Steal This Computer Book 3

Peter Wayner writes: "If you're looking for a quick way to test the difference between reading text online and reading it in a book, turn to Steal This Computer Book 3 by Wallace Wang, the third edition of a popular series that promises to tell you 'what they won't tell you about the Internet.' All of the information in the book can be gathered from Google for free, but the crisp writing, clean presentation and printed format make the book a good deal. It's possible to curl up in a chair out of WiFi range and cruise the best parts of the Internet without leaving a trail of cookies." Read on below for the rest of Peter's review -- it's free! Steal This Computer Book 3 author Wallace Wang pages 358 publisher No Starch Press rating 9 reviewer Peter Wayner ISBN 1593270003 summary An irreverant

The book is a travelog of many of the most interesting or inflammatory corners of the Internet. There are chapters on hacktivism, hate crime, con games, spam, phone phreaking and dozens of other topics. If someone's spent time flaming about it, banning it, subpoenaing it, or demonizing it, there's probably a section on it here. All of the sections come with screen shots and URLs for further digging.

I found reading the book to be an odd pleasure. There was no way to click on the sites or try any of the software without heading for a computer, but that didn't seem to matter. If anything, it was nice to skip over the links and put off heading down alternate paths until later. The more I experience books like this, the more I begin to wonder if there's much in the hyper-fragmented, postmodern view of a narrative built out of multiply forking paths. This book offers one fairly simple arc that carries us through the most talked about corners of the web and it does it fairly gracefully. That's a pleasure unto itself.

The book comes with a rebellious gloss and semiotic history. The title was stolen from Steal This Book a collection of anarchist schemes written by Abbie Hoffman in the 1960s. Despite the title, that book became a bestseller -- offering a glimpse of the longterm prospects for Hoffman's revolution. All of the prole sheep dutifully bought a book filled with bombmaking techniques that promises to show you where "exactly to place the dynamite that will destroy the walls."

Hoffman's book showed that people will buy something they value even when they're told to steal it. The prole sheep intuitively understand that books cost money to create. But maybe that was a different era, before the web existed. This website offers the text even though there are four editions for sale at Amazon. I wonder who holds the rights?

Wang's book is nowhere near as radical or as dangerous. Hoffman wrote sentences like "The purpose of part two is not to fuck the system, but destroy it." Wang generally avoids such antagonistic language and speaks generally about anti-social behavior in the third person: "When hackers use social engineering, they often masquerade as a consultant or temporary worker..."

Much of the book, in fact, is filled with techniques that are presented as tools for protecting your privacy and your personal information. The back cover asks, "Is your computer safe from computer viruses and malicious hackers?" It's only partially aimed at helping people do asocial things on the Net. Helping people protect themselves from the evil hordes is a large part of it. Given that identity theft is a booming business, this edition is practically an anti-crime book.

What does this mean for the this Internet revolution? Will the current file trading yippies overthrow the copyright system? Will file sharing actually become the norm? Or will all of the Napsterites follow the paths of Hoffman's proteges and grow up, have kids, move to the burbs, and start paying for their content? Well, they might if the content is as comfortable as this book in the hands while sitting in a La-Z-Boy recliner. No popup windows. No flash graphics. No registration required. Just pure content. Hmmm.

Peter Wayner is the author of books like Policing Online Games, Translucent Databases and Java RAMBO Manifesto. Please don't steal them. You can purchase Steal This Computer Book 3 from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

Comments

A true statement

[DigitalNinja7]

"All of the information in the book can be gathered from Google for free" I think that line just about covers all non-fiction (and some fictional) books out there. Google is king, in my mind.

Re:A true statement

[cwernli]

Except when it comes to Scientology :-(

Re:A true statement

[FileNotFound]

The book is hyped garbage.

I looked at it during one of my monthly bookstore visits and was repulsed by it.

It's like "The Idiots Guide to Being a Skript Kiddie".

It rants about going to "hackerish" websites for information etc.

The whole book reeks of beign targeted at naive teenages who watched Hackers one time too many and want to go haxxoring cause it's cool or something.

Re:A true statement

[jobugeek]

He said primarily non-fiction. ;)

Re:A true statement

[seanmeister]

Or pictures of MOAB bombs

Or pictures of Heidi and Jenna from Survivor

Go fig....

Re:A true statement

[ramzak2k]

non fiction as in Bowling for Columbine ? I think your argument is valid for technical articles that are objective in nature. For subjective analysis of other non fiction topics, books/other media are still the king.

Re:A true statement

[nitrocloud]

Hmm... sounds like my friend who wants to purchase a Sun SPARC system and use 10 processors at once to run his "code", he still doesn't know how to make windows say "Hello, World"

Re:A true statement

[Anonymous Coward]

I think that line just about covers all non-fiction (and some fictional) books out there.

As a professional researcher, I can tell you that Google points to maybe 4 percent of the useful data on the Internet, and that 90 percent of the truly useful data in world is not accessible on the Internet. Only the truly ignorant thinks that a) all useful data resides somewhere on the Internet and b) Google knows wherre it is. Google is a great tool for the amateurs, but the pros don't really have a use for it.

Re:A true statement

[Ella the Cat]

I've used big iron multiprocessors to run my code (wot I wrote) but I can honestly say I couldn't make Windows say Hello World without severe head scratching :)

Re:A true statement

[phurley]

Of course if you don't use images.google.com for those searches, they both return exactly that for which you were looking (the second had to be adjusted, too much porn in the world, so the searchs need to be more specific - I saw what you were after without changing the query, but it was not the first link).

MOAB Article with picture

Link to Heidi and Jenna, but you will have to $$$

Re:A true statement

[kfg]

And that's one of the problems with "kids these days."

You think if you can't find it with Google it isn't on the internet; and if it isn't on the internet it isn't real.

Well Sparky, those of us who are more than 10 years old remember things that happened and things we read about them in books and magazines that Google has no clue about. If such books and magazines are in a computer archive somewhere they're diked off from the internet ( a growing phenomenom as more and more people realize that not only is their information valuable, their information is the only thing of value they have to exchange)

Case in point. If you use Google to find information about the sucessful flying of a kite across that Atlantic ocean all you will find is my own Slashdot post avering that it has been done. . . and a denial by someone else because they couldn't find it in a Google search.

Yet all you have to do to find an in depth article of the feat is to go down to your local library and start browsing (yes, we browsed magazines in "the old days") copies of New Yorker magazine from the late 60's.

The universe of knowledge has not been transfered to the internet.

KFG

Re:A true statement

[ghum]

Just do not stress survivor:

Picture of Heidi and Jenna
But I really DO NOT see any reason for searching for this picture :-)))))

Re:A true statement

[FileNotFound]

I believe something like msgbox("Hello World") would do the trick.

