Define "hate speech", then make that sarcastic statement again.
If you make it possible to criminalize any statements that you don't like, someday someone may decide they don't like your statements. "Common carrier", anyone?
Don't we already send out enough signals into space, many of which deal with the subject of life on our planet?
Yeah, but considering what percentage of that is FOX news, daytime soap operas, infomercials and Jerry Springer, maybe they'd be happy to see some hot naked French chicks without having to invade North Dakota with pod ships just so they can get all the good porn on cable.
You forgot large quantities of methamphetamines, that usually seems to work, at least for the guys behind the train station biting through steel pipes while stammering something about GIANT SPIDERS.
Young'un. Spoiled brats with their newfangled tech. IN MY DAY, WE SPEEDREAD ACOUSTIC PHONE SIGNALS DIRECTLY INTO THE DAMN RECEIVER. KZZZCHHHHZKKKKZHHHTTTTKKKCHZZZZZZZZBLEEEEEEP. Hoarse for days, I tell you. And all that clicking on connect? That's an obscure Bantu dialect of Swahili. I tell you. When you said you learned a new language, it was a real language, not that that object-oriented fiddlesticks you have today. Internet? We'd just SHOUT PACKET CONTENTS at each other REAL LOUD.
That is, when we weren't busy touching live wires together to program in binary. There's a reason why a lot of 1970s hackers had huge frizzy hair. I tell you. Computing got a lot more interesting after electricity was invented.
Man, I'm an old fart too, but I so hate old-school technology downmanship:-)
...if you can. Assuming it's not a private high school, that is.
Organize your statements, as previous posters have said--define what is "technology", have concrete proposals ready.
Prepare possible cost breakdowns.
Compare science programs of other schools, communities, school districts.
Appeal to patriotism (cheap, but hey, it's America.) Sputnik caused a boom in American science education, and ChinaIndiaRussia are in the process of blowing America out of the water.
Use sound economic logic (i.e. it's a gift that keeps on giving through alumni donations, it profiles our schools as academic powerhouses and makes it more desirable to academics, it results in statistically higher admissions to good engineering schools, whatever--do research.)
Try to engage corporate sponsorship--write letters to companies like HP, Sun, Cisco, Intel, Microsoft, etc., they have entire departments devoted to creating PR through this sort of thing. Also, corporate matching funds tend to motivate people to spend public money.
Try to contact your school board reps directly, organized like-minded friends in a letter-writing campaign. Get your and their parents involved as well.
Get PR--write letters to the editor of your local paper, try to get someone to cover the story with a slant. "Schools neglecting science and technology education in favor of jocks" sells papers.
As for yourself? The truth is out there. You have a PC, an Internet connection and some equally interested friends? Start a club, start reading and hacking, and you're off.
While I dislike ham-handed copyright suits, at least this might serve to get rid of the gajillions of Backdorm Boys ripoffs by pimply American college kids.
I mean, the originals were pretty funny, at least Da Da Da, Peking Opera and Don't Lie made me laugh, but aside from that, Go Get'em Universal!
I can't judge whether he's a jerk or not, but I surely wouldn't draw that confusion based on whether he makes lecture notes available for $$.
If what you say is correct, I could have saved myself 5 years of UC Berkeley and just obtained a massive reading list. However, access to really top-notch profs and their lectures really enhanced my experience and allowed me to get context for the material that I wouldn't have been able to pick up in a non-interactive manner. None of my profs, thankfully, used lectures as an opportunity to present "bonus material" that would be on the test, and without which you could not pass the course, but my notes of their discussions sure helped when reviewing the material later, to jog my memory of some of their points, etc. Nobody's a "slave" to that.
Many of my profs put their lecture notes/slides online for free, but we also had a service called Black Lightning which hired professional note takers to (usually) provide fairly high quality outlines of lectures for money. If a prof is going to extra effort to transcribe his lectures for you, there's no reason he shouldn't charge for it.
Crappy Student, 2.3 GPA (but really got a lot out of university.)
Sorry, maybe I'm missing something here, but can someone give me a hint how Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution (quoted on page 5 as a basis for the authority of Congress to issue wiretapping laws) has any relevance to this? As far as I can see, it's purely in regards to maintenance and operation of armed forces...
