I'm not saying you need to know the names of the generals, but there's no doubt that the Civil War shaped America, or that WWII did just as much: Mass higher education started as a result of the government's GI bill program that was designed to give a useful task to soldiers returning from the field of battles; suburbia started when the soldiers started families; the baby boom generation is the echo of WWII; nuclear power came about faster because of the war effort, etc. It's not that war is itself important, but rather that it is usually a signpost for major cultural and economic changes. Korea is a forgotten war largely because it didn't change our country the same way Vietnam did.
Most Americans don't learn much about these skirmishes in school . . . . That's a pity, because the fight against the Barbary pirates was a big part of shaping the U.S. military into what it is today.
There's just not enough time in most school history classes to teach the kids something meaningful about all of the very major wars (Revolution, Civil War, WWI, WWII, Vietnam) that even some of the medium-sized wars (French and Indian, 1812, Korea) get short shrift. It's not a coincidence that Korea is called the "forgotten war." It'd be great if every high school kid had as much curiosity and interest about history as you clearly do, but it's just not the case. One survey, admittedly not very scientific, found that 57% of high school students didn't know that the Civil War was in the last half of the 19th century.
That's pretty bad. I'd much rather fix that than worry about teaching them about Barbary pirates. Maybe the right solution is more edu-tainment programming; it seems that your lesson to be taken from the Barbaray pirates is not dates and places, but more of a zeitgeist about the forces that were acting on the US in the early days. Some of that can be captured in a good period piece--think Pirates of the Caribbean, except not entirely fictionalized.
Similarly, it looks some somebody has already made silly videos about " protecting web booty" to riff on the pirate/cybersecurity theme.
Have they actually had any circumstances justifying such Draconian legislation?
The headline is incredibly misleading.
The law, like the US CALEA, just says that law enforcement needs to be able to tap into the system upon showing a lawful warrant. It's a technical standardization measure, not a warrantless wiretap measure.
It makes it easier to abuse the system, but nothing about this law allows warrantless wiretaps. It makes it possible for law enforcement to have a standardized set of hardware used to access lawful (with warrant) wiretaps.
It's true that opt-out and opt-in lead to very different solutions. But opt-out gets expensive when a lot of people do it; the companies have to actually go through and process each opt-out request.
Plenty enough of people are opting out through services allowing individuals to see what information the big data brokers have on them, and to delete some of it, but not all data can be removed that way. They call it a "global do not call list". keeping with the FTC's US phone do not call registry. If enough people opt out, the customer service costs become so high that it becomes cheaper for trackers to force opt-in instead.
To the predictable "They are proposing a [x] market based solution" -- yeah, it's true. But they at least have a shot at controlling some of it for the people who care the most.
Plaintiffs Tishman and Wilkinson filed a lawsuit against defendant Pine, but had difficulty serving Pine with the summons. The plaintiffs tried the conventional methods of service under New York law, such as personal delivery. They even tried the "nailing and mailing" method by affixing a copy of the summons to the door of Pine's residence, then sending a copy in the mail.
Tishman and Wilkinson had information, however, that led them to believe Pine was out of the country. . . They petitioned the court for permission to serve Pine by e-mail, pursuant to N.Y. C.P.L.R. Â308(5), which allows service by such manner as the court directs, when the more conventional methods are "impracticable."
The court allowed service of the summons to an e-mail address Pine had used in a classified ad listing his house for sale. The court held that given the uncertainty about the success of the attempted "nailing and mailing" effort, and the fact that the Pine's attorneys wouldn't give a clear answer as to where Pine was living, alternative service by e-mail was appropriate.
Most states have similar laws that allow service by any practical means if conventional methods fail.
Stranger things have happened, especially in cases where the events took place online. Normally you're right that service has to be done in person or by US mail.
BUT, if the only known way to contact a defendant or witness is by email (if, for example, their real names or addresses are unknown), then a court can authorize that as an alternative form of service. It's up to the court to decide if email would give sufficient notice and other means are impractical.
Here, of course, there's no reason to think that sending certified mail or a process server wouldn't work -- a corporate CEO isn't hard to find and service on a company can almost always be done through the state's secretary of state.
But, that doesn't mean that electronic subpoenas are never possible, as you suggest.
