Innocent until proven guilty applies even in civil suits. The onus is still on the opposing party to prove (just, to a different extent than criminal) that you are guilty. The difference is in the level of certainty required before conviction; there are very very few courts which will admit to being "guilty until proven innocent", since it would then be trivial to wreck someone's life with accusations that they would then be forced to disprove.
Who cares, its not like anyone is going to read the article anyhow. This is too juicy of a chance to rail about copyright, the government, and corporations.
It is likely that your password grants you access to the encryption key-- that way if you lose your password, you can reset it without losing access to all of your files.
The implementation of an algorithm, however, CAN be copyrighted, which Dropbox IS.
As for that "innocent til proven guilty", where does it say that the blogger was convicted of anything? This hasnt even gone to court; "innocent till proven guilty" has absolutely nothing to do with it. Dropbox is the service provider, and thus has the explicit right under DMCA to remove all material it believes to be infringing (as does, for example, Youtube).
In other words, they believed the material to infringe on DMCA, and as the file host, they have the right and duty to remove such a file when they believe it to be infringing. See, Dropbox isnt just the potentially "injured party", they are also the service provider-- and that is the capacity they were issuing the notice in. (NB- IANAL)
I'd personally prefer a proper enclosure over using a tower to do the RAID just because it's smaller,
It is true that getting those really small custom mobos and backplanes is hard, but it is also possible to build your own mini-ITX array thats about the size of a book and holds 6 drives-- see my post here.
If they just made a 1 U case that could fit an mini itx and 6 drivers.
If you dont mind paying for laptop drives, hereyougo (first link desktop mini-itx cases w/5.25" slot; second link rackmount 1u cases with 5.25" slot; third link a 6-drive 5.25" hotswap drive RAID cage).
AFAICT, Openfiler's development ceased in 2008, while Freenas is still being worked on. Additionally, my experience has generally been better on Freenas than it has on Openfiler-- seems less wonky in general, and has a wonderful web-based file manager (extplorer, which is easily replaceable with ajaxplorer).
As for hardware RAID, there are pros and cons, but getting a compatible replacement isnt much of an issue. The main reason is that generally hardware RAID will perform better (especially on rebuilds, which can be dreadfully slow with software raid), and can be battery-backed. Also, more RAID levels are generally supported-- I dont believe that Freenas or Openfiler support RAID10, or RAID6+1, or hotspares, whereas a hardware raid card will.
And as for the performance, if youre looking at a Drobo, the LAST thing you would be worried about on freenas is performance-- drobos apparently have really awful transfer rates.
That is not the same; he was not detained, and was participating in military action against the US. In such a situation, citizenship is not a shield (otherwise, the civil war could never have had any battles).
To quote from that very link....
"If you are a legitimate military target abroad—a part of an enemy force—the fact that you're a U.S. citizen doesn't change that", said Michael Edney, deputy legal adviser to the National Security Council from 2007 until 2009.
Do you disagree? Do you believe that some hypothetical citizen attacking our tanks on foreign soil should be detained rather than killed in the field of combat?
Or lets make this a little more real-- what about Joseph Goebbels, the Reich Minister of Propaganda in WW2 Germany. If he had gotten US citizenship, would you cry foul to an attempt to "remove" him?
Yes, clearly those were my exact words. Clearly, if we dont treat them like citizens and give them the full rights as one, then we're treating them as brute beasts.
Has it occured to you that using military confinement and trials might have something to do with their military nature? Name another war where POWs or suspected military combatants were each given representation. Do you realize how impossible such a war would be to fight?
For that matter, do you think the gitmo detainees are being treated any different than enemy combatants in WW2? How many POWs do you think got taxpayer-funded attorneys during that war? How bout WWI? Or the Civil war? How bout the war of 1812?
General idea seems good, but I dont really understand the fascination with drobos for anyone who does any kind of serious IT work. A freenas box with a proper hardware RAID card can be had (sans drives) for about half the price of an equivalent (sans drives) drobo, is faster, supports ZFS, and has built in Unison | Rsync | ftp.... etc. It also doesnt use some poorly documented "kind-of RAID".
Care to indicate a case where a US citizen has been denied his right to trial by jury, or denied "presumption of innocence"? Or was denied habeus corpus? A citation, link, whatever would be fine.
Are you advocating some form of anarchy, where we just disregard all the systems and procedures that were put in place to limit the harms and abuses that a government can inflict?
