The title of the article is NCAA Puts Severe Limits On Sport Event Blogging. That is misleading as the limits are only for accredited reporters and not for bloggers in general. I have nothing against complaining, but it should not be ignorant complaining.
From the FA: Now, before anyone goes screaming censorship or free speech or anything along those lines -- these are the rules that the NCAA is setting for credentialed reporters. And, as a private organization, the NCAA can set whatever rules it wants for handing out credentials, no matter how mind-numbingly stupid they may be.
I would tend to view 1 and 2 as similar. You have a right not to give testimony against yourself. Whether the ultimate object is a safe or a file on your computer should not matter IMHO.
So if they can be compelled to testify against themselves, what methods are appropriate for that? Nothing life-threatening, surely, but perhaps a bit of waterboarding is in order?
The point of the ruling is that the password has to be treated like testimony (which cannot be forced), rather than a physical object, like a safe key, which the defendant may be forced to surrender.
That's exactly right. As far as I understand, the main concern is that by opening the disk he would potentially give the government access to the incriminating files not seen by the customs agents.
By giving the government his password, the judge held, that the defendant was incriminating himself by opening up all of his files that weren't pertinent to the investigation.
Quite the opposite. By giving the password the defendant may incriminate himself by opening files containing incriminating (and pertinent) information, but unknown to the government prior to that.
Don't get me wrong, it works fairly well most of the time, but it is a far cry from what the founders could have imagined.
I agree with you. However, regulating the spectrum does not seem to be such a far-fetched application of the interstate commerce clause. Certainly, radio waves cross the state borders freely.
So if there were no fee to use the spectrum, how would you choose the winner? You cannot just let everyone use it -- there would be a lot of interference.
Web search does not immediately reveal any details of his algorithm or any relevant papers, just media publicity. He does not even seem to have a web page.
"The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens."
Hmm. If someone could explain to me how that isn't a factually correct statement, I'm all ears.
The statement may sound plausible, but do you have any evidence that it is factually correct? It seems to be just an opinion, not fact.
Bright lights + white walls + a cell size of a small closet, where you cannot lie down, + night interrogations for 8 hours and after a few months strong people would sign confessions, which would be used to imprison their families and friends along with their own death warrants. That was widely practiced under Stalin.
Sleep deprivation is often more effective then pulling your fingernails because it breaks your will to fight.
Re:Python is part of the answer
on
Open Source Math
·
· Score: 1
There were two different pieces of code (in different languages, in fact). One of them produced incorrect results under certain optimizations. It turned out that it was a known (although obscure) bug of the compiler. As far as I know, there was no bug in the code.
Re:Python is part of the answer
on
Open Source Math
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I have seen from personal experience, how a compiler error (some sort of incorrect optimization) led to a subtle difference in the results of a simple classification task.
The insidious thing about that particular result was that it looked very similar to the correct. In fact the difference would not have been found if two people did not run different versions of code independently (and more or less coincidentally) arriving to slightly different error rates.
Furthermore, if you've hopped onto your next door neighbours' wireless broadband connection to illegally download movies and music from the net, chances are that you are also slowing down their internet access and impacting on their download limit. For this reason, most ISPs put a clause in their contracts ordering users not to share access with neighbours - but it's very hard for them to enforce this.
So ISP's are trying to protect me from sharing my access with my neigbours and thus getting a slow internet connection. How very considerate!
As such, DARPA gets a copy of all software and development notes that the teams produced.
This information is useless without having the expertise of the people involved. The major goal of DARPA is to promote development of these technologies (to the point where they can be used in military applications), which they do by financing a number of teams.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, even a dwarf can hurt a giant's little toe.
Do you also have opinions on quantum gravity?
The title of the article is NCAA Puts Severe Limits On Sport Event Blogging.
That is misleading as the limits are only for accredited reporters and not for bloggers in general.
I have nothing against complaining, but it should not be ignorant complaining.
