my grandfather always told me how dangerous guns are, since (Murphy) everything can go wrong, but with a gun it can be deadly, or at least very harmful if it happens
I agree with the fact that most people shouldn't own guns because of the dangerous consequences, however I don't think we should deny anyone the right to own a gun. With right comes responsibility, those who can't handle the responsibility of gun ownership should seriously consider not owning a gun. I play paintball, but I don't consider myself gun savy and wouldn't ever consider owning a gun, there are too many dangers involved.
For protection against criminals we have the police. They carry weapons and are paid to do so.
The problem is that I don't think the majority of people in the US trust the police. Most people believe that police forces in general have become too corrupt.
I used to get a lot of spam at my usa.mil (read.net) until I started putting the following at the end of every e-mail I sent out.
It was written for telemarketing over phones, but has also been applied to e-mail. I have yet to collect any amount of money, but the spam has stopped completely.
I've also gotten in a habbit of e-mailing the host where the spam was routed through... at the very least I can get the account canceled or get the company to pay better attention to their security.
-- schmidbj@.usa.mil (.net) *******NOTICE********** Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, 227, any and all non solicited commercial E-mail sent to the address above is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $1000 US. Sending an E-mail to the address above denotes acceptance of these terms.
As a very active Slashdot user I take offense to your calling Slashdot a "online clubhouse for Microsoft haters" I do think that the majority of Slashdot users dislike Microsoft however, I'd like to believe that most of Slashdot's user base don't go around spouting anti-Microsoft sentiment. There are a few users who do go around spreading Microsoft hatred, but most of those are moderated down because of flamebait. Most people take up a devil's advocate position on anything Microsoft related.
Even though I think Microsoft is a Monopoly and has set the computer industry back several years. I still believe they have the right to exist. We cannot deny them that right.
A quote that I see quite often in Slashdotter's posts is: "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend you till death for your right to say it."
Slashdot is a diverse on-line community, made up of people from many different backgrounds. Every user has his or her own opinion on Microsoft or any number of subjects discussed on Slashdot.
I've known about this for quite a while. Reading cookies isn't the only thing you can do through IE. With a simple Active X script I can read/write to your hard drive. I've also seen scripts that allow a malicious person to start any program through the browser.
I'm not ragging on MS here, they aren't the only ones with exploits. Check out this link to security bugware. Exploits and fixes for all major operating systems.
Protect yourself make sure you have the latest patches to Windows 98. I'm sure you can find the links to other windows versions as well.
<Insert Linux Plug Here> Of course the ultimate fix would be to install Linux, but I know I'm not the only one on slashdot who's preaching Linux, so I'll let people decide for themselves. </Insert Linux Plug Here>
Breaking up Microsoft into smaller companies would give them even more of an advantage, unless they were required to release the source code to the Windows OS.
Microsoft owns the source code to windows, that gives them an advantage to code apps for windows that some other company wouldn't be able to code without prior knowledge of the aformentioned windows source code.
I'm all for breaking them up, but only if they also had to release the source code for Windows to make it easier for other companies to code apps for windows. If you know exactly how windows works inside and out you could code a much better app.
Irreguardless of personal opinion, we need to realize that Microsoft has a right to exist. They should be treated with the same as any other company would be. Just don't make things unfair for the consumers.
While on the one hand you want to save something (porn) that destroys families and on the other you want to save families from the evil of the world (namely porn).
Actually I don't want to save porn. I personally feel that porn on the net is out of control, but I also aknoledge the industry has a right to exist. What I'm saying here is everyone has the right to access porn, but they also have the responsibility not to. (at least around children)
However, while protecting porn you are the savior of the family? I think not! Porn destroys families. You are talking out of both sides of your mouth
I do not think porn destroy's families. Any family that can be torn apart by pictures of people having sex has many more problems than just the porn.
