Just because it's stable (i.e., compilable, doesn't spew warnings, has survived poking) doesn't mean it's mature enough for major distros to rely upon.
it is experimental at best.
Whether the kernel folks issued the appropriate disclaimers on it or not, it still lies upon the distros not to include code that is unproven/brand new/reasonably suspect.
This code may be stable, but it is definitely green.
Carbon sequestration is a farce unless they can manage to take it completely out of circulation, the way plants do when they suck the carbon off and spit the oxygen back out.
Pumping billions of gallons of CO2 into the ground in a cave? Puh leeeze. It's a GAS! It will, I dunno, leak?
Gas, especially gas under pressure, has a way of escaping, and if a sequestration cavern springs one, all the hard work done in pumping it underground will be wasted. Besides, the earth is far too porous to trust to that sorta thing.
What needs to be done is to find a way to turn that CO2 into a stable form. Using clean energy to turn CO2 back into gasoline (ala NASA's mars mission anyone?) would be a good start, and it would, quite literally, reverse the damage.
Cars are like animals that drink gas, move, and belch out CO2. It's the same chemical reaction that makes rover gulp down a can of Alpo, and use that can to frolic about or run like crazy when going out for a walk, then spew CO2 out his mouth. At least rover doesn't fart out CO or sulfur dioxide in the process.
We need to think green, not just in reducing the carbon we produce, but also increasing the carbon we recycle.
Sadly, if economics is the deciding factor, the present generation will throw a big fat party and leave the next one to pay the bill.
Actually, google haters and comcast haters are sorta in the same boat. They can't switch to something better.
The difference is that google is the cream of the crop among alternatives, and it's monopoly is only on comparative quality. That is to say, assuming I would trust ANY company with my private information, google would be the first, above all others. They are comparatively better.
The feds have a gun pointed at everyone's head, so to speak, when they want information. Google is no exception, and incidentally, neither is microsoft. Or apple, or International Widgets. And even entities like Super Uber Secure Solutions won't be able to stand up to a government spook barging in with a search warrant. The government will barge in with guns blazing if they have to. In fact, remember waco?
I would stick with google if anyone, because they are up front about lots of stuff, and I would trust them sooner than I woudl trust any other company. Not that I'd trust anyone based in the US to begin with.
When you are a benevolent company trapped in a malevolent world full of high powered and highly placed evil, it's a tough job. Yet, you cannot simply stand on principle and deprive the masses of your goodness, for in doing so you may leave them no refuge from the evils of the status quo, and worse, you make room for companies that don't even care to Not Be Evil, and would actually be more than happy.
As a short example, notice what happens when google gets slapped with a DMCA notice or a gag order. They are bound, but they don't take it lying down. Their position is "we will get in big trouble if we fight this, but at least it's not an NSL with a gag order so we're going to post it on chilling effects so that people can at least see who forced us".
The real problem, which is unfixable, is that people want to commit fraud in the first place.
A good interim solution would make fraud unattractive.
Right now, I can see a few good moves
1) Make election tampering in any form a federal offense punishable by mandatory prison time of at least a few years, no matter what level of government the office in question exists within.
2) Require periodic security audits of the machines, run by a company that has no connections to either the manufacturer or the government. Also, make it a crime to attempt to influence their evaluations.
3) Anyone who is a certified auditor of voting machines must at a minimum pass a technical competency test involving strong questions in
4) Don't allow an voting machine to be used unless it has been federally certified.
5) If any machine fails an audit, the model in question's certification needs to be revoked promptly
6) Any company that has X number of certs pulled for audit failures should be barred from ever contracting with a government agency for voting work.
7) Voting machine certification standards themselves need to be written by competent engineers, preferably including some ex-blackhats who would know how to break stuff.
I think that patents have gotten so bad we need to look at the possible criminal consequences of bullshitting the PTO?
Since the USPTO is a *federal agency*, wouldn't that make it, like, a federal offense to knowingly submit a patent application that you KNOW is invalid because of prior art?
