No. You are wrong. Minimum contacts are certainly not satisfied by having a web server on another country.
Yes, you do get to ignore a US court because you do not live in the US. Good luck BTW for collecting that judgment, as it has no force outside the US.:P
No. They didn't break RSA or CAST5 or 3DES. That would be way bigger news than this and nobody would try to keep it secret but risk leaking the news of the break by leaking something like this.
I actually liked Alice's 3D more than Avatar's. Granted, it was somewhat parallax (with only a few levels used at least in some places), but it was overall way more deep. Avatar's 3D effect was to me a bit shallow, it could have been deeper, but then I wonder if that would have caused more people to have nausea. Seems natural to me though: When you film in 3D, I'd guess it's much harder to get stuff that comes way out of the screen.
Finally, last but not least, circumstantially, crazy/insane people seem to encounter more unreproducible bugs than typical people. Don't know if they're more ornery so the tend to report more, or more creative so they tend to find more, but I do know they're a pain to deal with.
I think I'm one of these. Perhaps I do lots of weird things with my computer that nobody else does, but I don't think it's all explained by that. It's more like software hates me and somehow in a murphyesque way just breaks every chance it gets. Both in reproducible and unreproducible ways.
One day I realized that can be an advantage too, especially since I can usually debug the problems and when I can't, I can usually help the people who can (but can't reproduce it). If software tends to break in your hands no matter what you do, consider becoming a tester. I'm interested in testing too, but the way software seems to hate me is for me the big inspiration to my theoretical computer science major and focus on software verification. I've observed that software that has been proven correct (to some specification) tends to break at least slightly less often.
I agree. The comfort is the reason why I use dvorak, and I hate it when I need to use qwerty. OTOH I still prefer the physical keys in qwerty layout for the occasional case when I need to use qwerty (I don't need to look at the keyboard when typing with dvorak). The only case where this is not optimal is where I'd like to type with only one hand, so I'm considering getting some stickers to show also the dvorak layout.
As to speed, I haven't done any measurements, but my general feeling is that I type perhaps a little bit faster with dvorak, but nothing significant. But it's definitely worth for the comfort.
It's funny though how the people who are so eager to say there's no advantage to dvorak are invariably those that never tried it. (I do think that dvorak is not optimal either, it might make sense to choose some even better layout.)
Well, when they upload the song once, the way Internet currently works, exactly (or at most) one recipient gets it. Surely they should only liable for the copies they made themselves (i.e. the times they uploaded it), and the recipients for the copies they made further?
Curiously especially uneducated Americans who have never been outside US usually seem to think it's better to live in absolute poverty in the US than in any other place in the world. Such is the brainwashing in American schools.
The ones that annoy me are those in the pdf viewing pages. Instead of giving links to pdfs I get links to pages with small frames with embedded pdfs. If I read court opinions or such, I'd much rather view them fullscreen, without ads eating 20% of my precious screen estate, and in a PDF reader, not embedded in a small frame in a browser. Well, when it annoyed me enough, I found a Firefox plugin that lets you rewrite urls, so I just use that to rewrite the ad page + frame urls to the pdf urls.
You mean you would be willing to give costa ricans 200 year patentability in the US if their law grants patents for 200 years? I guess that would be quite profitable for Costa Rica, but for some reason you seem to believe the terms are for the US to decide. Which is absolute rubbish.
There is no natural God-given right for developed countries to first import slaves from developing countries, then make them slaves in their own countries making running shoes, and then when they finally start to get on their own feet, tell them they cannot make and give aids and malaria drugs to their own citizens because "we invented them first". It's a very modern idea that you can dictate to another government that they cannot medicate their own citizens with whatever means they have domestically available. And it's also idiotic.
This is one of the (admittedly very few) aspects where your constitution is a lot worse than the state of affairs we have in most of Europe. It doesn't have any privacy protection built in, since that was not a problem in the late 1700s, and freedom of speech is built in, so it always trumps any privacy concerns as long as the speech is truthful.
Fanatics who worship the founding fathers religiously of course claim this is as it should be (and the constitution is just perfect, wahwah...), but seriously, I see perp walks as an even worse offense of the very same kind. I do believe most Europeans do have a reason to be a bit envious for your constitution, but it's seriously starting to show its old age. And really 200+ years is a very honorable age for any piece of legislation, you shouldn't be ashamed that it doesn't fit modern needs!
