Yep, that's there too. For example, this page about an xpdf problem has date reported, links to the bug track which document the problem, the CVE page, itself what you are looking for, and packages to fix the problem. XPDF? Bummer, I had no idea, but I'm glad it got fixed in the upgrade last week.
Practically, you drop the appropriate line into your/etc/apt/sources.list file:
deb http://security.debian.org stable/updates main contrib non-free
deb http://security.debian.org testing/updates main contrib non-free
and security update will happen at every apt-get update, apt-get upgrade you do. Asking to add this line has been part of the installation for a long time. It may be the only thing you need for your sources.list file.
The Sarge net install CD gets all of it's packages straight off the web and does so before starting services that might be exploited. This makes every install as current as it can be and the whole process relatively secure. That's the bottom line, right?
Compare that to the typical Windoze wipe and reload with the "orignial" years old CD that came with the computer and M$'s aging codebase and you start to see how the free software development and distribution methods are vastly superior to closed source.
Allowing "gross invasions of privacy" seems to suit Uncle Sam right now. It's hard to believe that this judge does not know what he's doing and it's implications. It is hand in hand with the "storage" email reading decision that gives ISPs and companies the GO to read all of your email if some thing, like a Carnivore box, happens to "temporarily" store your email in the process of delivering it.
The bottom line is that you can not trust someone else's computer or network. To have real privacy, you have to use your own, with trusted (that's free) software and encryption. The internet has always been an untrusted network that must be guarded against.
That does not make this kind of capitulation to and conniving on the part of the Federal government any more appealing or sensible.
In Constitutional terms, this is the correct ruling. Federal laws only extend to "interstate commerce," which these days is interpreted to mean "interstate anything."
The logic of this ruling would let me put a voice recorder onto your telephone handset because it's only talking to the phone on your desk. It is self evident nonsense because the target of the conversation may be anywhere.
When I type an email and send it to my mom, it typically travels to Virginia and back. If that's not interstate, I'm not sure what is because I don't live in Virginia. If your computer is connected to an interstate network, it's interstate commerce. Indeed, it's global commerce and that's what the internet is supposed to be.
You have to wonder how people talk themselves into stuff like this. When you intercept people's electronic communications, you are wiretapping.
No, I think I can get around it by selecting "black and white" instead of "colour" when printing or copying. Perhaps my anti-government rantings will lack a certain pizzazz, but I will just have to make up for it with more colourful writing.
OK, that's funny. Despite your best attempts to obfuscate your writing, a pattern of missing black pixels or line spacing variations can make your printer easy to identify. I'm afraid the only people confused will be your readers.
Filter out the highest frequency signals and viola..
You have to do that with every color and it will probably make it impossible to print. If they designed the print so every pixel is a single bang, there are no lower frequency signals.
Worse, this would have no effect on something subtle like line or character spacing, which could encode a serial number the same way a bar code does. Proper equipment can be set up to detect line spacing serial numbers despite scale and rotation distortion.
If you don't know what the signal is, your noise might not be helping you.
What you know is that the US government and every major printing company have conspired to make it impossible to print a document that can not be tied back to the printer. That's creepy and it lends weight to stories that once you might have dismissed as paranoid delusions.
100% anonymity can be done without too much trouble, as long as you pay attention and stay organized. It never ceases to amaze me that they find people who write worms and other malware...in this day and age, releasing malware with 100% anonymity is trivial.
The aggravating part is that an upright citizen should not have to go to such great lengths. It seems that 20 years ago, Uncle Sam decided that there should be no more anonymous publications or did not take steps to prevent that from happening.
Free software helps, but electronic publication is just about impossible and everything you do will have to be checked with a hexeditor. How can anyone effectively communicate without the benefit of digital cameras, for instance? Every little gadget with a serial number is a potential give away. OpenBSD might be good for this, but most free software is built with openness in mind. I used to think OpenBSD was paranoid, now I'm thinking they were right all along.
You might find some comfort in the fact that your software is not ratting you out, but you have still lost a considerable fraction of your privacy and ability to publish anonymously. When you buy that printer at the swap meet, you can be sure the previous owner was not as careful as you. It will still be linked to a particular city, and further "terrorist" investigation will lead the domestic spys to the swap meet. That's way more information than a government agency would have for an analog printing press. You won't be able to use that printer for anything but your anonymous printing and you will have to keep that on the QT. Analog printing, of course, will stand out like a sore thumb.
