In other words, they are designed to be consistently enjoyable. I could say the same thing about sunny beaches, and yet not everyone goes giving up their lives to become beach bums.
But... but SOME people DO become beach bums! Close them down! All the beaches! Immediately!
At a Senate hearing tomorrow, privacy advocates and industry groups will urge the lawmakers to take action to protect the data and privacy of Americans not guilty of anything besides wanting to go home.
But if we can still use these searches for industrial espionage on foreign firms, well, Boy Howdy!
Over here, movies are never shown on TV before their DVD release date. Is this different in the US?
Actually, yeah. A few highly successful movies are released on a pay-per-view or video-on-demand basis through cable and satellite systems a couple weeks before being released on DVD. Conceivably, if these movies were released in high definition video-on-demand and the end user were to record it with a high definition DVR/PVR/TiVo, they could rip the data off the DVR and kick it to the net weeks before the bluray discs were on store shelves.
Not that I've ever had a cable company-provided DVR, but I figured they'd already be configured to block all recording from video-on-demand feeds.
There was a similar situation right before DVD's became mainstream here. The movie studios still had illegal price controls on the newest VHS releases and that made it 25% - 50% cheaper to order a movie on pay-per-view and tape it, than buy it on VHS at the store. $10 for pay-per-view, plus the cost of a blank tape, versus $20 for a new VHS release.
As much as I think TPTB would like to kill off truecrypt (assuming it's on their radar), it can live on with underground distribution since it's a software project. Development might grind to a halt, since no one could easily validate the source for various underground successor projects. But checksums for the last known, good version would be as easy to find elsewhere as a bootleged disc of code.
The whole point of Wikileaks is to make things public, so driving leaked documents repositories underground would make them indistinguishable from conspiracy theorists and the lunatic fringe.
not just to keep tabs on the merchants, but to keep a better lock on consumers [terrorists]. A lot of consumer [terrorist] capital [funding] goes through small business owners, that might be the people you buy groceries, liquor, cigarettes, sandwiches, meals, etc from.
and you've probably got it. Orwell would be proud.
Maybe. But somebody drill it into Bush's thick head: Criminals pay cash.
Regardless of what they say publicly, my guess is that they are probably seeking the information not just to keep tabs on the merchants, but to keep a better lock on consumers.
I still don't get it. You're saying they'll be able to look at all my credit card receipts and see if I actually had $20k in business meals. They'll be able to infer something from how they're itemized. Trouble is, taxpayers have to prove a lot of those deductions up front when they take them.
Hell, it might help people getting audited. Can't find your business lunch receipts? Are any of these it?
To the extent this would could spot people's spending when they get paid under the table, as has come into sharp focus this last year: credit cards represent debt, not income. Nothing says there's a receipt of income justifying the $5,000 that was charged for a plasma T.V.
Of course, while PGP may solve some of these problems what is so bad about having some face to face time with your lawyer.
Nothing. Some encrypted e-mail correspondence might be cheaper, though. Which may explain why lawyers hesitate to go that route.
Kidding. I suspect the reasons for not supporting e-mail encryption have less to do with bill padding and more to do with:
Decision makers at law firms typically constitute the second-oldest generation on the scene and they tend to be the least tech-savvy working day-to-day.
The most tech-savvy attorneys in a firm may not know about encryption.
Stereotypes aside, firms don't want to train their staff in a new way to do things.
Firms don't want to alienate their clients by demanding the clients use public key encryption.
The web of communication from client to receptionist to secretary to paralegal to associate to partner could be irretrievably broken by any one of them having an outdated public or private key.
But do those reasons justify never using public key encryption, or not making it an option for clients?