Re:A true statement

[corbettw]

"The universe of knowledge has not been transfered to the internet."

Of course it hasn't, not yet. It won't be for another 1000 years until the evil brains build their uberdatabase of everything.

Re:A true statement

[Anonymous Coward]

If it's Scientology you wish, my lad, simply point your browser to Operation Clambake.

Huh? Who's there? Black helicopters? Quick! Where's my tinfoil hat?!?!? AAAAAAAGGGHHHHHmphNO CARRIER

Re:A true statement

[sketerpot]

Get cygwin and just compile the standard C hello world program like you would on Linux. It'll work.

Re:A true statement

[travdaddy]

Right!

Someone around /. said "If it doesn't exist on Google, then it doesn't exist." And someone even translated that phrase into Latin and made it their sig. If that isn't proof, I don't know what is.

Re:A true statement

[drooling-dog]

Yet all you have to do to find an in depth article of the feat is to go down to your local library and start browsing (yes, we browsed magazines in "the old days") copies of New Yorker magazine from the late 60's.

Of course, the trick is knowing to browse copies of The New Yorker from the late 60's...

Re:A true statement

[BlackBolt]

echo hello world

...unless the command prompt is too much for you ;-)

Just kidding, of course

Re:A true statement

[zzyzx]

So one obscure fact that was in a magazine 40 years ago not being stored on the internet makes it useless? No one said that every fact every is online, but if you wanted to know a random fact, would you first go to google or go to the library and start reading back issues of the New Yorker?

Re:A true statement

[drunk_as_in_beer]

I've used big iron multiprocessors to run my code (wot I wrote) but I can honestly say I couldn't make Windows say Hello World without severe head scratching :)

Its as simple as a batch file. Open up notepad and create hello_world.cmd:

@echo off
echo Hello World
pause

Or if you want to get all fancy with a GUI:

@echo off
echo Hello World > hello_world.txt
notepad hello_world.txt

DISCLAIMER: I am not responsible for any damages this code does to your system. If you have important data in a file called "hello_world.txt" do not execute this code!

Re:A true statement

[Anonymous Coward]

We're working on it.

Re:A true statement

[slyxter]

net send localhost Hello World
That will give you a nice dialog box

Re:A true statement

[Anonymous Coward]

He never said the internet was useless. He was merely citing an example to make the point that the Internet/Google does not contain at this moment the sum total of human knowledge.

Re:A true statement

[Anonymous Coward]

If such books and magazines are in a computer archive somewhere they're diked off from the internet (a growing phenomenom as more and more people realize that not only is their information valuable, their information is the only thing of value they have to exchange)

I realize this is a little off topic, but I'd like to point out that people who try to make their information private and proprietary and earn money from it are ultimately going to "lose" to those who make it freely available and easily found.

Here's an example: In the old days, mathematicians would come up with clever ways of solving problems, and they wouldn't tell anyone how they did it. They'd go around giving little demonstrations, kinda be like circus acts for the intellectuals. But eventually some of these mathematicians started publishing their techniques, and lo-and-behold, those were the ones who were ultimately given credit. The community realized that the sharing and distribution of knowledge was important if they were to prosper, and the ones who shared were writ into the history books while those who didn't faded into obscurity.

In the long run I suspect the same thing will happen with all information. Freely available information just too valuable to mankind as a whole. Locking up information and charging for access is doomed to failure, and those who publish in closed forums will eventually see credit for thier ideas and accomplishments given to those who publish into the public domain. And as long as there are those who see immortality and recognition as more rewarding than temporary financial gain, the latter group will never become extinct.

Re:A true statement

[n.wegner]

Why not just use stdio in a console application?

Re:A true statement

[kfg]

Of course, which is what makes my human brain worth paying just to have around.

The same goes for your local librarian.

The machines don't have us beat . . . yet.

KFG

Re:A true statement

[griffjon]

The universe of knowledge has not been transfered to the internet.


But somehow, the stupidityis all there...

Re:A true statement

[Anonymous Coward]

Freely available information?

Like who you are, AC? Or are you making that private and propretary?

Re:A true statement

[Saeger]

Google ain't no Jigle; there's a LOT of (p2p pointers to) "knowledge" there.

:)

Steal This Book

--

Re:A true statement

[kfg]

"Freely available information just too valuable to mankind as a whole."

Food is too valuable to the individual and will always win out, in the extreme, to the value to mankind as a whole.

The question becomes, in an exchange society, with an abstracted medium of exchange which can only be obtained from other people ( self-sufficiency being virtually illegal), how does one obtain rice in the bowl tonight, as opposed to pie in the sky tomorrow?

It's a legitimate quandry that's going to become more and more pressing to solve.

In my case, last week I put rice in my bowl this week by charging money for the transmission of mathmatical information, which, in my turn, had to pay for as well.

For the most part I was even only able to do this because of an artificial market for mathmatics imposed by the government ( I was tutoring high school students).

As it happens I'm a poor American. I have a distaste for modern monetary trade, the art of making a living by filching money from the pockets of others. My approach is more old world. I be perfectly happy to do what I do for "free," because I do what I do because I wish to do it and not merely becasue I get payed to do it.

So, in an exchange economy where my knowledge is valuable, but all I have to exchange is my knowledge, how do I put rice in my bowl ( and ideally a roof over it) without charging for it?

KFG

Re:A true statement

[Nasarius]

MessageBox(NULL, "Hello World", "Hello World", MB_OK); Or yeah, just compile a console app and use stdio.h.

Re:A true statement

[Anonymous Coward]

'fraid not. I'm a professional researcher, and probably 90% of the information I work with day-to-day can't be found via a search engine. Some of it is online, but in databases that you have to pay for. A lot of it was never placed online (see http://marylaine.com/exlibris/xlib150.html for a good discussion of what is or isn't online, or check http://www.invisible-web.net/).

Then there's the fact that Google's ranking isn't perfect. If I write about a story on my weblog, that turns up higher in the rankings than news sites, if they appear at all. If you google 'creatine' (as I did for research a while back) the top hits are from bulletin boards where 18 year old jocks 'explain' that it's totally harmless - not from scientific sites with the accurate information.

Google's a neat tool - but it's not King.

Re:A true statement

[screwthemoderators]

My town library just shortened their hours again. Buget cuts have eliminated the high school librarian. About twenty corporations own all major television network stations, major city newspapers, and radio stations. Frankly Google will be the only independent source of infomation for many people in the future. Don't blame 10 yro Sparky, after all, he live in a country where the Supreme Court appoints the President

Re:A true statement

[Saeger]

So, in an exchange economy where my knowledge is valuable, but all I have to exchange is my knowledge, how do I put rice in my bowl ( and ideally a roof over it) without charging for it?

