uses. These things should be looked at on a per-user basis. Is the user using the tool to break the law? No? Move on then. An example of this in the present day? Guns: the most visible law-breaking tool in the land. The only difference is that the whole 'innocent until proven guilty' thing still applies there.

--
Crystal Meth: Would you ingest somthing made from a poisonous gas and an explosive metal? You do it every day -- Salt!

and so it begins. by MatthewNewberg · 2003-02-27 04:12 · Score: 1

how long before they come for you because you are committing some crime the depraves microsoft of some money?

--
mnewberg.com

Don't own hardware by kindbud · 2003-02-27 04:25 · Score: 1

[chrisd] In case you needed a reminder...you don't own your hardware.

Yeah, no shit Sherlock. Why do you think people with a brain cell or two declined to give up any cash for one?

Geezus H Christ on a Pogo Stick!

--
Edith Keeler Must Die

policeabuse.org by bee · 2003-02-27 04:38 · Score: 1

Check out this site: http://www.policeabuse.org/ -- these guys go and do things like ask police stations for a complaint form, and videotape the results. As often as not they get arrested or get some very interesting non-legal comments from the cops. Amusingly, once the cops find out they've been videotaped, every single time they drop all charges. Check on your locale and see how the cops there rate (Dekalb County in Atlanta got a grade of F).

--
At least mafia-owned pizzarias make excellent pizza. Compare to Bill Gates.

Just a flash ROM with a couple freakin' headers!!! by prator · 2003-02-27 05:10 · Score: 1

That's all an Xbox mod chip is. There is an LPC bus debug header on the Xbox that you can plug an external ROM into. You pull down one signal, and the Xbox sends memory reads over the LPC bus instead of the internal ROM bus.

Any Xbox "mod" that exists is basically wires to an external LPC ROM chip with other fancy features such as a way to disable the ROM and use the on-board BIOS. Plus, the pinout is an Intel-defined debug header.

There is no way that this hardware can be considered illegal.

-prator

Re:Just a flash ROM with a couple freakin' headers by jsnorman · 2003-02-27 05:22 · Score: 1

Unfortunately, under the "Digital Millenium Copyright Act" passed several years ago without much fanfare, any device that circumvents access or content protection is illegal. Go to jail, your life is over. It does not matter how simple it is, or how poorly the protection mechanism was designed; nor whether it is in hardware or software. It does not matter if you were hacking for fun or for profit. The analogy made by the content industries was that such circumvention devices are like "lockpicks" and use of such circumvention technology is like breaking and entering, and both should be illegal (according to this simple-mided analogy which seems to play well in Washington) -- and so now they are. By circumventing the XBos BIOS, the mod chips also had the effect of circumventing Microsoft's copy protection. Viola, DMCA violation.

If you don't like it, complain to your appropriate Sentator, your House of Representatives, and even the President. Complain frequently, complain loudly, complain often. Spread the word. Vote only for candidates at the federal level that will dismantle this flawed legislation. Set up a website that tracks government and private sector abuses via the DMCA, links to the many other anti-DMCA sites out there ... etc. The reason we have this problem is simply that most of us computer geeks have not cared enough about politics. And now politics is in control of technology.

Register domain in a country unlikely to usurp it by Jameson+Burt · 2003-02-27 05:33 · Score: 1

Some countries and some registrars within those countries treat the domain-name purchaser more respectfully. These registrars/countries are less likely to give domain-name ownership to another (usually a far wealthier usurper bringing a legal/criminal argument).

There was a wonderful site,
http://www.domainnamebuyersguide.com/m001/w ebpages /registrarranking/registrarrankings01.htm
now usurped by a registrar (don't go to this site now) that ranked registrars by several categories, including legal, cost, ease-of-use.
I chose my registrar based largely on their legal ratings, but also on their cost ratings.
Of course, networksolutions.com based in US (which gave isonews.com to the US government) has notoriety for taking your domainname away from you. Networksolutions.com has two legal counts against it: itself and its oversupplied-with-lawyers US base.
If the US doesn't turn around, its old-womanlike-chastisements and increasing copyright sanctioned monopolies/oligopolies (Microsoft, telephone, movie, music) will end its successes. A non-registrar example of non-US companies offering a FAR cheaper and less frustrating product within the US is in the cell phone business, where the Mexican TracFone offers US cell phone service for $50 per year with no requests for money for a FULL year, unless the customer needs to purchase more non-expiring minutes.

