So let's say, for the sake of argument, that you have a list of all your sources -- names, addresses,
phone numbers, etc.
Then you could match against that list, and know what to hide from notes, articles, etc.
You could ask the journalist for a nickname for each
person whose information is used in their notes, etc. and replace "555-1212" with "BunnySlipper's Phone Number".
So any info saved in such a system has all references to actual names, phone numbers, etc of sources replaced by nickname references, and the
info for each person so nicknamed is in an address book so they can get it back; if they can read the addressbook and know the nickname-person mapping.
This mapping could be stored encrypted with a password that only the reporter knows, as could the addressbook data itself.
Further, this encrypted info could be kept on a thumb drive that the reporter would keep with them, which they could hide/swallow/destroy if they felt so moved.
Except of course where Beatles is Beethoven -- in particular Because is
based
on Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata (well,
backwards anyway).
And of course, we can't forget Roll Over Beethoven, although that was of course written by Chuck Berry:-)...
Just a note, the same sort of logic catches a lot of intrusions, since intruders install network scanners as their first or second order of business. (It blocks onsite nodes which start acting dangerous, too...)
...a little package called
AutoBlocker
which analyzes netflow data in real time, and blocks
sites at the border router for a while when they appear to be trying to do bad things.
Of course, it's needed some tuning so it wouldn' think that things that should be talking to multiple systems in a short time window don't get blocked...
Suppose you work for Months or Years to create a game, intending to sell it, and nobody copies it,
but nobody buys it anyway... This happens all the time.
By your reasoning, we should be paying the mothers of any attractive person we enjoy looking at -- we're enjoying the result of their labor without paying them. Actually, this would be an interesting legal premise, but I don't think it is a premise of any existing legal system.
The ACLU seems to have gotten in bed with the big dogs on this one
And what's wrong with that? They're acting within their charter, and for once they can get on the good side of the publishing industry (or at least part of it...)
you do not need to break encryption to copy a DVD. You can copy the encrypted bits all you want.
you doneed to decrypt to play the DVD.
So all of the claimed DMCA violations are complete bull, as the encryption is not actually a copy protection mechanism -- it is a play-prevention mechanism.
Any exact copy of a DVD will play in all the same DVD players that the original played in.
"...is 'Information and Communication literacy' just a way for ETS to make money by selling more tests?"
I think that hits the nail squarely on the head.
Of course, that's ETS's business, so you should expect that. The real question is, (assuming it works -- and they do make money on it), what does it say about the state of such literacy, when folks need to pay someone else to figure out if people have it...
Actually, they mentioned in the article that they wanted to test some Antecs, but couldn't get them in time; and they're planning to do another round of tests in another month or two, and include them.
I didn't see any mention of Sparkle -- maybe you should send the guy a note and ask him to include them.
Myself I want them to test 1U rackmount power supplies, 'cause the difference between
74% and 79% efficiency on a rack of 16 1U boxes
comes out to over 3 amps per rack...
Soviet Russia was not communist (although arguably socialist.) They used communist ideas in their propaganda, surely, and folks called them communists for that reason, but they certainly weren't doing what Marx advocated.
It is a lot like calling the current crop of middle-eastern terrorists "Islamic". They use the terms and selected verbiage of Islam as propaganda for their cause, but their actions are anything but what Mohammed proposed.
Laser levels, dude. A level line all around the room at whatever height, so you can hang all your cabinets, pictures, whatever on the same level.
Also laser measurers; don't hang a tape measure hook, and stretch it 10 feet just to have it jump off -- just shine the light from here to the wall and it tells you how far away the wall is to +-0.5mm.
There are probably others i'm not thinking of just now...
Just think, you're a carpenter, using your
Laser level
to hang the cabinets in
a room level, and you happen to be near the airport.
Suddenly, the FBI bursts in and arrests you for
terrorism, 'cause the window is open and the laser light happened to shine on an airplane.
PRODUCT DETAILS
4 times brighter laser for best line visibility. Great for brightly lit conditions.
360 rotation for expansive 120 ft. work area
3M® Command Strips® mount the tool to any surface and remove with no damage - work hands free
Dual bubble vials are easy to read for accurate horizontal and vertical layouts
Distance control pivot action for adjusting line length and visibility
IDEAL FOR
- Hanging Cabinets or Heavy Shelving
- Leveling Trim Work
- Ceilings & Flooring
- Picture Arrangements
- Getting Arrested by FBI:-O
This is getting really silly, and really scary, both at the same time.
