Flowers For Algernon - Daniel Keyes (Short Story) Blood Music - Greg Bear (Short Story).
Both of the above deal with potential ramifications of human enhancement through medical or mechanical means. Both show the promise of the technologies as well as the potential ramifications (transience or transformation).
20,000 Leagues Under The Sea - Jules Verne Journey To The Center of The Earth - Jules Verne A Wrinkle in Time - Madeleine L'Engle (though now that I look back at it some of it's Religious themes might be considered inappropriate for school)
Stories of exploration and wonder.
Startide Rising - David Brin Watchers - Dean Koontz
Stories of the challenges and rewards of working with familiar animals (dolphins, chimpanzees and dogs) who have been given intelligence on par with humans.
Wasn't much of human history the epitome of 'unschooling'? Wouldn't that be a reasonable explanation why there was very little progress for many hundreds of thousands of years with only a very few bright lights in all that time? Only since the advent of formalized and widely accessible education and knowledge dissemination has there been significant progress in recent history.
My brother was 'homeschooled' in a way that was effectively unschooling. The best he can hope for is a manual labor job because his education is only at the 8th or 9th grade level, if that. Unless these children are truly exceptional, they are being severely disadvantaged by their parents and will pay for it for the rest of their lives. It's amazing how non-forward thinking some people can be.
Nothing too surprising here. The East Antarctic isn't expected to show dramatic melting due to Global Warming. It's the *West* Antarctic that's the worry and always has been.
Who or what piece of legislation authorized RIAA to collect all these information?
They don't need any. It's 'published' via a public system (the p2p network).
Who authorised RIAA to represent this information as some sort of "evidence"?
Presuming this is presented as a DMCA notification, their clients and the US Government.
Who authorised RIAA to submit all these (illegaly?) collected information as "evidence"?
See above.
Who authorised RIAA that they can submit (illegally collected?) "evidence" to a third party in order to "request" anything from a third party, based on (illegally collected?) "evidence"?
See above. Read the DMCA.
Any lawyer in the house?
IANL but I have received DMCA notifications that should have been directed to others.
If the ISP did 2) or 3), they'd be looking at a lawsuit from the end-user that would have 100% more bite than anything the RIAA was capable of doing legally.
While they don't explicitly identify them as such, the content of the e-mail is essentially a DMCA notification. Since the content is not stored on the ISP's systems, and is just a transitory communication over the ISP's network, the ISP is not obligated to perform any action whatsoever. They could >/dev/null 2>&1 them and there's nothing the RIAA could do about it.
To be valid, the DMCA notification needs to be directed to the party hosting the content, in this case the end-user. The ISP for that user is not obligated to 'pass on' the notification to the end user any more than they would be to 'pass on' a notification meant for another ISP. It is the complainants responsibility to identify the correct destination for the DMCA notification, not anyone else's.
Even _if_ the ISP were hosting the content on systems they own, the only obligation they would have would be to remove the specifically identified offending content from their systems. Per the DMCA, the alleged offender would have 10 days to contest the validity of the DMCA notification at which point the ISP would be required to re-post the content if they did so. The claimant would then need to begin legal proceedings to obtain further relief.
Seems to me to be a re-hash of a previously failed tactic. Once the RIAA found this was a dead-end, they began their DOE lawsuits.
You're kidding, right? I guess you haven't seen the Firefox support forums? 22 different, active support topics just in the past hour. That's 528 a day if that rate keeps up. Not exactly a shining example of a no-support OSS project.
Proportionally to it's use, that's good but certainly does require more support than one or a few developers could handle on their own.
pfft. I have personal knowledge of multi-million $/year businesses running about 80% on OSS software. I've been working for businesses using OSS for 100% of their server-side core business infrastructure since 1995. Saying OSS is 'far too risky for any commercial uptake' is a 100% bogus statement. OSS can be highly successful in the commercial space. Proper planning can mitigate any risk that you think OSS presents. Nothing just evaporates overnight.
