And you do not need to prove anything, just tie matters up in court.
No, that isn't how it would work. Under the act, the publisher would have to either amend/retract the material, OR affirm that it was correct. This is just like the DMCA and removal of copyrighted material: As long as the legality of the material is in dispute, it can still be published.
Logical extension of libel
on
Data Quality Act
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Libel law states that if someone publishes false and damaging statements about you, they can be forced to retract the statements and/or publish a correction. (If they published the false material deliberately, they can also be required to pay monetary damages.)
This is just the logical extension of that: Instead of having to prove that the statements caused harm to you, it is merely necessary to prove that the statements are false.
This is a Good Thing. Yes, it will result in less material being published... but the material which doesn't get published will be primarily the material which wasn't defensible in the first place.
Interesting that a non-telecommunications firm can parley a single asset (right-of-way in existing conduits in the crowded tunnels under Manhattan) into a business.
Sprint was created when the Southern Pacific Railway realized that they could take advantage of their railway rights-of-way to lay fiber-optic cable.
When a gun is manufactured today it's sole intention is to kill. [...] Therefore gun manufacturers are just as guilty for murders as Napster is for music piracy.
No. The intended use of firearms is to *kill* people, not to *murder* people.
You can use Napster to copy any sort of music, but the intended purpose was to facilitate copyright violations; you can use guns to carry out a wide variety of killings, but the intended purpose is not to murder people.
that's like saying "Hey I'm building a computer! The FBI better watch out, I might hack into the DOD mainframe!!"
Not really. The number of people interested in having their own flight simulator is vastly lower than the number of people interesting in having their own computer.
A better analogy would be to saying "Hey I'm building a teraflop cluster of systems designed specifically to factor large integers! The FBI better watch out, I might start cracking people's RSA keys!!"
Single best thing M$ could do to improve their product security is to adopt the 'patch often' mindset. Fix something, release a patch, everyone goes home happy.
That's great in theory, but the real world doesn't work like that. In the real world, it is very hard to get everyone to apply patches, and the software vendor gets blamed even when they've made the patches available months earlier; Code Red is a perfect example of this.
In the context of system administrators who forget to patch their boxes, you actually end up with better security if you release a large patch every month than if you release small patches every few days.
I think that "National Security" here means "the NSA asked us to put xyz into our code, and they'd be unhappy if it had to be removed or became public".
Remember: Cryptanalysis has, and will, always come in fourth place after burglary, blackmail, and bribery.
Originally, OpenBSD used a daemon; the fish came from BlowFish.
It happened, however, that people were starting to assume that daemon meant FreeBSD at around the same time as BlowFish became popular, so the openbsd crew decided to use the fish as mascot.
FTP is a fine way to serve files to anonymous clients.
No it isn't. FTP, with its separate control and data connections, made sense fifteen years ago; but now it causes terrible headaches for network and firewall administrators. In addition, FTP doesn't have any standardized mechanism for name-based hosting.
As far as I can see, there is no excuse for using FTP any longer, for any purpose.
If you read the article, you'd understand that this doesn't apply here because the shuttles were originally intended to have a ten year operational lifetime.
Weather is chaotic, but climate is... well, ok, climate might be chaotic, but we really don't know -- and if it is chaotic, it is still only chaotic on timescales of more than 50 years.
Predicting climate 50 years in the future is a computationally difficult task, but it isn't impossible the way that predicting weather would be.
...people who haven't even paid to see the film, have absolutely no interest in actually watching it, and who are treating the theatre as a convenient spot to gather, chat and (god help us) breed.
These people are breeding in the theatre?
Ok, so I haven't been to a movie theatre in a while, but still... I can't believe it has really gotten *that* bad.
You would have to be one cheap individual to want to download all the music in your life for free...
People *are* cheap. How many people do you know who send off their income taxes with a smile, saying "I'm so glad to contribute to the causes which we citizens have jointly agreed to support"?
wouldn't it be good to wait until we hear the school's side of the story? It is very easy to claim that you were only trying to learn the course material, but with only a single quote -- which was certainly taken out of context -- to indicate the school's view on the situation, it is hardly fair to weigh in on either side.
From a scientific viewpoint, nuclear power is a very clear alternative to burning coal. Not only are the available fuel reserves much larger, but the production cycle is much safer (think about how many people die in coal mines), the emission of NOx and CO2 is avoided, and there are much lower dangers posed by harmful waste products (think about how many deaths are caused by inhaling pollutants from coal power plants).
The only problem with nuclear power is that democracy is a tyranny of idiots, and said idiots are incapable of understanding the difference between a stable nuclear reactor and nuclear weapons.
Wouldn't such an operation require rather a large power budget?
I think the first step in reducing athmospheric CO2 must be to stop the use of fossil fuels for large power plants where clear alternatives (eg, solar/wind/wave/tidal/nuclear) exist.
Slashdot Mirror
And you do not need to prove anything, just tie matters up in court.
No, that isn't how it would work. Under the act, the publisher would have to either amend/retract the material, OR affirm that it was correct. This is just like the DMCA and removal of copyrighted material: As long as the legality of the material is in dispute, it can still be published.
Libel law states that if someone publishes false and damaging statements about you, they can be forced to retract the statements and/or publish a correction. (If they published the false material deliberately, they can also be required to pay monetary damages.)