I don't even want to think about how bad things will get with widespread RFID tag use.
It's fine until they link the printer serial number to a actual person...
That's what the printer driver is for. It's probably part of the shrink wrap EULA they think you opened to use your printer. They might as well stamp the outside, "Use of this printer voids your right to anonymous speech. By opening this box, you consent to anything you print being uniquely traced to you, you dirty little, counterfitting, pirating, pinko scumbag. Big brother IS watching YOU."
you track the printer, and then what? It's been sold over the counter somewhere to who-knows-whom.
Then you know what city it was in. Then you take advantage of backdoors in the printer driver that Xerox, HP, etc, were nice enough to put in there for you to find out what IP that printer is sitting behind. That routine would be easy to implement. Then you ask the ISP who exactly that IP was leased to. Then you know exactly where the document was printed if not when and by who.
This won't get criminals, it's going to make it easy to track and eradicate political opposition. It's evil.
Thinking about it, adding in a speckled yellow pattern as part of your printing algorithm would work - it would just take a little knowledge of what they print.
That knowledge would take lots of study to learn and you could never be sure. Printers with enough sophistication to detect currency and refuse to print can pull lots of tricks on you if it detects pattern prints and other investigations. A blank page needs no identification marks at all and the printer may refuse to print any. Subtle variation in letter spacing or shape can have the same effect. Do you know exactly where each pixel in each character you print are supposed to go? Missing pixels can encode a serial number as well as those that are not supposed to be there.
Do you realize how difficult that would make operations for a legitimate organization, such as an unpopular political movement? You get one shot anonymous publication if the equipment you used, such as M$ Word, does not rat you out. Sure, criminals can get around this kind of monkey business, but anonymous publication will be a thing of the past if companies like Xerox, HP and M$ keep co-operating with this.
see here for my thoughts on how this can end free speech.
From the article:
Crean says Xerox and the government have a good relationship. "The U.S. government had been on board all along--they would actually come out to our labs," Crean says.
That's really creepy and leaves little room for Xerox to do any differently. Now that the story is out in the open, I can only hope that they will take a stand against this practice.
The point is that if people know what they're up against, they can find a workaround. Ideally, these kinds of tricks would be kept secret.
You don't know what you are up against and I question your ideals. That's the problem with non free software and this crap is definitely non free. This trick is 20 years old, how do you know what other patterns they put in? Subtle changes in letter spacing, and other color manipulation can do the same thing. This kind of thing is very disturbing.
This is an area where software freedom directly affects real freedom. Speech without anonymity is not free. "Big deal," you might say, "they know a printed page came from a particular printer. So what?" So, if you are using a non free operating system, your print driver might have a back door that responds to requests for information and your ISP can be forced to reveal what IP the correct response came from. Zip, zip, just like that, without any help from retailers, you can be tied to what you thought you were publishing anonymously. You think you are going to get around it with an old typewriter? You might as well be the only person in your city making woodblock prints because everyone will know you are the nutcase with antique printing equipment. The Xerox down at the corner copy shop can put it's mark on every copy you make, and it won't take much doing after that to uniquely identify you.
The free software foundation and RMS' comparison of non free software to the old Soviet Union, where copy machines were numbered and guarded are right on target.
You could script a program to 'split' the image so that you print unmarked bands in multiple runthroughs which eventually add up to a full image.
I suppose you could simply shred your work, but that's what an oppressive government would want anyway. Tell on yourself, throw you work away and wait for the trip to Minilove, the place where there is no darkness.
Yet for some reason in IT we accept that excuse... If we instead refuse to buy the products then you can bet the next time they negotiate licencing, all the problems disappear.
It already works this way. Just look at the low value and reputation of Winmodems. You can't sell one of those for more than ten buck. If something won't spin up and work with Knoppix, I don't want it. Sure, I can ignore some non working hardware if there's a way to fix it, but the research is a drag and the value is substantially lower to me. The development of working free drivers is a risk so I consider non free hardware disposable junk and tell people so.
I tell my Windoze using friends to avoid hardware like that if they care about keeping the thing longer than Microsoft's two year upgrade cycle. Their risk is compounded and much higher. If there is zero chance of them switching to free software, there's about zero chance they will consider the hardware usable in two years. It's worth is reduced to toilet paper, just like that. Most people have been the victims of the upgrade cycle by now and know what I'm talking about.