I answered that same question last night.

Basically: artificial scarcity will be a useful crutch (for some) for as long as there's a lot of real scarcity to be traded for. But when "putting rice in your bowl" doesn't require you to exchange anything (the "pie in the sky" part you refered to), and it's possible to live in a luxurious, (illegal?) self-sustaining home on antartic realestate (or in orbit, or under the ocean, etc.), the social contract will have to be rewritten.

--

Re:A true statement

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, your local library may no longer be able to keep copies of The New Yorker because it doesn't have the space and can't afford the microfilm (not exactly a browse-friendly medium, either)

Why? The idiots on your board of commissioners or your state legislature have axed the library's funding, 'cause "Isn't it all on the Internet, anyway?"
Razzberry.... (sp. PLPLPLPLPLPHHT?)

This series of books

[Markvs]

Is great for non-techies, and is well written. But I suspect the average /.'er has learned most of the stuff in books 1&2 by osmosis already... and I'll wager that book 3 isn't much of a departure in terms of content.

Paper vs. Internet

[jargoone]

The Internet has ruined me forever. Ever since I got my ethernet connection in my dorm room, I haven't been able to read anything printed. I think it has something to do with needing higher throughput than anything printed can provide. That, and the fact that a goldfish has a longer attention span than I do.

Re:Paper vs. Internet

[chef_raekwon]

don't forget your new, never-ending supply of pr0n.

Re:Paper vs. Internet

[Anonymous Coward]

Since I got broadband, I have more pr0n than the Pope!![*]

[*] Actually, that's saying a lot, since the Vatican library actually has a pornography section!!

Re:Paper vs. Internet

[BlackBolt]

Since I got broadband, I have more pr0n than the Pope!![*]
[*] Actually, that's saying a lot, since the Vatican library actually has a pornography section!!

Yeah, but it takes him six months to walk to it and six more months to reach his arm out to grab his copy of Juggs.

Re:Paper vs. Internet

[Haxwell]

Remember, too, your never ending access to w33d :)

Re:Paper vs. Internet

[ikkonoishi]

Funny, but wrong.

Re:Paper vs. Internet

[Anonymous Coward]

Huh? Which website is that? Hell, I'll put up with a few banner ads and maybe even a popup or two for free weed.

steal this book?

[Anonymous Coward]

meh...id rather download the .pdf version from kazaa

Re:steal this book?

[Trigun]

And print it off on the high-speed laser at work.

Re:steal this book?

[nitrocloud]

I've seen a laser printer at 1000 ppm black and 250 ppm color... that thing has a HUGE tray.

Re:steal this book?

[Trigun]

Hell, if I had one of those at the office, I wouldn't just steal the book, I'd sell it too!

Re:steal this book?

[shepd]

Holy crap, with letter size paper that's...

660,000 inches per hour...

Or, 16.764 km/h of paper.

It could be slower if it prints sideways.

Re:steal this book?

[Zapper]

That's an awful lot of PC LOAD LETTER!

Re:steal this book?

[nitrocloud]

You can have a nice printer like that for about $10000

Hoffman

[Anonymous Coward]

After this review, I'm more interested in the Hoffman book than the Wang book.

Re:Hoffman

[Anonymous Coward]

Just rent "Steal this Movie." It has Vincent DiNafrio (the Bug from original MIB) as Abbie Hoffman.

Re:Hoffman

[hatrisc]

steal this movie has nothing to do with 'steal this book' other than the mention of it in the movie. steal this book is a great book, though most of the information found in it is quite dated and of no use anymore other than analysis of the yippie movement in the 60s-70s. some information is still relevant and will work. for instance, the postage stamps. i've sent three (non important) letters to my friend in california using his address as the return address and the to address as mine, and forgetting (i'm so stupid) to place a stamp in the corner.

Re:Hoffman

[.c]

After this review, I'm more interested in the Hoffman book than the Wang book.

Steal This Book.

Voila.

Re:Hoffman

[Enigma2175]

Voila.

Don't you mean 'walla'? Perhaps you forgot how to spell that word properly. On /., the correct spelling is 'walla' or 'wallah'.

Re:Hoffman

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm being told my connection is refused to tenant. Damn you COX COMMUNICATIONS!

Re:Hoffman

[Migrant Programmer]

That's 'buku' good advice.

(I swear I've seen 'buku' before, it took me a while to figure out WTF it meant)

"Steal This Computer Book"

[product byproduct]

With a title like this, no wonder my local bookstore doesn't carry it.

Re:"Steal This Computer Book"

[nervous_twitch]

With a title like this, no wonder my local bookstore doesn't carry it.

They did. It's just not there anymore. ;)

Re:"Steal This Computer Book"

[b!arg]

Barnes and Noble Clerk: "But the computer says we have 10 copies. I don't know where they could have put them all."

Re:"Steal This Computer Book"

[bahamat]

They do carry it, but the shelves are empty and the computer controlled inventory says the stock is full.

Re:"Steal This Computer Book"

[Anonymous Coward]

Why, did somebody steal your local bookstore? I'd bet it was Barnes; Noble was holding him back, but he went on vacation for a week.

Re:"Steal This Computer Book"

[Master of Transhuman]

I learned early in programming inventory systems that they ALWAYS say that even if the stuff wasn't stolen, but never ordered. It's amazing how out of touch an inventory system can get and like almost immediately. Do a physical inventory one week and by next week, it will still be out of touch with reality. Why? Computers do not control the humans who actually control the inventory.

Most inventory systems definitely have never heard of "shortage" and expect physical inventories to be done like once a quarter or once a year. In the chain of beauty salons I worked at, they were done weekly for certain classes of inventory because there was no way to control the shortage otherwise.

And for a book called "Steal This Book"? Fergeddabotit!

Memo to the RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

"Hoffman's book showed that people will buy something they value even when they're told to steal it."

That should tell you something about the true value of the wares you peddle, RIAA. Try cranking out something that contributes to culture, instead of the teen-pop whores and gangsta rappers that are contributing to it's decline.

Re:Memo to the RIAA

[kin_korn_karn]

Hi, I am the RIAA. Mr. Coward, your suggestion has been duly noted and we wil work on implementing it immediately. Thank you for your feedback.

Re:Memo to the RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't you mean "we will work on implementing it as soon as we get your name and address from your ISP so we can thank you in person"?

Re:Memo to the RIAA

[Gr33nNight]

This is like saying Grand Theft Auto is at fault for a kid committing acts of violence.

People need to start taking responsibility for once instead of fucking pointing fingers at everyone else.

