Did anyone else notice anything odd about the "door" they drilled through? Maybe it was my imagination, but I swear on the one they drilled through it looked like the handles were both the same size. Yet I've always noticed whenever a picture of the door is shown that the handle on the right is significantly longer than the one one the left. Doesn't that seem a bit fishy?
Just for the benefit of anyone who went rushing to get the patch like I did, the patch was released in May of 2000, which means it is over a year old, and they have released SP2 since then which apparently incorporates this fix.
When I read that statement, I couldn't help but think that it sounds sort of like some of those chain letters that circulate around. If someone were to start a chain letter with this sort of content describing what the SSSCA will do and tell them to forward it to 10 people and write their senators or something, it might have interesting results...
I don't see how you can put this without it sounding a little alarmist. Disney wants you to purchase a new TV, DVD, VCR/TiVo and cable decoder... that they will then control.
Every time you place a DVD or VCR that you own or have rented in the devices that you bought, Disney will decide whether you are allowed to watch it, and how many times. Disney will decide whether you may tape shows to watch later, and how many times you can watch them, or when they will become unwatchable, or even if you can watch them at all.
They will assume that you are a thief, and they will stop you from watching anything that you cannot absolutely prove that you have paid for. If there is any doubt, your screen will go blank, and you will have no right of reply, or opportunity to prove your innocence.
And the best part is that they will make you pay for the new hardware that will enable this.
The thing that occurs to me is "who gets the key to the backdoor?"
If this is only going to be US-based software that has the backdoor, then it is obviously pointless, which means for it to be effective against un-backdoored communications, every country in the world would have to go along with it...
Are these other countries going to let the US be the only one to have keys to every communication in the world? Of course not!... which means that these other countries must have the key too. So, we have every government in the world with the one key that cracks the backdoor of every communication in the world, which means that (for instance) the leaders of Afghanistan could read every single communication in the US as well as the inverse. Is this really what the government wants? If not, then it's not worth going after.
What I would propose is a sort of Handshaking for spam free e-mail. Three transactions would be required.
1) Sender sends the message.
2) Receiver sends back a small packet verifing receipt.
3) Sender sends back another small packet to verify that the receipt was recieved.
One other nice thing about this idea is it could pretty much eliminate the forged headers - if they put a fake return path then you'd never get the confirmation because they'd never receive the request for it..
If you don't like the EULA, just change it...
on
EULA In Games
·
· Score: 1
Seriously, I have seen some places where you can actually change the EULA before clicking "Agree" and it will accept it. Once I even changed it to something like "Company will pay the user $1000", and then pressed agree. Obviously they aren't storing those changes anywhere, since I never received my $1000, but if anyone asks I could honestly say "nope, I never agreed to their terms." [Note: These mistakes are much more likely to be found for websites which have a EULA than installed software.]
What I want to do, is that REM sleep (to me atleast, this isn't a fact, just my BS) is simplair to an LSD trip. What I would like to test, if have some one (I would do it!) study and work like normal, but at night instead of 8 hours sleep, do 2 hours sleep and then take LSD for the other time. Do a before and after type of thing. Get some material, some subject, it doesn't matter what, lets say LISP or small talk. And in the "normal" (without LSD), find a way to judge how much one learns during this time. Then during the "trip" days find a way to judge how much one learns during the time.
Actually, IIRC, LSD was originally a military experiment to create something which would allow soldiers to operate without sleep, so your idea may not be as off-the-wall as you might think..
One of the possibilities to consider is that there are life forms on Mars which we do not understand / have knowledge of yet. If there were some sort of life form existing on Mars which has a completely different life system than us (i.e. not carbon-based, possibly not mobile, etc.) we would most likely have no clue that it exists, or even think about the possibility that it might exist. This shouldn't be the major arguement against settling other planets, but it should at least be considered...
