The US does have jurisdiction if you choose to enter the country, after all -- it's not a *right* to enter, but a privilege based on circumstances (such as asylum seekers are treated in such-and-such a way, people who say "Yes, I'm a terrorist" on their visa applications can expect a different sort of treatment, et al). Thumbing one's nose from outside the country is generally safe (not that many notable exceptions; Noriega is a glaring one), but don't expect to be welcomed.
So if you were to visit China, would you expect to get arrested for viewing porn while in the U.S.?
The question is not whether he broke the law, he did.
Why do you say that? What evidence is there that Sklyarov was responsible for distributing the software in the U.S.? He's not charged with writing the software, because even the feds know it was perfectly legal for Sklyarov to write it in Russia.
Here are a couple new SF Chronicle articles of interest:
Martyr or criminal? -- good article, even gets some anti-Dmitry comments from the Association of American Publishers, just in case anyone thought that no one wanted Dmitry to rot in jail
I was looking through some server logs the other day, and it has logs of different browsers and whatnot that are used to access our site. One of the browsers showed up as "Netscape 8." anyone know what's up with that?
The User-Agent header is often faked. I just visited your site with Mozilla/69:
[liam@SexyVAIO liam]$ telnet www.swift-networks.com 80
Trying 216.83.167.139...
Connected to www.swift-networks.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
GET / HTTP/1.0
Host: www.swift-networks.com User-Agent: Mozilla/69
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Server: Microsoft-IIS/4.0
Content-Location: http://www.swift-networks.com/index.html
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 02:16:42 GMT
Content-Type: text/html
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Last-Modified: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 12:50:00 GMT
ETag: "04c50ee17b9c01:ce52"
Content-Length: 8745
Just FYI, this has been going on for _ages_ There was a 'web page
change detector' available back in my 14.4kbps modem days (early 1995
- I can't remember what it was called, tho - been too damn long) that
used this very technique...
I'm pretty sure you're thinking of NetMind's Mind-it service. NetMind is owned by Pumatech (which obtained the patent).
And our movies are also censored, and nobody would argue that this is not a good thing
I would argue that it's not a good thing. If I as an adult want to watch graphic portrayals of sex and violence, why do your children get to stop me?
(I stopped watching American TV in part because the censorship was so infuriatingly dumb. An episode of "Politically Incorrect" after midnight had the word "hummer" bleeped out when referring to oral sex, but "Hummer" the vehicle was let through a few seconds earlier.)
Its all very well as Americans for us to think freedom of speech is an absolute. We are fortunate enough to have something called a 'Constitution' which guaruantees that we will always be free to say whatever we like, whereever we like, whenever we like.
This is bullshit. While your Constitution may speak in absolutes, your Courts do not. Americans have freedom of speech unless that speech offends enough people. In that case, the speech is "obscene" and you, as an American, can be arrested.
One of these research labs being forced to comply could be days away from a cure for something like cancer, or idiocy, but they have to put it off to update a website?
The cancer research lab isn't having its researchers do Web page design or its Web page designers doing cancer research.
But wouldn't it be nice if Slashdot automatically worked well in any browsing environment? Then when I switch from my desktop at work to my Palm on the subway, I wouldn't have to bother changing my Slashdot prefs or using a different login.
(Slashdot's default mode actually works well on Palms, but you get the idea.)
First of all, there was no such thing as "HTML 1".
HTML 4 Strict is useful even for "plain pages" because it provides style sheet hooks (CLASS and ID attributes), internationalization (LANG and DIR attributes, BDO element, entities for characters such as the euro), as well as useful new elements like ABBR and ACRONYM that allow you to give the long form of the abbreviation through the TITLE attribute.
HTML 4 Strict also adds accessibility aids such as the LABEL element for indicating the text associated with a form control.
Your second idea doesn't sound better to me since it requires maintaining two separate pages--twice as much work. And how do you decide where to draw the separation? There are many more than two kinds of browser.
Your first idea--one page that looks good and works for all--sounds a lot better.
Web sites don't rely on one sense over another unless they've been written poorly. A well-written Web site will adapt seamlessly to any display device, whether it's your 21" monitor, your PalmPilot, or your speech browser.
Of course most Web sites are written poorly, so now you have to fix the mess. Good luck.
Any company that makes an investment in Ogg is going to want to get something in return, and they're going to want more than just a freely available audio compression format. They're going to want control.
History suggests that this is not the case. CMGI and iCast apparently did not want control when they invested in Ogg Vorbis. The potential of a free audio format was enough.
This isn't just some idle prediction. This sort of thing has happened before, and it's happening right now with other Open Source projects. Look at Mozilla. Netscape/AOL invested their codebase, and their staff programmers in an open source project, and now that it's just about ready for prime time, AOL forks the code, and retakes control of the Nescape browser
AOL didn't fork anything. They branched from a developmental browser to gain the stability needed for a release. Netscape's changes have been reintegrated back into "Mozilla 0.6".
The palm interface is really popular. There are a few reasons for this:
1) Graffitti, while difficult to learn compared to typing, eventually is much more natural than typing on a tiny keyboard which only serves to make the device larger.
RIM has handheld devices with a keyboard, one of which features the same size screen as a Palm but is still smaller. And no one has to learn a second alphabet.
Having tried both RIM's keyboard and Palm's Grafitti, I much prefer the RIM devices. Perhaps I simply haven't spent enough time with Grafitti to be efficient with it, but this is time that isn't required for the RIM device.
