I don't think they've got any hope of DA->AD->DA resistant watermarking that a moron couldn't defeat. As far as I'm concerned, they'll be holding these contests until they give up. They won't -ever- come up with anything difficult to defeat. I promise.
BTW: the 'who cares?' is in the spirit of Starstruck. ---
I remember sites where you could sign up (on the net) for a free shell. It was just a special login script. Any data you put in there could be entirely fabricated, and you'd get a login.
If that's not simple enough, in theory one could simply take advantage of one of the 'hacker wargames' systems, or the like, where you automagically get a shell, and I believe a public_html dir. It's bad mojo, but technically it would work... ---
Gnutella and Freenet are obvious distribution models. But surely
RIAA and the MPAA are scrutinizing them for vulnerability to legal
bombardment. Will they really hold up? A sort of free-for-all
model worked for distributing DeCSS; could that work routinely?
I was hoping this would happen with the CueCat drivers, but apparently it hasn't. Then again, it is trivial to write a program to use it.
I disagree, in a way. We use plenty of things from other languages. Like any 'scientific' word, which essentially means it's really latin or greek or worse (*G*). (silver orange... I must know you...) ---
You know, personally, I cannot stand Christianity. At the same time, I spell it out, and capitalize it. I do the same for Satanism, Discordianism and Zen, which I don't mind so much. I'll do it for any religion, regardless of how I feel about it. ---
I dunno. How young are you thinking? I'm getting far less religous and far more spiritual as I grow up. This 'spirit' is entirely within myslef, of course. The more I grow, the less I believe in greater devine entities, and the more I believe in the devine nature of existence itself. I've never been so content in my life. ---
Actually, I did a lot of research into occultism, and you wouldn't believe some of the prevalent memes. If you took them in the context that most 'occult practitioners' do -- self deception, it's just that. If you really take a hard look at it, some things are unbelievably accurate. Like the life-board business. It's positive thinking, visualization and all that jazz. It's what we'd call 'psychology' if we took it seriously. There have been numerous TV specials about stuff like this... and there have been numerous quotes about how all of science was at one point considered 'magic.'
The truth is everywhere you look, it just depends on -how- you look. ---
Aye, I've heard Zen compared to insanity. In an asylum, the 'crazies' can tell who's faking and who isn't -- even though the 'sane persons' can't. Zen is the same way. ---
This would make it difficult to read out the program. However it
doesn't sound like it would be too much work to re-write the code from
scratch.
Tell me about it. From the given description, that thing is so cheap and simple (yet effective) that I'm no longer wondering why they're giving them away. ---
I think virtual cheques would make much more sense. Slap some RSA keys on it and you've got something that could work. Who needs to go in debt when they have money? ---
I was about to laugh, as I was expecting this... but there's no reason for it. What do they lose if people make practical use of it? It's not like they're losing profits. They should have expected this anyhow. Stupid marketroids. ---
My take is a little different, but I do desire the same effect.
I think there should be more freedom for people and companies to do whatever they like, including doing whatever with any data they're given. At the same time, consumerism is revolting to me, which is the whole drive for targetted advertising. Without people buying stuff they don't need (and in cases, don't want) targetted advertising is pretty useless. Right now, targetted advertising doesn't really cut it anyhow, because people become annoyed and offended.
What are we going to do about it? Taking away freedoms associated with collected data isn't going to solve anything... taking away the incentives to do the nasty things is what will work, I think.
My first encounter with the words 'Operating System' also involved the word 'disk'. My point is, in my mind, an OS is simply a System used to Operate the computer.
What we refer to now as an OS and what once was an OS are likely terribly different things. MSDOS wasn't the only Disk OS or DOS. I remember TRSDOS, among others. DOSen generally would perform basic disk maintenance as well as loading programs from disk into memory, to be executed. It's more likely that the first OS had no application library features and was simply a media control system. ---
If MAPS simply issued the list as a list of servers that qualified against specific criteria, and made that criteria (and the methods used to gather it) there would be no case whatever for slander, since it's undeniable fact.
If people conclude that only spammers get onto the list, based on the criteria, that's their own perogative, and therefore has nothing to do with MAPS.
It's all semantics, but it can make a massive difference. Functionally, everything would be the same, but no one could legally tell MAPS to shut up, unless there was an entry on the list that did not fit the criteria.