I don't believe the government has any right to restrict anything parents should be doing anyway. It is not the government's job to be a moral compas for society, especially with the guy we have in office now.
he Justice Department's reasoning is simple: If products like Cyberpatrol and Surfwatch are so badly flawed that they don't block what they should, then the judge in the case should uphold a federal law making it a crime to post erotica online instead. "What they want me for is a kind of technical assault on filtering software, but the end result is that nothing can protect kids on the Web except some kind of blanket age restriction," says John Bowes, an associate professor at the University of Washington. "I don't like filtering, but I dislike age restrictions even more."
So I guess they're saying parents don't even filter into the equation.
IMHO the bottom line here is to not restrict things for "the kids", but rather get parents involved in their kids lives. Maybe there are some parents out there who may not care that thier childern are accessing porno, but I'd like to think the majority of parents do care. Either way it's not the place of the government to restrict things because some parents are to lazy to take responsibility for their children. If you are not up to the challenge of taking care of another human being, you shouldn't be having children.
Get involved in your childs life. Sit down with them find out what they watch on TV, what kind of sites they frequent on the web, what they learned in school.
If parents actually showed a little bit of interest in the lives of their children the whole country would be a lot better off.
Who could have done this to this AC post? I mean, TROLL??? We all need to go to the Moderation discussion and talk about this this, people!
AFAIK moderators shouldn't be moderating because they dissagree with the comment.
The rest of this comment is directed to the AC who wrote the original comment:
Have you ever heard of the 1st ammendment? In order to protect the right to freedom of speech, you're going to have to put up with things like this. At least in this country.
Sure there are a lot of bad things on the Internet, but that's no reason to hold someone who links to an illegal site responsible.
And that brings up responsibility, instead of going after someone who links to an illegal site, why not go after the company/person who is hosting it. That will surely make Hosting sites check up on what they're hosting.
It should not be the government's responsibility to censor things like this society should be doing that for itself.
Any ruling which prevents linking to illegal material is alright with me. I hope it includes search engines so that they aren't allowed to link either and the black side of the Internet will shrivel and die. I know this opinion flies in the face of Slashdot, but I'm sorry, I had to say something as I have very strong feelings on this issue.
I would dissagree with you strongly on this one... If the government trys to restrict information be it illegal or legal, the people who are providing this information will go even deeper underground. Thus making it harder to find them.
I don't think, however, that morality is relevant to whether one is a geek. I consider your average Evil Genius to be a geek just as much as the Heroic Scientist who vanquishes him before going to commercial. There are certainly geeks who have jobs oriented toward violence (gunsmiths, combat engineers, a lot of weapons crews in Today's {Army,Navy,Air Force}). There are geeks with fairly flexible beliefs about right and wrong, who do consider violence to be a solution at times, who lie to their bosses, and who steal from their equipment suppliers (not that I have anyone specific in mind;-). I just don't see any basis for putting a morality clause in geekdom, especially if it would mean excluding thousands of geeks.
you make a valid point... I wouldn't want to exclude any geeks from geekdom : I should have been a little less broader when I said sense of morality.
Media opinion aside, knowing how to use Frontpage does not make you a geek.
Quote from the bottom of my webpage: This site created using EMACS... enough said.
It's been my experience that weening (no I can't spell) people off of what I would consider bad products is a lot like getting a baby off of a bottle or out of a Crib. I have a sister that is 7 years younger than me. I remember my parents trying to get her off of a bottle. Quite an interesting experience. According to my parents (I don't remember anything before 2 years old, but who does?) I was weaned quite easily. In the end it comes down to maturity. You've got to go from training wheels before you can learn to ride a bike. The same can be applied to AOL or Microsoft. I've never used AOL and try to avoid using Microsoft products, (I grew up on Apple 2c's Commies and *nix) but they're a great way to train people who are otherwise afraid of learing about computers and the Internet. AOL provides a comfortable atmosphere to learn nice and slow. Take things one day at a time. After spending some time with AOL the transition to a Dialup ISP or some sort of dedicated connection is nice and smoothe. I got my parents started with AOL and just recently they moved over to a 56K dialup and couldn't be happier. The same thing applies with Microsoft. My parents started with Win95/98 and after I showed them the basics of Linux running plain X11, they've never turned back. In fact they were surprised that no matter what they did it never blue screened. You don't need to know how to program or Grep or mount a drive in order to use Linux. The same way you don't need to know how Neucular fision works when you turn on your electric light. Background information is usefull, but only if you're going to use it. If all you're going to do is check your e-mail, surf the web and maybe do some word processing, you only need to know the basics.