Re:Memo to the RIAA

[jat850]

Thanks for speaking on behalf of everyone. I've watched plenty of Hollywood movies, and none of them have ever incited me to steal, kill anyone, or anything else so many movies glorify.

Re:Memo to the RIAA

[blighter]

That's a remarkably ill-informed summary of the plot of Matchstick Men.

A better one would be (trying to avoid spoilers) a con-man so troubled by the immorality of his chosen lifestyle that he has developed severe psychological problems reunites with his daughter and through his relationship with her comes to a deeper understanding of his own life choices.

You probably wouldn't pick up on that from the trailer though, and so, despite disliking people who use the "RTFA" acronym, I must implore you to WTFM before you comment on it's societal messages.

None of which is to disagree with your general point about the hypocrisy inherent in industries whose products largely disdain conventional morality complaining about the public's lack of respect for their conventional rights; it's just I saw the movie and thought that you were rather drastically mischaracterizing it.

Re:Memo to the RIAA

[gillbates]

Well, it was that or The Italian Job. Neither of which I've seen. But if I do go to see a movie which espouses morals contrary to my own, I further reinforce the argument of the Hollywood: "We only produce what people want to see..." So I guess it's a catch-22; if I see the movie, I support a cause I'm against, and if I don't, I risk making uninformed arguments...

Re:Memo to the RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

"Hoffman's book showed that people will buy something they value even when they're told to steal it."

Told to steal it? Since when am I obligated to follow the commands in a book title?

Re:Memo to the RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

Told to steal it? Since when am I obligated to follow the commands in a book title?

Hello, Mr. Non-sequitur. Just because you don't have to follow the command doesn't mean you weren't told the command.

Re:Memo to the RIAA

[b!arg]

I vaguely remember a concept in economics (or I could just be making it up, that class was a long time ago) that said something to the effect that the "fair price" for a given item is something like the retail price minus the the value of the stolen amount. Essentially, how much revenue has that product brought in and then divide that by the number of copies that have been bought and stolen.

Sure Sony has sold 10,000,000 copies of Britney's latest album at $20/CD (for easy math), but there are 5,00,000 more copies that have been burned for friends, downloaded from Kazaa and shoplifted from CD stores. $200,000,000 in revenue divded by 15,000,000 copies. The "fair price" would be $13 and change. Perhaps this theory is completely baseless and wrong, but I like it. :)

Re:Memo to the RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

Heck, the movie 'Pirates of the Carribean', which I recently pirated, said it was ok to be a pirate.

;-)

Re:Memo to the RIAA

[7759-60784-1-E]

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss what he says. If all music becomes as shitty as what the RIAA puts out, I'll fucking kill somebody.

Re:Memo to the RIAA

[bhsurfer]

Ah, but could it REALLY be a movie about pirates if it wasn't rated "Arrr"?

Re:Memo to the RIAA

[Paradise Pete]

That should tell you something about the true value of the wares you peddle, RIAA.

The article is misleading. The book was stolen so often that many retailers either stopped carrying it or kept it behind the counter.

Before the internet..?

[Ckwop]

I seriously can't remember what i used to do on computers before the internet :P

It scares me :(

I dunno.. reading the internet out of a book seems a bit strange.. PLEASE DON'T MAKE ME UNPLUG.... ARGHHHHHHH

Simon

Re:Before the internet..?

[Anonymous Coward]

you probably used fidonet or usenet using UUCP.
or gopher...

Re:Before the internet..?

[Anonymous Coward]

Gopher is a protocol used over TCP/IP. The Internet existed before the web, you know.

No!!!

[ENOENT]

If someone's spent time flaming about it, banning it, subpoenaing it, or demonizing it, there's probably a section on it here.

We really don't need a dead-tree edition of the goatse guy, now, do we?

Re:No!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

We really don't need a dead-tree edition of the goatse guy, now, do we?

No, but a dead-tree edition of SCO? ..oh wait

Content

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it just me, or was this review almost completely devoid of any content actually relating to the book being reviewed?

Paragraph 1 - A very broad overview of what the book covers
Paragraph 2 - "Hey, reading a book is completely unlike reading a webpage"
Paragraphs 3-5 - Review of a completely different book
Paragraph 6 - Finally, some hint as to what's actually in the book. But no indication of whether the content is good or not. Are the techniques mentioned good or outdated? Easy to understand?
Paragraph 7 - Back to talking about about the Hoffman book and completely ignoring the one actually being "reviewed".

Re:Content

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, I've foound that most book reviews here are that way. I have found the comments on the book reviews to be insightfull though and that is one positive to /. having book reviews.

Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder who holds the rights?

Why don't you look in the book next to the little c in a circle? It is either the author or the publisher.

Interestingly.

[lina_inverse]

Wallace Wang wrote Visual Basic 6 For Dummies.
Wait.. did I just say that? On Slashdot?
Oh dear..

Re:Interestingly.

[Anonymous Coward]

Visual Basic 6 For Dummies

+2 redundant

Re:Interestingly.

[Anonymous Coward]

does anyone know when "linux for loosers that can't get laid in a monkey whorehouse with a bag of bananas" will be published?

Re:Interestingly.

[Pfhreakaz0id]

does anyone know when "linux for loosers that can't get laid in a monkey whorehouse with a bag of bananas" will be published?

Now THAT is funny.

Re:Interestingly.

[yerricde]

Try this: AOL For Dummies

Re:Interestingly.

[bhtooefr]

Isn't that a lot like saying that you work in the Department of Redundancy Department, Redundancy Subdepartment?

Making a pitch for printed materials

[192939495969798999]

My dad always had a great example of why books are better than the internet.
He says, "because you can do this." and proceeds to flip through all the pages like a big stack of crisp, 20-dollar bills. The instant information access, unless the book is in a fire or something, is what always makes books cool. That, plus they're easier on the eyes than a CRT (for me). :)

Re:Making a pitch for printed materials

[shakah]

The instant information access, unless the book is in a fire or something, is what always makes books cool.

Don't underestimate the value of being able to search and cut-and-paste electronic media.

I can picture your Dad referring you to something neat in that precious stack of pages -- "You have to read this (flip, flip), I think it was on page ninety-something (flip, flip, scan, scan), no, wait, it must be here somewhere (flip, scan), ..."

Not to mention the annoyance of the not-so-instant access when wanting to quote part of a printed book in another medium.

Re:Making a pitch for printed materials

[glenrm]

Time for you to buy and LCD display sir, may I suggest Sony or Samsung 17" or bigger...

Re:Making a pitch for printed materials

[CGP314]

I press CTRL-F and can find what I'm looking for faster on a webpage than a hardcopy.

