That's a pretty heavy accusation you're making - that ISPs turn over that content without warrants. IIRC, such evidence collection violates the 4th amendment and is likely not admissible in court. If, OTOH, you're using a gov't network to do said transferring of files, it's not a question of evidence collection - you performed the action over gov't property.
Your argument is akin to the police who want into your apartment, and ask the landlord to let them in.
Your other point is that the gov't has the right to do what it wants with anything you use its property for...this would be similar to living in federally owned housing (let's exclude military stuff, since that just gets complicated). You're saying the gov't could search the house without a warrant because they own it (no expectation of privacy)
Our gov't is well-known to do things it isn't technically allowed to do. It usually does so through intermediaries (proxy wars, proxy wiretaps, CALEA, etc). The illegal nature of the telecom snooping is exactly the reason participating telecoms got *RETROACTIVE* immunity. Not immunity from future activities, but from everything, past and present. It's not even a pardon, because we don't even know what they're being pardoned for.
That water is wet.
For crying out loud...wasn't this fairly obvious? Of course, you have real hackers, who hack things like Xboxen and PS3's to make them run homebrew (and in the process, learning a lot) and you have the ones who see the criminal potential. You know, kind of like the kids who enjoy testing security at the mall versus the ones who like shoplifting.
Nope. They have to create both, due to Pro-IP, DMCA, Affirmative Action(tm), and the civil Rights Act of 1964.
The real problem is when the time comes to find out which one you got, due to quantum entanglement, Heisenburg's uncertainty principle, and of course, wave functions. It turns out that observing it will cause it to collapse into a male coworker, a female coworker, or a persnickety cat, with no way to pick one over the others.
Actually, using your example of the DVD player, wouldn't it be more like a locked door with somebody on the inside holding a key and unlocking the door everytime somebody (trusted) knocks?
Actually, it's more like the key's owner telling some "trusted" person that the key is under the doormat.
whitespace is seating at the front of the bus only
<tongue in cheek>
Testify brutha! Tell it on the mountain! Broadcast it with a whitespace device that blocks out those namby pamby PC messages on the corporate TV run by the Five Jewish Bankers from their outer space station.
</tongue in cheek>
Doesn't the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) Preclude them from using that as a bar to employment? Or is ADA toothless when it come to mental illness?
Well, it's toothless insofar as all they have to do is say "We didn't feel like he would work in our company." or "He just wasn't what we were looking for."
Of course, the HR people would likely also be covered by ADA if they're stupid enough to tell someone that's why someone weren't hired.
I wish they'd call it a "flying car" instead of a "roadable aircraft".
After all, the former implies a car, while the latter implies a plane. This has an implication:
Plane: $198,000, probably regulated by FCC, not as likely to be regulated by DMV.
Car: $90,000, more likely DMV, with the FCC playing a smaller part in regulation.
Of course, this has an implication: At half the cost, I'm twice as likely to purchase one making this product a success. of course, twice the odds 1 in 100,000 is still only 2 in 100,000.
I once chopped up my neighbor with an axe because it seemed like a fun thing to do.
He didn't seem to care for it very much, and chopped me up with an axe because he was pissed at me for chopping him up with an axe because it seemed like a fun thing to do.
Random phrase misuse nazi info: Little to no. As in, little to none. As in, not very much! They may have little to know as well, but that's beside the point!
Do I get to call Godwin's Law on this one? Oh please, please, please let me!:)
Why does a dog always have to be kicked? Why can't it be a cat or a rabbit?
Now, I understand why it wouldn't be a snake or a lizard. One a snake would a)slither away or b)bite the bejesus out of you and a lizard would probably just flick its tongue and scamper off.
But can we just leave the dogs out of it? This message is not brought by PETA.
1. Make all advertisement, solicitation, marketing, etc , etc via email illegal. No exceptions.
2. Institute a mass anti-spam campaign across the media, educating people about what to expect and what to do.
3. Prosecute spammers.
4. Prosecute people who buy from spammers.
Personally, I think step 4 is the option that will have the most effect. The more people who are responding to spam that get jail the better.