All those fascist school policies came down the pike immediately afterward, true, but that's just one of life's crazy coincidences So what you're telling me is that all of the increased security, ID checking etc etc... is just a coincidence? I really find that hard to believe. All of the school polocies started as a direct result of the shootings and the media's portrayal therein. Yes these guys were crazy, and no these guys wern't "geeks" because I'd like to believe that all geeks have a sense of morality. As much as I disliked Jocks while I was in high school, I NEVER wished any of them severe harm. The occasional prank yes... but I've always believed that violence never solved anything. Props to Katz for getting the word out. I think the media (especially these days) could use a fresh injection of the opposite view point. Personally I think the whole high school experience is just part of life and should be left the way it is. In the end what you get out of life is what you put into it. Think of it like the conservation of mass or energy.
The reverse XOR String is stored in the registry... however, this is only for sharing directories over a LAN and only works in 98. I wouldn't be surprised if they used the same encryption elsewhere to store passwords.
Actually win95 stored passwords in Reg as plaintext. No encryption if you want to call XOR'ing encryption. 98 solved that problem by XOR'ing by a different string... I don't remember what it was, but it's not to difficult to set a password and reverse XOR it to get the orignal string back.
As far as the ATM/bank computer encryption goes... I figured they'd be running 2048 Bit RSA. You're right some people will just never learn.
To respond to your saying I'm serving the devil himself... Even though I agree what Microsoft has done is wrong, and even though their business tactics have set the computer industry back many years... it's still no reason to throw stones at them.
All I'm saying is that Microsoft has the right to exist. Whether or not I agree with what they have done isn't the issue... I think this editorial slams Microsoft for the purpose of slamming Microsoft.
When you write for a publication, I think you have the responsibility to look at an issue from both sides. This article was blatently one sided. ESR dropped the ball on this one. What he says here reflects back on slashdot as a whole, and I hope slashdot isn't in the business of throwing stones at a company (or anything for that matter) because of personal feelings toward that company.
On the issue of responsibility... Personally I feel that if this hole has cost web developers money, Microsoft should be held responsible.
Reguardless of personal feelings, Microsoft still diserves the same treatment as any other company. It would be hypocritical of us to deny them of that just because we don't like what they've done.
As much as I agree with ESR about what was said here... I have to play devil's advociate on this one.
As much as I dislike Microsoft's products and general business tacticts, I don't go around telling people how much they suck. I just show people alternatives. (be it Linux, BeOS or whatever)
Microsoft has a right to exist. Kicking them while they're down doesn't help matters much. Microsoft will get what's coming to them in the near future.
I always thought slashdot at least attemped to be serious about journalism. This story has given me doubts. Perhaps a moderation script for the mainpage would be in order.
As much as I agree with you, I believe people should have the right to freedom of speech. It would be really hypocritical (no I can't spell) of slashdot to say to someone "You're post is contributing to pointless babble-- we're going to ban you."
If you don't like what's being said, don't listen to it.
I found this site a while ago... It details exploits for most operating systems, with fixes, workarounds and/or patches. I usually see things posted here before I see them posted elsewhere bugtraq might be a bit better, but I've used this site for a long time and it's saved me quite a bit of trouble.