Every way, the hardware maker loses. Some people don't mind spending money on disposable hardware, but they are a decided minority. Worse for the hardware maker, these people put significant downward pressure on the price of new hardware by throwing away old stuff that people like me can use with a few awkward work arounds. I'll take and use broken equipment if the price is right. Most people don't want to spend a thousand dollars on something that won't work in two years and they are very angry at hardware makers for this kind of thing. Hardware makers that get a junk reputation suffer.
If Intel wants to make their wireless the next Winmodem, they will lose.
all I do is download new browsers for security and never run windows update. That would make too much sense...
That's true, you would be foolish to trust an automatic software updater from a company with M$ style QC. They have a long record of breaking applications and not caring. That's why companies pay people to evaluate "updates".
The burden is considerably less in the free software world where there's no incentive to spaghetti code and break other people's applications. When code is properly modularized, it has a tendency not to break other code. I can contrast my experience with frequent distribution upgrades of Debian Unstable without problems to single applications frying Winblows.
In any case, the need for upgrading is much less in the free software world. Exploits there remain largely a laboratory exercise, despite volumes of FUD. Exploits in the Winblows world translate to a mean life for networked machines that are much less than the time it takes to use Winblows updater.
There's a metric fuckton of jobs that can't be done on linux (anything regarding graphics / multimedia)
Oh, you mean like making movies and music? Go Google it and you will see that free software mixed with non-free on Linux dominates the business now and has for years. When your job depends on this and your company wants to be competitive, you will use Linux.
On the personal level, you should read this glowing Mepis review by a long standing Winblows professional who detailed how to do every conceivable multimedia task, including DVD watching and video editing. If you want a computer that will do tomorrow what it does today without getting schmegged by scammers, advertisers and others, you want Linux.
Where do you want to go today? Free software will get you there with less trouble and cost.
That's helpful but it's not an answer. You seem to have forgotten the zero click phishing scam reported a few weeks ago that replaces your hosts file. If they don't get you with though a compromised web server, they will get you with a spam. There are enough holes in Winblows that you can't win. Better to use a good quality browser on a good quality OS.
I've never seen a electric car with very good crash protection. There's no way my dad is going to give up his Volvo for something that doesn't even have real side doors, [lbl.gov] let alone an actually safe passenger compartment.
You need to look at the image video. The way they have made the battery compartment part of the frame would make for an excellently rigid passenger compartment. I don't like how they extended this out front, as it looks like it lacks a crush zone, but that's something that can be fixed easier than a conventional combustion engine model. The mass of the battery will protect you from rapid deceleration as well.
Compare it to the typical vehicle where a much too rigid engine compartment stops you dead. The best conventional vehicles try to dump the engine on the road so you don't get impaled by it as your hood crushes. A well built electric will lose the motors off the side and have you protected in a generous crush zone surrounded but way rigid cage.
I know how effective crush zones are from personal experience. 1997 I was hit by a dump truck. It demolished the trunk, but the dump truck bumper was too high and missed the bumper and frame of the crown viki I was in. The force was enough for my body to bend the bench seat and for my hands pulled the steering wheel out of shape. I got a flash of the dome light on the roof and it was over. I had a sore neck for a few days, but I'm sure I'd have been really injured if that dump truck had hit something rigid, like an engine compartment. The trunk was pushed almost to the back seat, about 2 feet, so I reckon that's a good crush zone.
Oregon is working on a toll-road system that downloads global positioning satellite data and odometer readings at the gasoline pump to collect fuel taxes on each gallon based on the amount a motorist drives.
Brilliant. Instead of estimating an average car mileage and using that as a gauge of road use per gallon and adding a fixed price to each gallon of gasoline, Oregon is going to show us how smart they can be! They will get to pay for the development, deployment and upkeep of totally unnecessary and invasive computer system. Imagine people's glee at getting to pay more for my gasoline because they buy an economy car that gets more miles to the gallon.
Let me know next week.
on
Hacking Vodka
·
· Score: 1
However, it was fun to do and we will probably repeat the experiment again next Friday with that godawful Russian Prince vodka.
Let me know if you have to buy another $15 filter to do the second bottle. If you do, I think I'll just spend the $15 on a better bottle of Vodka.
