Yes, Internet presents a technology for transmission of information and connecting people. But that's not the only thing that makes the Internet. It's not just the technology behind it. It's a phenomena, which encompasses the Internet community. While the technology isn't a human right, what it brings should be.
Just like the press. The press isn't a technology that refers to the printing press, it's a phenomena.
SOPA is a tool. If it corresponds to something in Belarus, it's the dictatorship itself.
The ban on foreign websites as described is just a use of that tool and, yes, an example of how SOPA might be used.
The possibilities that it opens are frightening, but it's not as bad as what's going on in Belarus already. And the Great Firewall of China might be a better example of how SOPA might be actually used.
Every time I've asked for the key to an unofficial repository, I've been given the short ID, and both the Ubuntu and Debian community seem to suggest this as the way to import the key.
You can't get BASIC for your phone for the same reason you can't get a reasonable BASIC for your average GNU/Linux distro. It's just not that good and it only teaches you bad habits, and in the end - it's just not useful. It's not that good language for the masses as it is advertised, and you can't do much in it.
Why not Python? It's a very easy language in which you can write something significant with the least effort and it has a very steep learning curve. It's easy, it's powerful, and if you ever plan to become a real programmer - it teaches you good programming habits.
That said, I've added CHDK to my Canon camera, and it allows you to extend it with UBASIC scripts. It's one case where a BASIC variant is actually useful, because it's rather easy to implement, and it's used mainly for tasks that are quite suitable for it in their extreme simplicity. Can you give an example - what do you like to script in BASIC on your phone? Maybe you can support BASIC in your app in a way similar to CHDK!
Comparing anti-whalers to nuclear power opponents is disingenuous. The opponents of nuclear power are crying against the dangers and pollution it can cause, ignoring the fact that compared to other energy sources it's relatively safe and clean. Their campaign is self-contradictory.
The anti-whalers are against the killing of these and other species, because they consider this an immoral act the seriousness of which trumps the matters past that. Even if you don't agree with them, you can't say it's not wise. And they do have a point. Whales are species with recognized cognitive abilities. You know what's NOT wise? Hunting them. Do you also realise that whaling is banned by many countries, and part of what the Sea Shepherds are doing is enforcing laws that nobody else is?
It's much more important to select a good candidate when voting, than to just vote. And that's not simply picking the best or the least bad. If there isn't an obviously good candidate that you want to vote for, sometimes the candidate that sends the biggest message, that penalizes those who supported terrible policies or stands against the worst things about the status quo would do.
Did they find planets orbiting a white dwarf at orbits that would have been inside the red giant, did they find planets orbiting a red giant or did they find planets orbiting inside the red giant? Is the star dead or dying? TFA doesn't seem to say anything about the former, and conflicts with TFS about the latter.
You've got to be careful when you're assuming about their reasoning, though. They might not know or realize the speed with which a virus could potentially spread. They might think that if it is released in the USA, it will stay in the USA, somehow magically obeying country borders. This might be because they do not know or care there are other countries in America, or because they think that human deceases can be contained by border control, because of the existence of such control designed for animal pathogens. And it's on the other side of the planet, how could it possibly affect us?
This knowledge *is* potentially dangerous, there's no need to deny that. In this case, however, it's one of the reasons the information should be released -- the chances of creating a vaccine are much higher if it is widely known, and if someone is crazy enough they'd find ways to replicate this research regardless of any censorship attempts. On top of that, a similar virus might naturally form sometime soon, and we shouldn't take that chance.
Can you give an example of something that is different?
Both present a fictional story whose followers hold as dear, which describes a supernatural-like force that has a profound effect on the universe and its inhabitants, and the followers believe in its existence. The story introduces philosophical teachings about good and evil that the followers consider important to their lives, most often more important than their belief in the details of the story. In both cases, most followers have their doubts about the veracity of the story and the existence of the supernatural-like elements, many of them know that it is not true, but are eager to believe in it so much that they knowingly they choose to ignore reality and let their imagination carry them to that fictional world. This most often happens in periods of desperation, or the end of one's life, when they need something to hold on to -- in normal circumstances few give it much thought. In both cases, there are a few who would completely lose their touch with reality and live by their story.
