IANAL, but I have 2 major problems with this case:
1. The prosecution is misusing/abusing the "furtherance of of a tortious act" verbiage as if it were an element of the crime, when in fact if one reads the statute, it's only a factor to determine the punishment of the crime if and only if it is determined that a crime was actually committed. The reason they have to spin it that way, of course, is because otherwise their charge boils down to "unauthorized obtaining of information from a computer across state lines", which is so vague and broad that I don't think any judge or jury would consider it a criminal act.
2. Do we really want to deputize ISPs and/or web content providers as agents of the Federal Government, by allowing them to, via changing their ToS'es, arbitrarily with little or no notice, "de-authorize" users, thus turning them into Federal felons? That's an awful lot of power to give entities which are not officially part of the Federal government. I don't think ISPs and/or web content providers would want this precedent set, once they realize that as agents of the Federal Government, they now have to abide strictly by the First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, a raft of ordinary Congressional laws and rules (e.g. the tree-killing CFR compendium), that they have to buy equipment through the GSA, etc.
The bright side to all of this is that since the Federal Government has an IPv6 mandate, if ISPs become part of the Federal Government, that should help to solve our IPv4 runout problem:-)
Having said all of that, I really think Lori Drew should be criminally prosecuted for what she did. She essentially harassed Megan Meier to her suicide. I just don't know that Missouri has the proper laws on the books to permit such a prosecution. So, unfortunately, the Meier family may have to seek retribution only through a civil suit.
IANAL either, but in KENNEDY V. MENDOZA-MARTINEZ, 372 U. S. 144 (1963), the Supreme Court enumerated several tests that it had used in the past to determine whether a statutory punishment is "punitive" or not, and if it's punitive, the procedural safeguards associated with "criminal" actions are constitutionally required:
"The punitive nature of the sanction here is evident under the tests traditionally applied to determine whether an Act of Congress is penal or regulatory in character, even though in other cases this problem has been extremely difficult and elusive of solution. Whether the sanction involves an affirmative disability or restraint, [Footnote 22] whether it has historically been regarded as a punishment, [Footnote 23] whether it comes into play only on a finding of scienter, [Footnote 24] whether its operation will promote the traditional aims of punishment -- retribution and deterrence, [Footnote 25] whether the behavior to which it applies is already a crime, [Footnote 26] whether an alternative purpose to which it may
rationally be connected is assignable for it, [Footnote 27] and whether it appears excessive in relation to the alternative purpose assigned [Footnote 28] are all relevant to the inquiry, and may often point in differing directions."
Note that in that particular case, it was ruled that stripping someone of their U.S. citizenship was considered sufficiently "penal" that procedural safeguards were required.
In a later case, however (UNITED STATES v. WARD, 448 U.S. 242 (1980)), the Court ruled that a "civil penalty" resulting from a minor infraction of federal environmental laws did not trigger Fifth Amendment protections, so there seems to be no clear precedent here.
I suppose you also keep all the files on your computers in their respective root directories, right?
Noob
Hierarchical organization is good, if done properly, and this applies to naming organization just as much as file organization, and many other methods/systems of keeping track of information or physical objects, for quick and efficient retrieval on demand.
As for individual companies registering their own TLDs, as corrupt and/or incompetent as ICANN is, I don't think they'd allow this. These are, after all, supposed to be generic TLDs. A TLD which is specific only to a particular company is not by any reasonable definition "generic". I may not trust ICANN on much, but I think I can trust them on at least that basic disctinction.
Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Seems this guy was "seek[ing...] information" and the Universal Declaration would apply.
Does anyone know, is Afghanistan a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
If not, should they not be, er, persuaded to become a signatory? We do, as it happens, have a number of persuaders currently resident in that country
Easy. Perceived value + in a persistent form = property (arguably).
If you want to argue that a hotel in Monopoly is as persistent as items in WoW, I'd like to see the Monopoly hotel -- not the physical, plastic representation of a hotel, the actual "hotel" value-container that actually exists in a game of Monopoly -- that's older than some of my 3-year-old WoW items.