10:49 [after two hours of drinking Vlad the Impaler] - 6th filtration dose, Ken - ?Wow? and ?goes down like water.? Fletcher - ?Quite Comfortable.? and I gave it a boring ?Good.?
The guy flipping you off in this picture then tells you that you are blind drunk and have no taste left. He's substituted gasoline without telling you.
I've gotten similar results from two hours of drinking. Fast food suddenly tastes good and vodka goes down like water. I have not tried gasoline and don't recommend it as it might just kill you. Still, I suspect it will do it's damage without you being able to appreciate all of the warnings your tounge, nose and other senses try to send your brain. If you are lucky, you vomit. It's really frightening when you wake up the next day and remember some of what you did.
Copying single favorite passages is allowed under fair use.
So, isn't a song just a favorite passage of an album? Aren't I rendering a critical judgement by telling my mom, "this is excellent and typical of this band's work"? Don't I make a copy of any copyrighted work everytime I play it anyway?
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
It's not enough, but it's a start. It certainly allows copy. The other exemptions, in theory, are rather liberal.
The problem, according to Lessing, is that the enforcement is so heavy and expensive to defend against that what you say is effectively true. If a record company wants your life savings, you have little or no choice but to give it up. They will use the courts to take it and then some from you.
This needs to change and it will. The copyright warriors are extortionists and supporting them is a kind of self defeating extremism. Attitudes will change and laws will follow attitudes.
"Any highly excitatory stimuli (whether sexually explicit sex education or X-Rated films) say neurologists, "which lasts half a second within five to ten minutes has produced a structural change that is in some ways as profound as the structural changes one sees in [brain] damage...[and] can...leave a trace that will last for years."
Nooooo! they have discovered my super secret study method: masturbation. 3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375 10... how far can you go? Lasts for years, that's for sure. There is real pleasure in learning and I can't get enough of it! Lock me up, now, for my own good.
This is tripe. I hate pornography because it's demeaning to those who make it and creates unrealistic expectations for those who consume it, but this kind of psycho babble is not the way to fight it. My government at work, how pathetic.
Sharing files with your friends is not at all like sharing books, because the file is copied. Copyright says nothing about book sharing because it doesn't involve copying but file "sharing" is actually file copying and as such is governed by copyright.
Your interpretation is recent and radical. Copying has always been tolerated and encouraged, even with books.
Copyright laws were made to govern printing presses and nothing more. Their intent is clear even through the most superficial historical review. The framers were all educated with "lesson books", which were hand written coppies of other works made by children as school exercises. Indeed, the whole purpose of copyright was to encourage printing of books so that other people could do with them what they wanted. That included making coppies of favorite chapters, poems and other passages in their own books and letters. The makers of US copyright laws also through favorably of public libraries, who's sole purpose is to make books available to as many people as possible. It is only recently that publishers have turned against libraries and that is a most radical stance.
KDrive allows users to set up secure groups across the net, push files to the group, and selectivly share different files with different groups
Why bother renting someone else's "virtual" hard drive when you can own one? Sure, it might be nice to have someone help, but it's really easy to set this up for yourself.
Every modern linux distribution has this ability. For less than $200, anyone can hang 200 GB of content off a cable modem connected computer and share whatever they want with their friends and family by password protected, encrypted communications. With Konqueror, it's drag and drool simple. Most of the distros install that easily too, especially something simple like a utility cable box. What better use do you have for that old 233 MHz computer?
Grouper looks like it's going to bring some of that functionality to Winblows. Good for them and I wish them luck.
Slashdot Mirror
Try http://www.debian.org/security/. It's more than just a line in your sources.list.
and the fixes?
Yep, that's there too. For example, this page about an xpdf problem has date reported, links to the bug track which document the problem, the CVE page, itself what you are looking for, and packages to fix the problem. XPDF? Bummer, I had no idea, but I'm glad it got fixed in the upgrade last week.
Practically, you drop the appropriate line into your /etc/apt/sources.list file:
deb http://security.debian.org stable/updates main contrib non-free
deb http://security.debian.org testing/updates main contrib non-free
and security update will happen at every apt-get update, apt-get upgrade you do. Asking to add this line has been part of the installation for a long time. It may be the only thing you need for your sources.list file.
The Sarge net install CD gets all of it's packages straight off the web and does so before starting services that might be exploited. This makes every install as current as it can be and the whole process relatively secure. That's the bottom line, right?