Re:Do you know what you are saying?
on
Defining Google
·
· Score: 1
One of the secrets to being able to understand the implementation behind an API is something like a computer science degree -- If you've learned basic abstract data storage ideas like stacks, lists, queues, decks, dictionaries, etc. and basic methods of implementing them like arrays, linked lists, balanced trees, hash tables, etc. you can look at a brief description in an API reference and know what it means as far as data allocation, runtime performance, etc.
On the other hand, in the vast majority of cases, you don't care -- you only need to worry about those cases in the 10% of code where your program spends 90% of its time. The difference between
5n and n**2 runtime is pretty nominal when n never gets much over 5...
So the place you need the guy with the hard-core Computer Science degree is when you want to make your programs run faster and use less memory. Clearly as we look at, say, Microsoft, this is not a priority,;-)
Once again, free as in beer is not what free software means.
The free software movement says (as well as any such loosely defined group can be said to say anything) that people should get paid for writing, distributing, and supporting software, but that the software itself should not be restrictively licensed -- i.e. the customer should be able to make changes, (or hire someone else to make changes) to the software if they choose. The reasons to go back to the original author for such work are:
He/She knows the code better, and so can do the job more quickly and efficiently
you got such good support from your initial efforts with the software you want to go back to them for more.
As opposed to the Bad Reasons to go back to a software vendor:
if you want someone else to do a similar package they'll have to start from scratch
if anyone else modifies the software, the original vendor will sue you into bankruptcy and beyond.
Yes, some people take advantage of the license to simply get the software without paying for it. But then they don't get good support. And sometimes they send you improvements for free, so you have a better product to provide to your paying customers.
The point is, if you aren't providing support, documentation, etc. the software isn't worth much anyway. And if you are providing support, charge for the support. But don't leave people in the position where if you go out of business, or stop working on a given package anymore, they're S.O.L. because only you can modify the code.
Oh, but I do care! I care that each year a man with a gun comes and steals my money and spends it on programs that have no substantiated scientific basis! Yes, there's evedince that the environment is changing, but the causality has not been proven.
Actually, the people who are doing this research are simply trying to predict the weather -- annual rainfalls, hurricanes, etc. If you don't think its worth the tax money to predict the course of hurricane Charley, and thereby save lots of lives, then I'm forced to disagree with you.
The fact of the matter is, if you don't take CO2 levels into consideration, you can't predict the weather even with the moderate accuracy available today. Thats why all of these places are measuring CO2 levels -- not out of some global-warming-research rip-off, but to accurately predict the weather.
I think you owe the researchers who do that sort of work an apology. They're out there doing careful research that saves lives and protects people and businesses. You're making baseless and insulting claims about them and their motives.
Next thing you know, you'll be complaining about firemen's associations publishing electrical codes and not letting you wire your 220V circuits with telephone wire...
...so the interaction you describe (event -> server, update->client) requires at least two network packets. So sending the tree updates versus sending the whole tree is a really nominal savings -- maybe 30 bytes of a 1k frame.
So making the + sign in the tree listing an html link which yeilds a new page with the tree unfolded
really doesn't cost you much different in performance, and it requires much less smarts and compatability on the browser side.
Now on the other hand, if you're text-editing a 10k document, and resending it on every edit action, that would suck...
Anyhow, my point is that the example you give doesn't show the savings well.
Except that approach clearly doesn't work -- all the prisons are already filled over capacity with people arrested on drug offenses -- it hasn't changed the laws, they've just used it as an excuse to build more prisons -> more money to you know who.
If all you're doing is tying up police, they'll just hire more police, and advocate privatizing the police force so they can make money off of that, too. What you have to do is figure out who is making all the money from the current situation, and how people acting in concert can stop that money from flowing.
So you have to ask yourself, who is making all the money from whatever you care about being illegal?
Two groups:
those who sell it at astronomicly marked up prices
those who profit from lots of people being in jail.
with, I suspect, the former group making the most money & therefore having the strongest interest.
This is exactly the kind of thing that gives civil disobedience a bad name. The people who successfully used civil disobedience (Ghandi, Martin Luther King, etc.) figured out where the benefit to the people in power was in the current system, and organized specific protests designed to remove those benefits.