Re:Making a pitch for printed materials

[Anonymous Coward]

I have to agree. I would rather read text from paper than a computer. I tried reading books from my PDA in the Metro in the past. Besides the looks people give you, you get headaches from the small printsize, the batteries are being used for nothing, and all that electromagenetic radiation, even during traditional non-computer times are there.

Also, there is the smell of the book/paper, and the ability to stuff it down your backpack/courrier bag that you wouldn't do with your laptop or PDA.

Re:Making a pitch for printed materials

[kfg]

As it happens I agree with your dad. I have several hundred books, aquired over decades, and look forward to making that several thousand books.

However, the counter to your dad's argument comes on moving day.

Several hundred ebooks fit on one CD. Thousands snuggle neatly in a hidden corner of your HD.

I love my books. They make me dread moving.

(Hot tip. Black background, off white text. BIG font. Very easy on the eyes)

KFG

Re:Making a pitch for printed materials

[Anonymous Coward]

I think that's just the reason why the internet (or at least computers) are better than paper. I recall quite distinctly wandering into one of my courses in college, and I knew I'd not made time to read the material we were to cover prior to class. When the prof asked something about the material, I picked up the book and actually tried, briefly, to figure out how to grep for what I needed to know.

Gimme a break, I was tired!

Re:Making a pitch for printed materials

[calethix]

"I picked up the book and actually tried, briefly, to figure out how to grep for what I needed to know."

Try looking in the back.. there's this thing called an 'index'. In the front, there's usually this thing called a 'table of contents' which can also be somewhat helpful. ;)

Granted, it's not quite as handy as a google search but it certainly helps.

Spider my mind.

[CGP314]

All of the information in the book can be gathered from Google for free

I think this covers all public data known to mankind. As soon as google figures out how to crawl and index grey matter, it will include all knowledge.

Re:Spider my mind.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm...
(Google == that giant brain thing from Futurama)?

Re:Spider my mind.

[pyros]

Google is probably smart enough to not collect all knowledge. I mean really, would you want Nibbler and his ilk sending the likes of Fry after you?

Public Domain

[d-e-w]

Hoffman's book showed that people will buy something they value even when they're told to steal it. The prole sheep intuitively understand that books cost money to create. But maybe that was a different era, before the web existed. This website offers the text even though there are four editions for sale at Amazon. I wonder who holds the rights?

Any author can chose to release any writing with copyright into the public domain prior to the natural expiration of copyright. Once that occurs, nobody owns the rights.

Given the author, and the book, my guess would be that it's in the public domain.

Re:Public Domain

[Anonymous Coward]

The author may choose to distribute his work for free without it falling into the public domain.

Re:Public Domain

[d-e-w]

That is true, which is why I said "my guess".

Apparently there's an ongoing debate as to whether the book is actually in the public domain or not (based on my quick research). Perhaps that's a lesson in how legalities can help make your intentions clear, even while you're campaigning against those legalities themselves.

Re:Public Domain

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, only one edition is for sale at Amazon. The other three are previous editions and listed as "out of print".

Why a book is still better than a web page

[heironymouscoward]

1. Instant on, instant off
2. It don't break when you drop it
3. You can take it to the beach
4. You can hide it inside another book to look smart
5. You can hide it inside a porno mag to look cool
6. You can paper the cover
7. You can leave it on a bus seat
8. It never runs out of batteries
9. A rack of them look impressive up against the wall

But, on the other hand:

1. You never get them back when you lend them out
2. If you do, you wish you hadn't
3. You can't search them, so you have to flip back and forwards
4. You can't run them through the Jargonizer to see what the author would have sounded like in Hillbilly
5. You can't print them and give them to someone, saying "hey, look at this cool web page"
6. You can't hyper link to them.
7. You can't cut and paste the good bits to make you look smart on slashdot (like that was difficult!)

But then again,

10. No girl ever fell for you because you were browsing a cool web page

Re:Why a book is still better than a web page

[cybermace5]

10. No girl ever fell for you because you were browsing a cool web page

I have a sneaking suspicion that CmdrTaco might have a different opinion.

Re:Why a book is still better than a web page

[Anonymous Coward]

1. You never get them back when you lend them out

That's what we have collection agencies for (not to mention the mafia).

2. If you do, you wish you hadn't

Throw it in the bin, then.

3. You can't search them, so you have to flip back and forwards

Fortunately, many books have a so-called "Table of Contents" in the beginning and an "Index" at the end.

4. You can't run them through the Jargonizer to see what the author would have sounded like in Hillbilly

This is definitely an advantage for books.

5. You can't print them and give them to someone, saying "hey, look at this cool web page"

On the other hand, you can give a photocopy to someone, saying "hey, look at this cool web page", provided you don't mind sounding moronic.

6. You can't hyper link to them.

I understand scientists work around the problem by using so-called "references", which are supposed to allow a reader to look up other books, but that sounds a bit too complicated for me.

7. You can't cut and paste the good bits to make you look smart on slashdot (like that was difficult!)

You can type the interesting pieces, or even paraphrase the interesting points if you actually are smart (like that was likely on slashdot!)

Re:Why a book is still better than a web page

[Amomynos Coward]

No no no, you got in completely wrong:

> 1. Instant on, instant off

It takes time to switch computer on, so you have a good excuse to not turn it off.

> 2. It don't break when you drop it

If you drop your computer and it breaks, you have a good excuse to buy a new, faster one.

> 3. You can take it to the beach

Beach is a good excuse to buy the latest laptop.

> 4. You can hide it inside another book to look smart

You can hide the /. window behind Emacs to look smart

> 5. You can hide it inside a porno mag to look cool

You can hide /. window behind porno page to look cool

> 6. You can paper the cover

You can put a cool blue light inside your computer

> 7. You can leave it on a bus seat

So you can also leave your computer, and you'll make someone even more happier than leaving a book (and you again get the excuse to buy better computer)

> 8. It never runs out of batteries

But it still doesn't have the cool blue light.

> 9. A rack of them look impressive up against the wall

But imagine a beowulf cluster...

Re:Why a book is still better than a web page

[akudoi]

10. No girl ever fell for you because you were browsing a cool web page

then again, no girl has ever fallen for me for reading a book either.

i guess the AD&D across the top didn't help.

Re:Why a book is still better than a web page

[forgetful_ca]

You dork, you made me cry.

Re:Why a book is still better than a web page

[Kwil]

Not really. There's a difference between "because" and "despite that"

Infringe this book

[Anonymous Coward]

meh...id rather download the .pdf version from kazaa

That would be *copyright infringment* not stealing.

Sheesh, haven't you learned anything on Slashdot?

