Not just no, but hell no. If we're going to watch TV in 'near live' time, we'll check our wishlists, check the todo list or watch a few minutes of that interesting but not riveting movie we have recorded. About 20 minutes in, we start watching.
Who has that many friends that they need a 10GB hard drive to store all their phone numbers?
Yeah, becasue no one wants to use their phone for anything except making and receiving phone calls. Except taking photos. And surfing the internet. An sending e-mail. And, these days, watching streaming video. Besides that, nothing at all. Except for rest of the stuff I missed.
I disagree - why isn't this bought up as copyright infringement instead? It's clearly that. Why bring the DMCA into this?
Because the DMCA is a much bigger, scarier stick with which to beat them, and probably carries the potential for greater penalty than 'simple' copyright infringement.
You're either 12 or 92 if you think 9-1-1 is useless for truly emergent situations. (To young to know better or too set in your ways to get rid of your rotary-dial phone with the administrative number to your local fire department stuck to the side.)
I won't say all, but many PSAPs (Public Safety Answering Points) have implemented Emergency Medical Dispatch (EMD) programs that allow the 9-1-1 telecommunicators to quickly get the right assistance on the way and then step the caller through a variety of pre-arrival instructions. These protocols very clearly define the steps to be taken for situations like choking, heart attacks, apparent anaphylactic shock, etc. No, the programs aren't perfect, but they have many documented saves that make the value of a well-trained 9-1-1 staff clear to anyone who actually looks into the question instead of just lipping off with stupid and incorrect generalizations.
Please feel free to just go ahead and call a priest instead of 9-1-1 when someone in your family has a heart attack.
I doubt users are going to put up with software on their system hogging the disk to do a complete DOD 7 pass write over deleted sectors...
...How are we "hogging" disk space to do a seven pass overwrite? If we overwrite the same hard drive blocks that originally made up a 46 kb file, the size of of the overwrite will be the size of those blocks, nothing more.
He didn't say hogging disk space. He said hogging the disk. I imagine that 7-pass over writing would involve a bit of I/O. Clearing enough content would indeed hog the disk while it was in progress.
Yes, the application could be written in such a way as to avoid this bottleneck, but I doubt that sharing I/O with other apps is on the top of the features list for that type program.
If those are the only two choices, I'd have to go with a Pit Bull. Scooby Doo is a cartoon, so reviving him would really just involve getting some fresh ink for the next panel.
I used the CIA figure for just the reason you said. Seems to make more sense to me. Following that line of reasoning, I agree with what you said at the end of your post, but the piracy we're dealing with here is by the government. I don't think the distribution of wealth throughout the general population makes any difference in this scenario.
Wow, we need to be careful here. We're having a logical, reasoned discussion. This may shoot our slashdot karma all to hell.
And while I'm ranting... I also have a little trouble with poor, underprivileged, developing Indonesia and its miniscule $827 BILLION GDP (16th largest economy in the world) whimpering about how it just can't afford to actually pay for the software its using. So goodness knows that those lower on the financial ladder should be cut a break as well. Australia, Taiwan, Netherlands, Belgium, Saudi Arabia, Austria, et als - free software for everyone!!
"Microsoft is being realistic. They can't force developing countries like us to solely use legal software since we can't afford it. They want us to gradually reduce our use of it."
Hmmm... Let's try that line of reasoning in some other situations, shall we?
(Robber/rapist/murderer let off with a $1 fine per offence) "The D.A. is being realistic. They can't force people who grew up under less-than-optimal circumstances to abide by the same moral code as the general populace since we didn't have any good role models. They want us to gradually reduce the amount of pillaging we do."
(Paris Hilton-esque spoiled rich kid gets caught making amateur porn; the world says 'tsk, tsk, tsk' and moves along) "The media is being realistic. They can't force people who grew up in circumstances so obscenely privileged as to defy description to abide by the same moral code as the general populace, else since we didn't have any good role models (We grew up in boarding schools in Europe, so we haven't a clue how our parents behaved, except when they wound up in the media themselves...) They want us to gradually reduce the amount of crap we fling at everyone we don't consider our social equals.
(Movie actor/professional athlete slapped on the wrist for some outrageous behavior that would wind most people up in jail for 30 days) The courts are being realistic. They can't force us to abide by the same moral code as the general populace because we rise above mere morals in our efforts to entertain the masses. We're simply too important and aloof to be bothered by morality and ethics. They want us to gradually reduce the number of hotel employees we bean with telephones when we're having a temper tantrum.