I wonder if those patent applications have the familiar "I declare under *penalty of perjury* that the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge* clause you often find on federal paperwork.
I think that this should be the case if it isn't already.
And I think that any company that bullshits the PTO by hiding prior art should be indicted on federal perjury charges.
Actually if I remember correctly from Business Law, reproduction during a court proceeding is considered fair use. Along with legislation and "parody or satire".
Which is why patents and copyrights should be socialized, IMHO, once the revenue is sufficient to cover costs, INCLUDING the opportunity costs of the person holding the IP rights in the form of what they had to give up to produce it.
Slashdot Mirror
and you're sure that going through a VM-VMM boundary won't slow things down?
Just because it's stable (i.e., compilable, doesn't spew warnings, has survived poking) doesn't mean it's mature enough for major distros to rely upon.
it is experimental at best.
Whether the kernel folks issued the appropriate disclaimers on it or not, it still lies upon the distros not to include code that is unproven/brand new/reasonably suspect.
This code may be stable, but it is definitely green.
Ext4 is still alpha-ish, and declared as such.
Any *user* who trusts production data to an experimental filesystem is already too stupid to have the right to gripe about losing said data.
Carbon sequestration is a farce unless they can manage to take it completely out of circulation, the way plants do when they suck the carbon off and spit the oxygen back out.
Pumping billions of gallons of CO2 into the ground in a cave? Puh leeeze. It's a GAS! It will, I dunno, leak?
Gas, especially gas under pressure, has a way of escaping, and if a sequestration cavern springs one, all the hard work done in pumping it underground will be wasted. Besides, the earth is far too porous to trust to that sorta thing.
What needs to be done is to find a way to turn that CO2 into a stable form. Using clean energy to turn CO2 back into gasoline (ala NASA's mars mission anyone?) would be a good start, and it would, quite literally, reverse the damage.
Cars are like animals that drink gas, move, and belch out CO2. It's the same chemical reaction that makes rover gulp down a can of Alpo, and use that can to frolic about or run like crazy when going out for a walk, then spew CO2 out his mouth. At least rover doesn't fart out CO or sulfur dioxide in the process.
We need to think green, not just in reducing the carbon we produce, but also increasing the carbon we recycle.
Sadly, if economics is the deciding factor, the present generation will throw a big fat party and leave the next one to pay the bill.
Actually, google haters and comcast haters are sorta in the same boat. They can't switch to something better.
The difference is that google is the cream of the crop among alternatives, and it's monopoly is only on comparative quality. That is to say, assuming I would trust ANY company with my private information, google would be the first, above all others. They are comparatively better.
The feds have a gun pointed at everyone's head, so to speak, when they want information. Google is no exception, and incidentally, neither is microsoft. Or apple, or International Widgets. And even entities like Super Uber Secure Solutions won't be able to stand up to a government spook barging in with a search warrant. The government will barge in with guns blazing if they have to. In fact, remember waco?
I would stick with google if anyone, because they are up front about lots of stuff, and I would trust them sooner than I woudl trust any other company. Not that I'd trust anyone based in the US to begin with.
When you are a benevolent company trapped in a malevolent world full of high powered and highly placed evil, it's a tough job. Yet, you cannot simply stand on principle and deprive the masses of your goodness, for in doing so you may leave them no refuge from the evils of the status quo, and worse, you make room for companies that don't even care to Not Be Evil, and would actually be more than happy.
As a short example, notice what happens when google gets slapped with a DMCA notice or a gag order. They are bound, but they don't take it lying down. Their position is "we will get in big trouble if we fight this, but at least it's not an NSL with a gag order so we're going to post it on chilling effects so that people can at least see who forced us".
The real problem, which is unfixable, is that people want to commit fraud in the first place.
A good interim solution would make fraud unattractive.
Right now, I can see a few good moves
1) Make election tampering in any form a federal offense punishable by mandatory prison time of at least a few years, no matter what level of government the office in question exists within.