For those non-US'ers among you wondering wtf a "Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court" is, here's a description:
Up until page 27, it looks OK, basically amendment to the FISA, with good oversight ensured. The thing that really bothers me (and I hope, you) is this:
"Sec. 102. (a)(1) Notwithstanding any other law, the President through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this title to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to 1 year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that--"(and then a bunch of things that oh yeah, this is necessary and we promise to follow the rules.)
Ugh. Call your senator...maybe I'm misreading it, but it sounds weirdly like the POTUS/AG can basically do what they want, as long as they provide an "oh yeah, don't worry, we promise it's fine" pat on the hand to the Senate. No mention of FISC (which is at least an independent judicially appointed body) intervention or approval anywhere.
Furthermore, "...the Attorney General may direct a provider of any electronic communication service, landlord, custodian or other person...who had access to electronic communications (in any form)...to (1) furnish all information, facilities or technical assistance...and (2) maintain under security procedures approved by the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence (wtf is that?) any records concerning the surveillance or the aid furnished..." (page 30.)
So basically, law enforcement can force _anyone_ involved in electronic communications to help spy on others, and then to shut up about it under threat of penalty? Kewl. Sounds vaguely STASI-ish to me. Oh, and they reimburse you for your efforts, nice touch there.
I understand the need for quick response and some flexibility in fighting "terror", but I also insist respect for the ideals of the constitution, i.e. no secret laws, no culture of spying on citizens, etc. This doesn't measure up.
Not necessarily--at some point you're just not willing to play games. If the person interviewing you isn't willing and able to sit down with you and get a clear idea of how good you are and what you've done, then it's probably a waste of your time.
Pre-screening should be able to take care of the herd; we used to ask prospective firewall admins bullshit stuff like "do you really need ethernet in a switched environment?" You'd be surprised how many just go bug-eyed. For programming jobs, I can see things like the little proveyourworth riddle, even though there's non-PHP ways of submitting the form; it'll either show that you know PHP or that you're at least creative enough to figure out an other way to do it. But bogus theoretical riddles and crap like that? Give me a break.
On the other hand, you may have a point; maybe the company wants someone who doesn't see it as a waste of time to solve mind games, in which case most people I know wouldn't be happy there anyway.:-)
True, however the implementation of the current system is flawed in a number of ways:
-It effectively removes influence on all but a few major/institutional shareholders--if you own, say, 5,000 shares of company X, good luck having a say in getting incompetent/corrupt members of a board off -Boards are rarely as independent in practice as they are in theory (i.e. executive bonuses are usually approved with little discussion) -It's still too easy for people to serve on multiple boards and be subject to major conflicts of interest (i.e. major institutional shareholder's board + board of company whose shares they hold.)
I'm not saying the system is broken per se, as the above aren't fundamentally wrong, just needs some tweaking.
Governments do not give rights to anything. Governments can only take rights away (or try to.) A right is something that you just have, period. I think that is what you are fundamentally misunderstanding here.
The point isn't that they "knew" about these deeds, the point is that it was more of an "oh gee, whatever shall we do, I sure wish SOMEONE would pull ALL THE STOPS to find this out wink wink nudge nudge."
The whole plausible deniability thing is what's at issue, the core of the matter being that it's just not kosher or legally justifiable to hide behind a thin veneer of supposed ignorance of your lackeys' actions. If you're in charge, you'd damn well better know what's going on during your watch.
Heh, if he was Australian, I can only assume his reply was a bit more colorful than that:-)
I talked my way onto a flight in Frankfurt with a Leatherman I'd accidentally left in my laptop bag once, by playing stupid American. I felt really bad about it, because the guys there were extremely nice (telling each other in German, "but I know these things, they're really expensive, we can't take it away from him!")
At the same time, at Sydney airport some poor German dude had his gold cigar clipper confiscated and thrown in the bin (you know these things, you stick the cigar in, no exposed blade, the worst you could do is threaten to cut off someone's pinkie) after a 30 minute argument with the idiot girl there.
Considering I once managed to get a switchblade onto a flight in my laptop bag after I'd forgotten it in there (pre-9/11) -- they make great tools for cutting tape with one hand when you need your other hand to balance heavy objects like, I dunno, Sun server racks. You can put it in your pocket and flick it open easily with one hand and they're a lot handier than carpet cutters--only to have it confiscated on arrival in the US for being illegal:-)
This is absolutely true. I once nicely asked a TSA guy at SFO about why I'd been selected. His response was a very polite "I'm sorry sir, I can't tell you that." However, when I asked him whether it was because of the one-way ticket, he told me it was.