I actually retract my statement above. It's not clear whether the ship is North or South Korean at this point. The only entry in the international ship registry matching an MT Ann ("Merchant Transport Ann") is a North Korean vessel.
5105 7320069 ANN HMZE6 Oil Products Tanker 22600 1973 12 Korea (North)
However, there's an "Ankuk" on the same list that's a South Korean ship that would also match:
I'm no expert on ships, so it's possible I'm looking in all the wrong places. Or that there's a translation problem from Korean to English. Maybe somebody else has a better lead?
Not all ships owned by Korean companies are registered as Korean flag vessels.
Look at US cruise lines -- most US-owned cruise liners are registered in other countries (usually the Bahamas).
See flag of convenience for a list of countries that are the most frequent places to register vessels. There are Korean-owned vessels registered in Belize, Cambodia, Cyprus... etc.
Your wish is the community's command. Here's ZDNet on cable statistics
According to one paper presented at last year's SubOptic conference in Baltimore, Maryland, rates of cable fault in water over 1km deep are less than 0.1 faults per year, per 1,000km of installed cable. This implies around 50 deepwater repairs per year, globally. At depths of less than 1km, failure rates hovered between 1-2 per 1,000km in the 1990s, but have been steadily declining. According to a SubOptic 2004 paper, the rate in 2003 was 0.2 fault per 1,000km.
In other words, that's 50 deep-water cuts per year, in addition to some more shallow-water cuts per year.
He said there are approximately 50 cable cuts a year, 65 percent of which are due to fishing trawlers dragging heavy nets and 18 percent of which are due to shipsâ(TM) anchors. âoeThey donâ(TM)t even track terrorism,â he said. âoeCable cuts are a routine part of the business.â
These statistics don't include power failures and other problems with cables that arise from the land side; if a switching station goes down then the cable goes dark, even if it's still intact.
Except the second ship was South Korean, our ally. North Korea only has a handful of blue water ships. South Korea, electronics manufacturer to the world, has many.
Sure, fair enough. But the great-grandparent hinted that she was being sued, which is a very different proposition. Being sued would be completely unconscionable.
Third-party witnesses get subpoenaed all the time. From here, it sure looks like this subpoena is abusive. But I can imagine other contexts (where she had secret documents from the PharmaCos related to the case or something) where it'd be reasonable. THIS subpoena looks abusive and I'd hope that the court looks at sanctions closely. But, not all third party subpoenas are evil.
She's being subpoenaed, not sued. To be subpoenaed means that you have to turn over records or give testimony. She's not a party to the lawsuit. She doesn't have to pay any money or change any of her postings.
Don't get me wrong -- it's still a pain in the butt and it's wrong and probably an abuse of the legal system. But her freedom of speech isn't at risk. She could respond by just giving the documents requested. She shouldn't have to do so, but her speech is in no way at risk.
Non-party witnesses get subpoenaed all the time in civil cases. If you see a car crash, you could be subpoenaed to give testimony whether you want to come or not. Here, it looks like it's abusive since the witness doesn't appear to have any evidence relevant to this particular case, but it's not like she's being sued for her opinion.
Within this 3 to 6 second range recommended by Section 4D.10 of the MUTCD, jurisdictions are free to set yellow change interval timing based on their own policies or studies. . . . Because vehicle laws vary by State and conditions vary by intersection, the engineer must exercise judgment in deciding on the length of the yellow interval.
That's not binding on the states, other than through highway fund coercion.
Of course, on/. there's the normal "I have the physical copy, I can do whatever I want with it" mentality.
But what if Universal had signed a contract with each and every DJ and reviewer that got a promo copy that said "in exchange for getting this CD a week early, you have to keep it secret." Would people still be in favor of the rule that the person with their hands on the physical copy gets to do whatever they want with it?
It seems like if this were a once-off transaction there'd be no doubt that the world would be better off if the person with the physical object gets to resell it, no matter what the contract says. But is the world better off if Universal sees what happens and stops giving out review and promo copies? People complained when Maxim reviewed a CD without listening to it but there's no way for print publications to review albums without advance/promo copies. The print publication cycle is so slow that if a magazine had to wait to buy its copy at Amazon or the iTunes store then the review would be three months stale. And Universal is going to quite logically not send out promo copies if they find their way out before the release date; they don't want an unfinished product on the shelf any more than you want your neighbors looking at you before you finish dressing.