From my notes on that wonderful, now gone domainbuyersguide site, the best sites for avoiding legal usurpations were
http://www.gandi.net #France, $12 US
http://www.InternetNamesWW.com #Australia, $30
I have since wondered about good legal arrangements with the newer and also inexpensive
http://joker.com #Germany, $15

Here is a movie about the whole truth! by Snaller · 2003-02-27 05:34 · Score: 1

See the shocking Truth!

--
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating

Re:Oh YOU come on by Genjurosan · 2003-02-27 05:36 · Score: 1

I'd also like to point out that up until that point I never had a problem with the "law". Infact until my honorable discharge on Dec 5th 2002 I was an intel analyst for a Military Police Battalion and knew a truck load of police officers. The difference I realize is that I used to live in Suburbia.. Moving to Brooklyn changed the ideologies. Says alot about white people huh?

That does say shit about white people. What is says is that you are like eveyone one else. You are the racist. You just clasified a group of people by their skin color based on behavior. The problem is, people like you only see things with your eyes.

If I tought you as a child that Orange was called Red and Red was ALSO called Red, you would call them both Red as an adult. Or would your human nature force you to clasify it? Clasification lends itself towards racism when people dont have the time to care about details. But the thing you and everyone else keeps forgetting is that they are both colors.

Nothing will change until you stop considering yourself as a insert color here male/female and start considering yourself as an individual.

You're the racist, remember that.

absolutely wrong by WaxParadigm · 2003-02-27 05:46 · Score: 1

Radar detectors are not under state jursidiction, it's a federal (fcc) thing. The federal government has only banned using them in VA and MD, because of their proximity to DC.

EVERY other state they are LEGAL to use. Period. States do not have the jurisdiction to restrict communications (tv, radio, radar, etc).

Now, some states have tried to make them hard to use by passing laws against having things attached to the inside of your windshield, but you can still use detectors if you mount them elsewhere (though I wonder what those states will do when they want to use transponders for toll road access).

As for the usefulness of them, you're right about the ones they sell at radio shack (and best buy and almost everywhere else). I got nailed by photo radar and real radar using those. I have yet to get a ticket using a Valentine1 (www.valentineone.com) and know I've been saved from both photo radar and real cops.

The usefulness of ever this best detector goes out the window, however, if the cop is using instant-on radar and doesn't have an itchy triger finger (I pick up most instant on several miles before I'm in range because he's gunning every 10th car, warning everyone behind them that he's there.)

I do not think that means what you think it means. by Soulfader · 2003-02-27 05:55 · Score: 1

An unconstitutional law never holds force in the first place. The Supreme Court hasn't ruled on this yet, but even if they claim that these laws are valid, they are still wrong -- anyone can read the Constitution and decide for themselves.

Sorry, but I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the concept of law. Legal and illegal are not just abstract concepts. Whatever you happen to think, the Supreme Court is the official body that interprets laws in light of the United States Constitution. They may interpret poorly, but having done so, that interpretation has the force of law. It is the law. If they decide that the DMCA prevents you from converting your car to electric (to pick one ridiculous example from an infinite stock), that is the law of the land.

It may be an incredibly poor interpretation, and likely to be eventually overturned by a subsequent ruling, but until then that is the law of the land.

I don't know where people get the idea that "anyone can read the Constitution and decide for themselves;" while literally true, that interpretation doesn't mean a damned thing for keeping you out of prison unless you manage to convince the Supreme Court. And until you manage to do that, you are acting contrary to the law--that is, you are acting illegally.

In general, people do not understand just how important and central the Supreme Court is, else they would pay more attention to things like confirmation hearings. But I guess that is true of pretty much everything relating to government and politics in general in this age. We get the government that we let happen.

Website design by Eq+7-2521 · 2003-02-27 06:03 · Score: 1

Perhaps the DOJ should hire David Rocci as their website designer. Their new site looks like something that was designed by a Middle School student in 1993.

--
At my age I find coming up with a witty signature too exhausting.

Re:Oh YOU come on by mmacdona86 · 2003-02-27 06:09 · Score: 1

I think its ridiculous when people act like there is some kind of symmetry in race relations in the US. A black person can't be racist in this country in the same way a white person is, simply because whites are the dominant/colonizing culture. If you deny this, you are being thoroughly pigheaded, in a way that makes others think you are trying to justify your own conscious or unconscious biases.

Defining "racism" purely as "making distinctions on the basis of race" is a ridiculous oversimplification, which shouldn't be hard for anyone to figure out, but it persists because it so valuable to closeted and not-so-closeted (white) racists.

Yes, blacks can be bigoted and discriminatory, but the social context is entirely different. Don't try to exonerate yourself by blaming the victim.

