The minister is complaining about maps.google.com and satellite imagery. Google has already acquiesced to the US government, regarding satellite imagery of the White House and Treasury Buildings.
This concept can largely be summed up as 'defense in depth'. You use multiple layers to defend that which you value the most.
Saying 'I have secured my OS, I no longer need a firewall' is like saying 'I have an airbag, thus I do not need this seatbelt'. One complements the other.
This is merely pointing out that they're following their own rules, at least, concerning presidential candidates and debates... not hard to follow them if you get to make them up, I suppose.
CPD Announces Application Of Non-Partisan Candidate Selection Criteria For October 13, 2004 Debate
October 6, 2004
The non-partisan, non-profit Commission on Presidential Debates ("CPD") announced today that it has applied its Non-Partisan Candidate Selection Criteria for 2004 General Election Debate participation to determine eligibility to participate in the presidential debate to take place at Arizona State University in Tempe, Arizona on October 13, 2004.
Pursuant to the criteria, which were publicly announced on September 24, 2003, those candidates qualify for debate participation who (1) are constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President of the United States; (2) have achieved ballot access in a sufficient number of states to win a theoretical Electoral College majority in the general election; and (3) have demonstrated a level of support of at least 15 percent of the national electorate, as determined by five selected national public opinion polling organizations, using the average of those organizations' most recent publicly-reported results.
The Board of Directors of the CPD convened today to apply the criteria with the assistance of the Editor-In-Chief of the Gallup Polling Organization, Dr. Frank Newport. Of the declared candidates, President George W. Bush and Senator John F. Kerry were found to have satisfied all three criteria. Accordingly, President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry qualify to participate in the October 13 presidential debate. No other candidates satisfied the criteria for inclusion in the October 13 debate.
The candidates who have qualified to participate today previously have committed to participate in the debates sponsored by the CPD.
As previously announced, President Bush and Senator Kerry will participate on October 8 in a town meeting-style debate sponsored by the CPD. That debate will take place on the campus of Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri.
...that cellular telephone companies are NOT the holders of a monopoly on wireless telephone service in their areas, whereas for the past 50-75 years, RBOCs (and AT&T before them) have had monopolies granted by the government (and regulated by FCC/PUCs/PSCs). Buildout of the public telephone network was partially done at taxpayer expense - I cannot see how major (commercial) ISPs or wireless phone providers that owe nothing to the government for funding for their networks should even have to disclose such information.
(But, if they did, it should definitely be public:)
Re:Performance is pretty reasonable
on
XORP 1.0 Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Uhm. Not everyone lives in a carrier hotel, and not everyone has easy/simple/cheap access to Metro Ethernet, or UDF, or anything closely resembling a RJ45 connection. I work for an ISP - Bellsouth delivers our PTP DS3s via RG58 coaxial DS3 out of a fiber shelf they installed - asking for a DS3 interface isn't really that exotic, or outdated. You assume that everyone who would want to use routers has access to MANs/Metro Ethernet/RPR/whathaveyou - this is extraordinarily shortsighted.
If you have a campus (large business, research, or education) network with existing ATM, it's now cheaper for you to rip out everything you have and replace it with switched or routed gigabit ethernet than it is to maintain your existing kit.
How is ripping out your existing infrastructure cheaper than continuing to use it?
No offense, I don't see a Linux router manufacturer stepping up to help me troubleshoot why my BGP sessions keep dying mysteriously, or why not all of my IGP routes that I've designated in a specific prefix-list are being injected into BGP - something that I'm more than willing to pay Cisco for, because their stuff just plain works.
Re:Performance is pretty reasonable
on
XORP 1.0 Released
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
The problem, IMHO, is that ALL high end routers use HARDWARE routing (see: flow/fast switching in 7500/12000s) instead of software routing. Unless you 're building ASICs to handle stuff in the data plane (VIPs or whatever the 12ks use for dCEF and the like), you're not really in any danger of becoming used by the higher end routing equipment manufacturers.
Also, software can be written all day long to run on a general purpose PC - but when was the last time you saw a multimode ATM DS3 interface, or a multichannel T3 interface for a PC?
Finally, I'm not convinced that opening the router software market is a 'good thing' - Linux advocates continually talk about 'software monoculture' being a bad, bad thing, as evidenced by Microsoft, yet you speak in your last paragraph of wanting precisely this. Imagine a flaw in the way you handled PIM (a la Cisco about a year ago), which would effectively DoS the router. Cisco at least notified their large carriers before specific details leaked onto the net - I shudder to think of someone posting 0day exploit code for something like this on Full-Disclosure.