(If there's been a continuous Monopoly game that's persisted for longer that 3 years, I'd argue that it is the result of unnatural collusion between the participants, and as we all know from recent headlines, unnatural and illicit collusion can create false "value" that evaporates under proper scrutiny).
"Alternative root zones"? ROFL. That ship has already launched and sank miserably. A unitary root zone is the only practical model.
As for DNSSEC, again, it may not be perfect, but it's the most thoroughly defined, mature solution we have for the DNS data integrity problem. DNSCurve, like most of DJB's creations, is a clever little academic exercise, but nowhere near as close to implementation as DNSSEC.
If I remember my Physics correctly, (wavelength)x(frequency) = c (speed of light), for electromagnetic radiation, assuming a vacuum. So, for this field test, they used effectively 100 Gigahertz. The wavelength, therefore, was approximately 3mm, assuming the radiation wasn't slowed artificially. This still falls within the range which is referred to as "millimeter wave", but be aware that it's not exactly one millimeter. The band ranges from 1 millimeter (300 Ghz) to 10 millimeters (30 Ghz).
In any case, despite the obvious humor here, there are plusses and minuses to giving car-insurance discounts to victims of LSLTAs (Life-Sucking Leisure-Time Activities). On the one hand, they probably aren't driving much (no social life). On the other hand, when they are driving, they're probably drowsy, falling asleep at the wheel (sleep deprivation is de rigueur). Overall, I think the plusses and minuses would even out.
Prostitution is not legal in Vegas, though it is in the rest of the state.
I'm no expert in such things (really!), but my understanding was that only certain low-population counties in Nevada were eligible to legalize prostitution, and even then, it would only be legalized if the county voted to make it so. The state legislature was very mindful of the social risks of legal prostitution and sought to minimize them. Refreshingly enlightened, IMO.
In any case, even if I'm off on some of the details, I don't think it's as simple as "legal everywhere in Nevada except Vegas"...
Kaminsky demonstrated the vulnerability by finding a way to insert a YouTube video from 80s pop star Rick Astley into Facebook and PayPal domains.
Ryan, Ryan, old buddy, old pal... Haven't you ever heard of the term rickroll?!?!?! Even an old fuddy-duddy such as myself, is familiar with the concept. Here's a Wikipedia entry to get you started: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rickrolling. Please study up before writing your next Wired article. There will be a pop quiz.
Maybe it is, but I'm not the type to try and "scam" karma by using trickery. Honestly, I thought the correction was just as likely to be modded down as Flamebait, but I appreciate the fact that someone considered it Informative.
That's a little misleading, since the documentation of the law is the law itself, which is why exact wording and consistent, systematic interpretation and application is so very important.
Rarely do I see a bunch of programmers arguing for months or years over exactly what a particular piece of software documentation means, how it applies in particular situations etc. If you have any doubt, just run the code and see what works, what doesn't. Lawyers and judges can't do the same, because there is no "code" to run: the law is what it is, it's all in how it's interpreted and applied. So they just keep arguing , and arguing, and arguing, and that's why you need an advanced degree to even play that game...
Did Judge Kollar-Kotelly actually utter the phrase "unfit for US consumption"? I think not. After TFA and TFALRFTOA (= Linked, Recursively, from the Original Article), all I see is that she scolded Microsoft for claiming that they had provided the documentation -- a condition of the Consent Decree -- and urged them to finish the job.
What would that phrase mean anyway? I don't "consume" documentation, do you? I use it as a tool in the development process, not a repast. And does "US consumption" imply that the documentation is fit for European consumption? Asian consumption? This article title is not worth of Ars or Slashdot, IMO.
It won't have any immediate effect, but when the gambling companies go to change their nameservers, transfer domains between themselves, etc. they'll be stymied. As time goes on, this will become more of a thorn in their sides.