Kinda stupid, like the taking-off-shoes and other, more recent, dumber measures--won't really stop a smart attacker, but inconvenience everyone. At least the security screeners I've run across recently were all very polite and professional, far more so than the mooks I used to encounter right after 9/11.
Haha, this reminds me a of a great episode in college: I visited a friend's dorm room around 1996; he lived in one of four highrises arranged around a central quad. As it was a warm sunny afternoon in September, quite a few people had their windows open.
All of a sudden, the (very loud) Windows 95 startup sound comes out of someone's room across the way.
Followed immediately by shouts from about 30 windows of "DON'T DO IT!" "NOOO!" "GET A MAC!
I would use the following definition, or a variant thereof: "DRM is the name given to technology used by the people who sell you digital content to control how, when and where you view/listen, store or copy that content. It includes laws to make it illegal for you to get around those controls." Beyond that, don't bother explaining, show them what it is and how it works, read on:
In years of trying to make my girlfriend, who is a strategy consultant and all-around pretty competent 'business' PC user (i.e. knows her way around Windows reasonably well, knows end-user apps, etc.) and a very bright person, I couldn't get her to care ("I buy all my music/films".)
What'd it take for her to understand why this is important and to listen to me on how it works? Well, we're spending a year on another continent and all of a sudden, her DVDs don't work in the player in our furnished apartment. Oops. Boy, was she pissed. Boy, did she want to know how it worked, why it sucked and how to get around it all of a sudden.
Same with why Windows is broken ("but it just works for what I want to do.") Until it didn't "just work." Same with data privacy ("I don't have anything to hide") until someone stole her credit card number.
The phrase you need to remember is "show me the money" or, in consulting terminology, "where's the 'so what'?" Most people won't care or give a rat's ass until it affects them directly.
I see where you're coming from, but in this case, federal is not some sort of monolithic affiliation (i.e. Neal Stephenson's "Feds" from Snow Crash.) I'm sufficiently confident in the independence of most judiciary, federal or not, to give the benefit of the doubt (note that it was also "federal" judges who threw out the executive branch's arguments in several recent "WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU PEOPLE THINKING" cases.)
The thing I'd be far more worried about, and on a way more fundamental level, is "against whom did the 'federal government' score a major victory today?" Once it becomes an us-versus-them situation, I fear for the very foundations of modern democracy.
I won't comment on your political ideas, but you might want to look up "Qassam" (they also have Fajr-3 and Fajr-5 122mm rockets, although they haven't to my knowledge used them yet), and "al qaeda" +"surface-to-air".
While I agree with the technical problems of something like this, I think you're letting your ideology goad you into wishful thinking.
Re:Can you say more Non-Free than cheap beer?
on
Things To Download
·
· Score: 1
Um... and open source software can't be supported by the company that wrote it? Or a third party support company?
Of course it can. Which is why, when making a purchasing decision for software, you need to consider _all_ the alternatives and pick whatever's best. Including both FOSS and commercial/proprietary stuff.
Ideology should have, at best, a secondary place in the decision. I've seen as many companies get bogged down with open source stuff that was chosen for poor reasons (i.e. because it was free rather than because it was better) as I've witnessed organizations held hostage by evil proprietary vendors.
Just because it's not FOSS doesn't automagically make it some sort of demon-spawn.
The only comparable thing I can think of is Switzerland's Rega or alpine helicopter rescue outfit. Basically, they're a semi-public service; co-financed by the government, but when they pick you up, either you or your insurance foot a large part of the (sizeable) bill.
If you don't follow the rules (i.e. break your leg skiing off-piste) get ready to cough up. But if you buy a ca. $15 sponsorship, they either don't charge you at all, or are a lot kinder with your insurance....
Never heard of this sort of thing with something like a fire dept., though. I always thought police, fire, paramedic, that sorta thing, belonged pretty firmly into the realm of the stuff my tax dollars pay for.
To the "I shouldn't pay for public schools" guy below, aside from the altruistic aspects that we probably wouldn't see eye to eye on (i.e. I think it does fall in the public responsibility to pay for things like schooling, national parks, roads, whatnot, in addition to the services I listed above, since even someone like Adam Smith is pretty clear about nobody else being motivated to pay for them), I look at it as an investment.
