It's ICANN trying to shut us up! Rise against the man! Rise against ICANN! Don't let the man keep you down! ICANN simulated the error to wait for the/. hype to die down, it will open back up in an hour or 2 when the story is old news! CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE! Give encryption a chance!
While I would love to see this help, I don't think that this is going to promote the cause of freedom much. At most, I see the voices of the uninformed being used for political leverage by ICANN. Voting, of course, can be used to help counteract this, but alas, I am not sure that our voice will be strong enough, and they don't have to listen to us anyway.
I'm not saying don't go out and vote, of course. One voice is small, but one hundred are not. To be one of one hundred is big, and that is how you can help this situation out. Also, ICANN is not the end all to be all of political power on the internet, but one thing that it is, is a face that governments recognize when they think of the net (kind of), which is a form of political power. I think that louder voices are in the form of independant political action, however. So, vote, vote wisely, but if you are really concerned with what is going on in the net. Write to someone in government, write a story, write an editorial to your paper. These are ways to really get your voice heard.
Gasohol damages the internals of older cars. Just ask my family who had to replace a good number of hoses in our old station wagon after the energy crisis. Gas stations wishing to sell gasohol would have to do one of 2 things.
1) Stop selling gasoline, clean out their tanks, and fill them with gasohol
2) Increase facilities to sell gasohol.
And of course, the 3rd option that makes neither the gas people or the gasohol people happy.
3) Start selling a mix of the 2.
You can make your own gasohol, but that doesn't help much on a road trip unless you want to forget your luggage and carry what in most states would probably be considered a bomb with you.
It's a nice idea, but the cost of switching to gasohol doesn't make sense, and would only lose companies money. If you have a nice little moped or a car that you only take around your home town with you, yeah, I could see it, but I'm not switching from gasoline for my truck any time soon.
It will happen sooner or later with enough incetive, but right now, there is a strong infastructure built up in the support of gasoline automobiles, and not one in support of alternative fuels. There are also a wide variety of fuels, and people want cars that run THE NEXT FUEL, not just a cleaner fuel. Also, cost is a big factor, most states won't pay to have your car converted. Most people know how to work on/supe up gasoline powered cars. They don't want to take them in to a mechanic to work on them when they are used to working on them themselves. Mechanics are trained to work on gas powered cars. Companies manufacture mainly parts for gas powered cars. The infastructure to purchase fuel, inexpensively, for alternative fuel vehicles isn't everywhere.
I mean, I would love to have an electric powered car, right? Where would I charge it? Just about only at my house! What would I charge it in? I plug that I have to get specially installed that is more powerful than the ones on my dryer, possibly requiring that I have lines run to my house for the power requirements.
It's not like, "Why would anyone run open source software." When the infastructure is there, and in fact better than that of closed source software. This is something where you really have to use the options given to you.
Wow, they have some serious balls. Perhaps they should think of going into porn when the FBI shuts their asses down. Very cool though. It's good not to just submit to monitoring, but what will happen to them now?
Why would you want to USE PDF's all over the internet? First of all, those are proprietary (property of Adobe). Second, the most common tool to create them is not only proprietary, but expensive. The files are also rather larger than webpages are... They don't support all of the features that one would want on a website. Other such things...
No offense, but it really just doesn't make sense/is a bad idea.
With all due respect, the W3C and Netscape are 2 different bodies entirely. Also, if you code the tables correctly, Netscape seems to deal with them fine. It just goes a bit apeshit when you throw the tags in all screwed up, but then, most browsers do.
Well, it's good to know that M$ can keep using anti-competitive practices and severely mess things up even more.
On a side note, if I tried to explain what happened to most people I know, they would probably say something along the lines of "MicroSoft sets all of the standards anyways, right?"
It would be innovation if they: A) Worked with regular HTML B) Released the specs to implement these features publicly.
I'll be over here using all of these "obsolete" websites in Mozilla.
Not all distros are slack/debian, not all kernels are developmental ones. Installing the idiotware distributions is easier than installing windows or remembering to wipe your ass after you shit. Most of them have just as many point and clicky useless eye candy widgets as windows too.