This is an aspect in at least FSF's reasoning when claiming they need to have copyrights assigned to them that I've never been able to understand.
Why the assertion that you need to be a major copyright holder or get permission from everyone to be able to enforce your copyright? That just doesn't seem to be the case to me, but then IANAL (but I do consider myself knowledgeable on this subject). It seems to me that you can enforce your copyright in a court, no matter how minor your contribution, as long as it is complex enough to be considered a work.
You don't need to launch the lawsuit anyway. They are the ones who think you owe them money, so if they want their money, they launch the lawsuit, not you. Unfortunately the US legal system is so broken that it's impossible to defend yourself without going bankrupt, but that's something you should take up with your government, not Verizon. (How is it that in _no_ other country I know of lawsuits are so ridiculously expensive?)
Maybe. Except things like Firewire (and some USB controllers) allow a device to read all the memory, so they are practically operating system agnostic. They can just grab a live memory image of your Hurd running, which will contain the hard drive crypto key (the only really interesting piece of information I can think of, if your HDD is not encrypted, you don't have much privacy anyway).
So it's, after all, not that much different from a voting system where your name is printed on the ballot. Sure, the authorities can decide to keep that secret too. However any voting system that needs to rely on that is much worse than the plain old paper system.
And the old system is verified just as well. The verification comes from the ballot handling and counting being done together by a group of diverse people, at least one person for each candidate, so they don't have the motivation to collude to commit fraud.
Mod parent up. These are all legit deficiencies in ZFS that really need to be fixed at some point.
Only if it's costworthy. For a case I know about XFS lacks filesystem shrinking too, and it has been asked for many times. It has been estimated that it would take months for a skilled XFS engineer to code. If it's so important that someone is willing to put up that money (or effort), it may happen; otherwise it will not. I'm sure the same applies to ZFS.
But then you could just use your magic SHA-256 breaking skillz to divert bank transactions and many outright vital things in commerce and communications, so it seems to me that replacing the contents of a file on some file system would be petty crime compared to that.
No. We're talking about such amounts of data needed that there's no conceivable way now or in the near (1000-year) future that such a collision would be found by accident, and even after that only on some supercomputer that is larger than earth and is powered by its own sun. It's not going to happen by accident. The probabilities are just so much against it, given any conceivable amount of data - and there are elementary limits that come from physics that cannot be surpassed. Moore's law will stop working sooner or later, and then the humanity will not be much closer to finding an SHA-256 collision by accident.
The only realistic way you're going to have a hash collision is malice (or perhaps fate or divine intervention, if you believe in such). That's not anywhere near realistic actually now, but if a significant weakness would be found on SHA-256, it could become a possibility one day (and judging from history I'd say it's probable it will be broken sooner or later). An attacker that can store a file on your filesystem can then replace your precious data with crafted data with the same hash.
Some other smaller attack vectors come to mind though, depending on how it's implemented. If the deduplication shows on filesystem usage, an attacker could use it to check if you have a certain block of data on the filesystem (in a file inaccessible to him). For example.
It wouldn't work at all. Nearly all voip, and I'm sure Skype is no exception, uses lossy compression for the audio. If you stuff encrypted data in, you'll just get garbage out.
I doubt that. If the binary part is the codec+protocol, good luck trying to stuff anything except audio (and preferably voice then) through it. Lossy compression works poorly for encrypted data.
Bullshit. Words are not "owned" by people who used them first.
Open source, decapitalized, has gained a widely accepted meaning, and only a small vocal minority tries to claim that it's somehow different from Open Source. This tends to be the same crowd that has strange opinions about the differences of open source and free software (other than the philosophies), often claiming that some open source license is not a free software license or vice versa.
You are aware that those assumptions make your code inherently unportable, aren't you?
Not only long, but assuming that int has 32 bits. I agree it may be misguided, but int is defined to be (usually the most efficient) integer data type with at least 16 bits.
Well, the same NPT stipulates that the existing nuclear powers are to strive towards total nuclear dearmament. That hasn't happened, so it's really hard to see much more validity in that treaty anymore than the right of the strongest to bully the weakest to compliance.
Slashdot Mirror
No. You are wrong. Minimum contacts are certainly not satisfied by having a web server on another country.
