Sounds like a new way to steal items from the supermarket, as soon as they come out with their cart at a time checkout, you just carry around a device to kill the signal on some of your more expensive, harder to notice items (say razorblades)... Or, if you are against the devices, in an act of civil disobedience kill the signal on everything in the store...
By your logic, if anyone claims that you have murdered a child, they can force you into court, with no evidence at all. No, it doesn't work that way, you have to have reasonable cause to force someone into court. But I think you said it yourself. You do not have to prove yourself innocent, someone else has to prove that you are guilty. Now lets take this particular case: the domains are not identical or confusing. The plaintiff has failed to prove guilt. The defendant doesn't have to prove anything. Possession (in this case, of the domain), is 9/10 of the law.
Domain names in the.com,.net, and.org domains can now be registered
with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
for detailed information.
No match for "SLASHDOTSUCKS.COM".
>>> Last update of whois database: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 09:24:01 EST
The Registry database contains ONLY.COM,.NET,.ORG,.EDU domains and
Registrars.
The domains were not confusingly similar. He shouldn't have to respond, no more than slashdot should have to respond to a charge that they are cybersquatting on a domain confusingly similar to microsoft.
I know the owner of typu.com, but he got it in one of his drunken nights of surfing stupidity and has no idea what to use it for. Any ideas? Is this typosquatting?
I have no problem with typo squatting as a whole, but there are a dozen Slashdot typo sites, one of which frames Slashdot with a 2nd banner ad. Now I don't care... but this fools about 1 person every 2-3 days, and they flame me for selling out and doing something so horrible as framing Slashdot for extra ad space. So I guess typo sites that frame the site are pretty slimey, but as long as the typo site provides a link to the correct site, I'm totally cool with 'em.
The Journal also reported that electronic logs showed that the internal passwords had been used to transfer source code outside Microsoft's Redmond headquarters. That was denied by Schmidt in his account to the Times, who said there was no such record of a transfer, and that it was highly unlikely the intruder did more than get a brief look at the code.
There must be a shortage of floppy disks. I used to get free ones in the mail every week. Now all I get is these weird looking coasters.
Re:Libertarianism the new Republicism bur more evi
on
Should You Vote?
·
· Score: 1
Nader opposes the "maximum wage" tax. See this article. Of the GPUSA's plans to scrap the Senate and impose a 100 percent tax on all income over 10 times the minimum wage, he says: "I don't like those two positions. . . . I'm adopting positions that disagree with some positions of the Green Party USA."
Re:The Middle Class' Best Interest is to Vote Nade
on
Should You Vote?
·
· Score: 1
read the facts in this washington post article. Nader is not a member of The Green Party USA. He is a member of the Association of State Green Parties. He opposes the maximum wage. I do not know off hand his position on the other two issues you mention.
The Green Party USA (GPUSA), which calls itself "the original Green Party organization in the USA," traces its history to 1984, 12 years before the Association of State Green Parties (ASGP) formed. But Nader, who is not a Green Party member, says he doesn't "really pay much attention" to the older, more radical party's platform.
Of the GPUSA's plans to scrap the Senate and impose a 100 percent tax on all income over 10 times the minimum wage, he says: "I don't like those two positions. . . . I'm adopting positions that disagree with some positions of the Green Party USA. I'm not for the abolition of the Senate. There's so many bad things going through Congress I want two opportunities to stop them." Taxing a maximum wage, meanwhile, he dismisses as "not comprehensive enough. If you really want to have a tax on wealth, have a tax on wealth."
How, exactly, can corporations oppress people? If WalMart won't sell you the CD you want, then CDNow will. If CDNow won't, then Amazon will. Or Target. Or KMart. Or Hemp Nation CD Sales. Someone will want your money and will sell you the CD.
Easy, control of the media. Browne wants to abolish all government control over the airwaves. The biggest corporations will then control your news and entertainment without any regulations as to what they can do with it. Corporations already control the major networks enough to exclude Nader from the debates, even though over 50% of the country wants him in them. Corporations already control the media enough, and they are starting to gain control of the internet. Browne wants to abolish all government control over the internet. When Microsoft/AOL/Time/Warner/Disney obtains 99% control over the internet (less than 1% of the U.S. connects to the internet without using one of their products, and products used by the other 1% can easily be bought), who is going to stop them from shutting off access to any site which doesn't exist to continue their assimilation? No one. I'm probably voting Nader, the lesser of 5 evils.