There's more than just this case. Maybe the tradeoff is that we're willing to give up promo copies in exchange to keep the doctrine of first sale pure. But maybe we're not. It's not an easy issue and there are arguments on both sides.
Even just looking at search engine queries it's possible to put QUITE a bit of data together. And Google is a natural starting point for a government to start looking for dirt on an individual. If a totalitarian government suspects that an individual is up to no good, then it just has to force Google (one company) to open up its books to figure out some good leads. Maybe he's searching for bomb-making materials, or maybe he's just searching for information about Tianamen Square. Either way, Google knows what's up and can lead the government to the next steps. Or Google can reveal if the victim has some weakness, like an embarassing disease or secret lover.
Good luck trying to figure it out without a search engine--the government would have to randomly go after sites until it happened across a match. Google is one of the key starting point for government abuse of its citizens, short of installing the Great Firewall.
The title ("Wicked Cool") just shows east coast bias. If it were written in San Francisco it'd be "Hella Cool." If it were written in Sacramento it'd be "Hecka Cool." And if it were written in LA it'd have a picture of a babe on a beach on the cover.
Saying that "a factor of 2 is pretty damn close in the astronomical world" is right, but it proves how unlikely it is that we'll find another solar system "just like ours." If astronomers think that being off by 50% is a discovery worth announcing worldwide, then that shows just how unlikely they think it is that they'll discover something that's only off by 5-10%. As others have said, a sun that's half the size of ours will have a much smaller habitable zone (at least based on carbon/water life), and there are only gas giants circling this star.
You're right that a lot of this overlaps with the "use common sense" lessons from other contexts. But the thing is that kids really don't all have a ton of common sense. In fact, a lot of kids demonstrate shockingly little of it at times. Maybe they have it and choose not to use it, or maybe it's just not fully developed.
It's one thing to say "don't meet strange people handing out candy." It's a good lesson and one that schools should mention since a lot of parents don't remember to. Heck, when I was in elementary school (pre-Internet) they taught us that kind of basic safety lesson.
But not all 3rd graders will extrapolate from "don't take candy from strangers" to "don't expose yourself on a webcam for a 'girl' in another state." I'm sure that any future-slashdotter would figure that one out without any help, but not all kids are above average.
If this is really just adding lessons about Internet common-sense to lessons about real-world common-sense then it's probably on the net a good thing. Kids haven't developed their common sense yet and can easily get hurt by it.
Slashdot Mirror
Vietnam is sure as heck in the books, but we didn't win there.
And the capitol burned in the Civil War too. By your definition that's a loss.
Rah-rah boosterism is far worse in your head than in real life.
I'm not saying you need to know the names of the generals, but there's no doubt that the Civil War shaped America, or that WWII did just as much: Mass higher education started as a result of the government's GI bill program that was designed to give a useful task to soldiers returning from the field of battles; suburbia started when the soldiers started families; the baby boom generation is the echo of WWII; nuclear power came about faster because of the war effort, etc. It's not that war is itself important, but rather that it is usually a signpost for major cultural and economic changes. Korea is a forgotten war largely because it didn't change our country the same way Vietnam did.
Most Americans don't learn much about these skirmishes in school . . . . That's a pity, because the fight against the Barbary pirates was a big part of shaping the U.S. military into what it is today.
There's just not enough time in most school history classes to teach the kids something meaningful about all of the very major wars (Revolution, Civil War, WWI, WWII, Vietnam) that even some of the medium-sized wars (French and Indian, 1812, Korea) get short shrift. It's not a coincidence that Korea is called the "forgotten war." It'd be great if every high school kid had as much curiosity and interest about history as you clearly do, but it's just not the case. One survey, admittedly not very scientific, found that 57% of high school students didn't know that the Civil War was in the last half of the 19th century.
That's pretty bad. I'd much rather fix that than worry about teaching them about Barbary pirates. Maybe the right solution is more edu-tainment programming; it seems that your lesson to be taken from the Barbaray pirates is not dates and places, but more of a zeitgeist about the forces that were acting on the US in the early days. Some of that can be captured in a good period piece--think Pirates of the Caribbean, except not entirely fictionalized.
Similarly, it looks some somebody has already made silly videos about " protecting web booty" to riff on the pirate/cybersecurity theme.
Have they actually had any circumstances justifying such Draconian legislation?