This is just the logical extension of that: Instead of having to prove that the statements caused harm to you, it is merely necessary to prove that the statements are false.
This is a Good Thing. Yes, it will result in less material being published... but the material which doesn't get published will be primarily the material which wasn't defensible in the first place.
Interesting that a non-telecommunications firm can parley a single asset (right-of-way in existing conduits in the crowded tunnels under Manhattan) into a business.
Sprint was created when the Southern Pacific Railway realized that they could take advantage of their railway rights-of-way to lay fiber-optic cable.
"The great thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from"
When a gun is manufactured today it's sole intention is to kill. [...] Therefore gun manufacturers are just as guilty for murders as Napster is for music piracy.
No. The intended use of firearms is to *kill* people, not to *murder* people.
You can use Napster to copy any sort of music, but the intended purpose was to facilitate copyright violations; you can use guns to carry out a wide variety of killings, but the intended purpose is not to murder people.
that's like saying "Hey I'm building a computer! The FBI better watch out, I might hack into the DOD mainframe!!"
Not really. The number of people interested in having their own flight simulator is vastly lower than the number of people interesting in having their own computer.
A better analogy would be to saying "Hey I'm building a teraflop cluster of systems designed specifically to factor large integers! The FBI better watch out, I might start cracking people's RSA keys!!"
Somehow, I can't quite see that quote coming from the average corporate suit, where "proprietary" is regarded as a feature not a flaw...
You don't understand, do you? Obsolescence is a feature, not a flaw.
Single best thing M$ could do to improve their product security is to adopt the 'patch often' mindset. Fix something, release a patch, everyone goes home happy.
That's great in theory, but the real world doesn't work like that. In the real world, it is very hard to get everyone to apply patches, and the software vendor gets blamed even when they've made the patches available months earlier; Code Red is a perfect example of this.
In the context of system administrators who forget to patch their boxes, you actually end up with better security if you release a large patch every month than if you release small patches every few days.
I think that "National Security" here means "the NSA asked us to put xyz into our code, and they'd be unhappy if it had to be removed or became public".
Remember: Cryptanalysis has, and will, always come in fourth place after burglary, blackmail, and bribery.
Originally, OpenBSD used a daemon; the fish came from BlowFish.
It happened, however, that people were starting to assume that daemon meant FreeBSD at around the same time as BlowFish became popular, so the openbsd crew decided to use the fish as mascot.
Wouldn't the Unix Way be to have inetd spawn login directly, and have terminal negotiation handled by a program run from .shrc ?
If all ISP's simply provided a standard API to Law Enforcement (LE)
There already is a standard API. It's called "you fax us a search warrant, we'll conduct the search and send the results back to you".
The only simple way to improve upon this would be to use digital signatures, in order that the fax could be replaced by secured email.
FTP is a fine way to serve files to anonymous clients.
No it isn't. FTP, with its separate control and data connections, made sense fifteen years ago; but now it causes terrible headaches for network and firewall administrators. In addition, FTP doesn't have any standardized mechanism for name-based hosting.
As far as I can see, there is no excuse for using FTP any longer, for any purpose.
If you read the article, you'd understand that this doesn't apply here because the shuttles were originally intended to have a ten year operational lifetime.
In my experience, Half Life is not necessary.
GNU/Redhat, GNU/Mandrake, GNU/Debian, etc. are operating systems.
Slashdot was guilty of some rather significant rewriting -- without their usual "Update:" -- of a story back in June 2001.
0 2
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/06/24/22462
Weather is chaotic, but climate is ... well, ok, climate might be chaotic, but we really don't know -- and if it is chaotic, it is still only chaotic on timescales of more than 50 years.
Predicting climate 50 years in the future is a computationally difficult task, but it isn't impossible the way that predicting weather would be.
...people who haven't even paid to see the film, have absolutely no interest in actually watching it, and who are treating the theatre as a convenient spot to gather, chat and (god help us) breed.
These people are breeding in the theatre?
Ok, so I haven't been to a movie theatre in a while, but still... I can't believe it has really gotten *that* bad.
You would have to be one cheap individual to want to download all the music in your life for free...
People *are* cheap. How many people do you know who send off their income taxes with a smile, saying "I'm so glad to contribute to the causes which we citizens have jointly agreed to support"?
wouldn't you love to run emacs on an eMac? It runs OS X; who knows, it might already be part of the default install.
don't use their code.
When people are offering you something for free, it's pretty rude to complain that they're not offering you even more.
wouldn't it be good to wait until we hear the school's side of the story? It is very easy to claim that you were only trying to learn the course material, but with only a single quote -- which was certainly taken out of context -- to indicate the school's view on the situation, it is hardly fair to weigh in on either side.
From a scientific viewpoint, nuclear power is a very clear alternative to burning coal. Not only are the available fuel reserves much larger, but the production cycle is much safer (think about how many people die in coal mines), the emission of NOx and CO2 is avoided, and there are much lower dangers posed by harmful waste products (think about how many deaths are caused by inhaling pollutants from coal power plants).
The only problem with nuclear power is that democracy is a tyranny of idiots, and said idiots are incapable of understanding the difference between a stable nuclear reactor and nuclear weapons.
Wouldn't such an operation require rather a large power budget?
I think the first step in reducing athmospheric CO2 must be to stop the use of fossil fuels for large power plants where clear alternatives (eg, solar/wind/wave/tidal/nuclear) exist.