1. Define marketing
2. Try to keep your footing as you tumble down the slippery slope.
Catching spammers is pretty hard. Doable, but not very practical.
Prosecute the people who buy from them? Isn't this a bit like prosecuting someone prosecuting the victim? Or being retarded? If someone gets ripped off by a con-man or a business, we don't prosecute him. While part of the problem is that victims make themselves available, it doesn't solve the problem to punish them (it's also not terribly efficient to track down Joe Blow to the construction site where he works because he fell for the email promising free XXX while his wife is away, if only he gives his credit card.
Psystar is free to writing their own OS. Apple was even kind enough to open source huge parts of it.
As pointed out earlier, Apple's cash cow isn't the OS. It's hardware. They've never tolerated clone Apples/Macs, SLAPPing them whenever someone tries to sell them.
You're correct that Apple isn't stopping them from writing their own OS. Of course, that'd be rather pointless for people who want/have purchased MacOS X, but want to run it on different hardware.
To use another example: It'd be like Microsoft trying to enforce shrink/clickwrap license agreement "You can't install our OS on computers made by Peanut Computers", even if the Peanut PC is no different from a Microsoft Approved (tm) one.
But on the other hand I wouldn't like it if someone came in and told me how to operate my business in a free market.
You mean you wouldn't like it if you were the sole player in a market segment and suddenly you have to change your gameplan because some competition sprung up?
Slashdot Mirror
This makes me so mad I just wanna shoot someone in the face.
May I volunteer William H. Gates III, Steven Jobs, or any number of high-ranking politicians?
That's a pretty heavy accusation you're making - that ISPs turn over that content without warrants. IIRC, such evidence collection violates the 4th amendment and is likely not admissible in court. If, OTOH, you're using a gov't network to do said transferring of files, it's not a question of evidence collection - you performed the action over gov't property.
Your argument is akin to the police who want into your apartment, and ask the landlord to let them in.
Your other point is that the gov't has the right to do what it wants with anything you use its property for...this would be similar to living in federally owned housing (let's exclude military stuff, since that just gets complicated). You're saying the gov't could search the house without a warrant because they own it (no expectation of privacy)
Our gov't is well-known to do things it isn't technically allowed to do. It usually does so through intermediaries (proxy wars, proxy wiretaps, CALEA, etc). The illegal nature of the telecom snooping is exactly the reason participating telecoms got *RETROACTIVE* immunity. Not immunity from future activities, but from everything, past and present. It's not even a pardon, because we don't even know what they're being pardoned for.
The gov't controlled line that ISPs use in the interconnect will also be subject to gov't snooping and content filtering.
Why would this be off-topic? The exact thought had crossed my mind as well.
While I doubt some backwater town in Minnesoota is going to engage in snooping, I can see state and federal gov'ts doing it for the children.
Pffff, making it illegal makes it less susceptible to criminal influence, just like booze.
Kind of like drugs, right?
Bitter much?
Bit him, too.
That water is wet. For crying out loud...wasn't this fairly obvious? Of course, you have real hackers, who hack things like Xboxen and PS3's to make them run homebrew (and in the process, learning a lot) and you have the ones who see the criminal potential. You know, kind of like the kids who enjoy testing security at the mall versus the ones who like shoplifting.
This is not a new phenomenon.
Non-profits aren't immune to corner-cutting and greed, either.
Nope. They have to create both, due to Pro-IP, DMCA, Affirmative Action(tm), and the civil Rights Act of 1964.
The real problem is when the time comes to find out which one you got, due to quantum entanglement, Heisenburg's uncertainty principle, and of course, wave functions. It turns out that observing it will cause it to collapse into a male coworker, a female coworker, or a persnickety cat, with no way to pick one over the others.
I don't know. Plasma has problems with burn-in.
Actually, using your example of the DVD player, wouldn't it be more like a locked door with somebody on the inside holding a key and unlocking the door everytime somebody (trusted) knocks?
Actually, it's more like the key's owner telling some "trusted" person that the key is under the doormat.