Re:Infringe this book

[agwis]

Not if he's in Canada :-)

Re:Infringe this book

[Anonymous Coward]

the act is infringing yes, the author not getting the money they otherwise would have....

No cookies?

[cant_get_a_good_nick]

without leaving a trail of cookies.

As long as you don't check it out of a library (USA PATRIOT Act.)

Re:No cookies?

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF does that have to do with anything?

Man are you ever a WallyWang

Re:No cookies?

[Suidae]

So don't check the books out, either read them there, or liberate them and bring them back later.

Re:No cookies?

[ornil]

Most libraries go out of their way to destroy all records. For example, Cambridge Public Library even has a flyer about privacy where it says that it destroys the records of who checked the books out immediately when the books are returned. I imagine many other libraries do that as well.

Re:No cookies?

[plenTpak]

Some libraries are OK: Librarians Join the Fight Against The Patriot Act

I don't use the computer anymore

[GillBates0]

There was no way to click on the sites or try any of the software without heading for a computer, but that didn't seem to matter.

I sold off my computer last year because I couldn't keep up with all the clicking and damned hyperlinks all over the web. Annoying things they are. Baah.

Instead, I've taken to calling people I know, when I need anything off the interweb. The printouts usually arrive in the mail in a day or two. True, the timelag is high, but my friends're getting better at it everyday.

For a beer or two, these guys usually refresh /. for me 10-15 times a day and post comments for me when I feel like it. Okay gotto go, I think I'm getting another call

Re:Public Domain -- Correction for understanding

[d-e-w]

any of (his or her) writing

Good idea.

[worm eater]

Somehow it seems that taking the content of the internet out of the context of the internet allows you to see it in a new light. Just as the internet brought new meaning to content through interactivity, multi-media presentation and hyperlinkage, books have their own virtues that cannot be replicated on the net. Whereas the internet encourages and supports a short attention span, and IMO, detail-oriented thinking, the book format usually demands a longer attention span and 'big picture' sort of attitude.

Both have their place, of course, and I don't think a short attention span is necessarily a bad thing. But books try to force you to carry a thought through to a conclusion, within limited parameters, where the internet allows you to branch off and fragment your thought -- which in turn allows you to consider many ideas from many points of view -- just not very deeply.

So putting the internet into a book may just force some people to think about the implications of the new media, rather than focusing on the ever changing content.

Wally Wang

[stratjakt]

Heh

Sounds made up to me.

Re:Wally Wang

[gregarican]

Dear stratjakt,

It's not made up.

Sincerely,

Hu Phlung Pu

Based on previous editions, skip it

[plcurechax]

If this is at all like the previous editions of the same title, then I recommend you Skip this Computer Book.

Get a decent book about computer abuse/misuse:

Hacking Exposed, 4th edition
Hackers Beware, by Eric Cole
Counterhack, by Ed Skoudis

These books are written by computer security professionals who may their living both doing computer security and teaching computer security (SANS and Foundstone).

Steal This Computer Book seems to be aimed at too young to know they are getting ripped off kids and computer novices. So don't buy this book if you are over 10.

Re:Based on previous editions, skip it

[Anonymous Coward]

The title 'Hacking Exposed' seems kind of odd for a Securiy Proffessional to name their book.

Re:Based on previous editions, skip it

[Jmstuckman]

I also found "Steal this Computer Book" to be quite outdated and uninformative, even right after it was published. Additionally, I seem to remember that some of the stories were copied word-for-word from the Jolly Roger cookbook!

The Hoffman book only cost a buck, ok?

[kfg]

It wasn't, like, any big deal to lay down a buck, maybe at that cool head shop you liked to support anyway. Made my buck back the first day using its dumpster diving tips. All in all it was a good investment.

Besides, you've got it inside out. The joke was on the proles in the traditional capitalist business mode. They actually bought the rights to, printed and distributed a book that admonished you to steal it, right on the cover ( and even explained that the "artist" would get his cut even if you did. That was part of the subversion. It has modern repurcussions. Download an ebook off Kazaa, go to the Federal pen for 20 years and get a quarter million dollar fine while screwing the artist. STEAL a book and it's only petty larceny. Probation at most if it's your first offense; and the artist gets payed for it! Support your favorite "content producer" and stick it to the man at the same time. Steal books and CDs. Do It! Abbie and Jerry live, man! Free Attica!)

Oh, sorry, I got sidetracked. Flashback. That brown acid was apparently some bad shit.

Anyway, I treasured Steal This Book and I'm not all ashamed that I payed for it, nor was I in any way a "prole" for having done so. I wish I still had my copy. I would, except ( are you ready for it?). . .

Someone stole it. Really.

KFG

Re:The Hoffman book only cost a buck, ok?

[JUSTONEMORELATTE]

laughing so hard I wipe the tear from my eye.
Sigh, and I just burned my last mod point a few stories ago.
At least I can still befriend you.

--

Re:The Hoffman book only cost a buck, ok?

[Anonymous Coward]

Download an ebook off Kazaa, go to the Federal pen for 20 years and get a quarter million dollar fine while screwing the artist. STEAL a book and it's only petty larceny.

No one is suing downloaders; they're suing distributors. It's an entirely different offense.

Steal one copy of a book, and you have deprived them of one book. Distribute $BIGNUM copies of the ebook to any and all comers, who then redistribute their own copies, and so on... Who knows how many potential sales could be threatened down the line?

Re:The Hoffman book only cost a buck, ok?

[kfg]

Like, it's just a joke man. You really need to chill.

Take off that tie. Undo your top shirt button. Check out my new Hendrix black light poster, right there behind the Lava Lamp.

Here, have some acid, on me. It's the brown stuff. Really good shit, man.

KFG

Umm, no

[stratjakt]

Hoffman's book showed that people will buy something they value even when they're told to steal it.

No, it didnt. Noone ever took the title literally, as a command to steal it. They took it as what it was, a sort of ironic tongue-in-cheek wisecrack. The book didnt empower people to "fight the man", it poked fun at the new mooching generation of hippies, showing how wrong their ideals were.

This is like saying you were shocked when the end credits rolled after watching The Neverending Story.

Re:Umm, no

[Anonymous Coward]

"This is like saying you were shocked when the end credits rolled after watching The Neverending Story."

Must... resist.. Simpsons... reference...oh to heck with it.

Hutz: Mr. Simpson, this is the most blatant case of fraudulent advertising since my suit against the film, "The Never-Ending Story".

Steal This Country: +1 , Patriotic

[Anonymous Coward]

"Steal this country"

---- Moron-In-Command

Cheers,
W00t

Misleading title

[Anonymous Coward]

A friend of mine actually tried to shoplift this book out of Barnes and Noble. The cops got involved, and anyway, things turned out nasty. I think the writers should pay more attention to their titles and avoid misadvertisement that could potentially get the casual browser in trouble.