Oooh! by misfit13b · 2003-02-27 06:30 · Score: 1

Can I have your mod points? ;^)

Re:Terrible arguments! Troll response.. by fishbowl · 2003-02-27 07:05 · Score: 1

>My brother-in-law was in prison, and it's a
>fucking resort.

Something tells me that if given the choice to return, he would not go. I'm sorry to have to disagree with you, but I have real doubts that your brother-in-law could get "anything he wanted, whenever he wanted" in prison. Cocaine? Civilian clothes? A handgun?

--
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.

Re:DOJ, decietful and paints a false picture! by Big_Breaker · 2003-02-27 07:07 · Score: 1

Heres a non-digital world example of the problem:

What would the government say if Ford started selling a new luxury car for $4000 but it could only run on special $4 a gallon gas (with Ford licensing the technology for $2 a gallon). Then someone comes out with a cheap additive that let you use normal gas. Is that a violation? Do they go to jail? What if its so simple that a lay person could make the additive from instructions posted on the web. Do you take the web-site off the net?

This is really stupid.

Re:Terrible arguments! Troll response.. by Havokmon · 2003-02-27 07:34 · Score: 1

>>My brother-in-law was in prison, and it's a
>>fucking resort.

>Something tells me that if given the choice to return, he >would not go.
Well, duh. But that doesn't mean it's what you see on T.V. either.

> I'm sorry to have to disagree with you, but I have real
> doubts that your brother-in-law could get "anything he
> wanted, whenever he wanted" in prison. Cocaine?
> Civilian clothes? A handgun?

That you ACTUALLY said 'Civillian Clothes' shows me that you have NO IDEA what most of the prison system is like. They don't all wear orange jumpsuits. IIRC, that's only when they've been taken into custody, and are going to see the judge for the first time. Once they're out of Jail (jail is short-term , less than 1 year. Prison is greater than 1 year terms. EVERYONE is in jail, before they're sentenced.), and into the prison, at least minimum and medium, you wear street clothes.. with some restrictions. Though not much.

Yes, it is possible to get a handgun in prison:
http://www.policeandsecuritynews.com/janf eb01/surv ivingprisonerduties.htm
See the last bullet point. The first ones are about taking criminals into custody. Cocaine? Please. Only a strip/body cavity search of all visitors could keep that out.
Guards aren't looking for baggies anyways, they're checking for metal. (I really hated visitations..)

My wife's cousin is a Sheriff. I bet you think that this:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan03/10 9489.as p
doesn't happen regularly also. It's just rare for it to get caught on camera. Most criminals/druggies are happy to not get beat up when they're arrested.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

--
"I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)

Agreement, with a different take by Theaetetus · 2003-02-27 08:43 · Score: 1

You don't have to be black to be picked on by the police..... but it helps. You frequently just have to be young, and male.

Few years back, in college, I had long hair and frequently wore all black (I worked doing live sound, where you have to wear all black, and my wardrobe just got darker and darker as I bought new dark shirts to replace order worn out light ones). Late night (around 2 AM) one Friday night, I was driving two friends (who also, like me wore all black, had long hair - and did I mention, we all were between 6'2 and 6'6") and one guy's girlfriend home to her house (she was small, about 5'4", thin - dancer, and looked about 16).

So, we got stopped by the police, pulled over, waited while a second car arrived for backup before they came up to see us - approached on both sides with flashlights out and hands on their guns. Demanded ID, asked me to get out of the car, etc.
Note: we were going exactly the speed limit - 35, being a residential zone - none of us drink or do drugs, were driving perfectly straight and reasonably, and I had an older, but decent shape car (not a sports car or beat up wreck).

So, they ran the plates, ran our IDs, told us not to do 'it' again (without saying what 'it' was) and let us go.

Thing is, while it was annoying, I didn't/don't really object to it. Three large guys in dark clothing and one small young looking girl, at 2 AM on a darkened road? Yeah, I'd stop us too - and they didn't really 'hassle' us so much, no searches, no drug dogs.

So, likewise, in your case - young male hiding under a truck in an industrial district late at night. Yeah, I'd query you too. If you came out, told the story and showed your ID, they would probably have just recommended that you head home and let you go.

-T

IsoNews URL by skrowl · 2003-02-27 09:22 · Score: 1

http://66.201.243.170/ As usual, slashdot didn't do their reasearch before accepting a post. Looks like a simple DNS hijack.

--

Prevent linux based DDOS's!
http://linux.denialofservice.org/

Re:Hello by king_penguin_05 · 2003-02-27 10:00 · Score: 1

There are cases where they are not illegal, and I had not RTFA so I didn't know the intended purpose for which these were being sold.

--
"I can't drive 55. It only goes 38."