"But if that's the case, then OSS becomes worse than useless for businesses."
This shows a fundamental misunderstanding about OSS. OSS is not about being useful for business, it's about being useful for the programmer or people like the programmer who had an itch to scratch or need to fill. If it's useful for business or gives the programmer recognition, that's a side-effect but rarely the intent.
If that model doesn't suit your needs, then don't use open source. OSS is providing alternatives to closed source programs for those who are capable of supporting themselves. It's not for everyone.
An open source project isn't obliged to provide ANYTHING, except source code just to meet the minimum definition of Open Source. Anything above and beyond that is great for you. If it doesn't meet your needs, contribute, finagle or pay for that support or find something else that meets your needs.
Down from about 6,000msgs/minute (since forever ago) to about 2,000msgs/minute as of yesterday evening. This one actually seems to have made a difference (unlike the HerbalKing group's 'shutdown).
Costa Rica rarely (if ever) experiences hurricanes. I have a friend who did exactly this except he just built the house and lives there. No need for a job, no banditos, no hurricanes and walking distance from the beach.
Here's an example. Little Johnny accesses port. Susie, sitting behind him, sees it and tells her parents. Parents call the school/press asking why Susie was able to see pornography at school. Susie's parents sue the school for not protecting the students from pornography. Think it won't happen? It has many times. Johnny is certainly hurting more than himself.
Additionally, schools must take reasonable measures to block student access to inappropriate materials in order to receive the Federal E-Rate funding that pays for most of districts Internet access. Johnny potentially jeopardizes that funding and the entire Districts Internet access.
To the second point, the answer is E-Rate. A large part of a schools Internet Access funding comes from the Federal Government. The amount received depends on the number of Free&Reduced Lunch students but is typically >50% of the amount they pay for Internet access. This money is given to them free as long as they have measures in place to protect students from 'inappropriate' material. They must install CIPA compliant filtering to receive E-Rate funding.
Exactly. How many times have you heard about a student accessing inappropriate materials from the school in the news? "Little Johnny saw pornography at school! Let's sue the school board!". It happens quite a bit because parents *really* fuss about it. Schools use filtering systems not only to protect the students from inappropriate material but to protect themselves from attacks by the communities they serve. Johnny uses a proxy to access pornography. Mary was sitting next to him, saw it and told her parents. Her parents then complain and possibly escalate to the press. Johnny is affecting more than just himself and putting many people in legal jeopardy.
It is entirely appropriate for the schools to enforce anti-circumvention policies as not doing so can easily have greater impact overall.
As for the students displaying initiative, etc.. Not so. You may have one student that figures it out but then they tell others 'put this address in this place and you can access anything'. This goes through the student population very quickly.
And how, exactly, would this work? The camera would be several _feet_ closer to the background. Unless you had your face plastered to the screen the image wouldn't line up at all and would in fact be a large view of a small area. The effect would only really work if the background were quite some distance from the monitor, i.e. outdoors.
When there is proper oversight. For the last 5 years I have been directly involved in wonderful education projects that would not be possible without E-Rate funding. Many, many schools in the state where I live would not even have Internet access were it not for E-Rate funds and most would be stuck at ISDN speeds for hundreds of students per school. I have seen first hand the power of distance learning in cooperation with Universities, use of web resources for students such as Atomic Learning and NetTrekker, online teacher recertification training to be compliant with NCLB, and the ability for districts and states to modernize a significant portion of their daily administrative tasks such as attendance reporting, Free and Reduced Lunch tracking and centralized student information systems by bringing them all online. The savings in administration overhead are significant by themselves. All of this is possible because of E-Rate.
What people don't seem to realize is that most school districts are poor. They have very restricted budgets with little lee-way. E-Rate allows them to bring modern technology into the hands of students who most likely don't get to utilize it at home and educational resources that they most certainly wouldn't be able to use or even access at home.