(incidentally, I find the project fairly interesting, with the noted lack of redistribution ability.:( Hopefully, this is something that will come along in the next version (maybe?).)
Yes, it will - I regularly purchase books from there, or used off of Amazon for up to 80% off of list. Go look for Cisco Press stuff on either eBay, Alibris, or Amazon - you'll be absolutely amazed.
Cisco Press books are, without a duobt, the best technical manuals (from a manufacturer) that I have yet read. Anyone who simply bashes on the 'networking academy' crap is doing a serious disservice to the legions of people who have progressed far beyond that simple standard of networking knowledge.
I imagine that a large number of people who have never read Jeff Doyle's "Routing TCP/IP" Vols. I & II, or Kennedy Clark's "Cisco LAN Switching" will comment about this article - read any dense technical manual by either of the above, or Bassam Halabi, or Priscilla Oppenheimer, or any non-entry level book, and see what I mean.
Besides, all of the entry-level Cisco knowledge focuses on the OSI model and BASIC network troubleshooting. If you REALLY wanted to learn that and not be led by the hand thru a technical school, you would read "TCP/IP Illustrated" by W. Richard Stevens.
As long as you're willing to move, the CCIE market still seems to be pretty damned strong. I live in Alabama, and if I were to only judge the IT market based on what I know of/see here, I'd think that the industry was tits up, on it's way out. But, I know that it's not - through networking, and a number of highly-placed friends who live elsewhere.
As to the soft-skills part, yes, that's 100% true - I'm a tech support monkey and I have a close relationship with ALL of my customers (who routinely request me over other technicians) not because of skills, but because of my ability to talk to the customer pleasantly and instill confidence.
And finally, as for the homogeneity of any given environment, I would argue that the skillset required to pass the CCIE lab translates pretty well across the board, as far as other vendors go (Extreme, Foundry, Juniper, even Linksys). Configuration is a large part of any certification, but I've found that people who don't understand theory don't usually pass the exams, and it's the theory that allows you to transport that knowledge to other platforms.
I'm in the precise same boat, cert-wise - 5 months away from expiry of my CCNP/DP, and no desire to recert in them. But, I'm going ahead and taking the CCIE written anyways because it's the next logical step, IMHO. After taking the written, you have 18 months to schedule the lab, and 24 months to actually take it. Insofar as I know, the passing of the written doesn't confer recertification on the NP/DP, but it's at least as hard as those recert tests.
And for all of those saying don't waste your time/money on the CCIE, please familiarize yourself with the job landscape pertaining to CCIEs - there's quite a bit of demand, from what I can see, and very little in the way of CCIE certified candidates (that do not work for Cisco). I'd say that the CCIE is the top vendor certification available at the moment, in terms of need/desire by employers.
IP layer stuff (OSI model layer 3) is transparent to the layers both above and below it; you can easily map IPv4 addresses (as well as DNS entries) onto IPv6 addresses as long as you have a protocol stack capable of parsing the IPv6 stuff. Nothing new.
Remember people, IPv6 has been around in RFC form since December 1998 (5 years) - the adoption rate simply hasn't matched what was seemingly necessary.
Besides, ARIN isn't even close to full address depletion. There's so many spare/8's out there, that I imagine we could go on for at least another 3 before widescale implementation.
Your statement that 'no routers have it' is quite simply a pile of rubbish; Cisco, Juniper, Foundry, and Nortel routers all support IPv6 in at least one version of code, if not multiple versions.
If by 'routers' you mean Linksys, Belkin, or D-Link, you really need to redefine your concept of the word.
Jaba MUD Client is a great client - fast, flexible, and pretty much all you could want for just about any kind of MUD, including PK.
Shameless plug time: Everwar is quite simply the best PK mud out there. Check it out if you like alignment-based playerkilling with an emphasis on teamwork. Immortal staff is friendly and helpful, and usually online. And it works great with Jaba. See for yourself.
While driving today, I saw a guy with a SCO country sticker on the back of his car (similar to these), and the first thing I thought was "god, how could you like an OS/company like that so much that you'd put it on your car?"
Then, I realized that it was a Scottish flag next to the sticker, along with a simultaneous thought of "wow, I've been reading far too much/."