Re:Rant: John Ashcroft causes mental defficiencies by Fwonkas · 2003-02-27 10:08 · Score: 1

We are a nation of laws, not chaos. Just because Joe Citizen doesn't like a law doesn't mean he gets to be self-appointed dictator. The law does not bow to prima donnas, post-modernists, or cry babies.

Whoah, chill on the ad hominem right there. Joe Citizen, who disagrees with laws enacted by our representatives, is a prima donna, post-modernist and/or a cry baby?

What thought process led you to this remarkable conclusion? Do you even know what post-modernism is?

This is simply ridiculous name-calling. It is perfectly acceptable in our society to complain about laws we dislike. How do think unfair laws are dealt with? How do you think encryption export laws were loosened? There have been countless figures and groups throughout history who affected positive change. They were called names too.

And no, this isn't just about video games. Think about it.

--
COMPUTER! Whatever happened to Blueberry Muffin?

Re:Rant: John Ashcroft causes mental defficiencies by superyooser · 2003-02-27 10:48 · Score: 1

Joe Citizen, who disagrees with laws enacted by our representatives, is a prima donna, post-modernist and/or a cry baby?

No, not people who just disagree. I disagree with some of our laws. People who defy laws, i.e., unilaterally make their own rules ad hoc, basically fit one of those categories. Some are legitimate reformers, some are just not very bright, but for the most part, lawbreakers fit one of those categories. I suppose I could've used less flashy, more precise terms. :-)

Do you even know what post-modernism is?

In application, it means that "right" and "wrong" are not universal. Whatever a person thinks is right is right for that person. Whatever a person believes to be true is true for that person, but if somebody else believes different, that reality is true for him. It's a nonsensical philosophy, but it's growing in popularity.

It is perfectly acceptable in our society to complain about laws we dislike. How do think unfair laws are dealt with?

No argument there. Did you miss the whole last paragraph of my previous post? Political debate and lobbying, peaceful protest, and civil disobedience are time-honored traditions in the United States. The day that such things are crushed and made ineffectual by zealous authoritarianism is the day that we will have ceased being a democracy.

Re:Rant: John Ashcroft causes mental defficiencies by Fwonkas · 2003-02-27 11:22 · Score: 1

I'm not going to comment on the a couple points in your post, since I pretty much agree with you (other than maybe the potential upsides to zealous individuals, but I'm wading into deep water there). But I'll continue to fall off-topic with one of them:

Do you even know what post-modernism is?
In application, it means that "right" and "wrong" are not universal. Whatever a person thinks is right is right for that person. Whatever a person believes to be true is true for that person, but if somebody else believes different, that reality is true for him. It's a nonsensical philosophy, but it's growing in popularity.

Actually, what you're describing here would probably more correctly be called relativism. This sort of relativism is, I agree, nonsensical. It easily falls apart in the face of even basic logic. There are, however, other strains of relativism which are at least slightly more coherent.

My question of about post-modernism was probably a bit of a trick question. It certainly can contain elements of the sort of relativism you described, at least on the surface. It's actually pretty hard to define. I will say, though, that at least academic post-modernism can be suprisingly non-relativistic. Certain types of feminism are an off-shoot of post-modernism, for example, and many of these feminists believe in objective ethics. And I'm pretty sure Derrida denies being a relativist.

I think that post-modernism, or at least relativism is waning in popularity. In academia at least. I certainly don't think relativism is that prevalent in the general american populace, especially given events of the last two years. That's what political bumper stickers tell me, anyway. :)

So call them prima donnas, relativists and cry-babies. :)

--
COMPUTER! Whatever happened to Blueberry Muffin?

Re:Rant: John Ashcroft causes mental defficiencies by superyooser · 2003-02-27 14:03 · Score: 1

So call them prima donnas, relativists and cry-babies. :)

Thank you. I accept your correction. Consider my post updated. :)

If you want to make a difference........ by OEJack · 2003-02-27 15:58 · Score: 1

Know who voted in support of this Bill, and do everything you can to educate others of this fact. Express your displeasure/disagreement with this legislation to your represenatives and strongly suggest that they introduce legislation that overturns the DMCA.

Despite the overwhelming majority by which this legislation passed, it is important that your representaives know where you stand.

Most represenatives will consider any opposition to such popular (amongst the wealthy lobbyist groups) legislation the equivilent to career suicide, so it is important that you take up the fight on multiple fronts by supporting the EFFs efforts to challenge the DMCA in court.

Re:No, we won't by tekunokurato · 2003-02-27 17:09 · Score: 1

I'm gone, cocker!