It's quite obvious that they arn't going to listen to reason. Spamming them with flames is not the answer. However, I'm hoping that intelligent reasoning from 70,000+ people is the answer. 1 man cannot change someone's view. If we can get enough people with something intelligent to say, maybe, just maybe they'll consider scrapping the entire project.
I re-emailed the letter I sent to them earlier. A copy of which can be found here
I really don't know if e-mailing the suggestion box will do any good. By this time they're probaly forwarding all e-mail to/dev/null, but it won't hurt to try.
All e-mail concerning the above link can be directed to the address above.
As I think someone said before there are 2 possible outcomes to this situation:
1) 100% of all the under 18 population are reported and the company gives up because they finally realize how blatently stupid this whole idea is.
2) 100% of all the under 18 population are reported and the company says "Wow there sure are a lot of depressed kids out there... lets supress their rights even more."
then they achieve national status.
I seem to remember another party attempting this rat out eachother tactic. It took place during World War II... nah that couldn't happen here.
I have seen the movie and know exactly what you're talking about. The students of the group took it too far. They even went so far as to single out and ridicule those who were not affiliated with the group.
I'm the father of an 11 year old son. If one of his schools mates shows up at school with a firearm or a knife larger than a standard pen knife, I sure as hell expect him to report it.
I agree with you on that one, however this system can be abused very easily. Giving kids the power to determine who's dangerous and who's not is power kids don't disserve.
If all you read is this authors inflamatory article and get all hot and bothered, then you are no different than those who blindly went trailing behind McCarthy in the 50's.
I am hot and bothered by this, what if the government instituted this idea? Would we be any better off than an Orwellian society?
I was born in 1981, so I didn't live through the McCarthy era and can't comment on anything there.
The only other comment I can add is this... nobody has the right to target a certain group of people because the way they are, that is the essence of a free country. At least I thought it was.
If I choose to relish in my geekyness, I should be able to do so without the fear of being reported by my fellow classmates. I am so glad I am out of high school.
I normally don't post replies to my own posts, but after reading their website http://www.waveamerica.com/ I have to make a comment on the rewards/sign-up/rat out section:
Isn't this a bit like putting a carrot in front of a horse?
I also found it odd that they're giving away a computer. <Sarcastic> I thought that...
"81% of Americans thought the Internet caused the Columbine shooting"
if they believe that then aren't they contributing to the problem? Wouldn't it be easy enough to put Doom/half-life/cstrike/UT etc. on the computer, thus contributing to the problem further? </Sarcastic>
I must say I'm very frightened for anyone still in high school. I'm so glad I'm a year out of high school. I've already been branded a geek by most of society and relish in my geekyness. I guess we're getting 1 step closer to 1984. People seem to think you can condemn someone for being different, and yet these same people promote diversity. A bit hypocritical don't you think?
I see no reason to punish those who are different because someone else gunned down their classmates in their school. I was still in High School when this whole thing happened; I also wear a black trench coat. Almost immediately I was singled out as some sort of mass murdering freak who was there to kill everyone. Everyone started looking at me differently... but you know what I still wore my trench coat to school every day. I guess I considered it my own silent protest; I wanted to show people there was nothing to fear from me. I was already branded a hacker because I refused to use windows and promoted Linux. I know a little bit about network security, but I am learning. I am currently perusing a computer engineering/communications major.
The thing that frightens me the most is the cash reward. There were plenty of people at my high school that would have loved to have seen me hauled away. I never bothered anybody or made any waves, they just didn't like the way I dressed and acted. I didn't go along with the mainstream and was tormented because of it. Sure I was angry with some of those people, but not to the point I would wish them any harm. I think things will work out in the end. All of the jocks that ridiculed me in high school will be pumping gas into my Jaguar in 5 years.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with the fact that most people shouldn't own guns because of the dangerous consequences, however I don't think we should deny anyone the right to own a gun. With right comes responsibility, those who can't handle the responsibility of gun ownership should seriously consider not owning a gun. I play paintball, but I don't consider myself gun savy and wouldn't ever consider owning a gun, there are too many dangers involved.
