Then the cops wouldn't pick up any computers at all, which would be silly. I'd rather see compensation come out of the police budget if computers aren't turned over in a reasonable amount of time, similar to how US citizens technically have the right to a "a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury."
In the UK, yes. You'll be required to hand over your encryption keys to the government. If you refuse, it's 2-5 years, depending whether or not you're a "terrorist suspect." I wouldn't surprised if refusing makes you a terrorist suspect mighty quickly.
Perhaps there is nothing morally wrong with it. But it is stupid. No automatic tool will completely replace a trained professional (for now). And that's even ignoring the likelihood that the UK police are confiscating way too many computers. The fact that they have way too many computers to investigate is very likely a symptom of an overzealous police force/government declaring many things illegal, as seems to be the trend in the West as of late. So really all they're doing is attacking the symptom, not the problem; which is par for the course as far as governments are concerned.
Note: I'm an American. But it appears as if we're misunderstanding Japanese culture. This is after all, the same culture that has "monsters" come house to house in some villages, to scare children who have been lax at their school work, share a drink with the parents, and then move on. Here in America (and many western cultures), attendance in university classes is not deemed necessary; if you're smart enough to pass exams and assignments on your own, you're qualified. In the east, the attitude towards attendance appears to be different. Maybe that's why so many (higher tier) jobs are leaving America.
Mayhaps it isn't a major bug, but this is exactly what Microsoft does every time. Downplay their bugs (and take their sweet time patching them), while bashing any high profile bugs that crop up in open source projects. I'd be more impressed if their response was "There's a bug in IIS, don't use feature X or configuration Y while we fix it."
On one hand, he's right, when someone else runs your program, they have your data. This has always been a concern with "cloud computing" and software as a service. What happens if the company holding my information goes down? What if they're attacked?
On the other hand, many businesses don't have the time, or the equipment to run this software on their own. It's great to say that they should run open source software, but that's an easy generalization. Sometimes there isn't an open source alternative (keep in mind, I am writing this on Firefox, running on Linux. I love open source as much as the next geek, I'm just realistic). Or even if there is, sometimes just renting 10% of some other server to run a service for you is cheaper than getting your own servers, and IT people to maintain it.
Overall, RMS has become the ideological leader of the free software movement. Like any good Libertarian (analogy, I'm not saying he's Libertarian. I'm not aware of his political affiliations), he doesn't allow for practicality to interfere with ideology. I mean, the idea of free software is great, just some compromises need to be made. One cannot jump straight to free software without any in-between.
Oh, and his complaints about people calling GNU/Linux just Linux are really starting to get old.
To translate this out further to understandable terms, basically the judge had worked with several organizations that are the Swedish equivalents to the RIAA, MPAA, etc.
Cause political chaos by throwing sudden, and massive support behind a new political party. Wish Americans were capable of picking some other party aside from Republicans or Democrats.
This is such a poor plan. When you take music away from people, you take away entertainment. Take away books (especially text books), you make people dumber. And we have a problem with this already.
Then do something with the research! Any organization that has the power to do research for the sake of research, should be scientific and not have the power to patent to begin with.
On a more calm note. I understand your point. But I feel that by allowing companies to patent technology they never implemented, or even pursued, we do more damage via patent trolls; than the damage we would do by disallowing companies to patent unused research.
I believe that if you aren't using the item that's patented, you shouldn't be able to sue over it. The purpose of a patent is to protect those who innovate from having their ideas stolen. But if you aren't actually using those ideas (as a product, business, technology, whatever), then why should it be patented? More succinctly, why should companies be able to make money off of hoarding patents, without actually developing anything?
Now I think we can all see (at least at an intellectual level) why they want to try this. In theory, at least it'll allow for faster and more accurate convictions.
Furthermore, juries are lead to believe that DNA is perfect evidence. While in theory the probability of two non-twins matching is very low, the issue is there is absolutely no way to prove how exactly that material got there. What if you were in a car, and two weeks later someone else is shot in it? Or worse, what if you and your girlfriend did some dirty business in the back? Your DNA will be in the back, and it's going to be hard fighting that off in court, because the Jury believes that DNA is full-proof evidence.