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses (X) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected (X) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks ( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it ( ) Users of email will not put up with it (X) Microsoft will not put up with it ( ) The police will not put up with it ( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers (X) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once ( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers ( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists (X) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
(X) Laws expressly prohibiting it (X) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email (X) Open relays in foreign countries ( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses (X) Asshats (X) Jurisdictional problems ( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money ( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP ( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack ( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email (X) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes (X) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches ( ) Extreme profitability of spam (X) Joe jobs and/or identity theft (X) Technically illiterate politicians ( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers (X) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves (X) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering ( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
( ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable (X) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation ( ) Blacklists suck ( ) Whitelists suck (X) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored (X) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud (X) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks (X) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually (X) Sending email should be free (X) Why should we have to trust you and your servers? ( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses ( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem ( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome (X) I don't want the government reading my email ( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
( ) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work. (X) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it. ( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
The fact that BT is used to transport large, legal downloads doesn't excuse people using it for illegal purposes. But the fact that it is prone to substantial noninfringing use means the technology itself can't be made illegal or presumptively contrary to civil law.
The two caveats are, of course, what is "substantial" and how does the DMCA change things.
I was going to bring up the recent AD Council campaign about young voters not voting, and its fanciful candidates, like Frozen Peas for Senate. When I went to the site, I discovered that campaign has been replaced with one essentially proselytizing Buddhism.
?!?!
Good to know my Church & State hackles get up even when the majority religion isn't the one benefitting.
Given how trivial it was to conduct this attack, I have say that this forum didn't "used to be" a safe haven, it only seemed to be. Now, you have a clearer understanding of how the world really works.
Wow. That logic applies to so many other "That movie has warped my fragile little mind" scenarios. But I've never seen it put so succinctly before.
Vote Lib-Dem in 2010. There's no other answer. I don't care if Nick Clegg wants to drive the party into the ground. It's not like the Torries object to fingerprinting everybody and everything.
I wish our Democratic party had half the commitment to civil liberties as the Lib-Dems. And don't get me started with the libertarians: They don't have 80 seats in Congress. Besides, I like my personal freedom with a small side of business regulation.
I don't know why you were modded down. Monitoring employees at work is valid and monitoring them at home is not.
That said, one problem is the distinction between on-the-clock and off-the-clock is rapidly deteriorating. Maybe yours is an argument that we should rebuild the wall. But allowing more pervasive monitoring "at work" without rebuilding the wall between work life and home life will make it erode faster.
I humbly submit that the R&D money that could have increased the upper boundary of Ethernet speeds was spent to bring wireless to the masses. Five years ago, if you'd told me WiFi would now be a year away from nominal speeds of 250Mb/s I might have thought you were talking about prototypes. The dorms where I was a tech had just finished upgrading from 10Mb/s to 100Mb/s Ethernet. The few laptops that were sold with external wireless cards had nominal speeds of 10Mb/s. But now we have 802.11g and next year we should have 802.11n on the store shelves.
I think we've gained much more by pushing out the median speed of wireless than we could have gained from pushing out the marginal speed of twisted pair.
That sort of elitist thinking ("programming sounds far more fun than managing things and people") is part of the culture that keeps IT and engineering staff out of decision making positions. You're looking at the business from your perpective and yours only, and announcing it to everyone.
When did a desire to be at the top of the hierarchy become indicative of egalitarianism? Is today Opposite Day?
What is elitist about knowing you wouldn't enjoy a career in management? On the other hand, saying "I'm a nerd and to hell with our clients," is elitist. But the way those sentences are, I'm not sure you don't have your wires crossed.
Speier a better candidate? She hasn't put forth her position on IP Law reform OR Net neutrality! Just silly issues like "the economy" and "Iraq".
I guess all politics is local. Dash our hopes of banding together to have our own Congress-critter to represent the national nerd constituency. Surely we (not just Slashdot) make up more than 1/435 of the populace.
Eh. Depends on the context. If it's a false sworn statement, even if it's not part of an investigation, it's Perjury. If it's a false statement to an investigation, even if it's not sworn, it's Obstruction of Justice. How each is punished varies by jurisdiction.
I've heard that mentioned a lot, that maybe they'll see our Hitler broadcasts and immediately loathe us.
Wasn't it a part of Flash Gordon: The Movie, that Ming the Merciless saw early German TV broadcasts and thought Hitler would be a good guy to buddy up to?
Most of the joy of flying General Aviation (small) planes is the view - nothing like it anywhere else, including that commercial jet. (which rockets up to 45,000 feet in 10 minutes where you can't see jack) Flight simulators have typically given depictions of the landscape - patterns that are rough analogies of what you'd actually find out the window.