The headline is incredibly misleading.
The law, like the US CALEA, just says that law enforcement needs to be able to tap into the system upon showing a lawful warrant. It's a technical standardization measure, not a warrantless wiretap measure.
It makes it easier to abuse the system, but nothing about this law allows warrantless wiretaps. It makes it possible for law enforcement to have a standardized set of hardware used to access lawful (with warrant) wiretaps.
It's true that opt-out and opt-in lead to very different solutions. But opt-out gets expensive when a lot of people do it; the companies have to actually go through and process each opt-out request.
Plenty enough of people are opting out through services allowing individuals to see what information the big data brokers have on them, and to delete some of it, but not all data can be removed that way. They call it a "global do not call list". keeping with the FTC's US phone do not call registry. If enough people opt out, the customer service costs become so high that it becomes cheaper for trackers to force opt-in instead.
To the predictable "They are proposing a [x] market based solution" -- yeah, it's true. But they at least have a shot at controlling some of it for the people who care the most.
Most states have similar laws that allow service by any practical means if conventional methods fail.
Stranger things have happened, especially in cases where the events took place online. Normally you're right that service has to be done in person or by US mail.
BUT, if the only known way to contact a defendant or witness is by email (if, for example, their real names or addresses are unknown), then a court can authorize that as an alternative form of service. It's up to the court to decide if email would give sufficient notice and other means are impractical.
Here, of course, there's no reason to think that sending certified mail or a process server wouldn't work -- a corporate CEO isn't hard to find and service on a company can almost always be done through the state's secretary of state.
But, that doesn't mean that electronic subpoenas are never possible, as you suggest.
I actually retract my statement above. It's not clear whether the ship is North or South Korean at this point. The only entry in the international ship registry matching an MT Ann ("Merchant Transport Ann") is a North Korean vessel.
5105 7320069 ANN HMZE6 Oil Products Tanker 22600 1973 12 Korea (North)
However, there's an "Ankuk" on the same list that's a South Korean ship that would also match:
5090 8130033 ANKUK NO. 7 Oil Products Tanker 2474 1982 06 Korea (South)
I'm no expert on ships, so it's possible I'm looking in all the wrong places. Or that there's a translation problem from Korean to English. Maybe somebody else has a better lead?
Not all ships owned by Korean companies are registered as Korean flag vessels.
... etc.
Look at US cruise lines -- most US-owned cruise liners are registered in other countries (usually the Bahamas).
See flag of convenience for a list of countries that are the most frequent places to register vessels. There are Korean-owned vessels registered in Belize, Cambodia, Cyprus
In other words, that's 50 deep-water cuts per year, in addition to some more shallow-water cuts per year.
Another expert puts it this way:
These statistics don't include power failures and other problems with cables that arise from the land side; if a switching station goes down then the cable goes dark, even if it's still intact.
It was Iraq and North Korea!
Except the second ship was South Korean, our ally. North Korea only has a handful of blue water ships. South Korea, electronics manufacturer to the world, has many.
When in doubt, "Korean" mean South Korean.
You might be right. The city of Alameda tried it with traditional cable and failed miserably. It has a bond payment due soon and revenue won't even cover the interest.
Lowell, Michigan also tried and gave up in 2007 when it realized that the cost of upgrading the system to modern standards would far exceed the value.
Running a telecom service in an underserved area is more expensive and complex than many people think. Often, the area is underserved for a reason.
That said, maybe fiber will work. Or maybe it's worth it as a social value to the community, even if it's pricey. Fingers crossed for you.
Sure, fair enough. But the great-grandparent hinted that she was being sued, which is a very different proposition. Being sued would be completely unconscionable.
Third-party witnesses get subpoenaed all the time. From here, it sure looks like this subpoena is abusive. But I can imagine other contexts (where she had secret documents from the PharmaCos related to the case or something) where it'd be reasonable. THIS subpoena looks abusive and I'd hope that the court looks at sanctions closely. But, not all third party subpoenas are evil.
She's being subpoenaed, not sued. To be subpoenaed means that you have to turn over records or give testimony. She's not a party to the lawsuit. She doesn't have to pay any money or change any of her postings.
Don't get me wrong -- it's still a pain in the butt and it's wrong and probably an abuse of the legal system. But her freedom of speech isn't at risk. She could respond by just giving the documents requested. She shouldn't have to do so, but her speech is in no way at risk.