So Ghandi figured out that the British were making a fortune on the salt tax, and had made making sea salt illegal to make more tax money, so he organized lots of people to break that law and make sea salt. The point was not to flout the law, but rather to stop the money.
Now do the similar analysis: According to your statement, the people profiting from the current drug laws are "...making tons of money by investing in corporate prison systems".
You are proposing to get a factor of 10 or 100 more people arressted and jailed for each drug bust. So tell me, does that make those coprporate prison investors more money or less money?
You have to actually learn from history to make a difference.
I think the Christian Coalition types have already lost -- because the politicians have figured out that they can simply pay lip service to Christian Coalition issues -- that is:
Crow about "family values"
Talk about the importance of Jesus in their life.
pass known-to-be-unconstitutional anti-abortion laws (which are quickly struck down in the courts)
pass probably-unconstitutional same-sex-marriage bans (which at the state level have been struck down as unconstitutional in some states already)
which can be summarized as either just plain hot air, and passing laws the courts will throw out.
The Christian Coalition types lap this lip service up and come back for more, and the politicians laugh all the way to their publicly elected offices, even though the actual legel situation with respect to pornography, marriage, abortion, etc. doesn't actually change, modulo the time it takes assorted laws to get struck down by the courts.
Slashdot Mirror
So let's say, for the sake of argument, that you have a list of all your sources -- names, addresses, phone numbers, etc.
Then you could match against that list, and know what to hide from notes, articles, etc.
You could ask the journalist for a nickname for each person whose information is used in their notes, etc. and replace "555-1212" with "BunnySlipper's Phone Number".
So any info saved in such a system has all references to actual names, phone numbers, etc of sources replaced by nickname references, and the info for each person so nicknamed is in an address book so they can get it back; if they can read the addressbook and know the nickname-person mapping.
This mapping could be stored encrypted with a password that only the reporter knows, as could the addressbook data itself.
Further, this encrypted info could be kept on a thumb drive that the reporter would keep with them, which they could hide/swallow/destroy if they felt so moved.
Except of course where Beatles is Beethoven -- in particular Because is based on Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata (well, backwards anyway). And of course, we can't forget Roll Over Beethoven, although that was of course written by Chuck Berry :-)...
Just a note, the same sort of logic catches a lot of intrusions, since intruders install network scanners as their first or second order of business. (It blocks onsite nodes which start acting dangerous, too...)
Of course, it's needed some tuning so it wouldn' think that things that should be talking to multiple systems in a short time window don't get blocked...
Certainly nobody forced you to write the program.
Suppose you work for Months or Years to create a game, intending to sell it, and nobody copies it, but nobody buys it anyway... This happens all the time.
By your reasoning, we should be paying the mothers of any attractive person we enjoy looking at -- we're enjoying the result of their labor without paying them. Actually, this would be an interesting legal premise, but I don't think it is a premise of any existing legal system.
- you do not need to break encryption to copy a DVD. You can copy the encrypted bits all you want.
- you doneed to decrypt to play the DVD.
So all of the claimed DMCA violations are complete bull, as the encryption is not actually a copy protection mechanism -- it is a play-prevention mechanism.Any exact copy of a DVD will play in all the same DVD players that the original played in.
Lisdexics of the world Untie and Lure!
Of course, that's ETS's business, so you should expect that. The real question is, (assuming it works -- and they do make money on it), what does it say about the state of such literacy, when folks need to pay someone else to figure out if people have it...
The argument isn't over whether to use solar energy, it is whether to use it more directly, or less directly.
And of course, solar energy is nuclear energy; it's just the reactor is already built, and near enough to take advantage of.
I didn't see any mention of Sparkle -- maybe you should send the guy a note and ask him to include them.
Myself I want them to test 1U rackmount power supplies, 'cause the difference between 74% and 79% efficiency on a rack of 16 1U boxes comes out to over 3 amps per rack...
It is a lot like calling the current crop of middle-eastern terrorists "Islamic". They use the terms and selected verbiage of Islam as propaganda for their cause, but their actions are anything but what Mohammed proposed.
Also laser measurers; don't hang a tape measure hook, and stretch it 10 feet just to have it jump off -- just shine the light from here to the wall and it tells you how far away the wall is to +-0.5mm.