From the FA:
Now, before anyone goes screaming censorship or free speech or anything along those lines -- these are the rules that the NCAA is setting for credentialed reporters. And, as a private organization, the NCAA can set whatever rules it wants for handing out credentials, no matter how mind-numbingly stupid they may be.
No, the guy is working for the Ministry of Love over there. That's why the outrage.
I would tend to view 1 and 2 as similar. You have a right not to give testimony against yourself. Whether the ultimate object is a safe or a file on your computer should not matter IMHO.
So if they can be compelled to testify against themselves, what methods
are appropriate for that? Nothing life-threatening, surely, but perhaps a bit
of waterboarding is in order?
The point of the ruling is that the password has to be treated like testimony (which cannot be forced), rather than a physical object, like a safe key, which the defendant may be forced to surrender.
What is hard to understand here? A person cannot be compelled to give self-incriminating testimony.
Seems like a fair law to me.
That's exactly right. As far as I understand, the main concern is that by opening the disk he would potentially give the government access to the incriminating files not seen by the customs agents.
By giving the government his password, the judge held, that the defendant was incriminating himself by opening up all of his files that weren't pertinent to the investigation.
Quite the opposite. By giving the password the defendant may incriminate himself by opening files containing incriminating (and pertinent) information, but unknown to the government prior to that.
Don't get me wrong, it works fairly well most of the time, but it is a far cry from what the founders could have imagined.
I agree with you. However, regulating the spectrum does not seem to be such a far-fetched application of the interstate commerce clause. Certainly, radio waves cross the state borders freely.
Still, every technology has a limit on its capacity. You can only push so many bits through a channel before they become mashed together.
Interstate commerce, I suppose.
So if there were no fee to use the spectrum, how would you choose the winner?
You cannot just let everyone use it -- there would be a lot of interference.
patients with existing limbs need to learn how to use them all over again.
I sure hope patients with existing limbs will not have to learn to use them all over again.
I'm really hopful we will see a major leap in artifical limbs in the next 50 years
Or at least a hop.
Web search does not immediately reveal any details of his algorithm or any relevant papers, just media publicity. He does not even seem to have a web page.
"The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens."
Hmm. If someone could explain to me how that isn't a factually correct statement, I'm all ears.
The statement may sound plausible, but do you have any evidence that it is factually correct?
It seems to be just an opinion, not fact.
Bright lights + white walls + a cell size of a small closet, where you cannot lie down, + night interrogations for 8 hours and after a few months strong people would sign confessions, which would be used to imprison their families and friends along with their own death warrants. That was widely practiced under Stalin.
Sleep deprivation is often more effective then pulling your fingernails because it breaks your will to fight.
Unless they are resident aliens .
There were two different pieces of code (in different languages, in fact). One of them produced incorrect results under certain optimizations. It turned out that it was a known (although obscure) bug of the compiler.
As far as I know, there was no bug in the code.
I have seen from personal experience, how a compiler error (some sort of incorrect optimization) led to a subtle difference in the results of a simple classification task.
The insidious thing about that particular result was that it looked very similar to the correct. In fact the difference would not have been found if two people did not run different versions of code independently (and more or less coincidentally) arriving to slightly different error rates.
Furthermore, if you've hopped onto your next door neighbours' wireless broadband connection to illegally download movies and music from the net, chances are that you are also slowing down their internet access and impacting on their download limit. For this reason, most ISPs put a clause in their contracts ordering users not to share access with neighbours - but it's very hard for them to enforce this.
So ISP's are trying to protect me from sharing my access with my neigbours and thus getting a slow internet connection. How very considerate!
Those are very complicated systems. Without people who understand the principles of their design the code is pretty much useless.
As such, DARPA gets a copy of all software and development notes that the teams produced.
This information is useless without having the expertise of the people involved. The major goal of DARPA is to promote development of these technologies (to the point where they can be used in military applications), which they do by financing a number of teams.