I was going to do politicians and sexual immorality/fraud next, but I'm getting nauseous...
Of course, if you read the summary above, it was a District Court of Appeals, not the Supremes....
Yeah, I'd agree with you if it weren't for that inconvenient first sentence in the actual news article...
"The United States Supreme Court has rejected Lexmark's petition for certiorari, upholding Static Control's position against the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and copyright issues raised by Lexmark in connection with Static Control's sale of Lexmark compatible chips.
Gee, and here I was thinking that without a brain, you didn't make any sense either.
I'm pretty sure that it would be possible to convince a judge that a sequence was random to a degree of certainty that it would be admissible as evidence. Unless I missed it, we haven't fingerprinted and validated the uniqueness of individual fingerprints of the entire human race. Fingerprints are - at least on occasion - admitted as evidence.
No, of course there would be no realistic way to prove the data were completely random, but I don't think many people except you misunderstood the intent of my comment. And for those who still have a woody over 'verifying' randomness, note the use of the word novel in the original post. F-i-c-t-i-o-n, dude. It was a story.
I do know that cosmic rays are random, and I wouldn't be surprised if some government agency put a detector on some satellite and is beaming down a stream of random numbers. Frankly, I'd be surprised if this isn't being done
I don't recall which book it was, but one of the opening scenes in a Tom Clancy novel has Jack Ryan discussing a process to verify that the random numbers generated from the reception of cosmic radiation are actually random. They were planning to use this for encryption...
t's also not really that economically feasible in the U.S. or Canada - we'd need to have MACHINES to do this, and we don't yet. Google could build one, probably, but hasn't yet.
Are you out of your mind? We don' need no steekin' machines. We'd just outsource it. To China, perhaps...
The Free Software Foundation (FSF) is a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) charity, like the Red Cross. Like most charities, we ask for donations of money, which we use to pay staff to promote the cause of free software.
Whjile I agree that the parent poster is wearing a 7 3/8 tinfoil hat, he didn't just pull the IBM-Nazi connection out of his ass. Among other sources, the Washington Post reported on this in 2001.
No, I don't think this means that they were an evil company in the late 30s - early 40s, but I do think it indicates that they were a big business. Global market, don't really care how you use our products - just buy them.
Personally, I'm waiting for the version that interfaces with your brain.
Barclay> "...Tie both consoles into the Enterprise main computer core utilizing neural scan interface."
Enterprise computer >"There is no such device on file."
Barclay> "No problem--here's how you BUILD it..."
Right on! There's absolutely no freaking way it would be relevant to the officer who stopped me for speeding to know that I have been cited four times for doing 90 mph in a school zone! Keep that irrelevant crap hidden!
But the states should have a right to keep such law enforcement at the local level if they wish.
Oh, my. Sounds a hell of a lot like the argument that the South used to secede from the Union. 'Ain't none uh your damn Yankee business if we want to keep slaves...'. Dude, I'm FROM the South and that's a stupid argument.
The federal government has NO authority to do all of the things you outlined above. Read article 1, section 8, as well as the 9th and 10th ammendment.
OK, let's see - I assume that you're NOT referring to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution - '(The Congress shall have Power to)...regulate Commerce... among the several States', because if you were I'm pretty sure you'd comprehend that the same thesis that drives the Interstate Commerce Commission drives the ability to provide legitimate law enforcement information like DL status and histories across state lines.
As for Amendments IX and X, if the above isn't clear to you, then I suppose you'd think that these amendments apply to this situation. Luckily that's no more valid a train of thought than your 'keep such law enforcement at the local level' was.
And what happens when everything you do is public record? Anyone who wants to can find out what you bought at the grocery store last week, or what you ordered at Denny's 6 years ago? Isn't that a bit creepy? Once all knowledge is public, the government can regulate ANYTHING.
OK, I'll concede that one, although I don't consider it much of a concession. I'd strongly oppose the ability of any Law Enforcement Agency to gather such data about me without a warrant. I'm not sure how accesing my driving record after having stopped me for a driving violation compares, but if you think it does, OK.
I think I'll just skip out on the 'Information wants to be free!' rallying cry of uber-nerds everywhere with regards to public information.
I will give you props, though for not posting as an AC...
Well, all I can say is that I've been moderated up to five and so have most of the intelligent replies to my comment - whether they agree with me or not...
