1. Block outbound dns and force all queries to go through a central DNS server 2. Filter the domains that server allows to resolve 3. Adopt zero tolerance policy to evasion of firewalls 4. Do random audits of network traffic and punish anyone caught bypassing the firewall by any means. 5. Install deepfreeze so that students can't monkey with the machines
number 4 is good because you don't want your policies to become a joke. Kids these days are hardly technophobes, and you may need to be prepared to match wits with another nerd in the making. You need to instill a healthy respect for your rules.
If this sounds overbearing, then reconsider what sites you wish to filter out. Just remember, a policy is no good if it is not enforced.
Make the losers pay for the winner's legal bills and a lot of the meritless crap won't even be around to clog the courts in the first place. For there would be a strong incentive not to waste the court's time on a bullshit case.
More importantly, ISPs are private businesses against whom first amendment rights are not a defense if you have your access terminated.
Piss off your ISP and you kiss your internet goodbye. That's one thing and is completely legal (within reason, they can't cut you off because you're black, for example).
Have the government pass a law requiring the ISP to cut you off, however, and that's a different ballgame.
And college professors are guilty of aiding and abetting by forcing their students to buy the crap by assigning homework out of it.
Thing is those textbooks have super convenient instructor-only support material that professors love.
Students are in fact not the target market for textbooks. Just like husbands aren't the target market for diamonds, even though the money to buy them comes out of their pockets.
Catering to people who can squeeze money out of other people's pockets is a powerful marketing tool. The ethics of doing so are obviously a different story.
I kinda like the scheme set up by israel's knesset.
Direct election of representatives, who elect a prime minister. They can waive their own immunity.
Add to this the ability to recall a representative at will and you'd almost have a perfect system.
The biggest problem we have with the electoral college is that we can't fire our reps if they screw up or screw us in the arse.
Which means they have no incentive to be truthful during campaign season, just avoid pissing off the congress critters feeding from the same corporate trough they are.
More finishing touches would be to make election fraud (vote tampering, disenfranchisement, etc) a class A felony of sorts punishable by 20 years in prison.
Those idealists who think open source is a godsend have sadly not realized that commercial proprietary software has already entrenched itself in the market and is quite willing to fight dirty to keep it that way.
Slashdot Mirror
1. Block outbound dns and force all queries to go through a central DNS server
2. Filter the domains that server allows to resolve
3. Adopt zero tolerance policy to evasion of firewalls
4. Do random audits of network traffic and punish anyone caught bypassing the firewall by any means.
5. Install deepfreeze so that students can't monkey with the machines
number 4 is good because you don't want your policies to become a joke. Kids these days are hardly technophobes, and you may need to be prepared to match wits with another nerd in the making. You need to instill a healthy respect for your rules.
If this sounds overbearing, then reconsider what sites you wish to filter out. Just remember, a policy is no good if it is not enforced.
Equalling financial standing is what charities like the EFF are for.
Funny thing is that they will be able to reuse their legal budget once the defeated corporation has paid up for legal expenses.
Make the losers pay for the winner's legal bills and a lot of the meritless crap won't even be around to clog the courts in the first place. For there would be a strong incentive not to waste the court's time on a bullshit case.
laws that the patent trolls bought and paid for
Reread the constitution, and double check to see if that's referring to the federal government or the states.
More importantly, ISPs are private businesses against whom first amendment rights are not a defense if you have your access terminated.
Piss off your ISP and you kiss your internet goodbye. That's one thing and is completely legal (within reason, they can't cut you off because you're black, for example).
Have the government pass a law requiring the ISP to cut you off, however, and that's a different ballgame.
We tried a presidential line item veto act, but it was ruled unconstitutional as a violation of the presentment clause.
Unlicensed securities or an unchartered bank, take your pick.
THough it seems that as of the time I read your post at least two other people agreed with me.
Who wants to bet that the SEC will stomp in and claim that bitcoins are an illegal security?
I don't know if any punishment is strong enough to deter crooks from the ultimate prize.
Especially if you can grant your cohorts a full pardon once you get into office.
Maybe it's an exploit that simply cannot be patched.
And college professors are guilty of aiding and abetting by forcing their students to buy the crap by assigning homework out of it.
Thing is those textbooks have super convenient instructor-only support material that professors love.
Students are in fact not the target market for textbooks. Just like husbands aren't the target market for diamonds, even though the money to buy them comes out of their pockets.
Catering to people who can squeeze money out of other people's pockets is a powerful marketing tool. The ethics of doing so are obviously a different story.
Don't be silly.
Businesses don't hate piracy because it makes them lose money
They hate it because it threatens their monopoly control of the market.
So they get hacked, start serving malware, and the ukraine computer police bust THEM for the malware and let the hacker get off scot free?
Methinks the so called "hacker" was an inside job done by a mole of the copyright interests just to give the authorities an excuse to shut them down.
One can like part of a system without subscribing to the whole of it.
They don't work when we have to wait 4 years, during which they can screw us in the ass while the private sector rewards them with a cushy job.
It would solve enough of them to make the US tolerable once more.
The electoral college became a closed loop of corruption, especially with state laws against faithless electors.
What we need most is a way to fire our delegates.
Local politicians subject to recall tend to behave better while in office.
If we're really their bosses, why shouldn't we be able to hand them a pink slip?
I kinda like the scheme set up by israel's knesset.
Direct election of representatives, who elect a prime minister. They can waive their own immunity.
Add to this the ability to recall a representative at will and you'd almost have a perfect system.
The biggest problem we have with the electoral college is that we can't fire our reps if they screw up or screw us in the arse.
Which means they have no incentive to be truthful during campaign season, just avoid pissing off the congress critters feeding from the same corporate trough they are.
More finishing touches would be to make election fraud (vote tampering, disenfranchisement, etc) a class A felony of sorts punishable by 20 years in prison.
See "Tragedy of the commons" for a counter example.
History gives us a good reason to be paranoid.
And yet, the maintenance downtime was counted against the expiration of the petition?
People are inherently evil, and behind their altruistic motives is the instinct to backstab if they can get away with it.
Put someone in a position of trust where they have a chance to fuck everyone over and get away with it, they will do so.
The few who wouldn't, never seek such a position to begin with.
It's human nature, and will never change.
The best we can do is put in checks and balances so that we turn this nature against itself and keep it deadlocked in a stalemate.
Dead people don't have bank accounts for it to be deposited in.
What are they supposed to do, stash it in their coffin where it can't get spent?
Sad but true, +1 insightful please.
Those idealists who think open source is a godsend have sadly not realized that commercial proprietary software has already entrenched itself in the market and is quite willing to fight dirty to keep it that way.
Vendor lock-in's great, if you're the vendor.