Yes, you do get to ignore a US court because you do not live in the US. Good luck BTW for collecting that judgment, as it has no force outside the US. :P
Do you think they would have flown "further north" to the Arctic through Swedish, Norwegian or Russian airspace?
No. They didn't break RSA or CAST5 or 3DES. That would be way bigger news than this and nobody would try to keep it secret but risk leaking the news of the break by leaking something like this.
I actually liked Alice's 3D more than Avatar's. Granted, it was somewhat parallax (with only a few levels used at least in some places), but it was overall way more deep. Avatar's 3D effect was to me a bit shallow, it could have been deeper, but then I wonder if that would have caused more people to have nausea. Seems natural to me though: When you film in 3D, I'd guess it's much harder to get stuff that comes way out of the screen.
Finally, last but not least, circumstantially, crazy/insane people seem to encounter more unreproducible bugs than typical people. Don't know if they're more ornery so the tend to report more, or more creative so they tend to find more, but I do know they're a pain to deal with.
I think I'm one of these. Perhaps I do lots of weird things with my computer that nobody else does, but I don't think it's all explained by that. It's more like software hates me and somehow in a murphyesque way just breaks every chance it gets. Both in reproducible and unreproducible ways.
One day I realized that can be an advantage too, especially since I can usually debug the problems and when I can't, I can usually help the people who can (but can't reproduce it). If software tends to break in your hands no matter what you do, consider becoming a tester. I'm interested in testing too, but the way software seems to hate me is for me the big inspiration to my theoretical computer science major and focus on software verification. I've observed that software that has been proven correct (to some specification) tends to break at least slightly less often.
I agree. The comfort is the reason why I use dvorak, and I hate it when I need to use qwerty. OTOH I still prefer the physical keys in qwerty layout for the occasional case when I need to use qwerty (I don't need to look at the keyboard when typing with dvorak). The only case where this is not optimal is where I'd like to type with only one hand, so I'm considering getting some stickers to show also the dvorak layout.
As to speed, I haven't done any measurements, but my general feeling is that I type perhaps a little bit faster with dvorak, but nothing significant. But it's definitely worth for the comfort.
It's funny though how the people who are so eager to say there's no advantage to dvorak are invariably those that never tried it. (I do think that dvorak is not optimal either, it might make sense to choose some even better layout.)
Well, when they upload the song once, the way Internet currently works, exactly (or at most) one recipient gets it. Surely they should only liable for the copies they made themselves (i.e. the times they uploaded it), and the recipients for the copies they made further?
Curiously especially uneducated Americans who have never been outside US usually seem to think it's better to live in absolute poverty in the US than in any other place in the world. Such is the brainwashing in American schools.
The ones that annoy me are those in the pdf viewing pages. Instead of giving links to pdfs I get links to pages with small frames with embedded pdfs. If I read court opinions or such, I'd much rather view them fullscreen, without ads eating 20% of my precious screen estate, and in a PDF reader, not embedded in a small frame in a browser. Well, when it annoyed me enough, I found a Firefox plugin that lets you rewrite urls, so I just use that to rewrite the ad page + frame urls to the pdf urls.
You mean you would be willing to give costa ricans 200 year patentability in the US if their law grants patents for 200 years? I guess that would be quite profitable for Costa Rica, but for some reason you seem to believe the terms are for the US to decide. Which is absolute rubbish.
There is no natural God-given right for developed countries to first import slaves from developing countries, then make them slaves in their own countries making running shoes, and then when they finally start to get on their own feet, tell them they cannot make and give aids and malaria drugs to their own citizens because "we invented them first". It's a very modern idea that you can dictate to another government that they cannot medicate their own citizens with whatever means they have domestically available. And it's also idiotic.
This is one of the (admittedly very few) aspects where your constitution is a lot worse than the state of affairs we have in most of Europe. It doesn't have any privacy protection built in, since that was not a problem in the late 1700s, and freedom of speech is built in, so it always trumps any privacy concerns as long as the speech is truthful.
Fanatics who worship the founding fathers religiously of course claim this is as it should be (and the constitution is just perfect, wahwah...), but seriously, I see perp walks as an even worse offense of the very same kind. I do believe most Europeans do have a reason to be a bit envious for your constitution, but it's seriously starting to show its old age. And really 200+ years is a very honorable age for any piece of legislation, you shouldn't be ashamed that it doesn't fit modern needs!