Compare that to the typical Windoze wipe and reload with the "orignial" years old CD that came with the computer and M$'s aging codebase and you start to see how the free software development and distribution methods are vastly superior to closed source.
The bottom line is that you can not trust someone else's computer or network. To have real privacy, you have to use your own, with trusted (that's free) software and encryption. The internet has always been an untrusted network that must be guarded against.
That does not make this kind of capitulation to and conniving on the part of the Federal government any more appealing or sensible.
The logic of this ruling would let me put a voice recorder onto your telephone handset because it's only talking to the phone on your desk. It is self evident nonsense because the target of the conversation may be anywhere.
When I type an email and send it to my mom, it typically travels to Virginia and back. If that's not interstate, I'm not sure what is because I don't live in Virginia. If your computer is connected to an interstate network, it's interstate commerce. Indeed, it's global commerce and that's what the internet is supposed to be.
You have to wonder how people talk themselves into stuff like this. When you intercept people's electronic communications, you are wiretapping.
You won't know till data is sent requested, and even then only the sharpest of network traffic watchers will catch such a thing.
OK, that's funny. Despite your best attempts to obfuscate your writing, a pattern of missing black pixels or line spacing variations can make your printer easy to identify. I'm afraid the only people confused will be your readers.
You have to do that with every color and it will probably make it impossible to print. If they designed the print so every pixel is a single bang, there are no lower frequency signals.
Worse, this would have no effect on something subtle like line or character spacing, which could encode a serial number the same way a bar code does. Proper equipment can be set up to detect line spacing serial numbers despite scale and rotation distortion.
If you don't know what the signal is, your noise might not be helping you.
What you know is that the US government and every major printing company have conspired to make it impossible to print a document that can not be tied back to the printer. That's creepy and it lends weight to stories that once you might have dismissed as paranoid delusions.
The aggravating part is that an upright citizen should not have to go to such great lengths. It seems that 20 years ago, Uncle Sam decided that there should be no more anonymous publications or did not take steps to prevent that from happening.
Free software helps, but electronic publication is just about impossible and everything you do will have to be checked with a hexeditor. How can anyone effectively communicate without the benefit of digital cameras, for instance? Every little gadget with a serial number is a potential give away. OpenBSD might be good for this, but most free software is built with openness in mind. I used to think OpenBSD was paranoid, now I'm thinking they were right all along.
You might find some comfort in the fact that your software is not ratting you out, but you have still lost a considerable fraction of your privacy and ability to publish anonymously. When you buy that printer at the swap meet, you can be sure the previous owner was not as careful as you. It will still be linked to a particular city, and further "terrorist" investigation will lead the domestic spys to the swap meet. That's way more information than a government agency would have for an analog printing press. You won't be able to use that printer for anything but your anonymous printing and you will have to keep that on the QT. Analog printing, of course, will stand out like a sore thumb.
I don't even want to think about how bad things will get with widespread RFID tag use.
That's what the printer driver is for. It's probably part of the shrink wrap EULA they think you opened to use your printer. They might as well stamp the outside, "Use of this printer voids your right to anonymous speech. By opening this box, you consent to anything you print being uniquely traced to you, you dirty little, counterfitting, pirating, pinko scumbag. Big brother IS watching YOU."
Then you know what city it was in. Then you take advantage of backdoors in the printer driver that Xerox, HP, etc, were nice enough to put in there for you to find out what IP that printer is sitting behind. That routine would be easy to implement. Then you ask the ISP who exactly that IP was leased to. Then you know exactly where the document was printed if not when and by who.
This won't get criminals, it's going to make it easy to track and eradicate political opposition. It's evil.
That knowledge would take lots of study to learn and you could never be sure. Printers with enough sophistication to detect currency and refuse to print can pull lots of tricks on you if it detects pattern prints and other investigations. A blank page needs no identification marks at all and the printer may refuse to print any. Subtle variation in letter spacing or shape can have the same effect. Do you know exactly where each pixel in each character you print are supposed to go? Missing pixels can encode a serial number as well as those that are not supposed to be there.
That's tree words, but who's counting anyway?
Do you realize how difficult that would make operations for a legitimate organization, such as an unpopular political movement? You get one shot anonymous publication if the equipment you used, such as M$ Word, does not rat you out. Sure, criminals can get around this kind of monkey business, but anonymous publication will be a thing of the past if companies like Xerox, HP and M$ keep co-operating with this.
see here for my thoughts on how this can end free speech.