I.e. social security: if you don't force people to save _something_ in a somewhat responsible manner, when they lose their job and fall into penury I don't want them hanging out on my street. Or defense--I don't have any stake in invading foreign countries either, but sometimes it's preventing people from blowing me up. Fire services? Same thing. I'd rather have someone put out a fire than have it move over to my house.
Uh, the church is not a government service. It is subsidized by the government. There is a difference. Same in many European countries--I ditched my Swiss catholic church membership; they're even more expensive than in Finland. Guess when I buy the farm they'll just put me in the Soylent Green blenders.:-)
Farm subsidies also don't fit here; that's just waste, not something you "opt out" of.
And while I agree about European-style "public" television, paid for by involuntary license fees if you have a TV, no, you cannot decide not to have fire dept. coverage, get out of sending your children to school.
Humf. I have a third gen WAP-54G (I believe SveaSoft & co. only work for gen1 and gen2) and bricked it repeatedly before figuring this out. I originally bought the thing because I don't (or want) a wireless router--the WAP is hanging off the third interface of my PCEngines WRAP running M0n0wall.
That thing is a bit more expensive than the WRT, but M0n0 is such an awesome firewall distro that it's worth it.
Much as I support the EFF's efforts and goals, and sympathize with the gut-level worries of artists about "theft", this article does neither side any service.
It's basically two guys taking nasty swipes at each other. I think that either BBC2 was actively and selectively trying to portray them like two implacable, mean-mouthed curmudgeons, or that JPB and the RIAA guy could both have been a bit more factual.
One thing I really don't like is the characterization of "Electronic Hezbollah", although it's a catchy term; it's not like there's an organized, widespread movement to thieve and destroy. Rather, it's a combination of a groundswell sentiment against excessive prices and insulting, oppressive consumer-unfriendly practices, and a wish to have more convenient and accessible media (remind me again why iTunes was so successful) that doesn't hinder people from listening to their music / watching their movies anywhere or doing a bit of sharing with their friends.
Slashdot Mirror
Define "hate speech", then make that sarcastic statement again.
If you make it possible to criminalize any statements that you don't like, someday someone may decide they don't like your statements. "Common carrier", anyone?
Don't we already send out enough signals into space, many of which deal with the subject of life on our planet?
Yeah, but considering what percentage of that is FOX news, daytime soap operas, infomercials and Jerry Springer, maybe they'd be happy to see some hot naked French chicks without having to invade North Dakota with pod ships just so they can get all the good porn on cable.
You forgot large quantities of methamphetamines, that usually seems to work, at least for the guys behind the train station biting through steel pipes while stammering something about GIANT SPIDERS.
Oh, you meant "legal ways"...
You had modems?
:-)
Young'un. Spoiled brats with their newfangled tech. IN MY DAY, WE SPEEDREAD ACOUSTIC PHONE SIGNALS DIRECTLY INTO THE DAMN RECEIVER. KZZZCHHHHZKKKKZHHHTTTTKKKCHZZZZZZZZBLEEEEEEP. Hoarse for days, I tell you. And all that clicking on connect? That's an obscure Bantu dialect of Swahili. I tell you. When you said you learned a new language, it was a real language, not that that object-oriented fiddlesticks you have today. Internet? We'd just SHOUT PACKET CONTENTS at each other REAL LOUD.
That is, when we weren't busy touching live wires together to program in binary. There's a reason why a lot of 1970s hackers had huge frizzy hair. I tell you. Computing got a lot more interesting after electricity was invented.
Man, I'm an old fart too, but I so hate old-school technology downmanship
...if you can. Assuming it's not a private high school, that is.
Organize your statements, as previous posters have said--define what is "technology", have concrete proposals ready.
Prepare possible cost breakdowns.
Compare science programs of other schools, communities, school districts.
Appeal to patriotism (cheap, but hey, it's America.) Sputnik caused a boom in American science education, and ChinaIndiaRussia are in the process of blowing America out of the water.
Use sound economic logic (i.e. it's a gift that keeps on giving through alumni donations, it profiles our schools as academic powerhouses and makes it more desirable to academics, it results in statistically higher admissions to good engineering schools, whatever--do research.)
Try to engage corporate sponsorship--write letters to companies like HP, Sun, Cisco, Intel, Microsoft, etc., they have entire departments devoted to creating PR through this sort of thing. Also, corporate matching funds tend to motivate people to spend public money.