--
Read jack phelps dot net

A letter to my Representative... by samdu · 2003-02-27 20:11 · Score: 1

...has been sent. :)

Re:Nobody read the actual news item by st0rmcold · 2003-02-28 00:59 · Score: 1

Hmmmm... I love those claims your making about my intelligence, but what I especially love about you, is how you make up figures to prove a point, lol, where did you get those fictional % about how many people use mods legally? Did your excessively intelligent brain tell you say that?

Quote: "Fact: Modchips are used for piracy only - .00001 percent of "legal" uses are bullshit and everyone knows it but pretends not to."

If you want to make up stories to make yourself look good, go elsewhere. If you have REAL facts, I will be glad to accept them as your opinion.

You are being babysat by your governement, and you're accepting it because your scared. Regardless how many people do use a modchip for illegal purposes, you should be allowed to have one for legal purposes! If you do in fact break the law afterwards, then you go to jail. Instead, you're allowing the governement to start telling you, little by little, what you can and can't go, without being able to make up your own choices. It relates directly to a knife, it can be practical and deadly at the same time, and it wouldnt surprise me to find out the figures of how many are held up, injured, even killed, by the use of knives, where as mod chips pose no threat to bodily harm. Think about it, that's what Ashcroft is doing, he can't find people on his top 10 lists, so hes going after kids making very little profit so that M$ can make more money in the end.

Might as well vote Bill Gates in next election, he's making the rules now.

--
Posting useless rant since 2003.

Re:Rant: John Ashcroft causes mental defficiencies by alexo · 2003-02-28 04:29 · Score: 1

> John Ashcroft is the first person I've ever had spawn the words "Fascist Fuck" spontaneously in my head when seeing his image on sites like this. Normally I am a pretty level-headed guy. I think if you measured my autonomic responses, I would register more of a reaction to Ashcroft for than Saddam.

What, the same John D. Ashcroft who wrote the following?

"The protections of the Fourth Amendment are clear. The right to protection from unlawful searches is an indivisible American value. Two hundred years of court decisions have stood in defense of this fundamental right."
- Writing in The Washington Times in 1997 in opposition to Clinton administration plans to eavesdrop on international e-mail.

Go Hokies! by kyoko21 · 2003-02-28 05:36 · Score: 1

Well, too bad this hokie got caught. :-/ Bummers.

At least you can send your donations to him directly or drop him a voice mail.

http://search.vt.edu/people.jsp?query=david+rocc i

Racial profiling in today's news by netskip · 2003-02-28 10:29 · Score: 1

I would be very hesitant to assume I knew anything about life as experienced by someone outside my own personal demographic. (The operative word is "assume". I don't wish to discount the work of those who have actually done research.) An article in today's San Jose Mercury News lends support to the premise that racial profiling is alive and well. CHP is accused of stopping only Latinos in Pacheco Pass and jailing MacArthur Washington for the "crime" of being African-American while driving away from a convenience store in the pre-dawn hours. No admission of guilt was made in this settlement. I can kind of understand pulling over Latinos when trying to stop a drug running operation led by Latinos, if that's what was going on, but I can't fathom stopping an African-American "because everyone knows that blacks get drunk" as the officers might have assumed. While it would not be fair to assume that all police officers are prejudiced pigs, etc; history and my personal experience shows that power corrupts, and the police have a fair amount of power in their realm. -- Skip

ISO News new url by hif · 2003-02-28 18:47 · Score: 1

www.stolemy.com Found at a PC world news. here. Hum, thought ppl might find this uswful/interesting. (most likely this has been posted before me... but there are like 5 million posts, gaaaah! Forgive me)

--
"Flying is the sublte art of falling to the ground and missing".

Re: Ray of Hope by dwayrynen · 2003-02-28 23:23 · Score: 1

Can you cite your source regarding that in 2030 Hispanics are estimated to be 50% of the US Population?

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0108121.html lists current white population as 211 million, Hispanic Origin (which means of any race) at 35 million.

USA Today reports that Hispanics may pass Blacks shortly as the largest minority.

But to surpass 211 million (plus the white growth rate) in 27 years seems a bit impossible.

Many other web sites state something similar to:
A separate listing for Hispanic is not included because the US Census Bureau considers Hispanic to mean a person of Latin American descent (especially of Cuban, Mexican, or Puerto Rican origin) living in the US who may be of any race or ethnic group (white, black, Asian, etc.)

Don't get me wrong, I think Hispanic women are hot - one of the reasons I live in Arizona...

jk...

Slashdot Mirror

IsoNews Ostensibly Shut Down By The DOJ

619 of 920 comments (clear)