There are probably others i'm not thinking of just now...
Um... how about seeing how fast the plane is going? After all, police now frequently use laser speed guns instead of radar ones.
This is getting really silly, and really scary, both at the same time.
On the other hand, in the vast majority of cases, you don't care -- you only need to worry about those cases in the 10% of code where your program spends 90% of its time. The difference between 5n and n**2 runtime is pretty nominal when n never gets much over 5...
So the place you need the guy with the hard-core Computer Science degree is when you want to make your programs run faster and use less memory. Clearly as we look at, say, Microsoft, this is not a priority, ;-)
That's a question I can agree with.
The free software movement says (as well as any such loosely defined group can be said to say anything) that people should get paid for writing, distributing, and supporting software, but that the software itself should not be restrictively licensed -- i.e. the customer should be able to make changes, (or hire someone else to make changes) to the software if they choose. The reasons to go back to the original author for such work are:
- He/She knows the code better, and so can do the job more quickly and efficiently
- you got such good support from your initial efforts with the software you want to go back to them for more.
As opposed to the Bad Reasons to go back to a software vendor:- if you want someone else to do a similar package they'll have to start from scratch
- if anyone else modifies the software, the original vendor will sue you into bankruptcy and beyond.
Yes, some people take advantage of the license to simply get the software without paying for it. But then they don't get good support. And sometimes they send you improvements for free, so you have a better product to provide to your paying customers.The point is, if you aren't providing support, documentation, etc. the software isn't worth much anyway. And if you are providing support, charge for the support. But don't leave people in the position where if you go out of business, or stop working on a given package anymore, they're S.O.L. because only you can modify the code.
The fact of the matter is, if you don't take CO2 levels into consideration, you can't predict the weather even with the moderate accuracy available today. Thats why all of these places are measuring CO2 levels -- not out of some global-warming-research rip-off, but to accurately predict the weather.
I think you owe the researchers who do that sort of work an apology. They're out there doing careful research that saves lives and protects people and businesses. You're making baseless and insulting claims about them and their motives.
Next thing you know, you'll be complaining about firemen's associations publishing electrical codes and not letting you wire your 220V circuits with telephone wire...
So making the + sign in the tree listing an html link which yeilds a new page with the tree unfolded really doesn't cost you much different in performance, and it requires much less smarts and compatability on the browser side.
Now on the other hand, if you're text-editing a 10k document, and resending it on every edit action, that would suck...
Anyhow, my point is that the example you give doesn't show the savings well.
sigh.
If all you're doing is tying up police, they'll just hire more police, and advocate privatizing the police force so they can make money off of that, too. What you have to do is figure out who is making all the money from the current situation, and how people acting in concert can stop that money from flowing.
So you have to ask yourself, who is making all the money from whatever you care about being illegal? Two groups:
- those who sell it at astronomicly marked up prices
- those who profit from lots of people being in jail.
with, I suspect, the former group making the most money & therefore having the strongest interest.So why don't they use the same technology to call up the riot police -- have a "flash" riot sqad callup?
So Ghandi figured out that the British were making a fortune on the salt tax, and had made making sea salt illegal to make more tax money, so he organized lots of people to break that law and make sea salt. The point was not to flout the law, but rather to stop the money.
Now do the similar analysis: According to your statement, the people profiting from the current drug laws are "...making tons of money by investing in corporate prison systems". You are proposing to get a factor of 10 or 100 more people arressted and jailed for each drug bust. So tell me, does that make those coprporate prison investors more money or less money?
You have to actually learn from history to make a difference.
- Crow about "family values"
- Talk about the importance of Jesus in their life.
- pass known-to-be-unconstitutional anti-abortion laws (which are quickly struck down in the courts)
- pass known-to-be-unconstitutional anti-pornography laws (ditto)
- pass probably-unconstitutional same-sex-marriage bans (which at the state level have been struck down as unconstitutional in some states already)
which can be summarized as either just plain hot air, and passing laws the courts will throw out.The Christian Coalition types lap this lip service up and come back for more, and the politicians laugh all the way to their publicly elected offices, even though the actual legel situation with respect to pornography, marriage, abortion, etc. doesn't actually change, modulo the time it takes assorted laws to get struck down by the courts.