For protection against criminals we have the police. They carry weapons and are paid to do so.
The problem is that I don't think the majority of people in the US trust the police. Most people believe that police forces in general have become too corrupt.
I used to get a lot of spam at my usa.mil (read .net) until I started putting the following at the end of every e-mail I sent out.
It was written for telemarketing over phones, but has also been applied to e-mail. I have yet to collect any amount of money, but the spam has stopped completely.
I've also gotten in a habbit of e-mailing the host where the spam was routed through... at the very least I can get the account canceled or get the company to pay better attention to their security.
-- schmidbj@.usa.mil (.net)
*******NOTICE**********
Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5,
Subchapter II, 227, any and all non solicited
commercial E-mail sent to the address above is
subject to a download and archival fee in the
amount of $1000 US. Sending an E-mail to the
address above denotes acceptance of these
terms.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/opinion/
I read the Washington Post article a few minutes ago and e-mailed this letter to the editor:
I am writing this in response to your recent article Microsoft, Slashdot exchange volleys
As a very active Slashdot user I take offense to your calling Slashdot a "online clubhouse for Microsoft haters" I do think that the majority of Slashdot users dislike Microsoft however, I'd like to believe that most of Slashdot's user base don't go around spouting anti-Microsoft sentiment. There are a few users who do go around spreading Microsoft hatred, but most of those are moderated down because of flamebait. Most people take up a devil's advocate position on anything Microsoft related.
Even though I think Microsoft is a Monopoly and has set the computer industry back several years. I still believe they have the right to exist. We cannot deny them that right.
A quote that I see quite often in Slashdotter's posts is: "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend you till death for your right to say it."
Slashdot is a diverse on-line community, made up of people from many different backgrounds. Every user has his or her own opinion on Microsoft or any number of subjects discussed on Slashdot.
I'm not ragging on MS here, they aren't the only ones with exploits. Check out this link to security bugware. Exploits and fixes for all major operating systems.
Protect yourself make sure you have the latest patches to Windows 98. I'm sure you can find the links to other windows versions as well.
<Insert Linux Plug Here>
Of course the ultimate fix would be to install Linux, but I know I'm not the only one on slashdot who's preaching Linux, so I'll let people decide for themselves.
</Insert Linux Plug Here>
Microsoft owns the source code to windows, that gives them an advantage to code apps for windows that some other company wouldn't be able to code without prior knowledge of the aformentioned windows source code.
I'm all for breaking them up, but only if they also had to release the source code for Windows to make it easier for other companies to code apps for windows. If you know exactly how windows works inside and out you could code a much better app.
Irreguardless of personal opinion, we need to realize that Microsoft has a right to exist. They should be treated with the same as any other company would be. Just don't make things unfair for the consumers.
Actually I don't want to save porn. I personally feel that porn on the net is out of control, but I also aknoledge the industry has a right to exist. What I'm saying here is everyone has the right to access porn, but they also have the responsibility not to. (at least around children)
However, while protecting porn you are the savior of the family? I think not! Porn destroys families. You are talking out of both sides of your mouth
I do not think porn destroy's families. Any family that can be torn apart by pictures of people having sex has many more problems than just the porn.
I don't believe the government has any right to restrict anything parents should be doing anyway. It is not the government's job to be a moral compas for society, especially with the guy we have in office now.
So I guess they're saying parents don't even filter into the equation.
IMHO the bottom line here is to not restrict things for "the kids", but rather get parents involved in their kids lives. Maybe there are some parents out there who may not care that thier childern are accessing porno, but I'd like to think the majority of parents do care. Either way it's not the place of the government to restrict things because some parents are to lazy to take responsibility for their children. If you are not up to the challenge of taking care of another human being, you shouldn't be having children.
Get involved in your childs life. Sit down with them find out what they watch on TV, what kind of sites they frequent on the web, what they learned in school.
