Seconded. I am German, and have thought about this time and time again. I haven't been able to think of it as something that is not utterly and deeply stupid. The constitutional court judges, when they turned down the law that would allow the army to do something in such a case, even went so far as to say that "a state that weighted human lives against each other is unthinkable" ("Undenkbar"). How about that? Just fucking Unthinkable!
The fact that many fellow Germans think that this was a good decision scares me. It confirms my suspicion that the German public is living in a land of fantasy, at the same time reduced to a crippling state of cowardice and egoism. "I wouldn't want to take responsibility for such a decision". I wonder if they really wouldn't set a threshold. Suppose a bunch of terrorists with a nuclear bomb in a plane with 10 civilians heads towards Berlin. Still unthinkable to kill the 10 civilians including terrorists? Maybe if the 10 civilians file a petition?
I hope that, if it ever comes to that, someone will "disobey orders" and shoot down the plane. He will probably rot for years in a German prison, though.
From that decision of the constitutional court, and its large support in the population, it also follows that Germany would rather be shredded to pieces than ever go to war again.
Last time I checked, solaris tar did not have the compression flags either.
The machine I was working with back then (until about a year ago) had backspace and del do the same (IIRC delete char to the right) and nobody could find out how to change that. And that just scratches on the surface. It didn't help that the admins were assholes, so I only had CDE as a "window manager".
It sucked. Big. I ended up working on my machine at home using tightvnc, because that solaris box was absolutely unbearable.
Because as a matter of fact, "they" will be looking for anything that gives the impression of providing such hiding functionality. Thus, things like TrueCrypt, which are going to be a classic among smartasses with something to hide, will be well known in the forensics community for exactly that reason, and are actually a liability.
you certainly do not have to visit a myspace page where you are being slandered
No, you don't. But others do visit those pages, and this has effects on real life. And cyber-bullying is often more than just writing "foo is an asshole". It involves posting embarrassing and exposing pictures, movie clips, and gossip.
Besides, it is irrelevant wether you, melikamp, think that this is not important. The victims of cyber-bullying do feel very distressed, and do so in practically every case. To them it is important, and this is what matters. You see, you are just wrong.
Beyond that, they have no obligations to police the shit out of the site.
Precisely. At least for now, they feel no obligation to police the site and make sure the stuff doesn't get posted in the first place. As far as I understand, this is what Viacom wants to change. They want courts to order google/youtoube to properly police their site, and make sure undesired content cannot be posted in the first place. Or at the very least, introduce a proper mechanism for identifying users that post material owned by other people.
Again, YouTube is powered by users, not Google. Pull your head out of your ass.
The issue isn't as simple. One can argue, and I'm sure this will be at least one of the arguments, that google/youtube is hiding behind this mantra (modulo the anatomic correction term) in order to make money, and that most of its profits come, simply, from not being forced to take responsibility. Clearly, this argument isn't flat out wrong either. They have this beautiful scheme where anonymous, unidentifiable users post proprietary content at a rate so high that removing it on request makes no difference to the availability of the material. Alongside this content (which they of course will remove as soon as they are notified, but which keeps popping back instantly) they place ads, and make hard cash. Cash that they do not share with the copyright owners, btw. It's just a beautiful scheme.
My guess is that google/youtube will be forced to allow only correctly identifiable users to post videos, i.e, while you can choose any nickname you want, somewhere your real name and address will be stored in case someone has a legitimate reason to go after you.
I disagree. The internet doesn't leave the real world alone, and has a lot of ugly effects on it. It has lots of good ones, true, but not only good ones. What is needed is competent legislation, not no legislation.
(Besides, your position wrt parenting isn't widely shared, not even among parents.)
Just saying that the same conditions which allow anonymous communication of genuine importance will inevitably be exploited by morons; it's a price we should be willing to pay
An easy and cheap thing to say when you are not at the receiving end. You are essentially saying that these ladies should just pretend nothing has happened, that they should accept being harassed, stalked, and vilified in the name of great and shiny ideals. I hope you realize how mean and crazy that is.
The problem here is stalking, abuse and sexism, not just "being unable to find a job".
What is happening on that forum is wrong, and the fact that it is protected by free speech doesn't change that. If such things start to disrupt lives on a regular basis, there will be legislation to stop this kind of behaviour.
Refusing to discuss the issue on the basis that free speech takes precendence over everything else, even over the well-being, happiness and security of basically random people is very unhelpful, and is bound to give free speech a bad name. Think about it.
I've had incandecent lamps for a while. They take some time to warm up. After about five minutes i can't tell the difference to an incandescent any more.