If you read the top of that page, it noted that the majority of those listed problems were fixed for 8.x, but they weren't ready to be backported to 7.x
I think the OP's comment about perfect was within the context of the most basic users. And I'd agree. For the vast majority of "simple" tasks (a very ambiguous statement), the setup/use of Linux (esp. Ubuntu) is exceptionally easy (also subjective).
Within the spheres of some Windows power users, who understand the ins and outs of Windows perfectly, Linux is foreign and useless. But the same could be said about Linux power users and Windows. So that is more of a statement about the difficulty users who are strongly versed in one OS have in switching to another. And that proves nothing in the Linux vs. Windows debate.
As far as security is concerned, I'd probably argue that Linux is more secure, but not completely secure. It's possible to get a Linux box completely screwed up (someone was talking about that here, where they accidentally exposed a Linux box with a very old version of OpenSSL to the web and got it compromised), but the question of which is easier to get more secure, or which will have fewer issues. No software is perfect (please no BSD comments), it's all a game of lesser of two evils.
I bought the game, I own the media. I should NOT have to connect to the internet, download a client, download whatever updates it deems are necessary. It was really frustrating when I was between broadband watching Steam try to download huge updates so I could play the game I bought specifically so I'd have the media and wouldn't need to download anything. Naive me, assuming you can actually play a game you own the discs to.
What you talkin' about Willis?
You've never played any EA games. If I don't play BF2142 or BF2 for a long time, I have to go download a massive update, from a slow server, to be able to play on any ranked servers.
My experience with Steam has been excellent. I don't care about selling games, and I accept that updates are necessary sometimes, but they never interfere with actually using my game (first time excluded). That and if you wait, certain games will be very cheap at times.
Try coreboot. I haven't tried it or looked to heavily into it, but I understand that it can take a certain "cargo" into the bios, and one of the possibilities for that cargo is a linux kernel. That'd boot quickly.
All this cloud nonsense is silly. Most end-users and businesses have invested way too much money in powerful workstations, desktops, and laptops, to justify scrapping them in favor of ultralights depending on cloud computing. It's just a marketing pipe dream.
Even a watered down version of the cloud, say for storage has inherent security issues. How do you control what data goes where, who accesses it, how do you secure it, etc. If I'm counting on some server to hold all of my data outside of my computer, then god save me if I lose my network connection, or if their servers are compromised. At least if I lose my own data, I know whom to blame.
Good idea, but it's a pipe dream. Here in the US, Congress spends a lot of money on public research, but we never see most of it. Technically it's public domain, but you can't use the Freedom of Information Act on a document you don't know about.
A tiny percentage makes it to wikileaks anonymously through various senators and representatives, but only when it makes some of their opponents look bad. Reports that reflect poorly on the US government as a whole, especially Congress, quietly disappear.
Moral: Unless forced to, western governments will almost never admit that they're wrong. You have to catch them in the act before they'll say "sorry." Even then that won't stop them from doing it again.
Right, but even current (and comparatively primitive, I'm assuming) generation stealth aircraft are pretty resistant to IR sensors (which often lack range detecting ability). The coating doesn't have to necessarily absorb all the energy, it just has to throw it somewhere where the original sender won't pick it up.
That's all good and stuff, but as mentioned, a lot of the radiation you're referring to has a very different wavelength/frequency than what it is currently known to block. And, in high-risk applications, toughness of the coating becomes an issue. What do you do when your nuclear power plant, or space ship, gets a scratch and begins leaking radiation?
Slashdot Mirror
Then the cops wouldn't pick up any computers at all, which would be silly. I'd rather see compensation come out of the police budget if computers aren't turned over in a reasonable amount of time, similar to how US citizens technically have the right to a "a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury."
I wonder how many thumb drives you must go through.....
