Ahh, but what if it's a trick specially *designed* to make us remove the ads.doubleclick entry from our personal blackhole lists? I can see it now. Four months from now, they'll announce their return to user-tracking, and will in fact have continued to track all us innocent users the whole time!:-)
Robert Heinlein
C. J. Cherryh
A. E. van Vogt
Vernor Vinge
E. E. 'doc' Smith
Frank Herbert (just for Dune, since they make kids read it nowadays)
David Drake
S. M. Stirling
Edgar Rice Burroughs
You should note that the constitution is not a list of the rights of the people, but of the rights of the government. This is clear if you read the 11th amendment.
Article XI
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
And if you look at the 12th amendment:
Article XII
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Maybe your state constitution gives your state the right to ration food and restrict speech, but I'm pretty sure mine doesn't.
I'm an NYU student, and while I didn't actually see the planes as they crashed into the World Trade Center, I did see the second tower collapse. Here's a brief account of what I saw today...
I woke up at 8:30am, fiddled around a bit, and hopped into the shower around 8:35 or so. Midway through the shower, I heard what sounded like a low flying aircraft, and a loud crash. I didn't think much of it at the time, since we hear aircraft and loud crashes all the time in NYC without thinking to connect the two, but that must have been a plane hitting the WTC, from the time.
My window doesn't face south, so I didn't know what was going on until I left for class at 9:20am. I emerged to see everyone stareing to the south, and when I looked I saw both towers in flames. The pictures you saw on TV don't do it justice. I saw a ring of smoke and fire on the northern face of the west tower, and a few flames on the eastern tower. From 4th street & Washington Square West you could see individual floors on fire. There was a huge amount of smoke pouring from the impacted area and from vents on the roof, and I can only imagine what it must have been like in there. Both planes had hit at this point, and some of the onlookers were still talking about watching the *second* plane fly into the tower before their eyes.
After looking for a while, I dutifully toddled off to class. Class was obviously cancelled, so I returned home to awaken my roommates, "Hey guys! Wake up! The World Trade Center's on fire!" Turns out that one of my roommates was around, and we went outside to take another look. Both towers were still standing, and we presumed that they'd eventually get the flames put out and begin repairs, although we expected to see an ugly splotch on the WTC for some time thereafter. My roommate expected he might have class at 11am, so he started home, saying, "You didn't really need to wake me up, I'd probably have seen it at 11 when I woke up anyway"
"Yeah, that's probably true, but by then it might be a charred hulk."
"Tell you what, if they have it all cleaned up by the time I go to class at 11, I'll buy you a coke."
We returned to our room to learn from CNN that there had been additional attacks on the Pentagon and the Mall in D.C.. Then, on the live shot of the WTC, we saw a huge cloud of smoke start to rise from the base of the east tower. We, like the CNN commentator, didn't realize at the time that the tower was actually collapsing. Taking this to be a suspicious cloud of possibly poisonous smoke, and observing that it was engulfing lower manhattan, my roommate and I decided to start walking uptown ASAP. By the time we got outside, it appeared that the east tower was obscured in smoke (it was actually gone), and we marched up to about 25th street before turning back, as the smoke appeared to be keeping south of 4th street. We were near 6th avenue and 10th street when the second tower fell. We'd only just heard that the east tower had not been obscured, but had fallen, and as that was sinking in people started screaming. All traffic on 6th avenue came to a halt, and I ran out into the street to see the west tower start to collapse.
Clouds of smoke came out of the sides of the tower, and the whole thing just started to slump downwards. Glass and metal framing from the outside was shattered and fell beside the rest. It couldn't have taken more than 10 seconds to fall, but it seemed to take forever. I've walked around the base of the WTC, and this thing was immense! When you approach within three blocks of its base, you feel like you're walking indoors. It just seemed as though something that large could never move on its own. Yet there it fell before my eyes. The sheer enorminity left me stunned. How much it had taken to build, how much it had meant for all of us in the city, how it would probably never be rebuilt. Only as we continued down the sidewalk did I think of the people that must have been inside and around the building. It was not yet 11.
"Hey Xxxx, aren't you glad we evacuated our room? We'd never have seen this from there."
"..."
"Hey, I think you owe me a coke."
Zarchon
PS: As it stands now, you can't go south of Canal street. I took a hike down there earlier today, and it's all cordoned off. There were still a lot of people standing at the ends of the north-south streets, gazeing at the brown cloud where the WTC used to be...