In my opinion, wikipedia makes it way too easy to post libelous content with impunity, further pretending that this content is encyclopedic truth. They can be subpoenaed, true, but only for information that is meaningless unless the user felt like providing his correct identity. For example, the IP address they stored for this particular entry looks a lot like leading nowhere. It is an amply documented fact that this is the way the wikipedia community wants things to be. Their lax identity policy is a cause of problems. They know it, but prefer it that way. I can't understand why you call this "cooperating".
Did I just say "freedom" is totalitarian? No. And you know it. So why did you do this?
and denounced community projects
Insisting that community projects have immunity is wrong.
you railed against both free speech and free press
Wow, a fundamentalist.
Wikipedia makes it way too easy to post libelous and false claims that then are presented as encyclopedic truth, and without anyone assuming responsibility. This is not acceptable. Contribution to such constructs should only be allowed with proper identification.
The fact that he can't sue wikipedia is definitely a problem, and a loophole in the current legal system. The "anything goes, we do what we want and fuck you" mentality of constructions like wikipedia should be eliminated. At the very least, they should be forced to permanently remove entries on people who do not want to have articles about them. The fact is, he should be suing both.
I don't buy the "free speech" argument. That much "freedom" is totalitarian. It leaves no choice for those at the receiving end but to live with being harassed and defamed.
> Examine x replacing y with z - is there a current equiv without 2 or more steps? > > $x =~ s/y/z/g;
While I have to congratulate you for showing the old dog how it is done today, i feel a little nervous. In the olden days, folks at least talked to the machine in something resembling natural language. And now? We say "Dollar ex equal wiggle ess slash why slash zed slash gee semi-fucking-colon". Is that progress?
Yes, I wouldn't discount the idea in principle, even though I am quite confident that much of this story is a fake. Playing a movie from a self-built prototype implies quite a bit of bandwidth.
Nah. Neither tools, nor money. Leave them alone to sort their shit out. In contrast to any of the aid programs I've ever heard of, this might actually work. If someone wants a laptop, he/she should buy it.
Just as a data point: all the clothes that are donated by the first world and end up in african markets destroy the market for the local textile business, thus increasing poverty, dependence, and the general feeling of misery.
For those too lazy to type, here's the link: cosmopod.
This kind of thing has been needed for ages. Very interesting data point; thank you. So a good web OS is basically a large, well administered UNIX cluster. I believe that this will have a bright future, as clients can be embedded into web browsers using java. It works for VNC, at least.
I agree with you that selection is necessary. But I don't know if setting the threshold that tight is a good idea. in a 200:1 ratio the last 10 or so may as well drop coins or use dice. It may be rather wasteful, as a a lot of good people are left out. Wether selection is good or not also depends on the criteria. If age, for instance, is a strong criterium, people lose for completely random reasons (accidents, illnesses) that have nothing to do with actual ability. And some win because they are pushed by mentors, even if they are actually mediocre, and end up fulfilling criteria.
Selection by arbitrary and unjust criteria is the part that sucks most in science.
They voted against it in two whoopping countries. However, it takes 5 nos to definitely kill the text.
Technically you are right, of course, but without france in the mix, it gets a very tough proposition. Voting was halted because if at the end there were less than 5 noes, you have a rather big problem without a reasonable solution. Even if the text had "passed" by that measure, it would still not have been ratified by france, so essenially france has to leave the EU, or the text has to be dumped anyway.
it is instructive, for the understanding of these kinds of things, to download some decent genetic algorithm software and play with the parameters of a few of the examples (even though all of these genetic algorithms are of course just models of how evolution works in nature, sometimes with serious departures, as, for instance, algorithms featuring elitist selection, which means that the fittest don't die)
In any case, the sweet spot for the mutations ratio is usually very low. Higher rates of mutations tend to slow convergence down rather dramatically.
When I have a day like this one, I wonder really if this will not be our fall.
For those claiming that global warning isn't happening, a look at the dynamics of the discussion should shows that their standards of evidence are way beyond reasonable, and that they rather disagree with something for whatever reason than accepting global warning.
In other words, if, as the evidence overwhelmingly sugests, global warming is happening, we, the human race, might be unable to do something in time simply because... well, yes, simply because.
The human race. A bunch of monkeys on an old rock, on their merry road to hell. Knowing what is happening, but absolutely unable to get our act together and do something abobut it. What a sight, ladies and gentlemen. How utterly embarrassing.
Great. Let's just continue to release CO2 into the atmosphere and dump tons of iron into the oceans to offset the effects. What are you? A batman-movie-class villain?
In case you haven't noticed - there is a huge difference between restricting some freedoms and murdering people.
Slashdot Mirror
Outlawing Tor is very much specific to Germany.
Do you have any other links discussing this? Is this "Germany Outlaws Tor" for real?