Then isn't that enough to enforce it? Where does your copyright come into picture? He's enforcing his copyright, not yours.
This is an aspect in at least FSF's reasoning when claiming they need to have copyrights assigned to them that I've never been able to understand.
Why the assertion that you need to be a major copyright holder or get permission from everyone to be able to enforce your copyright? That just doesn't seem to be the case to me, but then IANAL (but I do consider myself knowledgeable on this subject). It seems to me that you can enforce your copyright in a court, no matter how minor your contribution, as long as it is complex enough to be considered a work.
You don't need to launch the lawsuit anyway. They are the ones who think you owe them money, so if they want their money, they launch the lawsuit, not you. Unfortunately the US legal system is so broken that it's impossible to defend yourself without going bankrupt, but that's something you should take up with your government, not Verizon. (How is it that in _no_ other country I know of lawsuits are so ridiculously expensive?)
Maybe. Except things like Firewire (and some USB controllers) allow a device to read all the memory, so they are practically operating system agnostic. They can just grab a live memory image of your Hurd running, which will contain the hard drive crypto key (the only really interesting piece of information I can think of, if your HDD is not encrypted, you don't have much privacy anyway).
So the tyrant can just come one day and unlock it and see who voted whom. No problem at all?
So it's, after all, not that much different from a voting system where your name is printed on the ballot. Sure, the authorities can decide to keep that secret too. However any voting system that needs to rely on that is much worse than the plain old paper system.
And the old system is verified just as well. The verification comes from the ballot handling and counting being done together by a group of diverse people, at least one person for each candidate, so they don't have the motivation to collude to commit fraud.
Another hyped e-voting system that is no good.
Mod parent up. These are all legit deficiencies in ZFS that really need to be fixed at some point.
Only if it's costworthy. For a case I know about XFS lacks filesystem shrinking too, and it has been asked for many times. It has been estimated that it would take months for a skilled XFS engineer to code. If it's so important that someone is willing to put up that money (or effort), it may happen; otherwise it will not. I'm sure the same applies to ZFS.
But then you could just use your magic SHA-256 breaking skillz to divert bank transactions and many outright vital things in commerce and communications, so it seems to me that replacing the contents of a file on some file system would be petty crime compared to that.
No. We're talking about such amounts of data needed that there's no conceivable way now or in the near (1000-year) future that such a collision would be found by accident, and even after that only on some supercomputer that is larger than earth and is powered by its own sun. It's not going to happen by accident. The probabilities are just so much against it, given any conceivable amount of data - and there are elementary limits that come from physics that cannot be surpassed. Moore's law will stop working sooner or later, and then the humanity will not be much closer to finding an SHA-256 collision by accident.
The only realistic way you're going to have a hash collision is malice (or perhaps fate or divine intervention, if you believe in such). That's not anywhere near realistic actually now, but if a significant weakness would be found on SHA-256, it could become a possibility one day (and judging from history I'd say it's probable it will be broken sooner or later). An attacker that can store a file on your filesystem can then replace your precious data with crafted data with the same hash.
Some other smaller attack vectors come to mind though, depending on how it's implemented. If the deduplication shows on filesystem usage, an attacker could use it to check if you have a certain block of data on the filesystem (in a file inaccessible to him). For example.
It wouldn't work at all. Nearly all voip, and I'm sure Skype is no exception, uses lossy compression for the audio. If you stuff encrypted data in, you'll just get garbage out.
I doubt that. If the binary part is the codec+protocol, good luck trying to stuff anything except audio (and preferably voice then) through it. Lossy compression works poorly for encrypted data.
Bullshit. Words are not "owned" by people who used them first.
Open source, decapitalized, has gained a widely accepted meaning, and only a small vocal minority tries to claim that it's somehow different from Open Source. This tends to be the same crowd that has strange opinions about the differences of open source and free software (other than the philosophies), often claiming that some open source license is not a free software license or vice versa.
All that is pure bullshit.
You are aware that those assumptions make your code inherently unportable, aren't you?
Not only long, but assuming that int has 32 bits. I agree it may be misguided, but int is defined to be (usually the most efficient) integer data type with at least 16 bits.
Well, the same NPT stipulates that the existing nuclear powers are to strive towards total nuclear dearmament. That hasn't happened, so it's really hard to see much more validity in that treaty anymore than the right of the strongest to bully the weakest to compliance.