The problem with the "waste your vote" debate is that you "waste your vote", in the sense that you do not affect the outcome, *any* time you vote for a candidate that does not win by a single vote in both your state, and the electoral college. So, while Nader or Buchanan may have a one in a million chance of winning, Bush and Gore have a one in 100 billion chance of winning by only a single vote. If you vote for any reason, it should be to send a message, not to actually affect the outcome. Chances are you won't do either, but you're more likely to put Nader over the 10% he needs for matching funds next year then you are for affecting the Bush/Gore race.
Personal Issues
-------- ------
1) Military service should be voluntary. (No draft) should say
1) Abolosh all U.S. military except the National Guard
2) Government should not control radio, TV, the press or the Internet should read
2) Sell the airwaves and the Internet to the highest bidder.
3) Repeal regulations on sex for consenting adults should read
3) Repeal regulations on sex for consenting adults.
4) Drug laws do more harm than good. Repeal them should read
4) Drug laws do more harm than good. Repeal them.
5) People should be free to come and go across borders; to live and work where they choose should read
5) People should be free to come and go across borders; to live and work where they choose
Economic Issues
-------- ------
1) Businesses and farms should operate without govt. subsidies should read
1) Large corporate farms should be permitted to put mom and pop farmers out of business
2) People are better off with free trade than with tariffs should read
2) Allow countries with child labor and forced labor to freely exchange the products of this labor with the United States. Allow U.S. corporations to replace American workers with slaves.
3) Minimum wage laws cause unemployment. Repeal them should read
3) Minimum wage laws cause unemployment. Repeal them.
4) End taxes. Pay for services with user fees should read
4) End taxes. Auction off government services to the highest bidder. Those without money can fend for themselves, with the concealed uzis that are legalized.
5) All foreign aid should be privately funded should read
5) All foreign aid should be privately funded.
A true libertarian would still vote "yes" on all these issues.
If a candidate has not qualified for the election in your state, your write in for her will not count. Otherwise, what if Joe Walsh did win? How would we know which Joe Walsh people meant?
The chances of your single vote changing the election are less than 1 in 100 billion, less than your chances of being killed on the way to the election. Besides, wouldn't it be cooler if you don't vote, and there was a tie! If you vote, don't do it to change the results, do it because you want to give support to the candidate of your choice. That means vote for whoever is eligible that you like best, not only those who have a chance of winning (since no one has a chance of winning except the person who wins).
The number of bits per second was static, and it wasn't increasing; meanwhile, processing power was expanding geometrically, logarithmically, explosively - Al Gore as quoted in RollingStone.com article
Gee, I'm sure no one has ever tried to find prior art on *that* patent before.
Re:Anonymous speech is not NECESSARILY a right.
on
Anonymity
·
· Score: 1
However, commercial or civil speech is (for better or ill) judged differently than political speech. If I post a message saying "Signal11 is a child-eating babyrapist!" anonymously, ought I be able to hide behind anonymity in order to evade a slander/libel suit? Does my right to anonymous speech outweigh Sig's right to defend his good name in a socially-proscribed manner (namely, challenging me to prove my assertion in court)?
Yes. But more interestingly, can you slander/libel an anonymous/psudonymous entity, such as Signal11?
One of the main arguments against casinos is the environment that they create in the towns that they run in. While many people don't mind visiting the Boardwalk and Park Place, not many want to live on Baltic Avenue. The internet changes all of this, and if the states can find a way to extract taxes from these businesses (even if they're operating in another state), you can be sure they will.
read his post again, he said "for each 1GB shot, you can download the image to disk and shoot some more". This would be for after the first capture, before the second.
Slashdot Mirror
this type of id would be harder to tear off compared to the various tags they have now
Actually, it would be much easier to carry around an RF-jammer. You wouldn't have to "tear" anything.