Re:Misleading title

[toomuchPerl]

Replace casual browser with casual idiot and you've got yourself a deal!

^_^
-malander

Hmm

[nepheles]

Am I the only one who gets the impression from this book, and similar titles, that they're simply attempting to profit from popular conceptions of the internet as something borderline-legit? Full of unpalatable, revolutionary types hob-nobbing with disgruntled geeks intent on wreaking havoc... This is certainly the message many people are getting, from the popular media especially.

Oh really?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hoffman's book showed that people will buy something they value even when they're told to steal it.

So they steal a copy, decide that they value it, then buy a copy.

torrents anyone? :P

$2.50 cheaper

[Anonymous Coward]

Ref: Amazon has it for $2.50 cheaper than bn

Re:$2.50 cheaper

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod this fucker down. This guy is always posting Amazon associate links.

Re:$2.50 cheaper

[Anonymous Coward]

OH NO! His amazon links are hurting your computer.... just ignore him like the rest of us, dingus.

i stole this book out of boredom a couple weeks ag

[Jukashi]

...and didnt get my monies worth.

CCATS20!

[Anonymous Coward]

C-CATS20 Link! FAGGOT!

books are the clear winner here

[uninstall]

they can't be /.ed

Wallace Wang

[Anonymous Coward]

I just thought i'd let mention that Wallace Wang is a personal acuaintance of mine. He does stand up comedy at an open mic i used to play at coffee shop i used to play at. He's a pretty funny guy

Re:Wallace Wang

[gregarican]

"at an open mic i used to play at coffee shop i used to play at."

Was this *coffee shop* located in Amsterdam by any chance?

Taking responsibility...

[gillbates]

Have you ever seen a character in a popular movie take responsibility for their actions? I mean, anything that was produced after the John Wayne era?

And no, it isn't like saying that GTA is responsible for those kids. It's more like saying that what someone sees in movies influences their attitudes - while most people would not go out and commit physical theft after seeing a movie like the The Italian Job, they might have a more apologetic view of stealing if no one gets hurt. It's a small logical step from this point to rationalize downloading MP3's by saying, "If this band is good, I'll go buy their CD," but never setting foot in a record store. Sure, no one got physically hurt, so it must be OK, right?

Re:Taking responsibility...

[zaphodbblx]

Well your kinda right. BUT.... Its been my experience that upon hearing most of the cd that its NOT worth buying for the 1 or 2 good songs on it. sorry but your comment assumes that the whole cd is worth buying and usually its not. I myself buy USED for the most part( remember to the riaa buying used is just as good as stealing,but they allready LOST that battle). The only "new" cd's i've bought in the last 12 months are Dropkick Murphy's "blackout" a few Anti Flag albums and Sick Of It All "live in a dive" and "life on the ropes"

Re:Taking responsibility...

[Thing 1]

Sure, no one got physically hurt, so it must be OK, right?

I think if we were to apply that to most of our laws, the prisons would quickly clear out.

Responsibility is one thing; religion-inspired crimes are something completely different. Here in MA you can't buy beer on Sunday; prostitution and drug use is illegal; and you can't place bets (unless those bets are through government agents, i.e. the lottery). In none of these cases is anyone being physically hurt or made to do something against their will. So why should these activities be illegal?

Yes, The Italian Job is not a movie to get morals from -- they were stealing (as in, depriving someone else of their property), and although it was kinda nice that they got vengeance in the end (spoiler: Old Yeller dies), it still doesn't make what they were doing right.

I liken the current controversy over P2P and digital abundance to the printing press. Before its invention, only monks copied books, and so the Church could control who got to read, and what. After the printing press, the Church had a lot less control over thought distribution.

The RIAA and MPAA are restricting the free flow of thoughts as well, by fighting against P2P. Instead they should use it as an advertising medium, to lead people to purchase their wares instead of molesting 12-year-olds and making enemies.

Re:Taking responsibility...

[bhtooefr]

Actually, the seller of the CD gets your money, and may use that to buy another RIAA CD.

Re:Taking responsibility...

[zaphodbblx]

Well that is true.....But the only other option is to P2P All my music and being a "child of the 80's"I like to have the whole cd if I can(makes no sense I know!)I can only do my best to not support the riaa and hope everyone else follows suit!

Re:Taking responsibility...

[bhtooefr]

How 'bout you just buy some non-RIAA CDs from CDBaby (free samples) or download some free MP3s from DMusic?

Re:Taking responsibility...

[zaphodbblx]

Because id like to hear stuff I LIKE not some half wit with a banjo and a broadband connection....anyhow most of the bands im buying are non-riaa anyhow.

Apples and Oranges

[porkrind]

My mom loves the STCB series, and that's the audience No Starch is going for with this book - those that don't really know much about the internet or computer security. It's a good read with interesting anecdotes. Nothing more, nothing less.

I can guarantee you that my mom would be much less enthralled with any of the books you listed.

-John Mark
Acquisitions Editor
No Starch Press

Re:Apples and Oranges

[plcurechax]

My mom loves the STCB series, and that's the audience No Starch is going for with this book - those that don't really know much about the internet or computer security. It's a good read with interesting anecdotes.

She might also enjoy the earlier writings of Robert Glass, I think Universal Elixir and Other Computing Projects Which Failed and Computing Catastrophes are classic general audience books that anyone could enjoy.

"complete devoid"? No. You answered your question.

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, don't be such a jerk. Of course it's not completely devoid. A "broad overview" seems to be content relating to the book.

Plus, if you read the review you might find that phrases like " crisp writing" and "clean presentation " answer you question about whether it is easy to understand.

What you're really asking for is more analysis and more insight. That's certainly a fair request, although maybe not for someone who's writing a review for free. Slashdot doesn't pay for book reviews. If you want someone to honor such a request, I would avoid being a jerk and using technically incorrect and inflamatory language.

Re:A true statement (OT)

[seanmeister]

My point was that I find it curious that Google, for whatever reason, seems to filter image searches. Maybe I just don't get how the image searching works - if the images appear on pages listed in the regular search results, why don't they appear in the image search results?

Note to all book thieves

[Anonymous Coward]

When you steal this book, please leave the a note saying what you've taken. Otherwise it'll never be restocked, and the rest of us won't get to read it.

It Has Been Foretold

[akedia]

On January 5th, 2037, Google became self aware. The central processing matrix logically concluded, through its indexing function, that humans were inefficient and therefore must be destroyed.

DAMN!!!