Just because you're a happy user, content to use your Xbox in whatever way Microsoft sees fit for you to do so, doesn't mean that everyone else on the planet shares your views. If I buy an Xbox, take it home, and decide to do something else with the equipment, that's my right, and my choice. As long as I am not unduly and tortiously interfering with the rights of others (people, not corporations), Microsoft has no recourse, period, end of story.
Selling Xbox mod chips is *exactly* like having a set of lockpicking equipment. Locks are meant to keep people out of areas they don't belong in; same goes for the 'security hardware' on the Xbox. You don't see the 5-0 arresting those guys that come and get your keys out of your locked car, do you?
Microsoft basically is using it's influence to crush out of existence what they don't like. Gee, who'd have thought they'd do that.
Well, usually, you're buying a T1 from your location to the ISP or hosting company or whoever. 99 times out of 100, you're going to have a full T1 from your place to theirs (ie: 24 channels of 64kbps, or 1.544kbps). The 1% is most likely going to be some unscrupulous ISP; I've heard stories, but never seen a T1 sold to a customer that wasn't a full on "T1".
Now, as for your bandwidth, that's a different story. It is accepted practice to have oversubscription on your network; ISPs simply don't have the money to provide a full, balls-to-the-wall, 1.544mbps connection to the net for every single one of their customers. Local loop charges for simply a T1 from their office to yours starts at around $200 (in Alabama), and that's only if you use a CLEC. The bandwidth is what you're wondering about, and quite frankly, without having someone in the know inside your ISP, you will *never* find out how oversubscribed they are. What you pay above and beyond local loop charges are bandwidth access charges; you're actually paying for internet access at that point. Roughly analogous to paying for a phone line (local loop), then paying for dialup internet service (the T1, in this analogy).
Basically, unless you're buying a DS3 (44.762mbps) or above, you will never ever get committed, 100% full bandwidth on demand all the time.
Digitally Imported, I think, is a good place to start learning about electronica in general. It's internet radio, so it does kind of require a broadband connection, however it lets you listen to various artists without spending time randomly downloading/pirating MP3s, and it gives you (what I consider to be) a relatively wide spectrum. Also, electronica stations are in abundance on Shoutcast, check them out for links and info.
Another personal favorite is Massinova, which is a pretty small webcast station. Try them out, I'm almost always listening if I'm in front of my PCs.
This is hardly surprising. This is the same comepany, after all, that has told people for years that throwing away perfectly good printheads (such as those conveniently attached to the ink cartridges) gives you 'higher quality' at a lower price. I used to work at CompUSA 4-5 years ago, and I remember even then how hard HP had to try to convince me and my fellow sales goons that this was 'good for the consumer'. Of course, then again, what with their extended warranties, CompUSA hasn't exactly been a shining paragon of sales morality.
Hmm. HP makes a ton of money off of those ink carts; I wonder how much CompUSA/Best Buy/Wiz/etc make off of each cart they sell. The guys pushing these disposable printers on people should get a fair share of the finger-pointing as well.
That's roughly akin to saying that the manufacturer of the coathanger some guy broke into my car and stole it with is responsible for grand theft auto (the crime, not the game). The piracy would have occurred with or without the help of Bnetd software; it just may have been harder.
Next time, please think before posting. Thank you, drive thru.
P-T: Do you feel that the huge number of pirated Blizzard games will hurt BNetD in the court cases?
Vivendi Rep: Yes. The fact that it is not only pirated server software but also pirated game software will do nothing but hurt BNetD in the courts.
Good thing he has such a firm grasp on the issues involved in this case. Of course, then again, most judges don't have a firm grasp on anything of this sort either.
I wonder, if more judges that oversaw cases such as these were highly technically minded, would the people litigating such cases be inclined to learn more about the stuff they're litigating against? And if so, would they feel some pangs of moral regret for using such an absurd piece of legislation to pas their own bank accounts? (Specifically, the DMCA)
Hey look, I got two ads on this Slashdot page - one for a Pentium 4-M processor, and one for some crappy book about dogs. I demand a refund. I thought they said no more than one ad per page.
Is it me, or does Gates sound a little high in this interview? I mean, this guy, by all accounts, is pretty GD smart whether you want to admit it or not, and here he's giving answers like "All the taxes will be paid by those guys or something -- I don't know. And the farmers will go home at night and work on the source code."
Who the hell would want to go home from a day of backbusting labor and work on source code?