A properly managed E-Rate fund with proper accounting and oversight is essential to the education of our future. The sensationalist examples of waste given in response to this article are exceptions and not the general rule. NASA had the same types of problems years ago. NASA wasn't abolished or suspended. Instead, they were forced to get their act together and perform proper accounting and oversight. That's the right way and what needs to happen here.
Are flying cars really that great of an idea? Sounds to me like a bureaucrat's nightmare. There'll be licenses, tests, laws, regulations. You can't fly too low, too high, too fast, over certain areas. You have to be under a certain weight, have a good medical history, good vision. Imagine a fender bender at 150 feet. Does your car fall to the ground? They'll want parachutes, airbags, harnesses.
It sounds to me like a bureaucrat's dream. Imagine all the extra money that the government is going to get from all the taxes, fees and fines related to all of the above. Similarly, if the taxes and fees for entry are so steep that only a (supposedly) more educated and wealthier group could gain access to the technology then the market would be self-limiting.
Umm. That's 4 years _after_ they first started using it. Please. Even in 2000 the Internet was widely used and you can't tell me that someone didn't think to check if the domain was already in use. That's back in the hey-day of buying/suing for domain names. They knew what they were doing.
This is probably the best way to do it. Think about the problem from the filtering company's perspective. Since the maintainer of the web site can create/modify/delete their own web pages at any time with any content without having to notify anyone about it (and that is as it should be), they would have to review every single website every single day to see if anything had changed and determine how that content should be categorized possibly by human review. This is, of course, hugely impractical so the solution is to categorize the highest level that covers the entire site and then let the maintainer of the filter make exceptions as they see fit. If you move all your "bad" content to a different subdomain, you more precisely define the location of that bad content allowing for more precise categorizations of the site in general. Admittedly I have a familiarity with filtering software as we use it to protect K12 schools but I find it hard to believe that anyone with any common sense and at least an inkling of how the web works wouldn't just understand this intuitively.
Slashdot Mirror
Flowers For Algernon - Daniel Keyes (Short Story)
Blood Music - Greg Bear (Short Story).
Both of the above deal with potential ramifications of human enhancement through medical or mechanical means. Both show the promise of the technologies as well as the potential ramifications (transience or transformation).
20,000 Leagues Under The Sea - Jules Verne
Journey To The Center of The Earth - Jules Verne
A Wrinkle in Time - Madeleine L'Engle (though now that I look back at it some of it's Religious themes might be considered inappropriate for school)
Stories of exploration and wonder.
Startide Rising - David Brin
Watchers - Dean Koontz
Stories of the challenges and rewards of working with familiar animals (dolphins, chimpanzees and dogs) who have been given intelligence on par with humans.
Wasn't much of human history the epitome of 'unschooling'? Wouldn't that be a reasonable explanation why there was very little progress for many hundreds of thousands of years with only a very few bright lights in all that time? Only since the advent of formalized and widely accessible education and knowledge dissemination has there been significant progress in recent history.
My brother was 'homeschooled' in a way that was effectively unschooling. The best he can hope for is a manual labor job because his education is only at the 8th or 9th grade level, if that. Unless these children are truly exceptional, they are being severely disadvantaged by their parents and will pay for it for the rest of their lives. It's amazing how non-forward thinking some people can be.
Nothing too surprising here. The East Antarctic isn't expected to show dramatic melting due to Global Warming. It's the *West* Antarctic that's the worry and always has been.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20227036.400-driller-thriller-antarcticas-tumultuous-past-revealed.html?full=true
Who or what piece of legislation authorized RIAA to collect all these information?
They don't need any. It's 'published' via a public system (the p2p network).
Who authorised RIAA to represent this information as some sort of "evidence"?
Presuming this is presented as a DMCA notification, their clients and the US Government.
Who authorised RIAA to submit all these (illegaly?) collected information as "evidence"?
See above.