Funny, cable access (here) is just about as cheap as dialup, and much cheaper than unlimited dedicated dialup. But, I don't really care, 'cause I'm on a T1 at the moment. =)
So should the math-inept complain to TI that their calculators are too hard to operate? Obviously not. The theory _is_ important, I agree -- this is the point I was trying to prove with that sarcastic post.
Sure. Of course, your doctor isn't using a program to diagnose you (I hope.)
Just because computers are flashy, and can do lots of stuff on their own (it seems,) doesn't mean that there's any less discipline involved in thier use than anything else.
The point isn't that everyone must learn computers inside and out. It's that people should realize that there's just as much to them as there is to anything else. Doctors wouldn't get away whining about how thier scalpel isn't user-friendly enough.
The _real_ point, the one that's actually on topic, is that there's hardly anyone qualified to use computers as a teaching tool. There's no magic in computers, but perhaps in the occasional wizard that sits down at one. People assume too much, and then they blame technology.
Thank you! I've been trying to get the point across for years that GUIs inhibit learning.
First a small rant.
I learned most of what I did because things were hard, intellectually. Now all anyone ever says is, "You'd make a lot of money if you could make ____ easier." Finally, someone said that about the install process for linux... I was mad. If I didn't install linux when there were no GUIs to help you... I'd be useless to my employers right now. I learned more in 50 hours (without sleep) than the entirety of school has taught me about computers.
It's apalling when EUs (end-users) who think they own the world complain about how difficult _____ is, and how every tech they know should go about fixing it.
What if we did eliminate every challenge in computer operation? If there's no challenge, there's no point.
Now, for the point.
In my opinion, computers shouldn't be marked unfit for the classroom, rather, I believe that most teachers should be marked unfit to teach a classroom full of computers. The assumption that computers inherently have a good or bad effect on learning is naive. If you put a capable teacher behind them, on the otherhand, you'll have more realistic results.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think they've got any hope of DA->AD->DA resistant watermarking that a moron couldn't defeat. As far as I'm concerned, they'll be holding these contests until they give up. They won't -ever- come up with anything difficult to defeat. I promise.
BTW: the 'who cares?' is in the spirit of Starstruck.
---
I remember sites where you could sign up (on the net) for a free shell. It was just a special login script. Any data you put in there could be entirely fabricated, and you'd get a login.
If that's not simple enough, in theory one could simply take advantage of one of the 'hacker wargames' systems, or the like, where you automagically get a shell, and I believe a public_html dir. It's bad mojo, but technically it would work...
---
Gnutella and Freenet are obvious distribution models. But surely RIAA and the MPAA are scrutinizing them for vulnerability to legal bombardment. Will they really hold up? A sort of free-for-all model worked for distributing DeCSS; could that work routinely?
I was hoping this would happen with the CueCat drivers, but apparently it hasn't. Then again, it is trivial to write a program to use it.
---
Interesting, I was asked very similar question once. My response was 'Yes.'
---
I disagree, in a way. We use plenty of things from other languages. Like any 'scientific' word, which essentially means it's really latin or greek or worse (*G*). (silver orange... I must know you...)
---
Aye! You've got just as much right, if not more, to tell off someone who's proselytizing you as they've got to proselytize in the first place.
---
You know, personally, I cannot stand Christianity. At the same time, I spell it out, and capitalize it. I do the same for Satanism, Discordianism and Zen, which I don't mind so much. I'll do it for any religion, regardless of how I feel about it.
---
I dunno. How young are you thinking? I'm getting far less religous and far more spiritual as I grow up. This 'spirit' is entirely within myslef, of course. The more I grow, the less I believe in greater devine entities, and the more I believe in the devine nature of existence itself. I've never been so content in my life.
---
Actually, I did a lot of research into occultism, and you wouldn't believe some of the prevalent memes. If you took them in the context that most 'occult practitioners' do -- self deception, it's just that. If you really take a hard look at it, some things are unbelievably accurate. Like the life-board business. It's positive thinking, visualization and all that jazz. It's what we'd call 'psychology' if we took it seriously. There have been numerous TV specials about stuff like this... and there have been numerous quotes about how all of science was at one point considered 'magic.'
The truth is everywhere you look, it just depends on -how- you look.
---
In discordianism, we phrase them less coherently and we call them 'mondos.'
Does a mondo hold hands with a koan?
Are they brothers or sisters?
---
Aye, I've heard Zen compared to insanity. In an asylum, the 'crazies' can tell who's faking and who isn't -- even though the 'sane persons' can't. Zen is the same way.
---
This would make it difficult to read out the program. However it doesn't sound like it would be too much work to re-write the code from scratch.