Also, if I understand it correctly, you can really only send an encrypted message to one person at a time, because you're encrypting it with their public key (so that their private key decrypts it). So PGP is not really a solution for, say, mailing lists.
Not really an issue. Just encrypt to the mailing list server, which will then decrypt and encrypt to list recipients.
Of course, you wouldn't be certain of who the mailing list server is sending the message to, but if you were worried, why'd you send the message to an untrusted list?
Based on a quick perusal of the aimster website, it appears that it's just a filesharing system tacked onto a chat program. My question is, if they can ban aimster, what will stop them from attacking good old IRC?
Think about it. Files can easily be transferred via dcc, and it'd be trivial to set up a bot to distribute the contents of selected directories to selected nicks, just like aimster.
Where will it end? They (the RIAA lawyers) can't possibly win until the whole of the net has been shut down. And then how will they reap the profits from their online sales?
One should notice that NASA has its statistical analysis incorrect. If the odds of hitting someone for each rentry are 1 in 18,405, then the odds of at least one of the 74 reentries hitting someone is about.4067%, or 1 in 245.
Their number of 1 in 250 is obviously calculated by multiplying 18,405 by 74, which is incorrect. They should be using the formula: P = Sum[p*(1-p)^n,n,0,74].
...We will fight on the seas, we will fight onthe land... We shall never surrender...
Bwahaha.
Re:watch out katz... you are right on target
on
Selfish Society
·
· Score: 1
i always complain that for the most part libertarians upset me more than the hardcore conservatives because the libertarians, if they cared, might be somewhat supportive on social legislation, but they dont.
Don't confuse the politics of the Libertarian Party with libertarianism. In recent years, the LP has followed the stupid strategy of allying itself with the Republicans in an attempt to take down Democrats. This has led to the even more stupid tactic of selectively choosing which issues to highlight and which ones to ignore (ostensibly "for now") to avoid offending Republicans. This, in addition to the fact that many gay rights legislation put forth by Democrats gives gays more rights than non-gays (reverse discrimination is also wrong), is why the party ignores gay rights issues.
Of course, The LP has done this for such a long time that we now have more neo-republicans in the ranks than true libertarians. (They talk like Republicans, act like Republicans, why shouldn't Republicans join? They get to look "fresh" too.)
My point is that the net is libertarian in the sense of the ideology, not in the sense of the Libertarian Party. (which sucks)
Take a look at The Webley Page for some essays talking about this (and other) libertarian issues.
I wonder how they justify their suit against iCraveTV when they themselves repackage and modify other broadcasters' content?
I refer, of course, to the TV media practice of adding and modifying the billboards that get into the scenes they broadcast. (Original slashdot story here.)
They don't compensate the billboard owners when they do this. After all, it's not their job to give the billboard renters free advertising in their medium. How, then can they logically justify going after iCrave, who's offering people who don't live within broadcast range of their stations the ability to watch the TV shows? It's legal to make recordings of television programs, and to share them with others, which is all that iCrave's doing. If they modify the advertising contained in those shows, what of it? It's legal to have a recording device which snips out the commercials, and after all, the networks do it to the billboards all the time!
Of course, the real difference, in this case, is that the networks have lots of money and lawyers at their disposal, unlike the billboard owners. Since might and money makes right in today's world, they'll probably win, too.
You really don't have to worry about losing individuality that much. If the network behaved as you suggest, with everyone automatically answering each others' questions, peoples' brains would soon become thoroughly overloaded trying to supply the necessary answers.
No, I think it's more likely that things will turn out much like our current internet, at its most basic level. Machines (or other automatons) will take care of the grunt work of data transfer, and we'll ask and answer questions in various online forums (i.e. USENET, IRC, *shudder* ICQ) as usual. The only difference will be the manner and effectiveness of the interface.
I for one think rapists (this one included) should be decapitated. The lower "head" for the first offense (plus prison, of course), and the upper head for the second.
Explain again how there could be a second offense after the removal of the *ahem* "lower head"?
Has anyone here read the David Falkayne/Van Rijn series by Paul Anderson? If you happen to be among the elite few who have, doesn't this business about splitting up/stealing from Microsoft strike you as somewhat similar to the way Van Rijn's era came to an end? (i.e. The Seven and the Commonwealth?)
> "Rest assured, although there will be increasing > unpredictability and some degradation in some > systems, the armed forces will be ready to > ensure national security before, on and after > the Year 2000," Hamre said.