In the UK, yes. You'll be required to hand over your encryption keys to the government. If you refuse, it's 2-5 years, depending whether or not you're a "terrorist suspect." I wouldn't surprised if refusing makes you a terrorist suspect mighty quickly.
Perhaps there is nothing morally wrong with it. But it is stupid. No automatic tool will completely replace a trained professional (for now). And that's even ignoring the likelihood that the UK police are confiscating way too many computers. The fact that they have way too many computers to investigate is very likely a symptom of an overzealous police force/government declaring many things illegal, as seems to be the trend in the West as of late. So really all they're doing is attacking the symptom, not the problem; which is par for the course as far as governments are concerned.
Note: I'm an American. But it appears as if we're misunderstanding Japanese culture. This is after all, the same culture that has "monsters" come house to house in some villages, to scare children who have been lax at their school work, share a drink with the parents, and then move on. Here in America (and many western cultures), attendance in university classes is not deemed necessary; if you're smart enough to pass exams and assignments on your own, you're qualified. In the east, the attitude towards attendance appears to be different. Maybe that's why so many (higher tier) jobs are leaving America.
Mayhaps it isn't a major bug, but this is exactly what Microsoft does every time. Downplay their bugs (and take their sweet time patching them), while bashing any high profile bugs that crop up in open source projects. I'd be more impressed if their response was "There's a bug in IIS, don't use feature X or configuration Y while we fix it."
RMS is a bit insane?
On one hand, he's right, when someone else runs your program, they have your data. This has always been a concern with "cloud computing" and software as a service. What happens if the company holding my information goes down? What if they're attacked?
On the other hand, many businesses don't have the time, or the equipment to run this software on their own. It's great to say that they should run open source software, but that's an easy generalization. Sometimes there isn't an open source alternative (keep in mind, I am writing this on Firefox, running on Linux. I love open source as much as the next geek, I'm just realistic). Or even if there is, sometimes just renting 10% of some other server to run a service for you is cheaper than getting your own servers, and IT people to maintain it.
Overall, RMS has become the ideological leader of the free software movement. Like any good Libertarian (analogy, I'm not saying he's Libertarian. I'm not aware of his political affiliations), he doesn't allow for practicality to interfere with ideology. I mean, the idea of free software is great, just some compromises need to be made. One cannot jump straight to free software without any in-between.
Oh, and his complaints about people calling GNU/Linux just Linux are really starting to get old.
To translate this out further to understandable terms, basically the judge had worked with several organizations that are the Swedish equivalents to the RIAA, MPAA, etc.
Cause political chaos by throwing sudden, and massive support behind a new political party. Wish Americans were capable of picking some other party aside from Republicans or Democrats.
I'm not trying to degrade music. But I feel books are more important, especially text books. Then again, I am a CS major, and the son of an engineer.
This is such a poor plan. When you take music away from people, you take away entertainment. Take away books (especially text books), you make people dumber. And we have a problem with this already.
Then do something with the research! Any organization that has the power to do research for the sake of research, should be scientific and not have the power to patent to begin with.
On a more calm note. I understand your point. But I feel that by allowing companies to patent technology they never implemented, or even pursued, we do more damage via patent trolls; than the damage we would do by disallowing companies to patent unused research.
I believe that if you aren't using the item that's patented, you shouldn't be able to sue over it. The purpose of a patent is to protect those who innovate from having their ideas stolen. But if you aren't actually using those ideas (as a product, business, technology, whatever), then why should it be patented? More succinctly, why should companies be able to make money off of hoarding patents, without actually developing anything?
Now I think we can all see (at least at an intellectual level) why they want to try this. In theory, at least it'll allow for faster and more accurate convictions.
The problem is, the UK, who has the largest DNA Database in the world, is having some problems with accuracy. And the Germans spent 15 years hunting a serial killer who didn't even exit.
Furthermore, juries are lead to believe that DNA is perfect evidence. While in theory the probability of two non-twins matching is very low, the issue is there is absolutely no way to prove how exactly that material got there. What if you were in a car, and two weeks later someone else is shot in it? Or worse, what if you and your girlfriend did some dirty business in the back? Your DNA will be in the back, and it's going to be hard fighting that off in court, because the Jury believes that DNA is full-proof evidence.