Sounds like a new way to steal items from the supermarket, as soon as they come out with their cart at a time checkout, you just carry around a device to kill the signal on some of your more expensive, harder to notice items (say razorblades)... Or, if you are against the devices, in an act of civil disobedience kill the signal on everything in the store...
By your logic, if anyone claims that you have murdered a child, they can force you into court, with no evidence at all. No, it doesn't work that way, you have to have reasonable cause to force someone into court. But I think you said it yourself. You do not have to prove yourself innocent, someone else has to prove that you are guilty. Now lets take this particular case: the domains are not identical or confusing. The plaintiff has failed to prove guilt. The defendant doesn't have to prove anything. Possession (in this case, of the domain), is 9/10 of the law.
$ whois slashdotsucks.com
.com, .net, and .org domains can now be registered
.COM, .NET, .ORG, .EDU domains and
[whois.internic.net]
Whois Server Version 1.3
Domain names in the
with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
for detailed information.
No match for "SLASHDOTSUCKS.COM".
>>> Last update of whois database: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 09:24:01 EST
The Registry database contains ONLY
Registrars.
The domains were not confusingly similar. He shouldn't have to respond, no more than slashdot should have to respond to a charge that they are cybersquatting on a domain confusingly similar to microsoft.
I wonder when someone is going to get onaoderyvjrm, slashdot.com typed on a dvorak keyboard...
I know the owner of typu.com, but he got it in one of his drunken nights of surfing stupidity and has no idea what to use it for. Any ideas? Is this typosquatting?
I have no problem with typo squatting as a whole, but there are a dozen Slashdot typo sites, one of which frames Slashdot with a 2nd banner ad. Now I don't care ... but this fools about 1 person every 2-3 days, and they flame me for selling out and doing something so horrible as framing Slashdot for extra ad space. So I guess typo sites that frame the site are pretty slimey, but as long as the typo site provides a link to the correct site, I'm totally cool with 'em.
The Journal also reported that electronic logs showed that the internal passwords had been used to transfer source code outside Microsoft's Redmond headquarters. That was denied by Schmidt in his account to the Times, who said there was no such record of a transfer, and that it was highly unlikely the intruder did more than get a brief look at the code.
Stupid cracker, why didn't you use scroll lock!
There must be a shortage of floppy disks. I used to get free ones in the mail every week. Now all I get is these weird looking coasters.
Nader opposes the "maximum wage" tax. See this article. Of the GPUSA's plans to scrap the Senate and impose a 100 percent tax on all income over 10 times the minimum wage, he says: "I don't like those two positions. . . . I'm adopting positions that disagree with some positions of the Green Party USA."
read the facts in this washington post article. Nader is not a member of The Green Party USA. He is a member of the Association of State Green Parties. He opposes the maximum wage. I do not know off hand his position on the other two issues you mention.
Nader is against the maximum wage.
The Green Party USA (GPUSA), which calls itself "the original Green Party organization in the USA," traces its history to 1984, 12 years before the Association of State Green Parties (ASGP) formed. But Nader, who is not a Green Party member, says he doesn't "really pay much attention" to the older, more radical party's platform. Of the GPUSA's plans to scrap the Senate and impose a 100 percent tax on all income over 10 times the minimum wage, he says: "I don't like those two positions. . . . I'm adopting positions that disagree with some positions of the Green Party USA. I'm not for the abolition of the Senate. There's so many bad things going through Congress I want two opportunities to stop them." Taxing a maximum wage, meanwhile, he dismisses as "not comprehensive enough. If you really want to have a tax on wealth, have a tax on wealth."
How, exactly, can corporations oppress people? If WalMart won't sell you the CD you want, then CDNow will. If CDNow won't, then Amazon will. Or Target. Or KMart. Or Hemp Nation CD Sales. Someone will want your money and will sell you the CD.