Slashdot Mirror
Way to RTFA.
The minister is complaining about maps.google.com and satellite imagery. Google has already acquiesced to the US government, regarding satellite imagery of the White House and Treasury Buildings.
This concept can largely be summed up as 'defense in depth'. You use multiple layers to defend that which you value the most.
Saying 'I have secured my OS, I no longer need a firewall' is like saying 'I have an airbag, thus I do not need this seatbelt'. One complements the other.
Note that all of this occurred (ostensibly, judging by the TLD) in the Netherlands.
US laws don't apply there, I'm pretty certain.
This is merely pointing out that they're following their own rules, at least, concerning presidential candidates and debates... not hard to follow them if you get to make them up, I suppose.
CPD Announces Application Of Non-Partisan Candidate Selection Criteria For October 13, 2004 Debate
October 6, 2004
The non-partisan, non-profit Commission on Presidential Debates ("CPD") announced today that it has applied its Non-Partisan Candidate Selection Criteria for 2004 General Election Debate participation to determine eligibility to participate in the presidential debate to take place at Arizona State University in Tempe, Arizona on October 13, 2004.
Pursuant to the criteria, which were publicly announced on September 24, 2003, those candidates qualify for debate participation who (1) are constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President of the United States; (2) have achieved ballot access in a sufficient number of states to win a theoretical Electoral College majority in the general election; and (3) have demonstrated a level of support of at least 15 percent of the national electorate, as determined by five selected national public opinion polling organizations, using the average of those organizations' most recent publicly-reported results.
The Board of Directors of the CPD convened today to apply the criteria with the assistance of the Editor-In-Chief of the Gallup Polling Organization, Dr. Frank Newport. Of the declared candidates, President George W. Bush and Senator John F. Kerry were found to have satisfied all three criteria. Accordingly, President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry qualify to participate in the October 13 presidential debate. No other candidates satisfied the criteria for inclusion in the October 13 debate.
The candidates who have qualified to participate today previously have committed to participate in the debates sponsored by the CPD.
As previously announced, President Bush and Senator Kerry will participate on October 8 in a town meeting-style debate sponsored by the CPD. That debate will take place on the campus of Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri.
...that cellular telephone companies are NOT the holders of a monopoly on wireless telephone service in their areas, whereas for the past 50-75 years, RBOCs (and AT&T before them) have had monopolies granted by the government (and regulated by FCC/PUCs/PSCs). Buildout of the public telephone network was partially done at taxpayer expense - I cannot see how major (commercial) ISPs or wireless phone providers that owe nothing to the government for funding for their networks should even have to disclose such information.
:)
(But, if they did, it should definitely be public
Uhm. Not everyone lives in a carrier hotel, and not everyone has easy/simple/cheap access to Metro Ethernet, or UDF, or anything closely resembling a RJ45 connection. I work for an ISP - Bellsouth delivers our PTP DS3s via RG58 coaxial DS3 out of a fiber shelf they installed - asking for a DS3 interface isn't really that exotic, or outdated. You assume that everyone who would want to use routers has access to MANs/Metro Ethernet/RPR/whathaveyou - this is extraordinarily shortsighted.
If you have a campus (large business, research, or education) network with existing ATM, it's now cheaper for you to rip out everything you have and replace it with switched or routed gigabit ethernet than it is to maintain your existing kit.
How is ripping out your existing infrastructure cheaper than continuing to use it?
No offense, I don't see a Linux router manufacturer stepping up to help me troubleshoot why my BGP sessions keep dying mysteriously, or why not all of my IGP routes that I've designated in a specific prefix-list are being injected into BGP - something that I'm more than willing to pay Cisco for, because their stuff just plain works.
The problem, IMHO, is that ALL high end routers use HARDWARE routing (see: flow/fast switching in 7500/12000s) instead of software routing. Unless you 're building ASICs to handle stuff in the data plane (VIPs or whatever the 12ks use for dCEF and the like), you're not really in any danger of becoming used by the higher end routing equipment manufacturers.
:( Hopefully, this is something that will come along in the next version (maybe?).)
Also, software can be written all day long to run on a general purpose PC - but when was the last time you saw a multimode ATM DS3 interface, or a multichannel T3 interface for a PC?