In both cases, the association with the following turns out to be more important than the teachings and beliefs, since most followers either have a vague idea about them or are not really believers, but consider themselves to be a part of the group.
Yes, that's it. I don't understand why would you want to encrypt anything unless you have passphrase support for it, or some other form of secret that makes the encryption do something. If you don't protect the key with a secret, the encryption is no longer an encryption.
Unless you have your phone ask you for a very long passphrase, any encryption is pointless. So you have only three options: 1) Use an encrypted key chain or better full disk encryption with a really long passphrase which is incredibly inconvenient to enter on a phone. 2) Don't store sensitive data to the phone. 3) Don't lose your phone.
That's part of the point. To learn how to clone an extinct species you have to start somewhere, you need to see what's missing. Granted, if you're close you might not necessarily know how close to the real species have you gone, but you will know if the approximation is good enough. After all, every species is an approximation. We no longer remember the mammoths, so any difference wouldn't matter. Who said that the approximation of mammoths that lived back then would be better than the approximation that we will get?
If they were shot, they would be more proof how dangerous nuclear power plants are. The accident would double the victims of nuclear power in the recent decade!
Sorry, reading comprehension fail. I misunderstood what GP meant.
But, again, the same thing stands. Free software developers had a choice of a license, had a choice of distribution terms, they are equal to everyone and these terms are most often in pursuit of fulfilling a good idea. They are encouraging the idea that they believe in, not entities they like or dislike. If they clash with the terms of an app store accidentally, it's not only the developer's fault, neither it is a result of their dislike. And if the terms of the app store are too restrictive maybe it's even a good thing.
Having a vision about how the world should be is not the same as having a favourite football team. Even if your vision has shortcomings.
Certain free software distributors (not authors) try to discourage you from using non-free software in different ways. You might disagree with their agenda or the way they approach the problem, but they are certainly not discouraging you from using things because they don't like someone. They have certain standards, you might disagree with them, but they are not discriminatory towards any entity based on personal feelings. They also have legal troubles in distributing such software, and technological troubles when the source code is missing, which makes anything they do not comparable to what you said. In fact, what you said is so not true that I'm not sure what you're even talking about.
Getting out of the cave a few times a week to hunt is enough to sustain myself. My cave and my stone weapons solve a problem to me, so why care about anything else? If ain't broken, don't fix it.
Yet, Google's suggestion does nothing to address this issue. At least judging from the summary, you'd just add more layers but have more or less the same system. On the top you'd have a few main moderators selected by some possibly unreliable criteria. They would approve smaller subset of moderators depending on their own evaluation.
The world like-minded is especially concerning. If it means thinking critically in the same lines, it's OK. If it means having the same opinions, you have been bubbled - a group of opinions different from the ones you've expected are invisible. What's more, sometimes even a bit of uninformed crazy opinions that show a total lack of reason are also a great contribution. If nothing else, they give you the chance to explain how are they wrong or how they are badly constructe, and given that quite a lot of us are unreasonable people around us, ignoring the unreasonable gives you no chance to address their questions.
I don't see how Slashdot's system is that different. Moderators are selected based on past moderations, and the layers are circular. If others have moderated you nicely, you get to moderate yourself. The internal bias created by this system is not that different than the bias created by a tree system, and I don't see how it's worse.
More important than the system are the rules that are used to judge the quality of the posts. There should be guidelines that outline carefully what is good and what isn't. Of course, Slashdot has that in a sense, and the labels "Insighful", "Informative" discourage voting "+1, Agree", but that apparently is not enough. But the thing that is really missing are higher standards as well as a way to observe these standards.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, Internet presents a technology for transmission of information and connecting people. But that's not the only thing that makes the Internet. It's not just the technology behind it. It's a phenomena, which encompasses the Internet community. While the technology isn't a human right, what it brings should be.
Just like the press. The press isn't a technology that refers to the printing press, it's a phenomena.
Don't use shell expansion like that. It breaks on filenames with spaces, etc.
find . -type f -exec sha256sum {} \; | sort # sha256 is safer because of the birthday paradox
SOPA is a tool. If it corresponds to something in Belarus, it's the dictatorship itself.