> i know this may sound stupid to americans
It's not just Americans it sounds stupid to.
Seconded. I am German, and have thought about this time and time again. I haven't been able to think of it as something that is not utterly and deeply stupid. The constitutional court judges, when they turned down the law that would allow the army to do something in such a case, even went so far as to say that "a state that weighted human lives against each other is unthinkable" ("Undenkbar"). How about that? Just fucking Unthinkable!
The fact that many fellow Germans think that this was a good decision scares me. It confirms my suspicion that the German public is living in a land of fantasy, at the same time reduced to a crippling state of cowardice and egoism. "I wouldn't want to take responsibility for such a decision". I wonder if they really wouldn't set a threshold. Suppose a bunch of terrorists with a nuclear bomb in a plane with 10 civilians heads towards Berlin. Still unthinkable to kill the 10 civilians including terrorists? Maybe if the 10 civilians file a petition?
I hope that, if it ever comes to that, someone will "disobey orders" and shoot down the plane. He will probably rot for years in a German prison, though.
From that decision of the constitutional court, and its large support in the population, it also follows that Germany would rather be shredded to pieces than ever go to war again.
Last time I checked, solaris tar did not have the compression flags either.
The machine I was working with back then (until about a year ago) had backspace and del do the same (IIRC delete char to the right) and nobody could find out how to change that. And that just scratches on the surface. It didn't help that the admins were assholes, so I only had CDE as a "window manager".
It sucked. Big. I ended up working on my machine at home using tightvnc, because that solaris box was absolutely unbearable.
A very insightful comment.
Because as a matter of fact, "they" will be looking for anything that gives the impression of providing such hiding functionality. Thus, things like TrueCrypt, which are going to be a classic among smartasses with something to hide, will be well known in the forensics community for exactly that reason, and are actually a liability.
you certainly do not have to visit a myspace page where you are being slandered
No, you don't. But others do visit those pages, and this has effects on real life. And cyber-bullying is often more than just writing "foo is an asshole". It involves posting embarrassing and exposing pictures, movie clips, and gossip.
Besides, it is irrelevant wether you, melikamp, think that this is not important. The victims of cyber-bullying do feel very distressed, and do so in practically every case. To them it is important, and this is what matters. You see, you are just wrong.
Precisely. At least for now, they feel no obligation to police the site and make sure the stuff doesn't get posted in the first place. As far as I understand, this is what Viacom wants to change. They want courts to order google/youtoube to properly police their site, and make sure undesired content cannot be posted in the first place. Or at the very least, introduce a proper mechanism for identifying users that post material owned by other people.
The issue isn't as simple. One can argue, and I'm sure this will be at least one of the arguments, that google/youtube is hiding behind this mantra (modulo the anatomic correction term) in order to make money, and that most of its profits come, simply, from not being forced to take responsibility. Clearly, this argument isn't flat out wrong either. They have this beautiful scheme where anonymous, unidentifiable users post proprietary content at a rate so high that removing it on request makes no difference to the availability of the material. Alongside this content (which they of course will remove as soon as they are notified, but which keeps popping back instantly) they place ads, and make hard cash. Cash that they do not share with the copyright owners, btw. It's just a beautiful scheme.
My guess is that google/youtube will be forced to allow only correctly identifiable users to post videos, i.e, while you can choose any nickname you want, somewhere your real name and address will be stored in case someone has a legitimate reason to go after you.
I disagree. The internet doesn't leave the real world alone, and has a lot of ugly effects on it. It has lots of good ones, true, but not only good ones. What is needed is competent legislation, not no legislation.
(Besides, your position wrt parenting isn't widely shared, not even among parents.)
Just saying that the same conditions which allow anonymous communication of genuine importance will inevitably be exploited by morons; it's a price we should be willing to pay
An easy and cheap thing to say when you are not at the receiving end. You are essentially saying that these ladies should just pretend nothing has happened, that they should accept being harassed, stalked, and vilified in the name of great and shiny ideals. I hope you realize how mean and crazy that is.
The problem here is stalking, abuse and sexism, not just "being unable to find a job".
What is happening on that forum is wrong, and the fact that it is protected by free speech doesn't change that. If such things start to disrupt lives on a regular basis, there will be legislation to stop this kind of behaviour.
Refusing to discuss the issue on the basis that free speech takes precendence over everything else, even over the well-being, happiness and security of basically random people is very unhelpful, and is bound to give free speech a bad name. Think about it.
That probably depends on the subject. It is not unusual to cite textbooks in mathematics papers.
I've had incandecent lamps for a while. They take some time to warm up. After about five minutes i can't tell the difference to an incandescent any more.