These werent stipulations that were pulled out of a hat. Theres a very very good reason why the Fed's power was supposed to be (and still is in many ways) restricted.
It would be helpful if Hazel could affirm or deny his statement that this argument hinges around-- does he still claim that Brandenburg v Ohio upholds some "right to yell fire in a crowded theatre"? And if so, can he give a citation please, because when i went to the case and did a page search on "fire in a crowded", it took me directly to Douglass stating that such actions were in fact prosecutable.
Please clarify this ^^^. Regardless of whatever else that particular case did, I still fail to see how your original statement has any basis in reality.
Which is why public policy should be directed to intercede. The public is short-sighted,/quote. So is policy.
Regulations have their place, but keep in mind that that well intentioned, well-reasoned policy you put in place today will likely be with us for a long long time.
If you just in general consider government intervention a last resort when nothing else will do, youll generally be better off.
which apparently cannot afford to offer national healthcare like others do in the UK and Canada
You had a good start, but lost me here. If youre not from the US (or even if you are, i suppose), you must not be familiar with its Constitution. See, in it it pretty explicitly lays out the Governments powers and responsibilities, and then caps it with an amendment that basically says "if its not in here, the fed isnt to get involved."
Healthcare wasnt one of those rights or responsibilities.
While I'm firmly of the stance that we need to drastically reduce spending (almost) across the board, this is the type of project I wish money would go to if it's going to be spent.
Im sure that most people on slashdot, myself included, would agree to that. Problem is, when you cant get anyone to agree to cut anything, talking of adding another thing to spend money on doesnt seem to make much sense.
Are you by any chance referring to the same democrat who signed off on extending them, presumably because he believes (as did Bush) that it will help the economy?
Might it be fair to now refer to them as the "Obama tax cuts"?
Slashdot Mirror
Innocent until proven guilty applies even in civil suits. The onus is still on the opposing party to prove (just, to a different extent than criminal) that you are guilty. The difference is in the level of certainty required before conviction; there are very very few courts which will admit to being "guilty until proven innocent", since it would then be trivial to wreck someone's life with accusations that they would then be forced to disprove.
Who cares, its not like anyone is going to read the article anyhow. This is too juicy of a chance to rail about copyright, the government, and corporations.
Er, "innocent until proven guilty" refers to court cases. This hasnt gone to court. How is that statement even remotely relevant?
Of course they have the private keys. How else would they be able to do password recovery?
It is likely that your password grants you access to the encryption key-- that way if you lose your password, you can reset it without losing access to all of your files.
The implementation of an algorithm, however, CAN be copyrighted, which Dropbox IS.
As for that "innocent til proven guilty", where does it say that the blogger was convicted of anything? This hasnt even gone to court; "innocent till proven guilty" has absolutely nothing to do with it. Dropbox is the service provider, and thus has the explicit right under DMCA to remove all material it believes to be infringing (as does, for example, Youtube).
It was not a DMCA "request". It was a notification that they were removing the file in order to comply with DMCA Section 512 C-1-c, which indicates "No liability if ... upon obtaining knowledge or awareness, OSP expeditiously removes Work"
In other words, they believed the material to infringe on DMCA, and as the file host, they have the right and duty to remove such a file when they believe it to be infringing. See, Dropbox isnt just the potentially "injured party", they are also the service provider-- and that is the capacity they were issuing the notice in. (NB- IANAL)
I'd personally prefer a proper enclosure over using a tower to do the RAID just because it's smaller,
It is true that getting those really small custom mobos and backplanes is hard, but it is also possible to build your own mini-ITX array thats about the size of a book and holds 6 drives-- see my post here.
If they just made a 1 U case that could fit an mini itx and 6 drivers.
If you dont mind paying for laptop drives, here you go (first link desktop mini-itx cases w/5.25" slot; second link rackmount 1u cases with 5.25" slot; third link a 6-drive 5.25" hotswap drive RAID cage).
AFAICT, Openfiler's development ceased in 2008, while Freenas is still being worked on. Additionally, my experience has generally been better on Freenas than it has on Openfiler-- seems less wonky in general, and has a wonderful web-based file manager (extplorer, which is easily replaceable with ajaxplorer).
As for hardware RAID, there are pros and cons, but getting a compatible replacement isnt much of an issue. The main reason is that generally hardware RAID will perform better (especially on rebuilds, which can be dreadfully slow with software raid), and can be battery-backed. Also, more RAID levels are generally supported-- I dont believe that Freenas or Openfiler support RAID10, or RAID6+1, or hotspares, whereas a hardware raid card will.