A better question, for perhaps someone who is familiar with Kentucky's civil forfeiture procedures (don't all speak up at once now!), is: what happens now? How will the gambling companies litigate in order to get their domains returned to them, through Kentucky's legal processes? Or, would it just be easier for them to appeal this decision through the federal court system? Enquiring minds want to know
Are all your domains hosted on the same set of servers?
Could you CNAME the 50 domains to a smaller subset of domain names, and then you only have to change the A records of that subset whenever you have a change?
I second this idea.
I'd also point out that you can ease your DNS transitions by carefully planning a "drawdown" of the TTL values of your records prior to the actual change and/or setting up HTTP redirection on the legacy addresses, redirecting to the new location, during the interval of time in which the new DNS information is still replicating and/or resident in DNS caches.
I wasn't disagreeing, just giving a more precise definition.
I'll note in passing, however, that "just salmon" can (arguably) be interpreted as establishing an exact equivalence between "lox" and "salmon", when in fact lox is a subset of the forms in which salmon is processed/prepared for consumption.
The word "just" in English has multiple meanings: in this context is can be taken as either synonymous with "merely", or synonymous with "exactly". Hence the ambiguity.
"Just" can also, of course, be taken as an adjective, meaning "fair", "equitable" or "even", but we don't normally attribute such qualities to fish, especially when they're dead:-)
Slashdot Mirror
IANAL, but I have 2 major problems with this case:
1. The prosecution is misusing/abusing the "furtherance of of a tortious act" verbiage as if it were an element of the crime, when in fact if one reads the statute, it's only a factor to determine the punishment of the crime if and only if it is determined that a crime was actually committed. The reason they have to spin it that way, of course, is because otherwise their charge boils down to "unauthorized obtaining of information from a computer across state lines", which is so vague and broad that I don't think any judge or jury would consider it a criminal act.
2. Do we really want to deputize ISPs and/or web content providers as agents of the Federal Government, by allowing them to, via changing their ToS'es, arbitrarily with little or no notice, "de-authorize" users, thus turning them into Federal felons? That's an awful lot of power to give entities which are not officially part of the Federal government. I don't think ISPs and/or web content providers would want this precedent set, once they realize that as agents of the Federal Government, they now have to abide strictly by the First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, a raft of ordinary Congressional laws and rules (e.g. the tree-killing CFR compendium), that they have to buy equipment through the GSA, etc.
The bright side to all of this is that since the Federal Government has an IPv6 mandate, if ISPs become part of the Federal Government, that should help to solve our IPv4 runout problem :-)
Having said all of that, I really think Lori Drew should be criminally prosecuted for what she did. She essentially harassed Megan Meier to her suicide. I just don't know that Missouri has the proper laws on the books to permit such a prosecution. So, unfortunately, the Meier family may have to seek retribution only through a civil suit.
But how do you tell the difference between a nutsoid Ret Pally and a "normal" one? I can't.
IANAL either, but in KENNEDY V. MENDOZA-MARTINEZ, 372 U. S. 144 (1963), the Supreme Court enumerated several tests that it had used in the past to determine whether a statutory punishment is "punitive" or not, and if it's punitive, the procedural safeguards associated with "criminal" actions are constitutionally required:
"The punitive nature of the sanction here is evident under the tests traditionally applied to determine whether an Act of Congress is penal or regulatory in character, even though in other cases this problem has been extremely difficult and elusive of solution. Whether the sanction involves an affirmative disability or restraint, [Footnote 22] whether it has historically been regarded as a punishment, [Footnote 23] whether it comes into play only on a finding of scienter, [Footnote 24] whether its operation will promote the traditional aims of punishment -- retribution and deterrence, [Footnote 25] whether the behavior to which it applies is already a crime, [Footnote 26] whether an alternative purpose to which it may rationally be connected is assignable for it, [Footnote 27] and whether it appears excessive in relation to the alternative purpose assigned [Footnote 28] are all relevant to the inquiry, and may often point in differing directions."