Easy, control of the media. Browne wants to abolish all government control over the airwaves. The biggest corporations will then control your news and entertainment without any regulations as to what they can do with it. Corporations already control the major networks enough to exclude Nader from the debates, even though over 50% of the country wants him in them. Corporations already control the media enough, and they are starting to gain control of the internet. Browne wants to abolish all government control over the internet. When Microsoft/AOL/Time/Warner/Disney obtains 99% control over the internet (less than 1% of the U.S. connects to the internet without using one of their products, and products used by the other 1% can easily be bought), who is going to stop them from shutting off access to any site which doesn't exist to continue their assimilation? No one. I'm probably voting Nader, the lesser of 5 evils.
The problem with the "waste your vote" debate is that you "waste your vote", in the sense that you do not affect the outcome, *any* time you vote for a candidate that does not win by a single vote in both your state, and the electoral college. So, while Nader or Buchanan may have a one in a million chance of winning, Bush and Gore have a one in 100 billion chance of winning by only a single vote. If you vote for any reason, it should be to send a message, not to actually affect the outcome. Chances are you won't do either, but you're more likely to put Nader over the 10% he needs for matching funds next year then you are for affecting the Bush/Gore race.
Personal Issues
-------- ------
1) Military service should be voluntary. (No draft) should say
1) Abolosh all U.S. military except the National Guard
2) Government should not control radio, TV, the press or the Internet should read
2) Sell the airwaves and the Internet to the highest bidder.
3) Repeal regulations on sex for consenting adults should read
3) Repeal regulations on sex for consenting adults.
4) Drug laws do more harm than good. Repeal them should read
4) Drug laws do more harm than good. Repeal them.
5) People should be free to come and go across borders; to live and work where they choose should read
5) People should be free to come and go across borders; to live and work where they choose
Economic Issues
-------- ------
1) Businesses and farms should operate without govt. subsidies should read
1) Large corporate farms should be permitted to put mom and pop farmers out of business
2) People are better off with free trade than with tariffs should read
2) Allow countries with child labor and forced labor to freely exchange the products of this labor with the United States. Allow U.S. corporations to replace American workers with slaves.
3) Minimum wage laws cause unemployment. Repeal them should read
3) Minimum wage laws cause unemployment. Repeal them.
4) End taxes. Pay for services with user fees should read
4) End taxes. Auction off government services to the highest bidder. Those without money can fend for themselves, with the concealed uzis that are legalized.
5) All foreign aid should be privately funded should read
5) All foreign aid should be privately funded.
A true libertarian would still vote "yes" on all these issues.
If a candidate has not qualified for the election in your state, your write in for her will not count. Otherwise, what if Joe Walsh did win? How would we know which Joe Walsh people meant?
The chances of your single vote changing the election are less than 1 in 100 billion, less than your chances of being killed on the way to the election. Besides, wouldn't it be cooler if you don't vote, and there was a tie! If you vote, don't do it to change the results, do it because you want to give support to the candidate of your choice. That means vote for whoever is eligible that you like best, not only those who have a chance of winning (since no one has a chance of winning except the person who wins).
sure, it may help you decide libertarian. the questions are rigged. Do you believe in freedom? Yes? You are a libertarian!!!
The number of bits per second was static, and it wasn't increasing; meanwhile, processing power was expanding geometrically, logarithmically, explosively - Al Gore as quoted in RollingStone.com article
Wow, Al, logarithmic growth, now there's speed.
Gee, I'm sure no one has ever tried to find prior art on *that* patent before.
However, commercial or civil speech is (for better or ill) judged differently than political speech. If I post a message saying "Signal11 is a child-eating babyrapist!" anonymously, ought I be able to hide behind anonymity in order to evade a slander/libel suit? Does my right to anonymous speech outweigh Sig's right to defend his good name in a socially-proscribed manner (namely, challenging me to prove my assertion in court)?
Yes. But more interestingly, can you slander/libel an anonymous/psudonymous entity, such as Signal11?
I hereby patent reading this post without moderating me up. Being that I haven't posted it yet, there can be no prior art.
One of the main arguments against casinos is the environment that they create in the towns that they run in. While many people don't mind visiting the Boardwalk and Park Place, not many want to live on Baltic Avenue. The internet changes all of this, and if the states can find a way to extract taxes from these businesses (even if they're operating in another state), you can be sure they will.
read his post again, he said "for each 1GB shot, you can download the image to disk and shoot some more". This would be for after the first capture, before the second.