I dislike the fact that the state treats driving as a privilege not a right -- I cannot go to work without a car. I can't simply choose not to get a liscence.
Sure you can - live on a farm and raise hogs. Farm equipment generally doesn't require a driver's license unless you're driving significant distances on public (notice that - public) roads. If that doesn't appeal to you, well, you can take public transportation. Nothing at all preventing you from working, unless you feel you have some God-given right to be able to do whatever you want without having to balance that opportunity against living in the real world where your actions impact other people.
A professional black man I work with made a trip by car from Washington state to Georgia in 2003, going the long way through California. He drives normally, doesn't speed, isn't reckless or drunk, but he IS quite black. He was pulled over once or twice in every single state . The traffic stops were mostly to hassle him for DWB, but he did get two un-earned tickets. On one of them he written up for 15 over when he was actually doing 10 under. Frankly I'm suspect of most instances of people claiming they were stopped for DWB. I don't by any means deny that it happens, but I've worked with literally thousands of police officers in dozens of jurisdictions over the last 20 years, and I can probably count on the fingers of one hand the number of flaming assholes who would make that kind of stop.
I'm white, but I drive a sports car. I can't count the number of times I've been written up for 5, 10 or 20 faster than what I was doing, just because I was in a sports car.
This, however, I'll call complete crap unless you live in some weird Anonymous Coward part of the world I've never visited. I drove a bright red Trans-AM with a big-assed V-8 engine for 6-7 years, and I was NEVER stopped for anything unreasonable. To get written for a higher speed than you were actually going you have ot push pretty hard. Screaming about your rights being violated by The Man is a good start.
Besides that, if you actually can't count the number oftimes you were stopped and charged improperly, you must have been stopped quite a few times and legitimately charged. That mens you're either a liar or a freaking maniac who I'd prefere to see off theroad for the safety of every human being in your path. Exactly the reason I like LEOs to be able to get your history no matter where in the US you were cited.
Slashdot Mirror
Not just no, but hell no. If we're going to watch TV in 'near live' time, we'll check our wishlists, check the todo list or watch a few minutes of that interesting but not riveting movie we have recorded. About 20 minutes in, we start watching.
Yeah, becasue no one wants to use their phone for anything except making and receiving phone calls. Except taking photos. And surfing the internet. An sending e-mail. And, these days, watching streaming video. Besides that, nothing at all. Except for rest of the stuff I missed.
This article has a little more info, including a projected price of $18.50/GB.
Because the DMCA is a much bigger, scarier stick with which to beat them, and probably carries the potential for greater penalty than 'simple' copyright infringement.
No, sorry. Those are all cute movies, but THIS is the one to watch.
You're either 12 or 92 if you think 9-1-1 is useless for truly emergent situations. (To young to know better or too set in your ways to get rid of your rotary-dial phone with the administrative number to your local fire department stuck to the side.)
I won't say all, but many PSAPs (Public Safety Answering Points) have implemented Emergency Medical Dispatch (EMD) programs that allow the 9-1-1 telecommunicators to quickly get the right assistance on the way and then step the caller through a variety of pre-arrival instructions. These protocols very clearly define the steps to be taken for situations like choking, heart attacks, apparent anaphylactic shock, etc. No, the programs aren't perfect, but they have many documented saves that make the value of a well-trained 9-1-1 staff clear to anyone who actually looks into the question instead of just lipping off with stupid and incorrect generalizations.
Please feel free to just go ahead and call a priest instead of 9-1-1 when someone in your family has a heart attack.
He didn't say hogging disk space. He said hogging the disk. I imagine that 7-pass over writing would involve a bit of I/O. Clearing enough content would indeed hog the disk while it was in progress.
Yes, the application could be written in such a way as to avoid this bottleneck, but I doubt that sharing I/O with other apps is on the top of the features list for that type program.
If those are the only two choices, I'd have to go with a Pit Bull. Scooby Doo is a cartoon, so reviving him would really just involve getting some fresh ink for the next panel.
Wow, we need to be careful here. We're having a logical, reasoned discussion. This may shoot our slashdot karma all to hell.
There's gotta be a karma whore joke in here somewhere...
I know its not that cut and dried, but sheesh...
Hmmm... Let's try that line of reasoning in some other situations, shall we?
(Robber/rapist/murderer let off with a $1 fine per offence) "The D.A. is being realistic. They can't force people who grew up under less-than-optimal circumstances to abide by the same moral code as the general populace since we didn't have any good role models. They want us to gradually reduce the amount of pillaging we do."