Note that in that particular case, it was ruled that stripping someone of their U.S. citizenship was considered sufficiently "penal" that procedural safeguards were required.
In a later case, however (UNITED STATES v. WARD, 448 U.S. 242 (1980)), the Court ruled that a "civil penalty" resulting from a minor infraction of federal environmental laws did not trigger Fifth Amendment protections, so there seems to be no clear precedent here.
I suppose you also keep all the files on your computers in their respective root directories, right?
Noob
Hierarchical organization is good, if done properly, and this applies to naming organization just as much as file organization, and many other methods/systems of keeping track of information or physical objects, for quick and efficient retrieval on demand.
As for individual companies registering their own TLDs, as corrupt and/or incompetent as ICANN is, I don't think they'd allow this. These are, after all, supposed to be generic TLDs. A TLD which is specific only to a particular company is not by any reasonable definition "generic". I may not trust ICANN on much, but I think I can trust them on at least that basic disctinction.
Article 19. Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Seems this guy was "seek[ing...] information" and the Universal Declaration would apply.
Does anyone know, is Afghanistan a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
If not, should they not be, er, persuaded to become a signatory? We do, as it happens, have a number of persuaders currently resident in that country
No Child Left Behind called and wants its punctuation lessons back...
(Sorry, pet peeve. Grrr).
"I tried Digg for awhile, but the comments system is crap. I have never peaked at Slashcode,"
Peak? You think Slashcode is the peak? The peak of what? The peak of programming excellence?
Methinks you meant "peeked". Sorry for the spelling flame, can't help it...
Easy. Perceived value + in a persistent form = property (arguably).
If you want to argue that a hotel in Monopoly is as persistent as items in WoW, I'd like to see the Monopoly hotel -- not the physical, plastic representation of a hotel, the actual "hotel" value-container that actually exists in a game of Monopoly -- that's older than some of my 3-year-old WoW items.
(If there's been a continuous Monopoly game that's persisted for longer that 3 years, I'd argue that it is the result of unnatural collusion between the participants, and as we all know from recent headlines, unnatural and illicit collusion can create false "value" that evaporates under proper scrutiny).
I think I smell someone's arena rating as being in the neighborhood of 1200.
"Alternative root zones"? ROFL. That ship has already launched and sank miserably. A unitary root zone is the only practical model.
As for DNSSEC, again, it may not be perfect, but it's the most thoroughly defined, mature solution we have for the DNS data integrity problem. DNSCurve, like most of DJB's creations, is a clever little academic exercise, but nowhere near as close to implementation as DNSSEC.
Mommy, what's Usenet?
If I remember my Physics correctly, (wavelength)x(frequency) = c (speed of light), for electromagnetic radiation, assuming a vacuum. So, for this field test, they used effectively 100 Gigahertz. The wavelength, therefore, was approximately 3mm, assuming the radiation wasn't slowed artificially. This still falls within the range which is referred to as "millimeter wave", but be aware that it's not exactly one millimeter. The band ranges from 1 millimeter (300 Ghz) to 10 millimeters (30 Ghz).
Nah, it's just all those Body Thetans trying to vote Xenu into office.
Nice try, fellas. Better luck next time...
A new level 70 is in T6? Hmmm...
In any case, despite the obvious humor here, there are plusses and minuses to giving car-insurance discounts to victims of LSLTAs (Life-Sucking Leisure-Time Activities). On the one hand, they probably aren't driving much (no social life). On the other hand, when they are driving, they're probably drowsy, falling asleep at the wheel (sleep deprivation is de rigueur). Overall, I think the plusses and minuses would even out.
Prostitution is not legal in Vegas, though it is in the rest of the state.
I'm no expert in such things (really!), but my understanding was that only certain low-population counties in Nevada were eligible to legalize prostitution, and even then, it would only be legalized if the county voted to make it so. The state legislature was very mindful of the social risks of legal prostitution and sought to minimize them. Refreshingly enlightened, IMO.