While reading some of these comments about the high prices of using cellular phones for internet access, an interesting idea occurred to me. What would happen if cell phones could somehow be hooked up into a network that was not dependant on having one service provider with cell phone towers, etc. In other words, the phones talk with eachother and transmit data around, routing it to the appropriate place, much like the internet is designed.. I don't know what kind of problems this would create with bandwidth, etc, and obviously there would be the privacy concerns with your information going through other peoples' phones, just as there is with it going through other peoples' servers, but wouldn't something like this be interesting? Just some food for thought.
-Trevor
My first reaction when I heard the news that Metallica was going after the people who had shared the files on Napster was complete shock; I thought "What? How can they do this?" But now that the news had time to sink in, what they're doing makes perfect sense.
Let's say you're an musician, and you find out that lots of people are stealing your songs. You feel your rights are being violated, so you want to do something about it. Who should you go after? Does it make sense to go after the service that is supplying the users with the means to share the files, or the users themselves? What's that? Neither, you say? Wrong answer - the law is being broken, your rights are being infringed upon, and nobody is going to do anything about it unless you take some action. So, does it make more sense to go after the service (which has a huge disclaimer, and does not censor any particular songs, and therefore may fall under "common carrier" status), or the users who are putting the songs online, knowing that they will be downloaded by people who aren't entitled to them (and, according to Napster's own licence agreement, are liable for any copyright infringement that occurs)? Get the point? (Yes, I realize they're actually going after both... but since this story is about the "outrage" over them going after the people posting their music online, that's what I'm responding to...)
Oh, and one more thing... "It's targets include many younger children and younger consumers who have no idea their online movements are being tracked, and who certainly have the right to pursue individual cultural interests without worring that they're being watched."
Huh? How is this any different than, say, the mall? A teenager walks into a CD store, grabs a CD, sticks it in his jacket pocket, and walks out the door. The store clerk sees him on the security camera and has the security guards go after him and catch him. His defense? "Oh, I didn't know I would be caught, or else I wouldn't have done it! I should have the right to pursue my musical interests without anyone stopping me from it! You're surpressing my rights!"...yeah, right...
Slashdot Mirror
Did anyone else notice anything odd about the "door" they drilled through? Maybe it was my imagination, but I swear on the one they drilled through it looked like the handles were both the same size. Yet I've always noticed whenever a picture of the door is shown that the handle on the right is significantly longer than the one one the left. Doesn't that seem a bit fishy?
Just for the benefit of anyone who went rushing to get the patch like I did, the patch was released in May of 2000, which means it is over a year old, and they have released SP2 since then which apparently incorporates this fix.
When I read that statement, I couldn't help but think that it sounds sort of like some of those chain letters that circulate around. If someone were to start a chain letter with this sort of content describing what the SSSCA will do and tell them to forward it to 10 people and write their senators or something, it might have interesting results...
I don't see how you can put this without it sounding a little alarmist. Disney wants you to purchase a new TV, DVD, VCR/TiVo and cable decoder... that they will then control. Every time you place a DVD or VCR that you own or have rented in the devices that you bought, Disney will decide whether you are allowed to watch it, and how many times. Disney will decide whether you may tape shows to watch later, and how many times you can watch them, or when they will become unwatchable, or even if you can watch them at all. They will assume that you are a thief, and they will stop you from watching anything that you cannot absolutely prove that you have paid for. If there is any doubt, your screen will go blank, and you will have no right of reply, or opportunity to prove your innocence. And the best part is that they will make you pay for the new hardware that will enable this.
The thing that occurs to me is "who gets the key to the backdoor?"
... which means that these other countries must have the key too. So, we have every government in the world with the one key that cracks the backdoor of every communication in the world, which means that (for instance) the leaders of Afghanistan could read every single communication in the US as well as the inverse. Is this really what the government wants? If not, then it's not worth going after.
If this is only going to be US-based software that has the backdoor, then it is obviously pointless, which means for it to be effective against un-backdoored communications, every country in the world would have to go along with it...
Are these other countries going to let the US be the only one to have keys to every communication in the world? Of course not!