Whoever wrote that letter lied when he said that "there have been numerous litigations involving out client's rights to the "backwardsR" US marks and our client has prevailed in every such litigation."
Check out http://www.rru.com/ for a log what TRU has attempted to do to that site. As far as I know, TRU hasn't prevailed yet!
Slashdot Mirror
Has anyone got a link to a mirror of sorcerer linux anywhere about? The site's been hosed for two days.
-Zarchon
Ahh, but what if it's a trick specially *designed* to make us remove the ads.doubleclick entry from our personal blackhole lists? I can see it now. Four months from now, they'll announce their return to user-tracking, and will in fact have continued to track all us innocent users the whole time! :-)
*lol*
Zarchon
Robert Heinlein
C. J. Cherryh
A. E. van Vogt
Vernor Vinge
E. E. 'doc' Smith
Frank Herbert (just for Dune, since they make kids read it nowadays)
David Drake
S. M. Stirling
Edgar Rice Burroughs
Article XI
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
And if you look at the 12th amendment:
Article XII
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Maybe your state constitution gives your state the right to ration food and restrict speech, but I'm pretty sure mine doesn't.
I'm an NYU student, and while I didn't actually see the planes as they crashed into the World Trade Center, I did see the second tower collapse. Here's a brief account of what I saw today...
I woke up at 8:30am, fiddled around a bit, and hopped into the shower around 8:35 or so. Midway through the shower, I heard what sounded like a low flying aircraft, and a loud crash. I didn't think much of it at the time, since we hear aircraft and loud crashes all the time in NYC without thinking to connect the two, but that must have been a plane hitting the WTC, from the time.
My window doesn't face south, so I didn't know what was going on until I left for class at 9:20am. I emerged to see everyone stareing to the south, and when I looked I saw both towers in flames. The pictures you saw on TV don't do it justice. I saw a ring of smoke and fire on the northern face of the west tower, and a few flames on the eastern tower. From 4th street & Washington Square West you could see individual floors on fire. There was a huge amount of smoke pouring from the impacted area and from vents on the roof, and I can only imagine what it must have been like in there. Both planes had hit at this point, and some of the onlookers were still talking about watching the *second* plane fly into the tower before their eyes.
After looking for a while, I dutifully toddled off to class. Class was obviously cancelled, so I returned home to awaken my roommates, "Hey guys! Wake up! The World Trade Center's on fire!" Turns out that one of my roommates was around, and we went outside to take another look. Both towers were still standing, and we presumed that they'd eventually get the flames put out and begin repairs, although we expected to see an ugly splotch on the WTC for some time thereafter. My roommate expected he might have class at 11am, so he started home, saying, "You didn't really need to wake me up, I'd probably have seen it at 11 when I woke up anyway"
"Yeah, that's probably true, but by then it might be a charred hulk."
"Tell you what, if they have it all cleaned up by the time I go to class at 11, I'll buy you a coke."
We returned to our room to learn from CNN that there had been additional attacks on the Pentagon and the Mall in D.C.. Then, on the live shot of the WTC, we saw a huge cloud of smoke start to rise from the base of the east tower. We, like the CNN commentator, didn't realize at the time that the tower was actually collapsing. Taking this to be a suspicious cloud of possibly poisonous smoke, and observing that it was engulfing lower manhattan, my roommate and I decided to start walking uptown ASAP. By the time we got outside, it appeared that the east tower was obscured in smoke (it was actually gone), and we marched up to about 25th street before turning back, as the smoke appeared to be keeping south of 4th street. We were near 6th avenue and 10th street when the second tower fell. We'd only just heard that the east tower had not been obscured, but had fallen, and as that was sinking in people started screaming. All traffic on 6th avenue came to a halt, and I ran out into the street to see the west tower start to collapse.
Clouds of smoke came out of the sides of the tower, and the whole thing just started to slump downwards. Glass and metal framing from the outside was shattered and fell beside the rest. It couldn't have taken more than 10 seconds to fall, but it seemed to take forever. I've walked around the base of the WTC, and this thing was immense! When you approach within three blocks of its base, you feel like you're walking indoors. It just seemed as though something that large could never move on its own. Yet there it fell before my eyes. The sheer enorminity left me stunned. How much it had taken to build, how much it had meant for all of us in the city, how it would probably never be rebuilt. Only as we continued down the sidewalk did I think of the people that must have been inside and around the building. It was not yet 11.
"Hey Xxxx, aren't you glad we evacuated our room? We'd never have seen this from there."