From the article:
Crean says Xerox and the government have a good relationship. "The U.S. government had been on board all along--they would actually come out to our labs," Crean says.
That's really creepy and leaves little room for Xerox to do any differently. Now that the story is out in the open, I can only hope that they will take a stand against this practice.
You don't know what you are up against and I question your ideals. That's the problem with non free software and this crap is definitely non free. This trick is 20 years old, how do you know what other patterns they put in? Subtle changes in letter spacing, and other color manipulation can do the same thing. This kind of thing is very disturbing.
This is an area where software freedom directly affects real freedom. Speech without anonymity is not free. "Big deal," you might say, "they know a printed page came from a particular printer. So what?" So, if you are using a non free operating system, your print driver might have a back door that responds to requests for information and your ISP can be forced to reveal what IP the correct response came from. Zip, zip, just like that, without any help from retailers, you can be tied to what you thought you were publishing anonymously. You think you are going to get around it with an old typewriter? You might as well be the only person in your city making woodblock prints because everyone will know you are the nutcase with antique printing equipment. The Xerox down at the corner copy shop can put it's mark on every copy you make, and it won't take much doing after that to uniquely identify you.
The free software foundation and RMS' comparison of non free software to the old Soviet Union, where copy machines were numbered and guarded are right on target.
You could script a program to 'split' the image so that you print unmarked bands in multiple runthroughs which eventually add up to a full image.
I suppose you could simply shred your work, but that's what an oppressive government would want anyway. Tell on yourself, throw you work away and wait for the trip to Minilove, the place where there is no darkness.
It already works this way. Just look at the low value and reputation of Winmodems. You can't sell one of those for more than ten buck. If something won't spin up and work with Knoppix, I don't want it. Sure, I can ignore some non working hardware if there's a way to fix it, but the research is a drag and the value is substantially lower to me. The development of working free drivers is a risk so I consider non free hardware disposable junk and tell people so.
I tell my Windoze using friends to avoid hardware like that if they care about keeping the thing longer than Microsoft's two year upgrade cycle. Their risk is compounded and much higher. If there is zero chance of them switching to free software, there's about zero chance they will consider the hardware usable in two years. It's worth is reduced to toilet paper, just like that. Most people have been the victims of the upgrade cycle by now and know what I'm talking about.
Every way, the hardware maker loses. Some people don't mind spending money on disposable hardware, but they are a decided minority. Worse for the hardware maker, these people put significant downward pressure on the price of new hardware by throwing away old stuff that people like me can use with a few awkward work arounds. I'll take and use broken equipment if the price is right. Most people don't want to spend a thousand dollars on something that won't work in two years and they are very angry at hardware makers for this kind of thing. Hardware makers that get a junk reputation suffer.
If Intel wants to make their wireless the next Winmodem, they will lose.
That's true, you would be foolish to trust an automatic software updater from a company with M$ style QC. They have a long record of breaking applications and not caring. That's why companies pay people to evaluate "updates".
The burden is considerably less in the free software world where there's no incentive to spaghetti code and break other people's applications. When code is properly modularized, it has a tendency not to break other code. I can contrast my experience with frequent distribution upgrades of Debian Unstable without problems to single applications frying Winblows.
In any case, the need for upgrading is much less in the free software world. Exploits there remain largely a laboratory exercise, despite volumes of FUD. Exploits in the Winblows world translate to a mean life for networked machines that are much less than the time it takes to use Winblows updater.
Oh, you mean like making movies and music? Go Google it and you will see that free software mixed with non-free on Linux dominates the business now and has for years. When your job depends on this and your company wants to be competitive, you will use Linux.
On the personal level, you should read this glowing Mepis review by a long standing Winblows professional who detailed how to do every conceivable multimedia task, including DVD watching and video editing. If you want a computer that will do tomorrow what it does today without getting schmegged by scammers, advertisers and others, you want Linux.
Where do you want to go today? Free software will get you there with less trouble and cost.
You need to look at the image video. The way they have made the battery compartment part of the frame would make for an excellently rigid passenger compartment. I don't like how they extended this out front, as it looks like it lacks a crush zone, but that's something that can be fixed easier than a conventional combustion engine model. The mass of the battery will protect you from rapid deceleration as well.