In any case, even if I'm off on some of the details, I don't think it's as simple as "legal everywhere in Nevada except Vegas"...
Kaminsky demonstrated the vulnerability by finding a way to insert a YouTube video from 80s pop star Rick Astley into Facebook and PayPal domains.
Ryan, Ryan, old buddy, old pal... Haven't you ever heard of the term rickroll?!?!?! Even an old fuddy-duddy such as myself, is familiar with the concept. Here's a Wikipedia entry to get you started: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rickrolling. Please study up before writing your next Wired article. There will be a pop quiz.
"I fart in your general direction!"
Love,
Siberian Shelf
Maybe it is, but I'm not the type to try and "scam" karma by using trickery. Honestly, I thought the correction was just as likely to be modded down as Flamebait, but I appreciate the fact that someone considered it Informative.
That's a little misleading, since the documentation of the law is the law itself, which is why exact wording and consistent, systematic interpretation and application is so very important.
Rarely do I see a bunch of programmers arguing for months or years over exactly what a particular piece of software documentation means, how it applies in particular situations etc. If you have any doubt, just run the code and see what works, what doesn't. Lawyers and judges can't do the same, because there is no "code" to run: the law is what it is, it's all in how it's interpreted and applied. So they just keep arguing , and arguing, and arguing, and that's why you need an advanced degree to even play that game...
Did Judge Kollar-Kotelly actually utter the phrase "unfit for US consumption"? I think not. After TFA and TFALRFTOA (= Linked, Recursively, from the Original Article), all I see is that she scolded Microsoft for claiming that they had provided the documentation -- a condition of the Consent Decree -- and urged them to finish the job.
What would that phrase mean anyway? I don't "consume" documentation, do you? I use it as a tool in the development process, not a repast. And does "US consumption" imply that the documentation is fit for European consumption? Asian consumption? This article title is not worth of Ars or Slashdot, IMO.
Here you go, sir, the court order.
Which shows a circuit court, not a district court ruling.
Not really enough for a "badsummary" tag, but a little sloppy nonetheless.
It won't have any immediate effect, but when the gambling companies go to change their nameservers, transfer domains between themselves, etc. they'll be stymied. As time goes on, this will become more of a thorn in their sides.
A better question, for perhaps someone who is familiar with Kentucky's civil forfeiture procedures (don't all speak up at once now!), is: what happens now? How will the gambling companies litigate in order to get their domains returned to them, through Kentucky's legal processes? Or, would it just be easier for them to appeal this decision through the federal court system? Enquiring minds want to know
"Al Gore claims to have invented the Internet", debunked (among other places) here: http://www.perkel.com/politics/gore/internet.htm (dated) and http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
(Burning my karma once again, folks don't seem to like to see "popular" falsehoods debunked).
Are all your domains hosted on the same set of servers? Could you CNAME the 50 domains to a smaller subset of domain names, and then you only have to change the A records of that subset whenever you have a change?
I second this idea.
I'd also point out that you can ease your DNS transitions by carefully planning a "drawdown" of the TTL values of your records prior to the actual change and/or setting up HTTP redirection on the legacy addresses, redirecting to the new location, during the interval of time in which the new DNS information is still replicating and/or resident in DNS caches.
I wasn't disagreeing, just giving a more precise definition.
I'll note in passing, however, that "just salmon" can (arguably) be interpreted as establishing an exact equivalence between "lox" and "salmon", when in fact lox is a subset of the forms in which salmon is processed/prepared for consumption.
The word "just" in English has multiple meanings: in this context is can be taken as either synonymous with "merely", or synonymous with "exactly". Hence the ambiguity.
"Just" can also, of course, be taken as an adjective, meaning "fair", "equitable" or "even", but we don't normally attribute such qualities to fish, especially when they're dead :-)
Haven't you guys ever heard of Wikipedia? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lox. Lox is cured salmon fillet. In its most popular form, it's thinly sliced.