The ban on foreign websites as described is just a use of that tool and, yes, an example of how SOPA might be used.
The possibilities that it opens are frightening, but it's not as bad as what's going on in Belarus already. And the Great Firewall of China might be a better example of how SOPA might be actually used.
It does, however, mean that the Internet is filled with guides that advertise an insecure practice that offers an attack vector:
http://blog.edseek.com/archives/2007/03/17/apt-key-gpg-key-import-on-ubuntu-and-debian/
Every time I've asked for the key to an unofficial repository, I've been given the short ID, and both the Ubuntu and Debian community seem to suggest this as the way to import the key.
You can't get BASIC for your phone for the same reason you can't get a reasonable BASIC for your average GNU/Linux distro. It's just not that good and it only teaches you bad habits, and in the end - it's just not useful. It's not that good language for the masses as it is advertised, and you can't do much in it.
Why not Python? It's a very easy language in which you can write something significant with the least effort and it has a very steep learning curve. It's easy, it's powerful, and if you ever plan to become a real programmer - it teaches you good programming habits.
That said, I've added CHDK to my Canon camera, and it allows you to extend it with UBASIC scripts. It's one case where a BASIC variant is actually useful, because it's rather easy to implement, and it's used mainly for tasks that are quite suitable for it in their extreme simplicity. Can you give an example - what do you like to script in BASIC on your phone? Maybe you can support BASIC in your app in a way similar to CHDK!
Your argument ignores this amazing thing called "progress". Calling solar and wind "pipe dreams" is extremely short-sighted.
Comparing anti-whalers to nuclear power opponents is disingenuous. The opponents of nuclear power are crying against the dangers and pollution it can cause, ignoring the fact that compared to other energy sources it's relatively safe and clean. Their campaign is self-contradictory.
The anti-whalers are against the killing of these and other species, because they consider this an immoral act the seriousness of which trumps the matters past that. Even if you don't agree with them, you can't say it's not wise. And they do have a point. Whales are species with recognized cognitive abilities. You know what's NOT wise? Hunting them. Do you also realise that whaling is banned by many countries, and part of what the Sea Shepherds are doing is enforcing laws that nobody else is?
It's much more important to select a good candidate when voting, than to just vote. And that's not simply picking the best or the least bad. If there isn't an obviously good candidate that you want to vote for, sometimes the candidate that sends the biggest message, that penalizes those who supported terrible policies or stands against the worst things about the status quo would do.
He found a way to build the universe from scratch (with LEGO), a girlfriend is only the next logical step.
The list should include itself - it's linking to pirate sites!
Did they find planets orbiting a white dwarf at orbits that would have been inside the red giant, did they find planets orbiting a red giant or did they find planets orbiting inside the red giant? Is the star dead or dying? TFA doesn't seem to say anything about the former, and conflicts with TFS about the latter.
You've got to be careful when you're assuming about their reasoning, though. They might not know or realize the speed with which a virus could potentially spread. They might think that if it is released in the USA, it will stay in the USA, somehow magically obeying country borders. This might be because they do not know or care there are other countries in America, or because they think that human deceases can be contained by border control, because of the existence of such control designed for animal pathogens. And it's on the other side of the planet, how could it possibly affect us?
This knowledge *is* potentially dangerous, there's no need to deny that. In this case, however, it's one of the reasons the information should be released -- the chances of creating a vaccine are much higher if it is widely known, and if someone is crazy enough they'd find ways to replicate this research regardless of any censorship attempts. On top of that, a similar virus might naturally form sometime soon, and we shouldn't take that chance.
Meter is a unit of length, not mass, so you're obviously wrong! I'm already living in my bomb shelter
Trust me. That's what most Slashdotters are hoping for when they are imagining themselves as a part of it.
Can you give an example of something that is different?
Both present a fictional story whose followers hold as dear, which describes a supernatural-like force that has a profound effect on the universe and its inhabitants, and the followers believe in its existence. The story introduces philosophical teachings about good and evil that the followers consider important to their lives, most often more important than their belief in the details of the story. In both cases, most followers have their doubts about the veracity of the story and the existence of the supernatural-like elements, many of them know that it is not true, but are eager to believe in it so much that they knowingly they choose to ignore reality and let their imagination carry them to that fictional world. This most often happens in periods of desperation, or the end of one's life, when they need something to hold on to -- in normal circumstances few give it much thought. In both cases, there are a few who would completely lose their touch with reality and live by their story.