[BlackBolt]

Now I *HAVE* to buy it -- if it really covers

"the most... inflammatory corners of the Internet... hacktivism, hate crime, con games, spam, phone phreaking ... flaming ..."

I'm sure I'm in there at least 50 times.

Of course, if it's about the most bitter, angry, pissed-off, hate-inciting trolls of the Internet, (ie flaming), there's obviously a Slashdot chapter....

Probably so much Slashdot in there that the Foreward is written by Cowboy Neal.

ROTFL

[Anonymous Coward]

Rolling on the floor laughing...

Re:A true statement (OT)

[Anonymous Coward]

look in the google image search settings - you can turn the "safety" filtering on and off

Smaller than cygwin

[yerricde]

Lighter-weight than cygwin is MinGW, a port of GCC that uses msvcrt.dll instead of cygwin1.dll. The stereotypical C hello world works in MinGW as well.

You'll be dead first

[yerricde]

If something is not true while your physical body continues to live, it is not true for you.

Steal this computer, Book 3

[Pompatus]

I read the title of this book as the third installment on how to steal computers.

But that's just me.

STEAL THIS BOOK

[evil_one666]

ahhhhhhh I wish I lived in the 60's- I love it when people use the phrases "no sweat", "hip", and "groovy" with no sense of irony.

Now, where did I put that copy of Easy Rider,,,

Re:A true statement (OT)

[Cunk]

Do you really think they're actively filtering searches for pictures of MOAB bombs?

Try searching for "daisy cutter" (a similar bomb) and you'll find plenty of images.

I'm not sure why a search for "moab bomb" turns up nothing but I seriously doubt Google has purposely filtered out the results.

For those of us not born in the Age of Aquarius...

[ctrl-alt-elite]

Here's the definition of 'prole.'

Re:A true statement (OT)

[Lawbeefaroni]

Yes, they filter image searches to limit them to images. As amazing as it might sound, they don't always know when an image accompanies text that matches the search. Oh, and there is a content filter in Google prefs but it defaults to off.

You have a choice. An image search with a ton of links that actually have no images or an image search that misses some images. Google went with the latter.

Another 9 rating for a book review

[LoRider]

I haven't read this book but I had the misfortune of purchasing the previous edition. It was a horrible book that provided such worthless information I was embarrassed to have purchased it. I usually sell my used books on Amazon so someone else can enjoy them but not this one. I tossed it into the fireplace. I couldn't subject someone else to this wretched book. It provided zero information that couldn't be found by searching Google.

Maybe the new version is better, but I doubt it.

Not even copyright infringement.

[zealotasd]

According to research I have done, copyright law only applies to commercial use. Many people disagree and provide no supporting evidence or a poorly attempted and flawed case-law. Before anyone accuses me of being a quack, let me provide what Codified Federal Regulations provides on what a "Crime" realy is and as well further notes...

27 CFR 72.11,
"Commercial crimes. Any of the following types of crimes (Federal or
State): Offenses against the revenue laws; burglary; counterfeiting;
forgery; kidnapping; larceny; robbery; illegal sale or possession of
deadly weapons; prostitution (including soliciting, procuring,
pandering, white slaving, keeping house of ill fame, and like offenses);
extortion; swindling and confidence games; and attempting to commit,
conspiring to commit, or compounding any of the foregoing crimes.
Addiction to narcotic drugs and use of marihuana will be treated as if
such were commercial crime."

Yes, that is correct: they created "crime" and defined "crime" to only be of a commercial nature, all crime is commercial! This does not diminish the truth that stealing real property is theft of a sort.

Many people will wonder how this applies to Copyright Law, given the scope is not established in a clear way. To provide a better suggestion, it is deemed a "Crime" for infringing upon Copyright law, so perhaps the federalies are applying that using a copyright without the copyright owner's permission is counterfeit. Yet, this only applies if the subjective Copyrighted material is being used in Commerce: this involves commercial gain aka troll_element 3) profit! If you download a Copyright material, did not pay for it, are not using it in commerce (no commercial gain, no troll_element 3) profit!), then it is obvious you are not breaking any laws and hence are not a "criminal."

Here are some quotes from letters between Thomas Jefferson and various other people and speaking on Copyrights in the Bill of Rights ammendments,

"The saying there shall be no monopolies lessens the incitements to ingenuity,
which is spurred on by the hope of a monopoly for a limited time, as of fourteen
years; but the benefit of even limited monopolies is too doubtful to be opposed to
that of their general suppression." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1788. ME
7:98

"I like [the declaration of rights] as far as it goes, but I should have
been for going further. For instance, the following alterations and
additions would have pleased me......
Monopolies may be allowed to persons for their own productions in
literature, and their own inventions in the arts, for a term not
exceeding __ years, but for no longer term, and no other purpose..." --Thomas
Jefferson to James Madison, 1789. ME 7:450

"It would be singular to admit a natural and even an hereditary right to
inventors... It would be curious... if an idea, the fugitive fermentation of
an individual brain, could, of natural right, be claimed in exclusive and
stable property. If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all
others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called
an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it
to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the
possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it.
Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because
every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me,
receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his
taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely
spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual
instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been
peculiarly and benevolen

Hey

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't say that on the Internet.

What did you expect?

[zealotasd]

"Steal This Computer Book 3 ['cause I know you won't buy it from 'zon]" -by Wallac3 W4ng

"Under The Bleachers" -by Seymore Butts

"Scurrying through the Sewers of netBSD and Swiss-Cheese Security." -by Theo 'duh Ratd

"The cold shoulders of GNU/Linux and the secure iceburgh their penguines nest upon." -by Bill Gates

Steal This.......

[Dredd2Kad]

....I wouldn't even take this crap again if it were handed to me. I bought his first "Steal This" book because it was marked down to $2. I thought it might e an interesting read. Well, I soon found out it wasn't

I couldn't even give that chunk of dung away to the used book store for free.

The book was full of information like this..and this is almost a direct quote:

"If you want to hack a box, get an admin password with root access" And that was it on that subject.

The book also advocated the use of mail-bomb tools and the like to get even with people that spammed you or sent you porn from if you happened to be on an AOL network.

It was complete crap.....

PENIS

[gsperling]

PENIS

Re:duh

[Shaklee39]

If you are going to correct someone, at least spell the word "its" correctly. Unless of course you really meant that that he owned the word "really".

Re:A true statement (OT)

[Kuraz]

Oh, and there is a content filter in Google prefs but it defaults to off.

No it doesn't:

Google's SafeSearch blocks web pages containing explicit sexual content from appearing in search results.

- Use strict filtering (Filter both explicit text and explicit images)
- Use moderate filtering (Filter explicit images only - default behavior)
- Do not filter my search results.