Who authorised RIAA that they can submit (illegally collected?) "evidence" to a third party in order to "request" anything from a third party, based on (illegally collected?) "evidence"?
See above. Read the DMCA.
Any lawyer in the house?
IANL but I have received DMCA notifications that should have been directed to others.
If the ISP did 2) or 3), they'd be looking at a lawsuit from the end-user that would have 100% more bite than anything the RIAA was capable of doing legally.
--
Marc
While they don't explicitly identify them as such, the content of the e-mail is essentially a DMCA notification. Since the content is not stored on the ISP's systems, and is just a transitory communication over the ISP's network, the ISP is not obligated to perform any action whatsoever. They could >/dev/null 2>&1 them and there's nothing the RIAA could do about it.
To be valid, the DMCA notification needs to be directed to the party hosting the content, in this case the end-user. The ISP for that user is not obligated to 'pass on' the notification to the end user any more than they would be to 'pass on' a notification meant for another ISP. It is the complainants responsibility to identify the correct destination for the DMCA notification, not anyone else's.
Even _if_ the ISP were hosting the content on systems they own, the only obligation they would have would be to remove the specifically identified offending content from their systems. Per the DMCA, the alleged offender would have 10 days to contest the validity of the DMCA notification at which point the ISP would be required to re-post the content if they did so. The claimant would then need to begin legal proceedings to obtain further relief.
Seems to me to be a re-hash of a previously failed tactic. Once the RIAA found this was a dead-end, they began their DOE lawsuits.
You're kidding, right? I guess you haven't seen the Firefox support forums? 22 different, active support topics just in the past hour. That's 528 a day if that rate keeps up. Not exactly a shining example of a no-support OSS project.
Proportionally to it's use, that's good but certainly does require more support than one or a few developers could handle on their own.
People already provide those options. CentOS for example.
pfft. I have personal knowledge of multi-million $/year businesses running about 80% on OSS software. I've been working for businesses using OSS for 100% of their server-side core business infrastructure since 1995. Saying OSS is 'far too risky for any commercial uptake' is a 100% bogus statement. OSS can be highly successful in the commercial space. Proper planning can mitigate any risk that you think OSS presents. Nothing just evaporates overnight.
"But if that's the case, then OSS becomes worse than useless for businesses." This shows a fundamental misunderstanding about OSS. OSS is not about being useful for business, it's about being useful for the programmer or people like the programmer who had an itch to scratch or need to fill. If it's useful for business or gives the programmer recognition, that's a side-effect but rarely the intent. If that model doesn't suit your needs, then don't use open source. OSS is providing alternatives to closed source programs for those who are capable of supporting themselves. It's not for everyone.
An open source project isn't obliged to provide ANYTHING, except source code just to meet the minimum definition of Open Source. Anything above and beyond that is great for you. If it doesn't meet your needs, contribute, finagle or pay for that support or find something else that meets your needs.
Down from about 6,000msgs/minute (since forever ago) to about 2,000msgs/minute as of yesterday evening. This one actually seems to have made a difference (unlike the HerbalKing group's 'shutdown).
Costa Rica rarely (if ever) experiences hurricanes. I have a friend who did exactly this except he just built the house and lives there. No need for a job, no banditos, no hurricanes and walking distance from the beach.
Here's an example. Little Johnny accesses port. Susie, sitting behind him, sees it and tells her parents. Parents call the school/press asking why Susie was able to see pornography at school. Susie's parents sue the school for not protecting the students from pornography. Think it won't happen? It has many times. Johnny is certainly hurting more than himself.
Additionally, schools must take reasonable measures to block student access to inappropriate materials in order to receive the Federal E-Rate funding that pays for most of districts Internet access. Johnny potentially jeopardizes that funding and the entire Districts Internet access.