In both cases, the association with the following turns out to be more important than the teachings and beliefs, since most followers either have a vague idea about them or are not really believers, but consider themselves to be a part of the group.
Yes, that's it. I don't understand why would you want to encrypt anything unless you have passphrase support for it, or some other form of secret that makes the encryption do something. If you don't protect the key with a secret, the encryption is no longer an encryption.
Unless you have your phone ask you for a very long passphrase, any encryption is pointless. So you have only three options:
1) Use an encrypted key chain or better full disk encryption with a really long passphrase which is incredibly inconvenient to enter on a phone.
2) Don't store sensitive data to the phone.
3) Don't lose your phone.
Anything else is snake oil.
Actually, he's talking about the noise rock band from Oakland.
So EU should stop selling surveillance equipment to the US (SOPA), France (HADOPI) and Sweden (Assange)?
Can it print yet?
That's part of the point. To learn how to clone an extinct species you have to start somewhere, you need to see what's missing. Granted, if you're close you might not necessarily know how close to the real species have you gone, but you will know if the approximation is good enough. After all, every species is an approximation. We no longer remember the mammoths, so any difference wouldn't matter. Who said that the approximation of mammoths that lived back then would be better than the approximation that we will get?
If they were shot, they would be more proof how dangerous nuclear power plants are. The accident would double the victims of nuclear power in the recent decade!
Sorry, reading comprehension fail. I misunderstood what GP meant.
But, again, the same thing stands. Free software developers had a choice of a license, had a choice of distribution terms, they are equal to everyone and these terms are most often in pursuit of fulfilling a good idea. They are encouraging the idea that they believe in, not entities they like or dislike. If they clash with the terms of an app store accidentally, it's not only the developer's fault, neither it is a result of their dislike. And if the terms of the app store are too restrictive maybe it's even a good thing.
Having a vision about how the world should be is not the same as having a favourite football team. Even if your vision has shortcomings.
They do... what?
Certain free software distributors (not authors) try to discourage you from using non-free software in different ways. You might disagree with their agenda or the way they approach the problem, but they are certainly not discouraging you from using things because they don't like someone. They have certain standards, you might disagree with them, but they are not discriminatory towards any entity based on personal feelings. They also have legal troubles in distributing such software, and technological troubles when the source code is missing, which makes anything they do not comparable to what you said. In fact, what you said is so not true that I'm not sure what you're even talking about.
Getting out of the cave a few times a week to hunt is enough to sustain myself. My cave and my stone weapons solve a problem to me, so why care about anything else? If ain't broken, don't fix it.
Yet, Google's suggestion does nothing to address this issue. At least judging from the summary, you'd just add more layers but have more or less the same system. On the top you'd have a few main moderators selected by some possibly unreliable criteria. They would approve smaller subset of moderators depending on their own evaluation.
The world like-minded is especially concerning. If it means thinking critically in the same lines, it's OK. If it means having the same opinions, you have been bubbled - a group of opinions different from the ones you've expected are invisible. What's more, sometimes even a bit of uninformed crazy opinions that show a total lack of reason are also a great contribution. If nothing else, they give you the chance to explain how are they wrong or how they are badly constructe, and given that quite a lot of us are unreasonable people around us, ignoring the unreasonable gives you no chance to address their questions.
I don't see how Slashdot's system is that different. Moderators are selected based on past moderations, and the layers are circular. If others have moderated you nicely, you get to moderate yourself. The internal bias created by this system is not that different than the bias created by a tree system, and I don't see how it's worse.
More important than the system are the rules that are used to judge the quality of the posts. There should be guidelines that outline carefully what is good and what isn't. Of course, Slashdot has that in a sense, and the labels "Insighful", "Informative" discourage voting "+1, Agree", but that apparently is not enough. But the thing that is really missing are higher standards as well as a way to observe these standards.