If parents actually showed a little bit of interest in the lives of their children the whole country would be a lot better off.
I was surfing around the Metallica website and found that most of the banner ads that were loaded were from MP3 sites. Rather ironic don't you think?
AFAIK moderators shouldn't be moderating because they dissagree with the comment.
The rest of this comment is directed to the AC who wrote the original comment:
Have you ever heard of the 1st ammendment? In order to protect the right to freedom of speech, you're going to have to put up with things like this. At least in this country.
Sure there are a lot of bad things on the Internet, but that's no reason to hold someone who links to an illegal site responsible.
And that brings up responsibility, instead of going after someone who links to an illegal site, why not go after the company/person who is hosting it. That will surely make Hosting sites check up on what they're hosting.
It should not be the government's responsibility to censor things like this society should be doing that for itself.
Any ruling which prevents linking to illegal material is alright with me. I hope it includes search engines so that they aren't allowed to link either and the black side of the Internet will shrivel and die. I know this opinion flies in the face of Slashdot, but I'm sorry, I had to say something as I have very strong feelings on this issue.
I would dissagree with you strongly on this one... If the government trys to restrict information be it illegal or legal, the people who are providing this information will go even deeper underground. Thus making it harder to find them.
you make a valid point... I wouldn't want to exclude any geeks from geekdom : I should have been a little less broader when I said sense of morality.
Media opinion aside, knowing how to use Frontpage does not make you a geek.
Quote from the bottom of my webpage:
This site created using EMACS... enough said.
It's been my experience that weening (no I can't spell) people off of what I would consider bad products is a lot like getting a baby off of a bottle or out of a Crib. I have a sister that is 7 years younger than me. I remember my parents trying to get her off of a bottle. Quite an interesting experience. According to my parents (I don't remember anything before 2 years old, but who does?) I was weaned quite easily. In the end it comes down to maturity. You've got to go from training wheels before you can learn to ride a bike. The same can be applied to AOL or Microsoft. I've never used AOL and try to avoid using Microsoft products, (I grew up on Apple 2c's Commies and *nix) but they're a great way to train people who are otherwise afraid of learing about computers and the Internet. AOL provides a comfortable atmosphere to learn nice and slow. Take things one day at a time. After spending some time with AOL the transition to a Dialup ISP or some sort of dedicated connection is nice and smoothe. I got my parents started with AOL and just recently they moved over to a 56K dialup and couldn't be happier. The same thing applies with Microsoft. My parents started with Win95/98 and after I showed them the basics of Linux running plain X11, they've never turned back. In fact they were surprised that no matter what they did it never blue screened. You don't need to know how to program or Grep or mount a drive in order to use Linux. The same way you don't need to know how Neucular fision works when you turn on your electric light. Background information is usefull, but only if you're going to use it. If all you're going to do is check your e-mail, surf the web and maybe do some word processing, you only need to know the basics.
All those fascist school policies came down the pike immediately afterward, true, but that's just one of life's crazy coincidences So what you're telling me is that all of the increased security, ID checking etc etc... is just a coincidence? I really find that hard to believe. All of the school polocies started as a direct result of the shootings and the media's portrayal therein. Yes these guys were crazy, and no these guys wern't "geeks" because I'd like to believe that all geeks have a sense of morality. As much as I disliked Jocks while I was in high school, I NEVER wished any of them severe harm. The occasional prank yes... but I've always believed that violence never solved anything. Props to Katz for getting the word out. I think the media (especially these days) could use a fresh injection of the opposite view point. Personally I think the whole high school experience is just part of life and should be left the way it is. In the end what you get out of life is what you put into it. Think of it like the conservation of mass or energy.
The reverse XOR String is stored in the registry... however, this is only for sharing directories over a LAN and only works in 98. I wouldn't be surprised if they used the same encryption elsewhere to store passwords.
As far as the ATM/bank computer encryption goes... I figured they'd be running 2048 Bit RSA. You're right some people will just never learn.