Compare it to the typical vehicle where a much too rigid engine compartment stops you dead. The best conventional vehicles try to dump the engine on the road so you don't get impaled by it as your hood crushes. A well built electric will lose the motors off the side and have you protected in a generous crush zone surrounded but way rigid cage.
I know how effective crush zones are from personal experience. 1997 I was hit by a dump truck. It demolished the trunk, but the dump truck bumper was too high and missed the bumper and frame of the crown viki I was in. The force was enough for my body to bend the bench seat and for my hands pulled the steering wheel out of shape. I got a flash of the dome light on the roof and it was over. I had a sore neck for a few days, but I'm sure I'd have been really injured if that dump truck had hit something rigid, like an engine compartment. The trunk was pushed almost to the back seat, about 2 feet, so I reckon that's a good crush zone.
Brilliant. Instead of estimating an average car mileage and using that as a gauge of road use per gallon and adding a fixed price to each gallon of gasoline, Oregon is going to show us how smart they can be! They will get to pay for the development, deployment and upkeep of totally unnecessary and invasive computer system. Imagine people's glee at getting to pay more for my gasoline because they buy an economy car that gets more miles to the gallon.
Let me know if you have to buy another $15 filter to do the second bottle. If you do, I think I'll just spend the $15 on a better bottle of Vodka.
The guy flipping you off in this picture then tells you that you are blind drunk and have no taste left. He's substituted gasoline without telling you.
I've gotten similar results from two hours of drinking. Fast food suddenly tastes good and vodka goes down like water. I have not tried gasoline and don't recommend it as it might just kill you. Still, I suspect it will do it's damage without you being able to appreciate all of the warnings your tounge, nose and other senses try to send your brain. If you are lucky, you vomit. It's really frightening when you wake up the next day and remember some of what you did.
So, isn't a song just a favorite passage of an album? Aren't I rendering a critical judgement by telling my mom, "this is excellent and typical of this band's work"? Don't I make a copy of any copyrighted work everytime I play it anyway?
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
It's not enough, but it's a start. It certainly allows copy. The other exemptions, in theory, are rather liberal.
The problem, according to Lessing, is that the enforcement is so heavy and expensive to defend against that what you say is effectively true. If a record company wants your life savings, you have little or no choice but to give it up. They will use the courts to take it and then some from you.
This needs to change and it will. The copyright warriors are extortionists and supporting them is a kind of self defeating extremism. Attitudes will change and laws will follow attitudes.
"Any highly excitatory stimuli (whether sexually explicit sex education or X-Rated films) say neurologists, "which lasts half a second within five to ten minutes has produced a structural change that is in some ways as profound as the structural changes one sees in [brain] damage...[and] can...leave a trace that will last for years."
Nooooo! they have discovered my super secret study method: masturbation. 3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375 10 ... how far can you go? Lasts for years, that's for sure. There is real pleasure in learning and I can't get enough of it! Lock me up, now, for my own good.
This is tripe. I hate pornography because it's demeaning to those who make it and creates unrealistic expectations for those who consume it, but this kind of psycho babble is not the way to fight it. My government at work, how pathetic.
Your interpretation is recent and radical. Copying has always been tolerated and encouraged, even with books.
Copyright laws were made to govern printing presses and nothing more. Their intent is clear even through the most superficial historical review. The framers were all educated with "lesson books", which were hand written coppies of other works made by children as school exercises. Indeed, the whole purpose of copyright was to encourage printing of books so that other people could do with them what they wanted. That included making coppies of favorite chapters, poems and other passages in their own books and letters. The makers of US copyright laws also through favorably of public libraries, who's sole purpose is to make books available to as many people as possible. It is only recently that publishers have turned against libraries and that is a most radical stance.
Why bother renting someone else's "virtual" hard drive when you can own one? Sure, it might be nice to have someone help, but it's really easy to set this up for yourself.
Every modern linux distribution has this ability. For less than $200, anyone can hang 200 GB of content off a cable modem connected computer and share whatever they want with their friends and family by password protected, encrypted communications. With Konqueror, it's drag and drool simple. Most of the distros install that easily too, especially something simple like a utility cable box. What better use do you have for that old 233 MHz computer?
Grouper looks like it's going to bring some of that functionality to Winblows. Good for them and I wish them luck.