But this is the real McCoy! Resolution is still weak, and the plane handling characteristics are lousy, but when I'm flying 5,500 VFR over the East Bay, it actually IS the East Bay. I noticed that once you've started the Easter Egg, you can re-launch from any view, which let me spin a few circles above local Oroville, CA.
For a better mix of realistic scenery and handling, have you tried Flight Gear? I haven't gotten it to work on my computer so I'm not speaking from experience, but I was taken in to try it by the fact that they have 10 degree by 10 degree texture packs you can get if you want to see the area you're in, instead of a white bread approximation of it. Or get the whole world on three DVD's!
So no more 2-dimensional information entry that is easily mappable to a 2-dimensional visual display?
Interesting. Maybe we'll have mind controlled computers finally.
If alive, in 2029 I'll be 53, ouch.
I think what they mean is that between the prevalence of lazer-mouses and laptops with integral touchpads, little grodolated carpet scraps of self-expression have become moribund and by the time today's newborns are old enough to form memories nobody will have them.
Maybe I hath been trolled, but these are necessarily pedestrian predictions.
This district, where sixty percent of students qualify for free lunches, has decided -- based on future job trends and what colleges want -- to offer sports, art, health, political science, business, communication, global warming and education.
I graduated high school nine years ago, when -- to save money on vocational classes -- if you wanted to take a particular set of vocational classes like shop or bookkeeping you went to a different high school: these career academies as the article called it.
How many of these kids are college bound? Is Pre-Ed what you take if you're going to become a day care worker after high school? Health if you are indeed going to go to cosmetology school instead of nursing school? To say nothing of preparing for a skilled trade -- Welding jobs in the manufacturing sector may be subject to outsourcing, but we'll always need licensed plumbers nearby.
Plus, the college-bound kids can't study stuff like science & engineering or agriculture. Or are they subsumed into the Liberal Arts catch-all or the Global Warming major?
The proponents of this program think having a major will put an end to the whining of "When am I ever gonna have to use this stuff?" But if a kid picks "International Business" and later foresees himself going into the foodservice industry -- even though McDonald's is an international business -- he's going to be asking that same question.
I know, secondary school teachers and administrators dream of all their little eggs going onto ivy league schools, but the best teachers know their audience / customer / whatever, and meet those needs and without patronizing them.
Do they really need to spend thousands of dollars analyzing data to determine there's more crime around check-cashing stores on paydays?
Actually, probably, yeah. In addition to the reasons addressed above -- knowing which outlets on which days, avoiding allegations of racial profiling, and having proof to back up the hunch -- there's a huge difference in mindset between those who have bank accounts and those who don't. Emergency service workers may live in blue collar neighborhoods, but their paychecks almost universally get direct-deposited, often to municipal employee credit unions.
So while they may be abstractly aware that crime happens at alternative financial institutions, like crime happens at a liquor store or any other establishment that does cash business in a distressed neighborhood, because they have access to a bank when they come off-shift, they don't appreciate the extent to which the poor depend on alternative financial institutions to make every dollar they live on liquid.
Slashdot Mirror
The Federal government has been violating due process and the US Constitution since FDR was in office.
Really? We didn't violate due process before FDR? I know you were trying to make a point, but what about Wilson? Lincoln? Jackson? Or Adams? How about Washington?
But... but SOME people DO become beach bums! Close them down! All the beaches! Immediately!
But if we can still use these searches for industrial espionage on foreign firms, well, Boy Howdy!
Actually, yeah. A few highly successful movies are released on a pay-per-view or video-on-demand basis through cable and satellite systems a couple weeks before being released on DVD. Conceivably, if these movies were released in high definition video-on-demand and the end user were to record it with a high definition DVR/PVR/TiVo, they could rip the data off the DVR and kick it to the net weeks before the bluray discs were on store shelves.
Not that I've ever had a cable company-provided DVR, but I figured they'd already be configured to block all recording from video-on-demand feeds.
There was a similar situation right before DVD's became mainstream here. The movie studios still had illegal price controls on the newest VHS releases and that made it 25% - 50% cheaper to order a movie on pay-per-view and tape it, than buy it on VHS at the store. $10 for pay-per-view, plus the cost of a blank tape, versus $20 for a new VHS release.