Try to contact your school board reps directly, organized like-minded friends in a letter-writing campaign. Get your and their parents involved as well.
Get PR--write letters to the editor of your local paper, try to get someone to cover the story with a slant. "Schools neglecting science and technology education in favor of jocks" sells papers.
As for yourself? The truth is out there. You have a PC, an Internet connection and some equally interested friends? Start a club, start reading and hacking, and you're off.
While I dislike ham-handed copyright suits, at least this might serve to get rid of the gajillions of Backdorm Boys ripoffs by pimply American college kids.
I mean, the originals were pretty funny, at least Da Da Da, Peking Opera and Don't Lie made me laugh, but aside from that, Go Get'em Universal!
I can't judge whether he's a jerk or not, but I surely wouldn't draw that confusion based on whether he makes lecture notes available for $$.
If what you say is correct, I could have saved myself 5 years of UC Berkeley and just obtained a massive reading list. However, access to really top-notch profs and their lectures really enhanced my experience and allowed me to get context for the material that I wouldn't have been able to pick up in a non-interactive manner. None of my profs, thankfully, used lectures as an opportunity to present "bonus material" that would be on the test, and without which you could not pass the course, but my notes of their discussions sure helped when reviewing the material later, to jog my memory of some of their points, etc. Nobody's a "slave" to that.
Many of my profs put their lecture notes/slides online for free, but we also had a service called Black Lightning which hired professional note takers to (usually) provide fairly high quality outlines of lectures for money. If a prof is going to extra effort to transcribe his lectures for you, there's no reason he shouldn't charge for it.
Crappy Student, 2.3 GPA (but really got a lot out of university.)
Sorry, maybe I'm missing something here, but can someone give me a hint how Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution (quoted on page 5 as a basis for the authority of Congress to issue wiretapping laws) has any relevance to this? As far as I can see, it's purely in regards to maintenance and operation of armed forces...
n _Intelligence_Surveillance_Court
For those non-US'ers among you wondering wtf a "Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court" is, here's a description:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreig
Up until page 27, it looks OK, basically amendment to the FISA, with good oversight ensured.
The thing that really bothers me (and I hope, you) is this:
"Sec. 102. (a)(1) Notwithstanding any other law, the President through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this title to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to 1 year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that--"(and then a bunch of things that oh yeah, this is necessary and we promise to follow the rules.)
Ugh. Call your senator...maybe I'm misreading it, but it sounds weirdly like the POTUS/AG can basically do what they want, as long as they provide an "oh yeah, don't worry, we promise it's fine" pat on the hand to the Senate. No mention of FISC (which is at least an independent judicially appointed body) intervention or approval anywhere.
Furthermore, "...the Attorney General may direct a provider of any electronic communication service, landlord, custodian or other person...who had access to electronic communications (in any form)...to (1) furnish all information, facilities or technical assistance...and (2) maintain under security procedures approved by the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence (wtf is that?) any records concerning the surveillance or the aid furnished..." (page 30.)
So basically, law enforcement can force _anyone_ involved in electronic communications to help spy on others, and then to shut up about it under threat of penalty? Kewl. Sounds vaguely STASI-ish to me. Oh, and they reimburse you for your efforts, nice touch there.
I understand the need for quick response and some flexibility in fighting "terror", but I also insist respect for the ideals of the constitution, i.e. no secret laws, no culture of spying on citizens, etc. This doesn't measure up.
Not necessarily--at some point you're just not willing to play games. If the person interviewing you isn't willing and able to sit down with you and get a clear idea of how good you are and what you've done, then it's probably a waste of your time.
:-)
Pre-screening should be able to take care of the herd; we used to ask prospective firewall admins bullshit stuff like "do you really need ethernet in a switched environment?" You'd be surprised how many just go bug-eyed. For programming jobs, I can see things like the little proveyourworth riddle, even though there's non-PHP ways of submitting the form; it'll either show that you know PHP or that you're at least creative enough to figure out an other way to do it. But bogus theoretical riddles and crap like that? Give me a break.
On the other hand, you may have a point; maybe the company wants someone who doesn't see it as a waste of time to solve mind games, in which case most people I know wouldn't be happy there anyway.