And as for the performance, if youre looking at a Drobo, the LAST thing you would be worried about on freenas is performance-- drobos apparently have really awful transfer rates.
That is not the same; he was not detained, and was participating in military action against the US. In such a situation, citizenship is not a shield (otherwise, the civil war could never have had any battles).
To quote from that very link....
"If you are a legitimate military target abroad—a part of an enemy force—the fact that you're a U.S. citizen doesn't change that", said Michael Edney, deputy legal adviser to the National Security Council from 2007 until 2009.
Do you disagree? Do you believe that some hypothetical citizen attacking our tanks on foreign soil should be detained rather than killed in the field of combat?
Or lets make this a little more real-- what about Joseph Goebbels, the Reich Minister of Propaganda in WW2 Germany. If he had gotten US citizenship, would you cry foul to an attempt to "remove" him?
Yes, clearly those were my exact words. Clearly, if we dont treat them like citizens and give them the full rights as one, then we're treating them as brute beasts.
Has it occured to you that using military confinement and trials might have something to do with their military nature? Name another war where POWs or suspected military combatants were each given representation. Do you realize how impossible such a war would be to fight?
For that matter, do you think the gitmo detainees are being treated any different than enemy combatants in WW2? How many POWs do you think got taxpayer-funded attorneys during that war? How bout WWI? Or the Civil war? How bout the war of 1812?
General idea seems good, but I dont really understand the fascination with drobos for anyone who does any kind of serious IT work. A freenas box with a proper hardware RAID card can be had (sans drives) for about half the price of an equivalent (sans drives) drobo, is faster, supports ZFS, and has built in Unison | Rsync | ftp.... etc. It also doesnt use some poorly documented "kind-of RAID".
Why would I want a drobo?
I would think that the sellers bear any responsibility for what their automated programs do.
The only contributions from Apple that Im aware of are for Webkit-- there may be others, but I have not heard of them.
You didnt read the manual, did you?
Care to indicate a case where a US citizen has been denied his right to trial by jury, or denied "presumption of innocence"? Or was denied habeus corpus? A citation, link, whatever would be fine.
Holy hyperbole, you mean to say the headline / summary are sensationalist?
If we cant trust a slashdot summary to keep things spin-free, who CAN we trust?
Are you advocating some form of anarchy, where we just disregard all the systems and procedures that were put in place to limit the harms and abuses that a government can inflict?
These werent stipulations that were pulled out of a hat. Theres a very very good reason why the Fed's power was supposed to be (and still is in many ways) restricted.
It would be helpful if Hazel could affirm or deny his statement that this argument hinges around-- does he still claim that Brandenburg v Ohio upholds some "right to yell fire in a crowded theatre"? And if so, can he give a citation please, because when i went to the case and did a page search on "fire in a crowded", it took me directly to Douglass stating that such actions were in fact prosecutable.
Please clarify this ^^^. Regardless of whatever else that particular case did, I still fail to see how your original statement has any basis in reality.
You mean the guys who control a whopping 1/6th of the federal government?
And its kind of funny to claim that theyre not his tax cuts, when theres a lot of extra tax cut provisions in there now...
Which is why public policy should be directed to intercede. The public is short-sighted,/quote.
So is policy.
Regulations have their place, but keep in mind that that well intentioned, well-reasoned policy you put in place today will likely be with us for a long long time.
If you just in general consider government intervention a last resort when nothing else will do, youll generally be better off.
which apparently cannot afford to offer national healthcare like others do in the UK and Canada
You had a good start, but lost me here. If youre not from the US (or even if you are, i suppose), you must not be familiar with its Constitution. See, in it it pretty explicitly lays out the Governments powers and responsibilities, and then caps it with an amendment that basically says "if its not in here, the fed isnt to get involved."
Healthcare wasnt one of those rights or responsibilities.
While I'm firmly of the stance that we need to drastically reduce spending (almost) across the board, this is the type of project I wish money would go to if it's going to be spent.
Im sure that most people on slashdot, myself included, would agree to that. Problem is, when you cant get anyone to agree to cut anything, talking of adding another thing to spend money on doesnt seem to make much sense.
Are you by any chance referring to the same democrat who signed off on extending them, presumably because he believes (as did Bush) that it will help the economy?
Might it be fair to now refer to them as the "Obama tax cuts"?