Ok, the guy's assertion, is that because the writer is getting a free copy of Mandrake, he's writing a glowing review of it, in hopes of getting another free copy.
This theory works if the software costs hundreds of dollars, like the software of certain competitors, but it doesn't hold up for mandrake, since the guy can already get that for free. Is the writer seriously saying that the books and extra garbage that comes in the boxed set is what is motivating a glowing review? What if they just sent him a CD-R. Heck, I got a copy of Mandrake with Maximum Linux this month. (Why would you subscribe if you don't already use it?) At any rate, the article's author is just full of shit, flat out. He wanted to write something that M$ advocates would suck on to like barnacles, and he did, but none of his points make any sense. No offense, but that article is total hack work (don't mean to crack on it's author, we all have to pick a position and fight it to write a good article sometimes I suppose, I remember college english.)
A lot of people don't like the artistic license for various reasons, but plenty of good apps have been listed under it. To be honest, INAL, and I've never used a major license in any project that wasn't already under that license that I just happened to be contributing to.
Here's an idea, just use a different license. I know that everbody wants to hop on the GPL bandwagon, but there are a lot of other licenses out there, if none of them satisfy your needs, you could just do like all of the commercial companies do and write your own, heck, if you want it to be open source, that doesn't mean that it has to be GPL. Perhaps this is a good call for an altogether new license, however, it really doesn't have to be just another GPL, it really could be a license tailored to the specific needs of either the application at hand, or of web applications that one would think fall well into the GPL.
Just because it's not GPL'd doesn't make it the end of the world, no offense.
One must remember as an American that the values of different cultures are not our own. In many countries, for instance, sexual acts and nudity on television and in media are much more acceptable than violence. We have discussed this before in the discussions of internet censorship. Having not spent any amount of time in Britain, and only knowing a few people from there myself, I cannot say how exactly they feel about violence, but probably more strongly than the American people do, who are somewhat self-righteous about sex.
Since most attacks are perpetrated by people who I can only refer to as true amatures, I said that attack logs should hang around for a while given that the security was successfully breached, whereas an unsuccessful attack, or some moron who is trying to "bitchslap" your webserver (can you believe that there are people who try that on boxen that obviously won't respond to such an attack), should be tossed after a few weeks, given that no repeat attempt has been made. If there has been a repeat attempt, older logs may be of use.
It's really not a question of what logs to keep, but how long to keep them. You should keep logs of requests, attacks, e-mails, routing information, anything that you might actually need, but only keep them for the appropriate period of time. You really don't want to have to dedicate a tape changer to this anyway, do you?
E-mail, routing information, and the like, should have a relatively short lifespan, if a person is being harassed, they should report it quickly. You should allow them a week or 2 for turnaround in such cases, and burn the necessary information to a CD or other storage media for any followup needed, when there is a report. You shouldn't, however, keep a long papertrail on your users, this only invades their privacy. If there is a legitimate need for such logs, it will arise relatively quickly.
Attack logs should be kept longer. All attack logs should be analyzed and damage should be evaluated. Appropriate individuals should be informed of the attack based on what has been compromised. Even these, however, should be trashed after a period of time. Do you really care about an unsuccessful attack 2 years ago? Probably not, you might, however, care about someone who root-kitted your server a year ago, since they probably still have the passwords of at least a few of your users.
It should be refreshing to the slashdot audience to see that people in government are taking a a sound and sane look at these laws. It is a rather interesting way to put it, but finally someone who makes a difference in all of this has said, "Look RIAA, you're using extremely bad business practices and abusing positions that you pretty much illegally set up for yourselves in the first place, this just isn't practical or right or even really sane."
Slashdot Mirror
I am Cornholio! I need TP for my bunghole!
Hrmm, perhaps I should cut back on my Coke/Coffee intake *hands shaking*
It's ICANN trying to shut us up! Rise against the man! Rise against ICANN! Don't let the man keep you down! ICANN simulated the error to wait for the /. hype to die down, it will open back up in an hour or 2 when the story is old news! CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE! Give encryption a chance!
HELP! HELP! I'm being oppressed!