Finally, I'm not convinced that opening the router software market is a 'good thing' - Linux advocates continually talk about 'software monoculture' being a bad, bad thing, as evidenced by Microsoft, yet you speak in your last paragraph of wanting precisely this. Imagine a flaw in the way you handled PIM (a la Cisco about a year ago), which would effectively DoS the router. Cisco at least notified their large carriers before specific details leaked onto the net - I shudder to think of someone posting 0day exploit code for something like this on Full-Disclosure.
(incidentally, I find the project fairly interesting, with the noted lack of redistribution ability.
Yes, it will - I regularly purchase books from there, or used off of Amazon for up to 80% off of list. Go look for Cisco Press stuff on either eBay, Alibris, or Amazon - you'll be absolutely amazed.
Buy used Cisco Press books from eBay, Amazon, or Alibris.
I regularly purchase books for under $20, slightly used. Don't let the cover price scare you.
Cisco Press books are, without a duobt, the best technical manuals (from a manufacturer) that I have yet read. Anyone who simply bashes on the 'networking academy' crap is doing a serious disservice to the legions of people who have progressed far beyond that simple standard of networking knowledge.
I imagine that a large number of people who have never read Jeff Doyle's "Routing TCP/IP" Vols. I & II, or Kennedy Clark's "Cisco LAN Switching" will comment about this article - read any dense technical manual by either of the above, or Bassam Halabi, or Priscilla Oppenheimer, or any non-entry level book, and see what I mean.
Besides, all of the entry-level Cisco knowledge focuses on the OSI model and BASIC network troubleshooting. If you REALLY wanted to learn that and not be led by the hand thru a technical school, you would read "TCP/IP Illustrated" by W. Richard Stevens.
As long as you're willing to move, the CCIE market still seems to be pretty damned strong. I live in Alabama, and if I were to only judge the IT market based on what I know of/see here, I'd think that the industry was tits up, on it's way out. But, I know that it's not - through networking, and a number of highly-placed friends who live elsewhere.
As to the soft-skills part, yes, that's 100% true - I'm a tech support monkey and I have a close relationship with ALL of my customers (who routinely request me over other technicians) not because of skills, but because of my ability to talk to the customer pleasantly and instill confidence.
And finally, as for the homogeneity of any given environment, I would argue that the skillset required to pass the CCIE lab translates pretty well across the board, as far as other vendors go (Extreme, Foundry, Juniper, even Linksys). Configuration is a large part of any certification, but I've found that people who don't understand theory don't usually pass the exams, and it's the theory that allows you to transport that knowledge to other platforms.
I'm in the precise same boat, cert-wise - 5 months away from expiry of my CCNP/DP, and no desire to recert in them. But, I'm going ahead and taking the CCIE written anyways because it's the next logical step, IMHO. After taking the written, you have 18 months to schedule the lab, and 24 months to actually take it. Insofar as I know, the passing of the written doesn't confer recertification on the NP/DP, but it's at least as hard as those recert tests.
And for all of those saying don't waste your time/money on the CCIE, please familiarize yourself with the job landscape pertaining to CCIEs - there's quite a bit of demand, from what I can see, and very little in the way of CCIE certified candidates (that do not work for Cisco). I'd say that the CCIE is the top vendor certification available at the moment, in terms of need/desire by employers.
IP layer stuff (OSI model layer 3) is transparent to the layers both above and below it; you can easily map IPv4 addresses (as well as DNS entries) onto IPv6 addresses as long as you have a protocol stack capable of parsing the IPv6 stuff. Nothing new.
/8's out there, that I imagine we could go on for at least another 3 before widescale implementation.
Remember people, IPv6 has been around in RFC form since December 1998 (5 years) - the adoption rate simply hasn't matched what was seemingly necessary.
Besides, ARIN isn't even close to full address depletion. There's so many spare
Your statement that 'no routers have it' is quite simply a pile of rubbish; Cisco, Juniper, Foundry, and Nortel routers all support IPv6 in at least one version of code, if not multiple versions.
If by 'routers' you mean Linksys, Belkin, or D-Link, you really need to redefine your concept of the word.
Jaba MUD Client is a great client - fast, flexible, and pretty much all you could want for just about any kind of MUD, including PK.
Shameless plug time:
Everwar is quite simply the best PK mud out there. Check it out if you like alignment-based playerkilling with an emphasis on teamwork. Immortal staff is friendly and helpful, and usually online. And it works great with Jaba. See for yourself.
While driving today, I saw a guy with a SCO country sticker on the back of his car (similar to these), and the first thing I thought was "god, how could you like an OS/company like that so much that you'd put it on your car?"