2) Require periodic security audits of the machines, run by a company that has no connections to either the manufacturer or the government. Also, make it a crime to attempt to influence their evaluations.
3) Anyone who is a certified auditor of voting machines must at a minimum pass a technical competency test involving strong questions in
4) Don't allow an voting machine to be used unless it has been federally certified.
5) If any machine fails an audit, the model in question's certification needs to be revoked promptly
6) Any company that has X number of certs pulled for audit failures should be barred from ever contracting with a government agency for voting work.
7) Voting machine certification standards themselves need to be written by competent engineers, preferably including some ex-blackhats who would know how to break stuff.
True, but the banks might turn around and sue diebold for damages if the hackability was a breach of diebold's warranty...
AND diebold didn't be a sleaze and put "your exclusive remedy is a full refund and we disclaima ll warranties" such and such...
Sounds like the banks are going to get ripped off. Poetic justice perhaps but diebold should still eat the dogfood it served.
I would propose that if it's nasty enough to protect our children from, then what makes it ok for adults to indulge in it?
The mind is fairly plastic even past childhood.
Seriously, why are people surprised in these ages about corruption anymore?
You forgot that now they have an RIAA lapdog very likely pulling the DOJ to their favor.
You have done us a favor by revealing your uncomfortable dilemma.
Now we know that your ISP's absurd oversubscribing isn't just a technical oversight...it is corporate policy to oversell to such an extreme degree.
So your company is probably abusing monopoly power.
And, perhaps other ISPs that have bandwidth issues have the same top-down power structure where the techies get pushed around by the higher ups.
And then corrupt customs agents will conveniently lose your report and then you'll get scrubbed.
not to mention that victims of mere clerical error are going to get screwed.
Remember US vs $124,700?
This idea has fatal flaws.
i think you are on the right track, but I wouldn't put THAT much faith in the feds.
I think that patents have gotten so bad we need to look at the possible criminal consequences of bullshitting the PTO?
Since the USPTO is a *federal agency*, wouldn't that make it, like, a federal offense to knowingly submit a patent application that you KNOW is invalid because of prior art?
I wonder if those patent applications have the familiar "I declare under *penalty of perjury* that the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge* clause you often find on federal paperwork.
I think that this should be the case if it isn't already.
And I think that any company that bullshits the PTO by hiding prior art should be indicted on federal perjury charges.
Actually if I remember correctly from Business Law, reproduction during a court proceeding is considered fair use. Along with legislation and "parody or satire".
As a statement of a future event, any reasonable person would hastily consider it a mere prediction, and thus, cannot reasonably give it any weight.
And I don't think psychic testimony is admissible in court.
And what about the TMAA?
Too Many Acronyms Agency?
We already have a TLA clash because the NSA and the NSA have the same TLA, so we have TMA.
I hope we don't have a FDA, we already have an FDA
(Federal Database of Acronyms, Food and Drug Administration)
actually, getting a site in trouble with google that way is a nice way to joe job someone.
Hate a site? does it use google adwords? Sweet! Just click it out of google's good graces!
sounds like a relatively cheap way to have a site's ad revenue choked off,
click-fraud it into banned-from-adwords hell.
When you squeeze the nobility, it's the peasants who feel the pinch.
I wish there was a +1 brave
Which is why patents and copyrights should be socialized, IMHO, once the revenue is sufficient to cover costs, INCLUDING the opportunity costs of the person holding the IP rights in the form of what they had to give up to produce it.
I would support this:
A flat tax on
Have you heard of the expression "Seeing far by standing on the shoulders of giants"?
You can get exponential returns on writing software if you don't have to rewrite everything from scratch
All right then get the fsck off my shoulder and go find a rock to stand on.
You mean like that freelancer that patented the wheel?
as long as the court applies *swedish* law correctly I have no objection.
Politics and power being what it is, no human (even a judge, especially, a judge) is immune to corrupt influence.