Oh boo hoo! Our buisness is booming and we'll be doubling our revenue! Whatever shall we do? How will we manage? What crazy buisness school is turning out managers who think massive growth is bad? Why don't ISP's want to sell more bandwidth instead of throttling us? Why would power sellers not want to sell more electricity? When you sell a metered comodity you should WANT to increase sales as that boosts your income and justifies performance bonuses.
That's the difference betwean security theatre and actual security. Theatre puts money into the pockets of your rich friends, actual security stops terrorism while also blocking you from allying with known terror supporters like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
When the stakes are high, as in foreign diplomatic relations, those involved will do what is needed to "handle" the matter. For starters I fully expect ALL american diplomats are using or considering off-line crypto right now. Secondly the practice of giving some no-name private access to such materials will end. Third a law will be passed allowing for "criminal" web sites to be shut down without trial. A point of interest- wikileaks has denied receiving diplomatic letters/cables. It's possible that this whole issue was manufactured by the NSA/CIA/TLA whatever for the express purpose of forcing these three actions to be taken.
There is a reasonable expectation of privacy in a private house. If you leave the front door of a restaurant wide open and people come in, it's not break and enter. So the question is did he have reason to think the material was private?
Words on paper are worthless if the people don't defend them. Many previous examples of the US government violating the constitution, and nothing happened. Why would spelling out your rights make any difference if the american people don't care?
No, they have different talking points. Both (right wing) groups consistently do and vote as they are told by their supporters. And by supporters i mean those that fund/pay them. It's been noted numerous times that both groups act the same in power, that's likely due to them taking orders from the same group of (rich) supporters. It's likely the only thing that will let the voters have a say is massive electoral reform to remove the money from the system. (and neither group has any motivation for that course of action.)
I've seen no evidence that obama cares about privacy. At every opportunity to vote for/against loss of rights/privacy he has consistently voted for taking it away. He's also consistently said the opposite in public. Therefore any claims he's about to increase internet privacy probably means he's taking away more privacy, probably through a massive (secret) government monitoring program.
NSA key? Generally speaking, if a company spends money on something it expects a return. Putting those "debug" features into silicon costs money so why don't they advertise them? I only see three likely reasons: security (can't be secured), doesn't work (oops!), government backdoor.
Why is an official government department working to help malware authors? If it's for hacking terrorists then it should be classified and hidden. Is this one of those weird french things where everything is backwards?
The US -has- ignored the constitution in recent memory, and got away with it. So clearly they can again. The US gov only listens to money, not the UK. Catholic isn't likely to become a state religion, it's not Protestant. However the Republicans would certainly vote for a state religion if they had the chance. If they can openly support creationist nonsense (intelligent design) and prayers in school then i'd not put official state religion past them.
None of the freedoms you mention are prohibited in the Koran. It's the culture of a few of the crazier arab countries, but not all. There -are- muslims who don't practice those hateful acts. When you want to fight something the first step is know your enemy. It makes it much easier to win. Our first step should be supporting the moderate muslims so they can deal with the radicals.
On the subject of blocking hate speech: In the USA it's illegal to be communist. In Canada it isn't. We even have/had a Canadian communist party, now renamed the NDP. We let them talk, took notes of who they were, and kept them in check. No riots, no social unrest. The USA forced them underground and lost track of them. (Other than the McCarthy witch hunts, which were ineffective for their "claimed" goals.) Sometimes the best way to deal with your enemy is just let them speak, and argue the point in public. It's a basic principle of democracy, you should try it some time.
Christians are notorious for this. Most of central and south america was converted to catholic at gun point. The question of how effective those conversions is, is another matter entirely.
A chip fab would be the best bet. In zero grav you can deposit the metal layers slower therefore more accurately. You can grow crystals easier, maybe better. Put a maglev launcher on the moon for silicon and you can build solar panels for basically nothing. I'd be willing to pay more in taxes if it got me beamed solar power to replace OPEC oil.
We're getting into diminishing returns from the station now. The first space station was a learning project, after that it's just incremental improvement. If half the money from the ISS had been spent on unmanned missions we'd have rovers on Jupiter's moons right now.
America put a man on the moon, Canada got universal healthcare. If you wonder who got the better deal: when was the last time you looked at a microchip and said "that Apollo program was money well spent."
The system is complicated because of all the loopholes in the system. The rich/powerful put those loopholes into the system for their own advantage. They make them complicated to use so the poor people won't/can't use them. There is no advantage to the rich in simplifying the system, so they don't. This is a classic example of the golden rule: those with the gold make the rules.
So if the Pope has a doctor treat him then his faith is weak? And if faith healing of Catholic priests doesn't cure them of abusing little kids then we can declare the whole religion bogus? Interesting idea, we should check into this (scientifically).
Publicly accusing people of criminal behavior without the ability to prove it is slander, and can get you sued. If a British soldier serving in Afghanistan is put on that list then most people would accept that as preponderance of evidence that he didn't do it and therefore was (published list) slandered. The fact that the internet account is in his name on not the (pirate) kids is irrelevant to the accusation of slander because the ISP said it was the guy not the family. This is the sort of liability that will give ISP's cold feet about this whole plan very quickly as shareholders get very upset over risk without profit.
Money is the key. Pick the weakest (least amount of money) recording company in RIAA and boycott them till they agree to stop. Rinse and repeat till the whole pack is down. The other method is to make enforcement of this so expensive for the ISP that they refuse to participate in the whole thing without compensation. Then watch as gov/riaa/isp fight over who pays.
Slashdot Mirror
What country are you from? Your opinion of politicians doesn't bear any resemblance to any I know.