As much as I think TPTB would like to kill off truecrypt (assuming it's on their radar), it can live on with underground distribution since it's a software project. Development might grind to a halt, since no one could easily validate the source for various underground successor projects. But checksums for the last known, good version would be as easy to find elsewhere as a bootleged disc of code.
The whole point of Wikileaks is to make things public, so driving leaked documents repositories underground would make them indistinguishable from conspiracy theorists and the lunatic fringe.
Maybe. But somebody drill it into Bush's thick head: Criminals pay cash.
I still don't get it. You're saying they'll be able to look at all my credit card receipts and see if I actually had $20k in business meals. They'll be able to infer something from how they're itemized. Trouble is, taxpayers have to prove a lot of those deductions up front when they take them.
Hell, it might help people getting audited. Can't find your business lunch receipts? Are any of these it?
To the extent this would could spot people's spending when they get paid under the table, as has come into sharp focus this last year: credit cards represent debt, not income. Nothing says there's a receipt of income justifying the $5,000 that was charged for a plasma T.V.
Nothing. Some encrypted e-mail correspondence might be cheaper, though. Which may explain why lawyers hesitate to go that route.
Kidding. I suspect the reasons for not supporting e-mail encryption have less to do with bill padding and more to do with:
But do those reasons justify never using public key encryption, or not making it an option for clients?
Your post advocates a
(X) technical (X) legislative ( ) market-based (X) vigilante
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
(X) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
(X) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
( ) Users of email will not put up with it
(X) Microsoft will not put up with it
( ) The police will not put up with it
( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
(X) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
(X) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
(X) Laws expressly prohibiting it
(X) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
(X) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
(X) Asshats
(X) Jurisdictional problems
( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
(X) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
(X) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
( ) Extreme profitability of spam
(X) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
(X) Technically illiterate politicians
( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
(X) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
(X) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
( ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever
been shown practical
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
(X) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) Blacklists suck
( ) Whitelists suck
(X) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
(X) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
(X) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
(X) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
(X) Sending email should be free
(X) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
(X) I don't want the government reading my email
( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
( ) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
(X) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your
house down!
The fact that BT is used to transport large, legal downloads doesn't excuse people using it for illegal purposes. But the fact that it is prone to substantial noninfringing use means the technology itself can't be made illegal or presumptively contrary to civil law.
The two caveats are, of course, what is "substantial" and how does the DMCA change things.
I'm Traffic James, Bitch!
I was going to bring up the recent AD Council campaign about young voters not voting, and its fanciful candidates, like Frozen Peas for Senate. When I went to the site, I discovered that campaign has been replaced with one essentially proselytizing Buddhism.
?!?!
Good to know my Church & State hackles get up even when the majority religion isn't the one benefitting.
Wow. That logic applies to so many other "That movie has warped my fragile little mind" scenarios. But I've never seen it put so succinctly before.
I don't know about Quantumn Wikipedia's policies, but Wikipedia itself doesn't take kindly to people publishing original research.
*hears whispers from offstage*
Well, yes, I guess they can cite themselves if they get published, pursuant to the conflict of interest policy and all that.
It's like how slashdot always tells people who were libeled to just fix the article. You're not supposed to edit information about yourself.
Vote Lib-Dem in 2010. There's no other answer. I don't care if Nick Clegg wants to drive the party into the ground. It's not like the Torries object to fingerprinting everybody and everything.
I wish our Democratic party had half the commitment to civil liberties as the Lib-Dems. And don't get me started with the libertarians: They don't have 80 seats in Congress. Besides, I like my personal freedom with a small side of business regulation.
I don't know why you were modded down. Monitoring employees at work is valid and monitoring them at home is not.
That said, one problem is the distinction between on-the-clock and off-the-clock is rapidly deteriorating. Maybe yours is an argument that we should rebuild the wall. But allowing more pervasive monitoring "at work" without rebuilding the wall between work life and home life will make it erode faster.