While I would love to see this help, I don't think that this is going to promote the cause of freedom much. At most, I see the voices of the uninformed being used for political leverage by ICANN. Voting, of course, can be used to help counteract this, but alas, I am not sure that our voice will be strong enough, and they don't have to listen to us anyway.
I'm not saying don't go out and vote, of course. One voice is small, but one hundred are not. To be one of one hundred is big, and that is how you can help this situation out. Also, ICANN is not the end all to be all of political power on the internet, but one thing that it is, is a face that governments recognize when they think of the net (kind of), which is a form of political power. I think that louder voices are in the form of independant political action, however. So, vote, vote wisely, but if you are really concerned with what is going on in the net. Write to someone in government, write a story, write an editorial to your paper. These are ways to really get your voice heard.
Gasohol damages the internals of older cars. Just ask my family who had to replace a good number of hoses in our old station wagon after the energy crisis. Gas stations wishing to sell gasohol would have to do one of 2 things.
1) Stop selling gasoline, clean out their tanks, and fill them with gasohol
2) Increase facilities to sell gasohol.
And of course, the 3rd option that makes neither the gas people or the gasohol people happy.
3) Start selling a mix of the 2.
You can make your own gasohol, but that doesn't help much on a road trip unless you want to forget your luggage and carry what in most states would probably be considered a bomb with you.
It's a nice idea, but the cost of switching to gasohol doesn't make sense, and would only lose companies money. If you have a nice little moped or a car that you only take around your home town with you, yeah, I could see it, but I'm not switching from gasoline for my truck any time soon.
It will happen sooner or later with enough incetive, but right now, there is a strong infastructure built up in the support of gasoline automobiles, and not one in support of alternative fuels. There are also a wide variety of fuels, and people want cars that run THE NEXT FUEL, not just a cleaner fuel. Also, cost is a big factor, most states won't pay to have your car converted. Most people know how to work on/supe up gasoline powered cars. They don't want to take them in to a mechanic to work on them when they are used to working on them themselves. Mechanics are trained to work on gas powered cars. Companies manufacture mainly parts for gas powered cars. The infastructure to purchase fuel, inexpensively, for alternative fuel vehicles isn't everywhere.
I mean, I would love to have an electric powered car, right? Where would I charge it? Just about only at my house! What would I charge it in? I plug that I have to get specially installed that is more powerful than the ones on my dryer, possibly requiring that I have lines run to my house for the power requirements.
It's not like, "Why would anyone run open source software." When the infastructure is there, and in fact better than that of closed source software. This is something where you really have to use the options given to you.
Wow, they have some serious balls. Perhaps they should think of going into porn when the FBI shuts their asses down. Very cool though. It's good not to just submit to monitoring, but what will happen to them now?
WAZZZUP?
Hehe, yeah, totally man.
Why would you want to USE PDF's all over the internet? First of all, those are proprietary (property of Adobe). Second, the most common tool to create them is not only proprietary, but expensive. The files are also rather larger than webpages are... They don't support all of the features that one would want on a website. Other such things...
No offense, but it really just doesn't make sense/is a bad idea.
With all due respect, the W3C and Netscape are 2 different bodies entirely. Also, if you code the tables correctly, Netscape seems to deal with them fine. It just goes a bit apeshit when you throw the tags in all screwed up, but then, most browsers do.
Well, it's good to know that M$ can keep using anti-competitive practices and severely mess things up even more.
On a side note, if I tried to explain what happened to most people I know, they would probably say something along the lines of "MicroSoft sets all of the standards anyways, right?"
It would be innovation if they:
A) Worked with regular HTML
B) Released the specs to implement these features publicly.
I'll be over here using all of these "obsolete" websites in Mozilla.
Not all distros are slack/debian, not all kernels are developmental ones. Installing the idiotware distributions is easier than installing windows or remembering to wipe your ass after you shit. Most of them have just as many point and clicky useless eye candy widgets as windows too.
Ok, the guy's assertion, is that because the writer is getting a free copy of Mandrake, he's writing a glowing review of it, in hopes of getting another free copy.