/."
Then, I realized that it was a Scottish flag next to the sticker, along with a simultaneous thought of "wow, I've been reading far too much
Just because you're a happy user, content to use your Xbox in whatever way Microsoft sees fit for you to do so, doesn't mean that everyone else on the planet shares your views. If I buy an Xbox, take it home, and decide to do something else with the equipment, that's my right, and my choice. As long as I am not unduly and tortiously interfering with the rights of others (people, not corporations), Microsoft has no recourse, period, end of story.
Selling Xbox mod chips is *exactly* like having a set of lockpicking equipment. Locks are meant to keep people out of areas they don't belong in; same goes for the 'security hardware' on the Xbox. You don't see the 5-0 arresting those guys that come and get your keys out of your locked car, do you?
Microsoft basically is using it's influence to crush out of existence what they don't like. Gee, who'd have thought they'd do that.
Well, usually, you're buying a T1 from your location to the ISP or hosting company or whoever. 99 times out of 100, you're going to have a full T1 from your place to theirs (ie: 24 channels of 64kbps, or 1.544kbps). The 1% is most likely going to be some unscrupulous ISP; I've heard stories, but never seen a T1 sold to a customer that wasn't a full on "T1".
Now, as for your bandwidth, that's a different story. It is accepted practice to have oversubscription on your network; ISPs simply don't have the money to provide a full, balls-to-the-wall, 1.544mbps connection to the net for every single one of their customers. Local loop charges for simply a T1 from their office to yours starts at around $200 (in Alabama), and that's only if you use a CLEC. The bandwidth is what you're wondering about, and quite frankly, without having someone in the know inside your ISP, you will *never* find out how oversubscribed they are. What you pay above and beyond local loop charges are bandwidth access charges; you're actually paying for internet access at that point. Roughly analogous to paying for a phone line (local loop), then paying for dialup internet service (the T1, in this analogy).
Basically, unless you're buying a DS3 (44.762mbps) or above, you will never ever get committed, 100% full bandwidth on demand all the time.
Digitally Imported, I think, is a good place to start learning about electronica in general. It's internet radio, so it does kind of require a broadband connection, however it lets you listen to various artists without spending time randomly downloading/pirating MP3s, and it gives you (what I consider to be) a relatively wide spectrum. Also, electronica stations are in abundance on Shoutcast, check them out for links and info.
Another personal favorite is Massinova, which is a pretty small webcast station. Try them out, I'm almost always listening if I'm in front of my PCs.
This is hardly surprising. This is the same comepany, after all, that has told people for years that throwing away perfectly good printheads (such as those conveniently attached to the ink cartridges) gives you 'higher quality' at a lower price. I used to work at CompUSA 4-5 years ago, and I remember even then how hard HP had to try to convince me and my fellow sales goons that this was 'good for the consumer'. Of course, then again, what with their extended warranties, CompUSA hasn't exactly been a shining paragon of sales morality.
Hmm. HP makes a ton of money off of those ink carts; I wonder how much CompUSA/Best Buy/Wiz/etc make off of each cart they sell. The guys pushing these disposable printers on people should get a fair share of the finger-pointing as well.
See title.
Someone failed l33t spelling in high school, I see.
That's roughly akin to saying that the manufacturer of the coathanger some guy broke into my car and stole it with is responsible for grand theft auto (the crime, not the game). The piracy would have occurred with or without the help of Bnetd software; it just may have been harder.
Next time, please think before posting. Thank you, drive thru.
Good thing he has such a firm grasp on the issues involved in this case. Of course, then again, most judges don't have a firm grasp on anything of this sort either.
I wonder, if more judges that oversaw cases such as these were highly technically minded, would the people litigating such cases be inclined to learn more about the stuff they're litigating against? And if so, would they feel some pangs of moral regret for using such an absurd piece of legislation to pas their own bank accounts? (Specifically, the DMCA)
Hey look, I got two ads on this Slashdot page - one for a Pentium 4-M processor, and one for some crappy book about dogs. I demand a refund. I thought they said no more than one ad per page.
Is it me, or does Gates sound a little high in this interview? I mean, this guy, by all accounts, is pretty GD smart whether you want to admit it or not, and here he's giving answers like "All the taxes will be paid by those guys or something -- I don't know. And the farmers will go home at night and work on the source code."
Who the hell would want to go home from a day of backbusting labor and work on source code?