I humbly submit that the R&D money that could have increased the upper boundary of Ethernet speeds was spent to bring wireless to the masses. Five years ago, if you'd told me WiFi would now be a year away from nominal speeds of 250Mb/s I might have thought you were talking about prototypes. The dorms where I was a tech had just finished upgrading from 10Mb/s to 100Mb/s Ethernet. The few laptops that were sold with external wireless cards had nominal speeds of 10Mb/s. But now we have 802.11g and next year we should have 802.11n on the store shelves.
I think we've gained much more by pushing out the median speed of wireless than we could have gained from pushing out the marginal speed of twisted pair.
When did a desire to be at the top of the hierarchy become indicative of egalitarianism? Is today Opposite Day?
What is elitist about knowing you wouldn't enjoy a career in management? On the other hand, saying "I'm a nerd and to hell with our clients," is elitist. But the way those sentences are, I'm not sure you don't have your wires crossed.
Speier a better candidate? She hasn't put forth her position on IP Law reform OR Net neutrality! Just silly issues like "the economy" and "Iraq".
I guess all politics is local. Dash our hopes of banding together to have our own Congress-critter to represent the national nerd constituency. Surely we (not just Slashdot) make up more than 1/435 of the populace.
Eh. Depends on the context. If it's a false sworn statement, even if it's not part of an investigation, it's Perjury. If it's a false statement to an investigation, even if it's not sworn, it's Obstruction of Justice. How each is punished varies by jurisdiction.
Wasn't it a part of Flash Gordon: The Movie, that Ming the Merciless saw early German TV broadcasts and thought Hitler would be a good guy to buddy up to?
For a better mix of realistic scenery and handling, have you tried Flight Gear? I haven't gotten it to work on my computer so I'm not speaking from experience, but I was taken in to try it by the fact that they have 10 degree by 10 degree texture packs you can get if you want to see the area you're in, instead of a white bread approximation of it. Or get the whole world on three DVD's!
Interesting. Maybe we'll have mind controlled computers finally.
If alive, in 2029 I'll be 53, ouch.
I think what they mean is that between the prevalence of lazer-mouses and laptops with integral touchpads, little grodolated carpet scraps of self-expression have become moribund and by the time today's newborns are old enough to form memories nobody will have them.
Maybe I hath been trolled, but these are necessarily pedestrian predictions.
I'll be 48.
This district, where sixty percent of students qualify for free lunches, has decided -- based on future job trends and what colleges want -- to offer sports, art, health, political science, business, communication, global warming and education.
I graduated high school nine years ago, when -- to save money on vocational classes -- if you wanted to take a particular set of vocational classes like shop or bookkeeping you went to a different high school: these career academies as the article called it.
How many of these kids are college bound? Is Pre-Ed what you take if you're going to become a day care worker after high school? Health if you are indeed going to go to cosmetology school instead of nursing school? To say nothing of preparing for a skilled trade -- Welding jobs in the manufacturing sector may be subject to outsourcing, but we'll always need licensed plumbers nearby.
Plus, the college-bound kids can't study stuff like science & engineering or agriculture. Or are they subsumed into the Liberal Arts catch-all or the Global Warming major?
The proponents of this program think having a major will put an end to the whining of "When am I ever gonna have to use this stuff?" But if a kid picks "International Business" and later foresees himself going into the foodservice industry -- even though McDonald's is an international business -- he's going to be asking that same question.
I know, secondary school teachers and administrators dream of all their little eggs going onto ivy league schools, but the best teachers know their audience / customer / whatever, and meet those needs and without patronizing them.
Actually, probably, yeah. In addition to the reasons addressed above -- knowing which outlets on which days, avoiding allegations of racial profiling, and having proof to back up the hunch -- there's a huge difference in mindset between those who have bank accounts and those who don't. Emergency service workers may live in blue collar neighborhoods, but their paychecks almost universally get direct-deposited, often to municipal employee credit unions.
So while they may be abstractly aware that crime happens at alternative financial institutions, like crime happens at a liquor store or any other establishment that does cash business in a distressed neighborhood, because they have access to a bank when they come off-shift, they don't appreciate the extent to which the poor depend on alternative financial institutions to make every dollar they live on liquid.