Actually, on that note, has anyone noticed "Linux" and "Windows" are antonyms?
whitespace is seating at the front of the bus only
<tongue in cheek> Testify brutha! Tell it on the mountain! Broadcast it with a whitespace device that blocks out those namby pamby PC messages on the corporate TV run by the Five Jewish Bankers from their outer space station. </tongue in cheek>
Doesn't the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) Preclude them from using that as a bar to employment? Or is ADA toothless when it come to mental illness?
Well, it's toothless insofar as all they have to do is say "We didn't feel like he would work in our company." or "He just wasn't what we were looking for."
Of course, the HR people would likely also be covered by ADA if they're stupid enough to tell someone that's why someone weren't hired.
Nice legs, shame about the boat race.
I wish they'd call it a "flying car" instead of a "roadable aircraft".
After all, the former implies a car, while the latter implies a plane. This has an implication:
Plane: $198,000, probably regulated by FCC, not as likely to be regulated by DMV.
Car: $90,000, more likely DMV, with the FCC playing a smaller part in regulation.
Of course, this has an implication: At half the cost, I'm twice as likely to purchase one making this product a success. of course, twice the odds 1 in 100,000 is still only 2 in 100,000.
My prediction for this toy's success: epic fail.
But I don't do drugs.
I once chopped up my neighbor with an axe because it seemed like a fun thing to do.
He didn't seem to care for it very much, and chopped me up with an axe because he was pissed at me for chopping him up with an axe because it seemed like a fun thing to do.
Cognitive radios?
Uh oh...
Que Terminators, stage right.
Random phrase misuse nazi info: Little to no. As in, little to none. As in, not very much! They may have little to know as well, but that's beside the point!
Do I get to call Godwin's Law on this one? Oh please, please, please let me! :)
Why does a dog always have to be kicked? Why can't it be a cat or a rabbit?
Now, I understand why it wouldn't be a snake or a lizard. One a snake would a)slither away or b)bite the bejesus out of you and a lizard would probably just flick its tongue and scamper off.
But can we just leave the dogs out of it? This message is not brought by PETA.
Not all snakes are bad. They're quite beneficial.
Please. Think of the snakes.
Actually, just be glad they aren't wearing red stars on furry hats, and they aren't named "Soviet Union" or "China"
1. Make all advertisement, solicitation, marketing, etc , etc via email illegal. No exceptions. 2. Institute a mass anti-spam campaign across the media, educating people about what to expect and what to do. 3. Prosecute spammers. 4. Prosecute people who buy from spammers.
Personally, I think step 4 is the option that will have the most effect. The more people who are responding to spam that get jail the better.
1. Define marketing
2. Try to keep your footing as you tumble down the slippery slope.
Catching spammers is pretty hard. Doable, but not very practical.
Prosecute the people who buy from them? Isn't this a bit like prosecuting someone prosecuting the victim? Or being retarded? If someone gets ripped off by a con-man or a business, we don't prosecute him. While part of the problem is that victims make themselves available, it doesn't solve the problem to punish them (it's also not terribly efficient to track down Joe Blow to the construction site where he works because he fell for the email promising free XXX while his wife is away, if only he gives his credit card.
eduke32 with the HRP, little buddy.
Psystar is free to writing their own OS. Apple was even kind enough to open source huge parts of it.
As pointed out earlier, Apple's cash cow isn't the OS. It's hardware. They've never tolerated clone Apples/Macs, SLAPPing them whenever someone tries to sell them.
You're correct that Apple isn't stopping them from writing their own OS. Of course, that'd be rather pointless for people who want/have purchased MacOS X, but want to run it on different hardware.
To use another example: It'd be like Microsoft trying to enforce shrink/clickwrap license agreement "You can't install our OS on computers made by Peanut Computers", even if the Peanut PC is no different from a Microsoft Approved (tm) one.
But on the other hand I wouldn't like it if someone came in and told me how to operate my business in a free market.
You mean you wouldn't like it if you were the sole player in a market segment and suddenly you have to change your gameplan because some competition sprung up?