To the second point, the answer is E-Rate. A large part of a schools Internet Access funding comes from the Federal Government. The amount received depends on the number of Free&Reduced Lunch students but is typically >50% of the amount they pay for Internet access. This money is given to them free as long as they have measures in place to protect students from 'inappropriate' material. They must install CIPA compliant filtering to receive E-Rate funding.
Exactly. How many times have you heard about a student accessing inappropriate materials from the school in the news? "Little Johnny saw pornography at school! Let's sue the school board!". It happens quite a bit because parents *really* fuss about it. Schools use filtering systems not only to protect the students from inappropriate material but to protect themselves from attacks by the communities they serve. Johnny uses a proxy to access pornography. Mary was sitting next to him, saw it and told her parents. Her parents then complain and possibly escalate to the press. Johnny is affecting more than just himself and putting many people in legal jeopardy.
It is entirely appropriate for the schools to enforce anti-circumvention policies as not doing so can easily have greater impact overall.
As for the students displaying initiative, etc.. Not so. You may have one student that figures it out but then they tell others 'put this address in this place and you can access anything'. This goes through the student population very quickly.
Remarkably similar in content and style to http://www.newscientisttech.com/channel/tech/mg192 25761.100-arson-evidence--shot-down-in-flames.html published November 6th, 2006...
5:47 is a nearly edge-on slice of the atmosphere that shows a very clear view of the shuttle launch trail.
And how, exactly, would this work? The camera would be several _feet_ closer to the background. Unless you had your face plastered to the screen the image wouldn't line up at all and would in fact be a large view of a small area. The effect would only really work if the background were quite some distance from the monitor, i.e. outdoors.
No but apparently 51% of us have. Remember, 49% of us didn't vote for him and do not support him or his policies.
When there is proper oversight. For the last 5 years I have been directly involved in wonderful education projects that would not be possible without E-Rate funding. Many, many schools in the state where I live would not even have Internet access were it not for E-Rate funds and most would be stuck at ISDN speeds for hundreds of students per school. I have seen first hand the power of distance learning in cooperation with Universities, use of web resources for students such as Atomic Learning and NetTrekker, online teacher recertification training to be compliant with NCLB, and the ability for districts and states to modernize a significant portion of their daily administrative tasks such as attendance reporting, Free and Reduced Lunch tracking and centralized student information systems by bringing them all online. The savings in administration overhead are significant by themselves. All of this is possible because of E-Rate.
What people don't seem to realize is that most school districts are poor. They have very restricted budgets with little lee-way. E-Rate allows them to bring modern technology into the hands of students who most likely don't get to utilize it at home and educational resources that they most certainly wouldn't be able to use or even access at home.
A properly managed E-Rate fund with proper accounting and oversight is essential to the education of our future. The sensationalist examples of waste given in response to this article are exceptions and not the general rule. NASA had the same types of problems years ago. NASA wasn't abolished or suspended. Instead, they were forced to get their act together and perform proper accounting and oversight. That's the right way and what needs to happen here.
That's inaccurate. The original mission was slated to last 90 days, not 30.
Umm. That's 4 years _after_ they first started using it. Please. Even in 2000 the Internet was widely used and you can't tell me that someone didn't think to check if the domain was already in use. That's back in the hey-day of buying/suing for domain names. They knew what they were doing.
This is probably the best way to do it. Think about the problem from the filtering company's perspective. Since the maintainer of the web site can create/modify/delete their own web pages at any time with any content without having to notify anyone about it (and that is as it should be), they would have to review every single website every single day to see if anything had changed and determine how that content should be categorized possibly by human review. This is, of course, hugely impractical so the solution is to categorize the highest level that covers the entire site and then let the maintainer of the filter make exceptions as they see fit. If you move all your "bad" content to a different subdomain, you more precisely define the location of that bad content allowing for more precise categorizations of the site in general. Admittedly I have a familiarity with filtering software as we use it to protect K12 schools but I find it hard to believe that anyone with any common sense and at least an inkling of how the web works wouldn't just understand this intuitively.