True, however the implementation of the current system is flawed in a number of ways:
-It effectively removes influence on all but a few major/institutional shareholders--if you own, say, 5,000 shares of company X, good luck having a say in getting incompetent/corrupt members of a board off
-Boards are rarely as independent in practice as they are in theory (i.e. executive bonuses are usually approved with little discussion)
-It's still too easy for people to serve on multiple boards and be subject to major conflicts of interest (i.e. major institutional shareholder's board + board of company whose shares they hold.)
I'm not saying the system is broken per se, as the above aren't fundamentally wrong, just needs some tweaking.
Governments do not give rights to anything. Governments can only take rights away (or try to.) A right is something that you just have, period. I think that is what you are fundamentally misunderstanding here.
The point isn't that they "knew" about these deeds, the point is that it was more of an "oh gee, whatever shall we do, I sure wish SOMEONE would pull ALL THE STOPS to find this out wink wink nudge nudge."
The whole plausible deniability thing is what's at issue, the core of the matter being that it's just not kosher or legally justifiable to hide behind a thin veneer of supposed ignorance of your lackeys' actions. If you're in charge, you'd damn well better know what's going on during your watch.
Heh, if he was Australian, I can only assume his reply was a bit more colorful than that :-)
:-)
I talked my way onto a flight in Frankfurt with a Leatherman I'd accidentally left in my laptop bag once, by playing stupid American. I felt really bad about it, because the guys there were extremely nice (telling each other in German, "but I know these things, they're really expensive, we can't take it away from him!")
At the same time, at Sydney airport some poor German dude had his gold cigar clipper confiscated and thrown in the bin (you know these things, you stick the cigar in, no exposed blade, the worst you could do is threaten to cut off someone's pinkie) after a 30 minute argument with the idiot girl there.
Considering I once managed to get a switchblade onto a flight in my laptop bag after I'd forgotten it in there (pre-9/11) -- they make great tools for cutting tape with one hand when you need your other hand to balance heavy objects like, I dunno, Sun server racks. You can put it in your pocket and flick it open easily with one hand and they're a lot handier than carpet cutters--only to have it confiscated on arrival in the US for being illegal
This is absolutely true. I once nicely asked a TSA guy at SFO about why I'd been selected. His response was a very polite "I'm sorry sir, I can't tell you that." However, when I asked him whether it was because of the one-way ticket, he told me it was.
Kinda stupid, like the taking-off-shoes and other, more recent, dumber measures--won't really stop a smart attacker, but inconvenience everyone. At least the security screeners I've run across recently were all very polite and professional, far more so than the mooks I used to encounter right after 9/11.
Haha, this reminds me a of a great episode in college: I visited a friend's dorm room around 1996; he lived in one of four highrises arranged around a central quad. As it was a warm sunny afternoon in September, quite a few people had their windows open.
All of a sudden, the (very loud) Windows 95 startup sound comes out of someone's room across the way.
Followed immediately by shouts from about 30 windows of "DON'T DO IT!" "NOOO!" "GET A MAC!
I would use the following definition, or a variant thereof: "DRM is the name given to technology used by the people who sell you digital content to control how, when and where you view/listen, store or copy that content. It includes laws to make it illegal for you to get around those controls." Beyond that, don't bother explaining, show them what it is and how it works, read on:
In years of trying to make my girlfriend, who is a strategy consultant and all-around pretty competent 'business' PC user (i.e. knows her way around Windows reasonably well, knows end-user apps, etc.) and a very bright person, I couldn't get her to care ("I buy all my music/films".)
What'd it take for her to understand why this is important and to listen to me on how it works? Well, we're spending a year on another continent and all of a sudden, her DVDs don't work in the player in our furnished apartment. Oops. Boy, was she pissed. Boy, did she want to know how it worked, why it sucked and how to get around it all of a sudden.
Same with why Windows is broken ("but it just works for what I want to do.") Until it didn't "just work." Same with data privacy ("I don't have anything to hide") until someone stole her credit card number.
The phrase you need to remember is "show me the money" or, in consulting terminology, "where's the 'so what'?" Most people won't care or give a rat's ass until it affects them directly.
I see where you're coming from, but in this case, federal is not some sort of monolithic affiliation (i.e. Neal Stephenson's "Feds" from Snow Crash.) I'm sufficiently confident in the independence of most judiciary, federal or not, to give the benefit of the doubt (note that it was also "federal" judges who threw out the executive branch's arguments in several recent "WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU PEOPLE THINKING" cases.)