What I would propose is a sort of Handshaking for spam free e-mail. Three transactions would be required.
1) Sender sends the message.
2) Receiver sends back a small packet verifing receipt.
3) Sender sends back another small packet to verify that the receipt was recieved.
One other nice thing about this idea is it could pretty much eliminate the forged headers - if they put a fake return path then you'd never get the confirmation because they'd never receive the request for it..
Seriously, I have seen some places where you can actually change the EULA before clicking "Agree" and it will accept it. Once I even changed it to something like "Company will pay the user $1000", and then pressed agree. Obviously they aren't storing those changes anywhere, since I never received my $1000, but if anyone asks I could honestly say "nope, I never agreed to their terms." [Note: These mistakes are much more likely to be found for websites which have a EULA than installed software.]
What I want to do, is that REM sleep (to me atleast, this isn't a fact, just my BS) is simplair to an LSD trip. What I would like to test, if have some one (I would do it!) study and work like normal, but at night instead of 8 hours sleep, do 2 hours sleep and then take LSD for the other time. Do a before and after type of thing. Get some material, some subject, it doesn't matter what, lets say LISP or small talk. And in the "normal" (without LSD), find a way to judge how much one learns during this time. Then during the "trip" days find a way to judge how much one learns during the time.
Actually, IIRC, LSD was originally a military experiment to create something which would allow soldiers to operate without sleep, so your idea may not be as off-the-wall as you might think..
One of the possibilities to consider is that there are life forms on Mars which we do not understand / have knowledge of yet. If there were some sort of life form existing on Mars which has a completely different life system than us (i.e. not carbon-based, possibly not mobile, etc.) we would most likely have no clue that it exists, or even think about the possibility that it might exist. This shouldn't be the major arguement against settling other planets, but it should at least be considered...
While reading some of these comments about the high prices of using cellular phones for internet access, an interesting idea occurred to me. What would happen if cell phones could somehow be hooked up into a network that was not dependant on having one service provider with cell phone towers, etc. In other words, the phones talk with eachother and transmit data around, routing it to the appropriate place, much like the internet is designed.. I don't know what kind of problems this would create with bandwidth, etc, and obviously there would be the privacy concerns with your information going through other peoples' phones, just as there is with it going through other peoples' servers, but wouldn't something like this be interesting? Just some food for thought. -Trevor
The way you just described it, MS Office sounds like a virus.... ;-)
My first reaction when I heard the news that Metallica was going after the people who had shared the files on Napster was complete shock; I thought "What? How can they do this?" But now that the news had time to sink in, what they're doing makes perfect sense.
...yeah, right...
Let's say you're an musician, and you find out that lots of people are stealing your songs. You feel your rights are being violated, so you want to do something about it. Who should you go after? Does it make sense to go after the service that is supplying the users with the means to share the files, or the users themselves? What's that? Neither, you say? Wrong answer - the law is being broken, your rights are being infringed upon, and nobody is going to do anything about it unless you take some action. So, does it make more sense to go after the service (which has a huge disclaimer, and does not censor any particular songs, and therefore may fall under "common carrier" status), or the users who are putting the songs online, knowing that they will be downloaded by people who aren't entitled to them (and, according to Napster's own licence agreement, are liable for any copyright infringement that occurs)? Get the point? (Yes, I realize they're actually going after both... but since this story is about the "outrage" over them going after the people posting their music online, that's what I'm responding to...)
Oh, and one more thing...
"It's targets include many younger children and younger consumers who have no idea their online movements are being tracked, and who certainly have the right to pursue individual cultural interests without worring that they're being watched."
Huh? How is this any different than, say, the mall? A teenager walks into a CD store, grabs a CD, sticks it in his jacket pocket, and walks out the door. The store clerk sees him on the security camera and has the security guards go after him and catch him. His defense? "Oh, I didn't know I would be caught, or else I wouldn't have done it! I should have the right to pursue my musical interests without anyone stopping me from it! You're surpressing my rights!"
-Trevor