:-)
So maybe you screwed it out too fast
In my opinion, wikipedia makes it way too easy to post libelous content with impunity, further pretending that this content is encyclopedic truth. They can be subpoenaed, true, but only for information that is meaningless unless the user felt like providing his correct identity. For example, the IP address they stored for this particular entry looks a lot like leading nowhere. It is an amply documented fact that this is the way the wikipedia community wants things to be. Their lax identity policy is a cause of problems. They know it, but prefer it that way. I can't understand why you call this "cooperating".
>IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
Did I just say "freedom" is totalitarian? No. And you know it. So why did you do this?
and denounced community projects
Insisting that community projects have immunity is wrong.
you railed against both free speech and free press
Wow, a fundamentalist.
Wikipedia makes it way too easy to post libelous and false claims that then are presented as encyclopedic truth, and without anyone assuming responsibility. This is not acceptable. Contribution to such constructs should only be allowed with proper identification.
The fact that he can't sue wikipedia is definitely a problem, and a loophole in the current legal system. The "anything goes, we do what we want and fuck you" mentality of constructions like wikipedia should be eliminated. At the very least, they should be forced to permanently remove entries on people who do not want to have articles about them. The fact is, he should be suing both.
I don't buy the "free speech" argument. That much "freedom" is totalitarian. It leaves no choice for those at the receiving end but to live with being harassed and defamed.
> Examine x replacing y with z - is there a current equiv without 2 or more steps?
>
> $x =~ s/y/z/g;
While I have to congratulate you for showing the old dog how it is done today, i feel a little nervous. In the olden days, folks at least talked to the machine in something resembling natural language. And now? We say "Dollar ex equal wiggle ess slash why slash zed slash gee semi-fucking-colon". Is that progress?
Yes, I wouldn't discount the idea in principle, even though I am quite confident that much of this story is a fake. Playing a movie from a self-built prototype implies quite a bit of bandwidth.
Nah. Neither tools, nor money. Leave them alone to sort their shit out. In contrast to any of the aid programs I've ever heard of, this might actually work. If someone wants a laptop, he/she should buy it.
Just as a data point: all the clothes that are donated by the first world and end up in african markets destroy the market for the local textile business, thus increasing poverty, dependence, and the general feeling of misery.
For those too lazy to type, here's the link: cosmopod.
This kind of thing has been needed for ages. Very interesting data point; thank you. So a good web OS is basically a large, well administered UNIX cluster. I believe that this will have a bright future, as clients can be embedded into web browsers using java. It works for VNC, at least.
Believe it or not - there's actually a gmail file system.
I agree with you that selection is necessary. But I don't know if setting the threshold that tight is a good idea. in a 200:1 ratio the last 10 or so may as well drop coins or use dice. It may be rather wasteful, as a a lot of good people are left out. Wether selection is good or not also depends on the criteria. If age, for instance, is a strong criterium, people lose for completely random reasons (accidents, illnesses) that have nothing to do with actual ability. And some win because they are pushed by mentors, even if they are actually mediocre, and end up fulfilling criteria.
Selection by arbitrary and unjust criteria is the part that sucks most in science.
Technically you are right, of course, but without france in the mix, it gets a very tough proposition. Voting was halted because if at the end there were less than 5 noes, you have a rather big problem without a reasonable solution. Even if the text had "passed" by that measure, it would still not have been ratified by france, so essenially france has to leave the EU, or the text has to be dumped anyway.
it is instructive, for the understanding of these kinds of things, to download some decent genetic algorithm software and play with the parameters of a few of the examples (even though all of these genetic algorithms are of course just models of how evolution works in nature, sometimes with serious departures, as, for instance, algorithms featuring elitist selection, which means that the fittest don't die)
In any case, the sweet spot for the mutations ratio is usually very low. Higher rates of mutations tend to slow convergence down rather dramatically.
I am quite sure they are going to be pissed off by this one. Although this "feature" is so nasty it is hard to believe it will ever see the market
When I have a day like this one, I wonder really if this will not be our fall.
For those claiming that global warning isn't happening, a look at the dynamics of the discussion should shows that their standards of evidence are way beyond reasonable, and that they rather disagree with something for whatever reason than accepting global warning.
In other words, if, as the evidence overwhelmingly sugests, global warming is happening, we, the human race, might be unable to do something in time simply because ... well, yes, simply because.
The human race. A bunch of monkeys on an old rock, on their merry road to hell. Knowing what is happening, but absolutely unable to get our act together and do something abobut it. What a sight, ladies and gentlemen. How utterly embarrassing.
Great. Let's just continue to release CO2 into the atmosphere and dump tons of iron into the oceans to offset the effects. What are you? A batman-movie-class villain?
In case you haven't noticed - there is a huge difference between restricting some freedoms and murdering people.