The thing I'd be far more worried about, and on a way more fundamental level, is "against whom did the 'federal government' score a major victory today?" Once it becomes an us-versus-them situation, I fear for the very foundations of modern democracy.
I won't comment on your political ideas, but you might want to look up "Qassam" (they also have Fajr-3 and Fajr-5 122mm rockets, although they haven't to my knowledge used them yet), and "al qaeda" +"surface-to-air".
While I agree with the technical problems of something like this, I think you're letting your ideology goad you into wishful thinking.
Um... and open source software can't be supported by the company that wrote it? Or a third party support company?
Of course it can. Which is why, when making a purchasing decision for software, you need to consider _all_ the alternatives and pick whatever's best. Including both FOSS and commercial/proprietary stuff.
Ideology should have, at best, a secondary place in the decision. I've seen as many companies get bogged down with open source stuff that was chosen for poor reasons (i.e. because it was free rather than because it was better) as I've witnessed organizations held hostage by evil proprietary vendors.
Just because it's not FOSS doesn't automagically make it some sort of demon-spawn.
Yes, you are going to get flamed for this, because it's an idiotic and irrelevant statement.
Freedb.org was invaluable to me when I was ripping the 700-odd CDs THAT I OWN.
Muppet. Accurate track listing database != music piracy. Get over it.
Wow that's interesting, never heard that before.
The only comparable thing I can think of is Switzerland's Rega or alpine helicopter rescue outfit. Basically, they're a semi-public service; co-financed by the government, but when they pick you up, either you or your insurance foot a large part of the (sizeable) bill.
If you don't follow the rules (i.e. break your leg skiing off-piste) get ready to cough up. But if you buy a ca. $15 sponsorship, they either don't charge you at all, or are a lot kinder with your insurance....
Never heard of this sort of thing with something like a fire dept., though. I always thought police, fire, paramedic, that sorta thing, belonged pretty firmly into the realm of the stuff my tax dollars pay for.
To the "I shouldn't pay for public schools" guy below, aside from the altruistic aspects that we probably wouldn't see eye to eye on (i.e. I think it does fall in the public responsibility to pay for things like schooling, national parks, roads, whatnot, in addition to the services I listed above, since even someone like Adam Smith is pretty clear about nobody else being motivated to pay for them), I look at it as an investment.
I.e. social security: if you don't force people to save _something_ in a somewhat responsible manner, when they lose their job and fall into penury I don't want them hanging out on my street. Or defense--I don't have any stake in invading foreign countries either, but sometimes it's preventing people from blowing me up. Fire services? Same thing. I'd rather have someone put out a fire than have it move over to my house.
Uh, the church is not a government service. It is subsidized by the government. There is a difference. Same in many European countries--I ditched my Swiss catholic church membership; they're even more expensive than in Finland. Guess when I buy the farm they'll just put me in the Soylent Green blenders. :-)
Farm subsidies also don't fit here; that's just waste, not something you "opt out" of.
And while I agree about European-style "public" television, paid for by involuntary license fees if you have a TV, no, you cannot decide not to have fire dept. coverage, get out of sending your children to school.
Humf. I have a third gen WAP-54G (I believe SveaSoft & co. only work for gen1 and gen2) and bricked it repeatedly before figuring this out. I originally bought the thing because I don't (or want) a wireless router--the WAP is hanging off the third interface of my PCEngines WRAP running M0n0wall.
That thing is a bit more expensive than the WRT, but M0n0 is such an awesome firewall distro that it's worth it.
"This technology could be used to find missing children, search for lost hikers, or survey a fire zone"
We're watching you, but won't someone please think of the children?
Much as I support the EFF's efforts and goals, and sympathize with the gut-level worries of artists about "theft", this article does neither side any service.
It's basically two guys taking nasty swipes at each other. I think that either BBC2 was actively and selectively trying to portray them like two implacable, mean-mouthed curmudgeons, or that JPB and the RIAA guy could both have been a bit more factual.
One thing I really don't like is the characterization of "Electronic Hezbollah", although it's a catchy term; it's not like there's an organized, widespread movement to thieve and destroy. Rather, it's a combination of a groundswell sentiment against excessive prices and insulting, oppressive consumer-unfriendly practices, and a wish to have more convenient and accessible media (remind me again why iTunes was so successful) that doesn't hinder people from listening to their music / watching their movies anywhere or doing a bit of sharing with their friends.