Oh boo hoo! Our buisness is booming and we'll be doubling our revenue! Whatever shall we do? How will we manage? What crazy buisness school is turning out managers who think massive growth is bad? Why don't ISP's want to sell more bandwidth instead of throttling us? Why would power sellers not want to sell more electricity? When you sell a metered comodity you should WANT to increase sales as that boosts your income and justifies performance bonuses.
That's the difference betwean security theatre and actual security. Theatre puts money into the pockets of your rich friends, actual security stops terrorism while also blocking you from allying with known terror supporters like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
Saudi Arabia (Terrorist supporting monarchy) got scared of getting annexed by Iraq(Democracy), and paid for someone to deal with the matter.
When the stakes are high, as in foreign diplomatic relations, those involved will do what is needed to "handle" the matter. For starters I fully expect ALL american diplomats are using or considering off-line crypto right now. Secondly the practice of giving some no-name private access to such materials will end. Third a law will be passed allowing for "criminal" web sites to be shut down without trial. A point of interest- wikileaks has denied receiving diplomatic letters/cables. It's possible that this whole issue was manufactured by the NSA/CIA/TLA whatever for the express purpose of forcing these three actions to be taken.
Actually money is a form of cloth, not paper. You would realize this if you've ever washed money, as paper dissolves in water.
There is a reasonable expectation of privacy in a private house. If you leave the front door of a restaurant wide open and people come in, it's not break and enter. So the question is did he have reason to think the material was private?
Words on paper are worthless if the people don't defend them. Many previous examples of the US government violating the constitution, and nothing happened. Why would spelling out your rights make any difference if the american people don't care?
No, they have different talking points. Both (right wing) groups consistently do and vote as they are told by their supporters. And by supporters i mean those that fund/pay them. It's been noted numerous times that both groups act the same in power, that's likely due to them taking orders from the same group of (rich) supporters. It's likely the only thing that will let the voters have a say is massive electoral reform to remove the money from the system. (and neither group has any motivation for that course of action.)
I've seen no evidence that obama cares about privacy. At every opportunity to vote for/against loss of rights/privacy he has consistently voted for taking it away. He's also consistently said the opposite in public. Therefore any claims he's about to increase internet privacy probably means he's taking away more privacy, probably through a massive (secret) government monitoring program.
NSA key? Generally speaking, if a company spends money on something it expects a return. Putting those "debug" features into silicon costs money so why don't they advertise them? I only see three likely reasons: security (can't be secured), doesn't work (oops!), government backdoor.
Why is an official government department working to help malware authors? If it's for hacking terrorists then it should be classified and hidden. Is this one of those weird french things where everything is backwards?
The US -has- ignored the constitution in recent memory, and got away with it. So clearly they can again. The US gov only listens to money, not the UK. Catholic isn't likely to become a state religion, it's not Protestant. However the Republicans would certainly vote for a state religion if they had the chance. If they can openly support creationist nonsense (intelligent design) and prayers in school then i'd not put official state religion past them.
None of the freedoms you mention are prohibited in the Koran. It's the culture of a few of the crazier arab countries, but not all. There -are- muslims who don't practice those hateful acts. When you want to fight something the first step is know your enemy. It makes it much easier to win. Our first step should be supporting the moderate muslims so they can deal with the radicals.
On the subject of blocking hate speech: In the USA it's illegal to be communist. In Canada it isn't. We even have/had a Canadian communist party, now renamed the NDP. We let them talk, took notes of who they were, and kept them in check. No riots, no social unrest. The USA forced them underground and lost track of them. (Other than the McCarthy witch hunts, which were ineffective for their "claimed" goals.) Sometimes the best way to deal with your enemy is just let them speak, and argue the point in public. It's a basic principle of democracy, you should try it some time.
Christians are notorious for this. Most of central and south america was converted to catholic at gun point. The question of how effective those conversions is, is another matter entirely.
Does ford still make engines? I thought they outsourced that.
A chip fab would be the best bet. In zero grav you can deposit the metal layers slower therefore more accurately. You can grow crystals easier, maybe better. Put a maglev launcher on the moon for silicon and you can build solar panels for basically nothing. I'd be willing to pay more in taxes if it got me beamed solar power to replace OPEC oil.
We're getting into diminishing returns from the station now. The first space station was a learning project, after that it's just incremental improvement. If half the money from the ISS had been spent on unmanned missions we'd have rovers on Jupiter's moons right now.
America put a man on the moon, Canada got universal healthcare. If you wonder who got the better deal: when was the last time you looked at a microchip and said "that Apollo program was money well spent."
The system is complicated because of all the loopholes in the system. The rich/powerful put those loopholes into the system for their own advantage. They make them complicated to use so the poor people won't/can't use them. There is no advantage to the rich in simplifying the system, so they don't. This is a classic example of the golden rule: those with the gold make the rules.
the copywrite clock started at date of creation/first public display. I think it's expired.
So if the Pope has a doctor treat him then his faith is weak? And if faith healing of Catholic priests doesn't cure them of abusing little kids then we can declare the whole religion bogus? Interesting idea, we should check into this (scientifically).
Publicly accusing people of criminal behavior without the ability to prove it is slander, and can get you sued. If a British soldier serving in Afghanistan is put on that list then most people would accept that as preponderance of evidence that he didn't do it and therefore was (published list) slandered. The fact that the internet account is in his name on not the (pirate) kids is irrelevant to the accusation of slander because the ISP said it was the guy not the family. This is the sort of liability that will give ISP's cold feet about this whole plan very quickly as shareholders get very upset over risk without profit.
Money is the key. Pick the weakest (least amount of money) recording company in RIAA and boycott them till they agree to stop. Rinse and repeat till the whole pack is down. The other method is to make enforcement of this so expensive for the ISP that they refuse to participate in the whole thing without compensation. Then watch as gov/riaa/isp fight over who pays.