Completely different scenarios. Rainbow tables only work when you have access to hashed passwords. They also run into trouble with salts. They also run into trouble when you change hash algos (have to re-generate the tables).
Ah yes, the old "extradite from the UK to Sweden so we can extradite you from Sweden to the US, even though we have an extradition treaty with the UK" maneuver-- creating red tape for no other reason than that we can.
Im willing to come with you and discuss the robbery charges, officer, if you sign this document stating that you promise to never extradite me to another country.
Any guesses as to why A) no officer would ever sign that and B) it would be worthless if he did?
A) I wasnt endorsing him, although certainly I do like the general idea of constitutional originalism that he supports, and what I have heard of his reasoning I have found spot on.
B) Justices arent hired for their wit, but their legal expertise. Im not sure Thomas really cares what you think of how loquacious or otherwise he is, nor do I. I care that a Justice does his best to rule accurately on what the constitution says.
Its interesting you would call me myopically picky while knowing essentially nothing of my positions. I dont tend to agree with a lot of how interstate commerce is defined.
Which really reads "xenophobic and reactionary", for how is it not "the US vs. THEM"?
I dont recall attacking you, your country, stating support for any particular war, or anything else. Youre the one who complained about the "us vs them mentality", and then launched into a tirade about how xenophobic, reactionary, stupid, shortsighted, selfish, and I dont know what else various groups are supposed to be.
You might want to take a deep breath, step back, and rethink how you post if you really dont like the sort of rhetoric that inhabits politics these days. Because Im gonna be honest: youre contributing your fair share to it.
Then lets start a campaign to sterilize all "unfit" individuals, and bring mandatory state-run eugenics programs up to full steam. Who cares how we do it, we're creating a utopia.
The problem is that European countries are not at all the same as the US, because you dont have a 10th amendment which explicitly gives a lot of lattitude to the states. Obamacare not only taxes something that has never really been taxed before ("just being alive"), it also takes control of something that has never been considered a governmental role, much less a federal one.
You cant just say "screw precedent, the constitution, and 230 years of history, my idea is a good one".
The thing with most politics in the USoA is that it isn't about your particular stance, but about whose side you're on,
Its ironic you would say that after your disparaging remarks about people identifying as tea party, and your generally disparaging remarks towards conservatives in general. How have you NOT just made this an "us vs them"?
... And yet Tea Partiers, Clarance Thomas, and conservatives in general get ridiculed when they question things like Obamacare, gun control, etc which all clearly go against the intent of the 1st, 2nd, and 10th amendments. I guess the "principle of the thing" really is important sometimes.
Your fantasy futuristic free-content utopian vision does not justify breaking IP laws that society has agreed are valid for 230 years (and longer). We have a system for changing laws if the majority of society agreed with you. It doesnt, which is why those laws arent changed.
Theres not much help when even anti-authoritarian communities like slashdot are willing to submit to "think of the children arguments" when it comes to the 2nd amendment and 5th amendment.
Or are the folks advocating their abolition truly the minority on here? I certainly hope so.
There is very little difference between the NSA's argument The spying is OK because it stops terrorist plots and the typical P2P apologist argument that piracy is OK because it doesnt drive publishers out of business
Also, if the poacher didnt NEED to kill the rhino to get the horn but historically does anyways, what makes you think they care at all about "needlessly jeopardising their future revenue stream"? How did such a line of reasoning work out with the american bison, how is it working out with fisheries?
People will hunt an animal to extinction without worrying about what it does to their future revenue stream, this has been shown throughout history, and its not hard to understand. If you are one fisherman, its A) very hard to think that the few fish YOU catch will have a significant impact, and B) hard to "do the right thing" when it means abandoning the way you make a living.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think your reputation can be salvaged at this point
We've heard that before when Sony...
I could go on. And now of course people are talking about how great Sony is.
The point is, yes, their rep can be salvaged, because people really dont care that much for very long.
The world where triple A titles will be on a system that RMS approves is the same world where communism works.
That is, not this one.
Im not supportive of anything particular here, just recognizing how ludicrous the claims of conspiracies surrounding assange are.
"Not a fan of big government" doesnt mean "believes every tin-foil hat conspiracy anyone makes up". Im capable of nuance and subtlety like that.
Completely different scenarios. Rainbow tables only work when you have access to hashed passwords. They also run into trouble with salts. They also run into trouble when you change hash algos (have to re-generate the tables).
Ah yes, the old "extradite from the UK to Sweden so we can extradite you from Sweden to the US, even though we have an extradition treaty with the UK" maneuver-- creating red tape for no other reason than that we can.
A little tried, but much feared legal gambit.
Im willing to come with you and discuss the robbery charges, officer, if you sign this document stating that you promise to never extradite me to another country.