This theory works if the software costs hundreds of dollars, like the software of certain competitors, but it doesn't hold up for mandrake, since the guy can already get that for free. Is the writer seriously saying that the books and extra garbage that comes in the boxed set is what is motivating a glowing review? What if they just sent him a CD-R. Heck, I got a copy of Mandrake with Maximum Linux this month. (Why would you subscribe if you don't already use it?) At any rate, the article's author is just full of shit, flat out. He wanted to write something that M$ advocates would suck on to like barnacles, and he did, but none of his points make any sense. No offense, but that article is total hack work (don't mean to crack on it's author, we all have to pick a position and fight it to write a good article sometimes I suppose, I remember college english.)
A lot of people don't like the artistic license for various reasons, but plenty of good apps have been listed under it. To be honest, INAL, and I've never used a major license in any project that wasn't already under that license that I just happened to be contributing to.
Here's an idea, just use a different license. I know that everbody wants to hop on the GPL bandwagon, but there are a lot of other licenses out there, if none of them satisfy your needs, you could just do like all of the commercial companies do and write your own, heck, if you want it to be open source, that doesn't mean that it has to be GPL. Perhaps this is a good call for an altogether new license, however, it really doesn't have to be just another GPL, it really could be a license tailored to the specific needs of either the application at hand, or of web applications that one would think fall well into the GPL.
Just because it's not GPL'd doesn't make it the end of the world, no offense.
I think that any moderation up should be "funny," if any. Otherwise, you really didn't get it ;-)
Ok, I'm a moron. I should have known that since my aunt is from there. That's one "cool point" for me *GRIN*
One must remember as an American that the values of different cultures are not our own. In many countries, for instance, sexual acts and nudity on television and in media are much more acceptable than violence. We have discussed this before in the discussions of internet censorship. Having not spent any amount of time in Britain, and only knowing a few people from there myself, I cannot say how exactly they feel about violence, but probably more strongly than the American people do, who are somewhat self-righteous about sex.
What about the copyright on the cukoo sound? Isn't somebody going to sue him for stealing their soundbyte?
Me, I live and let live, what he wants to do with his computer and time... Is his business...
Logs of a DDOS attack can just be tossed if you're not seeking litigation though, since they are relatively useless.
Since most attacks are perpetrated by people who I can only refer to as true amatures, I said that attack logs should hang around for a while given that the security was successfully breached, whereas an unsuccessful attack, or some moron who is trying to "bitchslap" your webserver (can you believe that there are people who try that on boxen that obviously won't respond to such an attack), should be tossed after a few weeks, given that no repeat attempt has been made. If there has been a repeat attempt, older logs may be of use.
I think that ELM has a much longer burn time, and a stronger, prouder smell, that reminds me of my heritage.
It's really not a question of what logs to keep, but how long to keep them. You should keep logs of requests, attacks, e-mails, routing information, anything that you might actually need, but only keep them for the appropriate period of time. You really don't want to have to dedicate a tape changer to this anyway, do you?
E-mail, routing information, and the like, should have a relatively short lifespan, if a person is being harassed, they should report it quickly. You should allow them a week or 2 for turnaround in such cases, and burn the necessary information to a CD or other storage media for any followup needed, when there is a report. You shouldn't, however, keep a long papertrail on your users, this only invades their privacy. If there is a legitimate need for such logs, it will arise relatively quickly.
Attack logs should be kept longer. All attack logs should be analyzed and damage should be evaluated. Appropriate individuals should be informed of the attack based on what has been compromised. Even these, however, should be trashed after a period of time. Do you really care about an unsuccessful attack 2 years ago? Probably not, you might, however, care about someone who root-kitted your server a year ago, since they probably still have the passwords of at least a few of your users.
It should be refreshing to the slashdot audience to see that people in government are taking a a sound and sane look at these laws. It is a rather interesting way to put it, but finally someone who makes a difference in all of this has said, "Look RIAA, you're using extremely bad business practices and abusing positions that you pretty much illegally set up for yourselves in the first place, this just isn't practical or right or even really sane."
Don't make me come and spank you!
It was a joke, man...
Darn it, we almost got away with it until you had to tell them that it wouldn't work CmdrTaco. Come on man, who's side are you on?