"..."
"Hey, I think you owe me a coke."
Zarchon
PS: As it stands now, you can't go south of Canal street. I took a hike down there earlier today, and it's all cordoned off. There were still a lot of people standing at the ends of the north-south streets, gazeing at the brown cloud where the WTC used to be...
Not really an issue. Just encrypt to the mailing list server, which will then decrypt and encrypt to list recipients.
Of course, you wouldn't be certain of who the mailing list server is sending the message to, but if you were worried, why'd you send the message to an untrusted list?
Based on a quick perusal of the aimster website, it appears that it's just a filesharing system tacked onto a chat program. My question is, if they can ban aimster, what will stop them from attacking good old IRC?
Think about it. Files can easily be transferred via dcc, and it'd be trivial to set up a bot to distribute the contents of selected directories to selected nicks, just like aimster.
Where will it end? They (the RIAA lawyers) can't possibly win until the whole of the net has been shut down. And then how will they reap the profits from their online sales?
Feh.
Zarchon
Their number of 1 in 250 is obviously calculated by multiplying 18,405 by 74, which is incorrect. They should be using the formula: P = Sum[p*(1-p)^n,n,0,74].
...We will fight on the seas, we will fight onthe land... We shall never surrender...
Bwahaha.
Don't confuse the politics of the Libertarian Party with libertarianism. In recent years, the LP has followed the stupid strategy of allying itself with the Republicans in an attempt to take down Democrats. This has led to the even more stupid tactic of selectively choosing which issues to highlight and which ones to ignore (ostensibly "for now") to avoid offending Republicans. This, in addition to the fact that many gay rights legislation put forth by Democrats gives gays more rights than non-gays (reverse discrimination is also wrong), is why the party ignores gay rights issues.
Of course, The LP has done this for such a long time that we now have more neo-republicans in the ranks than true libertarians. (They talk like Republicans, act like Republicans, why shouldn't Republicans join? They get to look "fresh" too.)
My point is that the net is libertarian in the sense of the ideology, not in the sense of the Libertarian Party. (which sucks)
Take a look at The Webley Page for some essays talking about this (and other) libertarian issues.
Can someone post the full article? The napster domain is banned at my humble institution of learning. :-(
I refer, of course, to the TV media practice of adding and modifying the billboards that get into the scenes they broadcast. (Original slashdot story here.)
They don't compensate the billboard owners when they do this. After all, it's not their job to give the billboard renters free advertising in their medium. How, then can they logically justify going after iCrave, who's offering people who don't live within broadcast range of their stations the ability to watch the TV shows? It's legal to make recordings of television programs, and to share them with others, which is all that iCrave's doing. If they modify the advertising contained in those shows, what of it? It's legal to have a recording device which snips out the commercials, and after all, the networks do it to the billboards all the time!
Of course, the real difference, in this case, is that the networks have lots of money and lawyers at their disposal, unlike the billboard owners. Since might and money makes right in today's world, they'll probably win, too.
No, I think it's more likely that things will turn out much like our current internet, at its most basic level. Machines (or other automatons) will take care of the grunt work of data transfer, and we'll ask and answer questions in various online forums (i.e. USENET, IRC, *shudder* ICQ) as usual. The only difference will be the manner and effectiveness of the interface.
Oops. Thought I'd had my passwd right when I posted this. *sigh*
Life is unfair. Kill yourself or get over it.
WTF? "Those who fathom the internet?" Give me a break. There can't be that few of us around, can there?
Sheesh.
At last, hard evidence supporting the hypothesis that all those moronic Anonymous Cowards are actually in the pay of Microsoft!
I for one think rapists (this one included) should be decapitated. The lower "head" for the first offense (plus prison, of course), and the upper head for the second.
Explain again how there could be a second offense after the removal of the *ahem* "lower head"?
Has anyone here read the David Falkayne/Van Rijn series by Paul Anderson? If you happen to be among the elite few who have, doesn't this business about splitting up/stealing from Microsoft strike you as somewhat similar to the way Van Rijn's era came to an end? (i.e. The Seven and the Commonwealth?)
Remember what happened after that?
> "Rest assured, although there will be increasing
> unpredictability and some degradation in some
> systems, the armed forces will be ready to
> ensure national security before, on and after
> the Year 2000," Hamre said.
Check out http://www.rru.com/ for a log what TRU has attempted to do to that site. As far as I know, TRU hasn't prevailed yet!