Tell me about it. From the given description, that thing is so cheap and simple (yet effective) that I'm no longer wondering why they're giving them away.
---
I think virtual cheques would make much more sense. Slap some RSA keys on it and you've got something that could work. Who needs to go in debt when they have money?
---
No, because I'm Canadian and the DMCA doesn't apply to me.
Althought it doesn't apply directly to you, it will affect you. It probably already has.
---
I was about to laugh, as I was expecting this... but there's no reason for it. What do they lose if people make practical use of it? It's not like they're losing profits. They should have expected this anyhow. Stupid marketroids.
---
My take is a little different, but I do desire the same effect.
I think there should be more freedom for people and companies to do whatever they like, including doing whatever with any data they're given. At the same time, consumerism is revolting to me, which is the whole drive for targetted advertising. Without people buying stuff they don't need (and in cases, don't want) targetted advertising is pretty useless. Right now, targetted advertising doesn't really cut it anyhow, because people become annoyed and offended.
What are we going to do about it? Taking away freedoms associated with collected data isn't going to solve anything... taking away the incentives to do the nasty things is what will work, I think.
---
Did it mention 'subject to change without notice'?
Scary, eh?
---
Good luck getting your '9-day-battery life, white-LED-backlit wireless anything box' to address it all. ;)
---
My first encounter with the words 'Operating System' also involved the word 'disk'. My point is, in my mind, an OS is simply a System used to Operate the computer.
What we refer to now as an OS and what once was an OS are likely terribly different things. MSDOS wasn't the only Disk OS or DOS. I remember TRSDOS, among others. DOSen generally would perform basic disk maintenance as well as loading programs from disk into memory, to be executed. It's more likely that the first OS had no application library features and was simply a media control system.
---
If MAPS simply issued the list as a list of servers that qualified against specific criteria, and made that criteria (and the methods used to gather it) there would be no case whatever for slander, since it's undeniable fact.
If people conclude that only spammers get onto the list, based on the criteria, that's their own perogative, and therefore has nothing to do with MAPS.
It's all semantics, but it can make a massive difference. Functionally, everything would be the same, but no one could legally tell MAPS to shut up, unless there was an entry on the list that did not fit the criteria.
My proof that laws are dumb.
---
script-fu: hash bang slash bin bash
Funny, cable access (here) is just about as cheap as dialup, and much cheaper than unlimited dedicated dialup. But, I don't really care, 'cause I'm on a T1 at the moment. =)
---
script-fu: hash bang slash bin bash
So should the math-inept complain to TI that their calculators are too hard to operate? Obviously not. The theory _is_ important, I agree -- this is the point I was trying to prove with that sarcastic post.
Thank you for taking the bait.
---
script-fu: hash bang slash bin bash
Sure. Of course, your doctor isn't using a program to diagnose you (I hope.)
Just because computers are flashy, and can do lots of stuff on their own (it seems,) doesn't mean that there's any less discipline involved in thier use than anything else.
The point isn't that everyone must learn computers inside and out. It's that people should realize that there's just as much to them as there is to anything else. Doctors wouldn't get away whining about how thier scalpel isn't user-friendly enough.
The _real_ point, the one that's actually on topic, is that there's hardly anyone qualified to use computers as a teaching tool. There's no magic in computers, but perhaps in the occasional wizard that sits down at one. People assume too much, and then they blame technology.
---
script-fu: hash bang slash bin bash
If we've got calculators, why teach math in school?
---
script-fu: hash bang slash bin bash
Thank you! I've been trying to get the point across for years that GUIs inhibit learning.
First a small rant.
I learned most of what I did because things were hard, intellectually. Now all anyone ever says is, "You'd make a lot of money if you could make ____ easier." Finally, someone said that about the install process for linux... I was mad. If I didn't install linux when there were no GUIs to help you... I'd be useless to my employers right now. I learned more in 50 hours (without sleep) than the entirety of school has taught me about computers.
It's apalling when EUs (end-users) who think they own the world complain about how difficult _____ is, and how every tech they know should go about fixing it.
What if we did eliminate every challenge in computer operation? If there's no challenge, there's no point.
Now, for the point.
In my opinion, computers shouldn't be marked unfit for the classroom, rather, I believe that most teachers should be marked unfit to teach a classroom full of computers. The assumption that computers inherently have a good or bad effect on learning is naive. If you put a capable teacher behind them, on the otherhand, you'll have more realistic results.
---
script-fu: hash bang slash bin bash