If you read the top of that page, it noted that the majority of those listed problems were fixed for 8.x, but they weren't ready to be backported to 7.x
They should (peacefully) scrap their government and try it again. If I recall correctly, they've done it 17 times since the French Revolution.
But Ubuntu has already reviewed it, and pushed it out through the repositories, marking it as critical. I love open source.
I think the OP's comment about perfect was within the context of the most basic users. And I'd agree. For the vast majority of "simple" tasks (a very ambiguous statement), the setup/use of Linux (esp. Ubuntu) is exceptionally easy (also subjective).
Within the spheres of some Windows power users, who understand the ins and outs of Windows perfectly, Linux is foreign and useless. But the same could be said about Linux power users and Windows. So that is more of a statement about the difficulty users who are strongly versed in one OS have in switching to another. And that proves nothing in the Linux vs. Windows debate.
As far as security is concerned, I'd probably argue that Linux is more secure, but not completely secure. It's possible to get a Linux box completely screwed up (someone was talking about that here, where they accidentally exposed a Linux box with a very old version of OpenSSL to the web and got it compromised), but the question of which is easier to get more secure, or which will have fewer issues. No software is perfect (please no BSD comments), it's all a game of lesser of two evils.
I bought the game, I own the media. I should NOT have to connect to the internet, download a client, download whatever updates it deems are necessary. It was really frustrating when I was between broadband watching Steam try to download huge updates so I could play the game I bought specifically so I'd have the media and wouldn't need to download anything. Naive me, assuming you can actually play a game you own the discs to.
What you talkin' about Willis?
You've never played any EA games. If I don't play BF2142 or BF2 for a long time, I have to go download a massive update, from a slow server, to be able to play on any ranked servers.
My experience with Steam has been excellent. I don't care about selling games, and I accept that updates are necessary sometimes, but they never interfere with actually using my game (first time excluded). That and if you wait, certain games will be very cheap at times.
Try coreboot. I haven't tried it or looked to heavily into it, but I understand that it can take a certain "cargo" into the bios, and one of the possibilities for that cargo is a linux kernel. That'd boot quickly.
All this cloud nonsense is silly. Most end-users and businesses have invested way too much money in powerful workstations, desktops, and laptops, to justify scrapping them in favor of ultralights depending on cloud computing. It's just a marketing pipe dream.
Even a watered down version of the cloud, say for storage has inherent security issues. How do you control what data goes where, who accesses it, how do you secure it, etc. If I'm counting on some server to hold all of my data outside of my computer, then god save me if I lose my network connection, or if their servers are compromised. At least if I lose my own data, I know whom to blame.
Good idea, but it's a pipe dream. Here in the US, Congress spends a lot of money on public research, but we never see most of it. Technically it's public domain, but you can't use the Freedom of Information Act on a document you don't know about.
A tiny percentage makes it to wikileaks anonymously through various senators and representatives, but only when it makes some of their opponents look bad. Reports that reflect poorly on the US government as a whole, especially Congress, quietly disappear. Moral: Unless forced to, western governments will almost never admit that they're wrong. You have to catch them in the act before they'll say "sorry." Even then that won't stop them from doing it again.
Strauss Zelnick presses charges against Jack Thompson, claiming this was a threat. Mostly because it would entertain me.
Right, but even current (and comparatively primitive, I'm assuming) generation stealth aircraft are pretty resistant to IR sensors (which often lack range detecting ability). The coating doesn't have to necessarily absorb all the energy, it just has to throw it somewhere where the original sender won't pick it up.
That's all good and stuff, but as mentioned, a lot of the radiation you're referring to has a very different wavelength/frequency than what it is currently known to block. And, in high-risk applications, toughness of the coating becomes an issue. What do you do when your nuclear power plant, or space ship, gets a scratch and begins leaking radiation?