Non-party witnesses get subpoenaed all the time in civil cases. If you see a car crash, you could be subpoenaed to give testimony whether you want to come or not. Here, it looks like it's abusive since the witness doesn't appear to have any evidence relevant to this particular case, but it's not like she's being sued for her opinion.
That's not binding on the states, other than through highway fund coercion.
I totally agree about this case.
I was just asking about a more difficult case that implicates a lot of the same ideas.
Of course, on /. there's the normal "I have the physical copy, I can do whatever I want with it" mentality.
But what if Universal had signed a contract with each and every DJ and reviewer that got a promo copy that said "in exchange for getting this CD a week early, you have to keep it secret." Would people still be in favor of the rule that the person with their hands on the physical copy gets to do whatever they want with it?
It seems like if this were a once-off transaction there'd be no doubt that the world would be better off if the person with the physical object gets to resell it, no matter what the contract says. But is the world better off if Universal sees what happens and stops giving out review and promo copies? People complained when Maxim reviewed a CD without listening to it but there's no way for print publications to review albums without advance/promo copies. The print publication cycle is so slow that if a magazine had to wait to buy its copy at Amazon or the iTunes store then the review would be three months stale. And Universal is going to quite logically not send out promo copies if they find their way out before the release date; they don't want an unfinished product on the shelf any more than you want your neighbors looking at you before you finish dressing.
There's more than just this case. Maybe the tradeoff is that we're willing to give up promo copies in exchange to keep the doctrine of first sale pure. But maybe we're not. It's not an easy issue and there are arguments on both sides.
In other words, eastern Europe runs on Yahoo! and LiveJournal, and the US runs on Gmail and WordPress.
At least we all use the same alphabet... oh, wait.
Speaking of light sabers -- who gets to sue the Star Wars Kid for IP infringement?
Even just looking at search engine queries it's possible to put QUITE a bit of data together. And Google is a natural starting point for a government to start looking for dirt on an individual. If a totalitarian government suspects that an individual is up to no good, then it just has to force Google (one company) to open up its books to figure out some good leads. Maybe he's searching for bomb-making materials, or maybe he's just searching for information about Tianamen Square. Either way, Google knows what's up and can lead the government to the next steps. Or Google can reveal if the victim has some weakness, like an embarassing disease or secret lover.
Good luck trying to figure it out without a search engine--the government would have to randomly go after sites until it happened across a match. Google is one of the key starting point for government abuse of its citizens, short of installing the Great Firewall.
The title ("Wicked Cool") just shows east coast bias. If it were written in San Francisco it'd be "Hella Cool." If it were written in Sacramento it'd be "Hecka Cool." And if it were written in LA it'd have a picture of a babe on a beach on the cover.
Saying that "a factor of 2 is pretty damn close in the astronomical world" is right, but it proves how unlikely it is that we'll find another solar system "just like ours." If astronomers think that being off by 50% is a discovery worth announcing worldwide, then that shows just how unlikely they think it is that they'll discover something that's only off by 5-10%. As others have said, a sun that's half the size of ours will have a much smaller habitable zone (at least based on carbon/water life), and there are only gas giants circling this star.
You're right that a lot of this overlaps with the "use common sense" lessons from other contexts. But the thing is that kids really don't all have a ton of common sense. In fact, a lot of kids demonstrate shockingly little of it at times. Maybe they have it and choose not to use it, or maybe it's just not fully developed.
It's one thing to say "don't meet strange people handing out candy." It's a good lesson and one that schools should mention since a lot of parents don't remember to. Heck, when I was in elementary school (pre-Internet) they taught us that kind of basic safety lesson.
But not all 3rd graders will extrapolate from "don't take candy from strangers" to "don't expose yourself on a webcam for a 'girl' in another state." I'm sure that any future-slashdotter would figure that one out without any help, but not all kids are above average.
If this is really just adding lessons about Internet common-sense to lessons about real-world common-sense then it's probably on the net a good thing. Kids haven't developed their common sense yet and can easily get hurt by it.
I'm trying to understand why the above is a troll. This is a big deal theory.
Am I the only one who hears they opening theme to 2001: A Space Odyssey* playing when I envision that video?
*--Also Sprach Zarathustra by Richard Strauss