Any guesses as to why A) no officer would ever sign that and B) it would be worthless if he did?
I'd be delighted if standards existed in this area; but they don't(to my knowledge, if they do, please let me know).
They are. Use a floppy boot disk, boot to a PXE thin client.
For example, 2x software has a solution that does this.
Thin clients should basically never need to be replaced until they HCF, at which point theyre much cheaper than your average desktop.
When volume is your target you want a flat tax-- ie, $0.01 per trade. THAT would have essentially zero effect on the average trader.
Percent based hits everyone exactly the same. It WOULD affect people chasing after a 0.01% profit, but it doesnt really target HFT particularly.
They dont control the computers in our homes. PRISM means a lot of things, but thats not one of them.
Take a deep breath, and lower the hysteria about 2 notches.
We've always known that the average slashdotter is nothing, if not consistent.
A) I wasnt endorsing him, although certainly I do like the general idea of constitutional originalism that he supports, and what I have heard of his reasoning I have found spot on.
B) Justices arent hired for their wit, but their legal expertise. Im not sure Thomas really cares what you think of how loquacious or otherwise he is, nor do I. I care that a Justice does his best to rule accurately on what the constitution says.
Its interesting you would call me myopically picky while knowing essentially nothing of my positions. I dont tend to agree with a lot of how interstate commerce is defined.
Which really reads "xenophobic and reactionary", for how is it not "the US vs. THEM"?
I dont recall attacking you, your country, stating support for any particular war, or anything else. Youre the one who complained about the "us vs them mentality", and then launched into a tirade about how xenophobic, reactionary, stupid, shortsighted, selfish, and I dont know what else various groups are supposed to be.
You might want to take a deep breath, step back, and rethink how you post if you really dont like the sort of rhetoric that inhabits politics these days. Because Im gonna be honest: youre contributing your fair share to it.
Actions are justified by it's consequences.
Then lets start a campaign to sterilize all "unfit" individuals, and bring mandatory state-run eugenics programs up to full steam. Who cares how we do it, we're creating a utopia.
Slashdot doesnt need more wild hysteria.
An arrest requires probable cause. What you describe would be the basis of a huge lawsuit.
The problem is that European countries are not at all the same as the US, because you dont have a 10th amendment which explicitly gives a lot of lattitude to the states. Obamacare not only taxes something that has never really been taxed before ("just being alive"), it also takes control of something that has never been considered a governmental role, much less a federal one.
You cant just say "screw precedent, the constitution, and 230 years of history, my idea is a good one".
The thing with most politics in the USoA is that it isn't about your particular stance, but about whose side you're on,
Its ironic you would say that after your disparaging remarks about people identifying as tea party, and your generally disparaging remarks towards conservatives in general. How have you NOT just made this an "us vs them"?
... And yet Tea Partiers, Clarance Thomas, and conservatives in general get ridiculed when they question things like Obamacare, gun control, etc which all clearly go against the intent of the 1st, 2nd, and 10th amendments. I guess the "principle of the thing" really is important sometimes.
... And then you get a pro-bono lawyer to win the biggest 4th amendment case of the decade.
Im pretty sure you cant get a warrant to go door-to-door swabbing random people-- at least not yet.
The ends do not justify the means.
Your fantasy futuristic free-content utopian vision does not justify breaking IP laws that society has agreed are valid for 230 years (and longer). We have a system for changing laws if the majority of society agreed with you. It doesnt, which is why those laws arent changed.
So then we should just be ok with people helping to extinct animals?
I dont think I said that, but making stupid ineffective laws surely is not the answer.
Theres not much help when even anti-authoritarian communities like slashdot are willing to submit to "think of the children arguments" when it comes to the 2nd amendment and 5th amendment.
Or are the folks advocating their abolition truly the minority on here? I certainly hope so.
There is very little difference between the NSA's argument
The spying is OK because it stops terrorist plots
and the typical P2P apologist argument that
piracy is OK because it doesnt drive publishers out of business
They both suck, and theyre both wrong.
Some regulations dont work because people are people, and its stupid to pretend otherwise.
Cutting the horns still may make sense
Dont rhinos generally need those horns?
Also, if the poacher didnt NEED to kill the rhino to get the horn but historically does anyways, what makes you think they care at all about "needlessly jeopardising their future revenue stream"? How did such a line of reasoning work out with the american bison, how is it working out with fisheries?
People will hunt an animal to extinction without worrying about what it does to their future revenue stream, this has been shown throughout history, and its not hard to understand. If you are one fisherman, its A) very hard to think that the few fish YOU catch will have a significant impact, and B) hard to "do the right thing" when it means abandoning the way you make a living.