All I'm saying is that Microsoft has the right to exist. Whether or not I agree with what they have done isn't the issue... I think this editorial slams Microsoft for the purpose of slamming Microsoft.
When you write for a publication, I think you have the responsibility to look at an issue from both sides. This article was blatently one sided. ESR dropped the ball on this one. What he says here reflects back on slashdot as a whole, and I hope slashdot isn't in the business of throwing stones at a company (or anything for that matter) because of personal feelings toward that company.
On the issue of responsibility... Personally I feel that if this hole has cost web developers money, Microsoft should be held responsible.
Reguardless of personal feelings, Microsoft still diserves the same treatment as any other company. It would be hypocritical of us to deny them of that just because we don't like what they've done.
As much as I dislike Microsoft's products and general business tacticts, I don't go around telling people how much they suck. I just show people alternatives. (be it Linux, BeOS or whatever)
Microsoft has a right to exist. Kicking them while they're down doesn't help matters much. Microsoft will get what's coming to them in the near future.
I always thought slashdot at least attemped to be serious about journalism. This story has given me doubts. Perhaps a moderation script for the mainpage would be in order.
If you don't like what's being said, don't listen to it.
Security Bugware
I re-emailed the letter I sent to them earlier. A copy of which can be found here
I really don't know if e-mailing the suggestion box will do any good. By this time they're probaly forwarding all e-mail to /dev/null, but it won't hurt to try.
All e-mail concerning the above link can be directed to the address above.
1) 100% of all the under 18 population are reported and the company gives up because they finally realize how blatently stupid this whole idea is.
2) 100% of all the under 18 population are reported and the company says "Wow there sure are a lot of depressed kids out there... lets supress their rights even more."
then they achieve national status.
I seem to remember another party attempting this rat out eachother tactic. It took place during World War II... nah that couldn't happen here.
Sound Familiar?
I agree with you on that one, however this system can be abused very easily. Giving kids the power to determine who's dangerous and who's not is power kids don't disserve.
If all you read is this authors inflamatory article and get all hot and bothered, then you are no different than those who blindly went trailing behind McCarthy in the 50's.
I am hot and bothered by this, what if the government instituted this idea? Would we be any better off than an Orwellian society?
I was born in 1981, so I didn't live through the McCarthy era and can't comment on anything there.
The only other comment I can add is this... nobody has the right to target a certain group of people because the way they are, that is the essence of a free country. At least I thought it was.
If I choose to relish in my geekyness, I should be able to do so without the fear of being reported by my fellow classmates. I am so glad I am out of high school.
Isn't this a bit like putting a carrot in front of a horse?
I also found it odd that they're giving away a computer.
<Sarcastic>
I thought that...
"81% of Americans thought the Internet caused the Columbine shooting"
if they believe that then aren't they contributing to the problem? Wouldn't it be easy enough to put Doom/half-life/cstrike/UT etc. on the computer, thus contributing to the problem further?
</Sarcastic>
I see no reason to punish those who are different because someone else gunned down their classmates in their school. I was still in High School when this whole thing happened; I also wear a black trench coat. Almost immediately I was singled out as some sort of mass murdering freak who was there to kill everyone. Everyone started looking at me differently... but you know what I still wore my trench coat to school every day. I guess I considered it my own silent protest; I wanted to show people there was nothing to fear from me. I was already branded a hacker because I refused to use windows and promoted Linux. I know a little bit about network security, but I am learning. I am currently perusing a computer engineering/communications major.
The thing that frightens me the most is the cash reward. There were plenty of people at my high school that would have loved to have seen me hauled away. I never bothered anybody or made any waves, they just didn't like the way I dressed and acted. I didn't go along with the mainstream and was tormented because of it. Sure I was angry with some of those people, but not to the point I would wish them any harm. I think things will work out in the end. All of the jocks that ridiculed me in high school will be pumping gas into my Jaguar in 5 years.