No it doesn't, at least not in the NCSA X Mosaic 2.7b5 that I have open at the moment. Of course, it's hardly Mosaic's fault since Slashdot specifies the stunningly readable black text on a black background in its <body> tag while Mosaic predates the table bgcolor that Slashdot uses to make things readable for newer browsers.
So here's my proposal: Let's get all of the major and some of the minor browsers companies together and (by some miracle) get them all to agree on standards or something. Then make THEM be the consortium that creates the standards.
Okay, so you'd like to replace the W3C with... the W3C.
You can read more about your new consortium at the W3C Web site. The W3C member list includes all major browser makers and many minor ones, as well as about 375 other organizations.
Slashdot Mirror
And if you don't ask for permission before installing software, are you arrested?
You are a terrorist.
But then how did this creator get created?
How? By giving a speech about the poor security of eBooks?
So if you were to visit China, would you expect to get arrested for viewing porn while in the U.S.?
So what? If an author's publisher sells his book in a country where that book is illegal, is the author breaking the law?
Why do you say that? What evidence is there that Sklyarov was responsible for distributing the software in the U.S.? He's not charged with writing the software, because even the feds know it was perfectly legal for Sklyarov to write it in Russia.
Here are a couple new SF Chronicle articles of interest:
The User-Agent header is often faked. I just visited your site with Mozilla/69:
[liam@SexyVAIO liam]$ telnet www.swift-networks.com 80
...
Trying 216.83.167.139...
Connected to www.swift-networks.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
GET / HTTP/1.0
Host: www.swift-networks.com
User-Agent: Mozilla/69
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Server: Microsoft-IIS/4.0
Content-Location: http://www.swift-networks.com/index.html
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 02:16:42 GMT
Content-Type: text/html
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Last-Modified: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 12:50:00 GMT
ETag: "04c50ee17b9c01:ce52"
Content-Length: 8745
<html>
I'm pretty sure you're thinking of NetMind's Mind-it service. NetMind is owned by Pumatech (which obtained the patent).
I would argue that it's not a good thing. If I as an adult want to watch graphic portrayals of sex and violence, why do your children get to stop me?
(I stopped watching American TV in part because the censorship was so infuriatingly dumb. An episode of "Politically Incorrect" after midnight had the word "hummer" bleeped out when referring to oral sex, but "Hummer" the vehicle was let through a few seconds earlier.)
This is bullshit. While your Constitution may speak in absolutes, your Courts do not. Americans have freedom of speech unless that speech offends enough people. In that case, the speech is "obscene" and you, as an American, can be arrested.
See, for example, U.S. v. Thomas.
The cancer research lab isn't having its researchers do Web page design or its Web page designers doing cancer research.
But wouldn't it be nice if Slashdot automatically worked well in any browsing environment? Then when I switch from my desktop at work to my Palm on the subway, I wouldn't have to bother changing my Slashdot prefs or using a different login.
(Slashdot's default mode actually works well on Palms, but you get the idea.)
First of all, there was no such thing as "HTML 1".
HTML 4 Strict is useful even for "plain pages" because it provides style sheet hooks (CLASS and ID attributes), internationalization (LANG and DIR attributes, BDO element, entities for characters such as the euro), as well as useful new elements like ABBR and ACRONYM that allow you to give the long form of the abbreviation through the TITLE attribute.
HTML 4 Strict also adds accessibility aids such as the LABEL element for indicating the text associated with a form control.
Your second idea doesn't sound better to me since it requires maintaining two separate pages--twice as much work. And how do you decide where to draw the separation? There are many more than two kinds of browser.
Your first idea--one page that looks good and works for all--sounds a lot better.
You apparently don't know what HTML 4 is. HTML 4 Transitional and HTML 4 Frameset may cater to people with working eyes, but HTML 4 Strict does not.
I use HTML 4 Strict on all new pages that I write, and eyes are not required.
Web sites don't rely on one sense over another unless they've been written poorly. A well-written Web site will adapt seamlessly to any display device, whether it's your 21" monitor, your PalmPilot, or your speech browser.
Of course most Web sites are written poorly, so now you have to fix the mess. Good luck.
Have a look at the W3C's Web Accessibility Initiative for some guidelines and techniques.
History suggests that this is not the case. CMGI and iCast apparently did not want control when they invested in Ogg Vorbis. The potential of a free audio format was enough.
AOL didn't fork anything. They branched from a developmental browser to gain the stability needed for a release. Netscape's changes have been reintegrated back into "Mozilla 0.6".
Were you trolling?
RIM has handheld devices with a keyboard, one of which features the same size screen as a Palm but is still smaller. And no one has to learn a second alphabet.
Having tried both RIM's keyboard and Palm's Grafitti, I much prefer the RIM devices. Perhaps I simply haven't spent enough time with Grafitti to be efficient with it, but this is time that isn't required for the RIM device.
Other than some trivial issues with XML and custom DTDs, yes, I believe so.
Mostly. Check the changelog for details.
Then the sites aren't to spec.
If you were an NCSA Mosaic user, you wouldn't be able to see that option.
No it doesn't, at least not in the NCSA X Mosaic 2.7b5 that I have open at the moment. Of course, it's hardly Mosaic's fault since Slashdot specifies the stunningly readable black text on a black background in its <body> tag while Mosaic predates the table bgcolor that Slashdot uses to make things readable for newer browsers.
Okay, so you'd like to replace the W3C with... the W3C.
You can read more about your new consortium at the W3C Web site. The W3C member list includes all major browser makers and many minor ones, as well as about 375 other organizations.
Are you sure it's not the Web pages that are buggy? Netscape shouldn't be blamed if Web authors can't bother to even think about standards.
(WDG HTML Validator)