(Paris Hilton-esque spoiled rich kid gets caught making amateur porn; the world says 'tsk, tsk, tsk' and moves along) "The media is being realistic. They can't force people who grew up in circumstances so obscenely privileged as to defy description to abide by the same moral code as the general populace, else since we didn't have any good role models (We grew up in boarding schools in Europe, so we haven't a clue how our parents behaved, except when they wound up in the media themselves...) They want us to gradually reduce the amount of crap we fling at everyone we don't consider our social equals.
(Movie actor/professional athlete slapped on the wrist for some outrageous behavior that would wind most people up in jail for 30 days) The courts are being realistic. They can't force us to abide by the same moral code as the general populace because we rise above mere morals in our efforts to entertain the masses. We're simply too important and aloof to be bothered by morality and ethics. They want us to gradually reduce the number of hotel employees we bean with telephones when we're having a temper tantrum.
I was going to do politicians and sexual immorality/fraud next, but I'm getting nauseous...
Yeah, I'd agree with you if it weren't for that inconvenient first sentence in the actual news article...
"The United States Supreme Court has rejected Lexmark's petition for certiorari, upholding Static Control's position against the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and copyright issues raised by Lexmark in connection with Static Control's sale of Lexmark compatible chips.
I'm pretty sure that it would be possible to convince a judge that a sequence was random to a degree of certainty that it would be admissible as evidence. Unless I missed it, we haven't fingerprinted and validated the uniqueness of individual fingerprints of the entire human race. Fingerprints are - at least on occasion - admitted as evidence.
No, of course there would be no realistic way to prove the data were completely random, but I don't think many people except you misunderstood the intent of my comment. And for those who still have a woody over 'verifying' randomness, note the use of the word novel in the original post. F-i-c-t-i-o-n, dude. It was a story.
Get over yourself.
I don't recall which book it was, but one of the opening scenes in a Tom Clancy novel has Jack Ryan discussing a process to verify that the random numbers generated from the reception of cosmic radiation are actually random. They were planning to use this for encryption...
Are you out of your mind? We don' need no steekin' machines. We'd just outsource it. To China, perhaps...
BUZZZZ! Sorry that answer was incorrect!!
From the Gnu project web site ;
The Free Software Foundation (FSF) is a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) charity, like the Red Cross. Like most charities, we ask for donations of money, which we use to pay staff to promote the cause of free software.
No, I don't think this means that they were an evil company in the late 30s - early 40s, but I do think it indicates that they were a big business. Global market, don't really care how you use our products - just buy them.
Barclay> "...Tie both consoles into the Enterprise main computer core utilizing neural scan interface."
Enterprise computer >"There is no such device on file."
Barclay> "No problem--here's how you BUILD it..."
I'm pretty sure that phones will retain the option activate GPS all the time or only when dialing 9-1-1.
Right on! There's absolutely no freaking way it would be relevant to the officer who stopped me for speeding to know that I have been cited four times for doing 90 mph in a school zone! Keep that irrelevant crap hidden!
Oh, my. Sounds a hell of a lot like the argument that the South used to secede from the Union. 'Ain't none uh your damn Yankee business if we want to keep slaves...'. Dude, I'm FROM the South and that's a stupid argument.
The federal government has NO authority to do all of the things you outlined above. Read article 1, section 8, as well as the 9th and 10th ammendment.
OK, let's see - I assume that you're NOT referring to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution - '(The Congress shall have Power to)...regulate Commerce ... among the several States', because if you were I'm pretty sure you'd comprehend that the same thesis that drives the Interstate Commerce Commission drives the ability to provide legitimate law enforcement information like DL status and histories across state lines.
As for Amendments IX and X, if the above isn't clear to you, then I suppose you'd think that these amendments apply to this situation. Luckily that's no more valid a train of thought than your 'keep such law enforcement at the local level' was.
And what happens when everything you do is public record? Anyone who wants to can find out what you bought at the grocery store last week, or what you ordered at Denny's 6 years ago? Isn't that a bit creepy? Once all knowledge is public, the government can regulate ANYTHING.
OK, I'll concede that one, although I don't consider it much of a concession. I'd strongly oppose the ability of any Law Enforcement Agency to gather such data about me without a warrant. I'm not sure how accesing my driving record after having stopped me for a driving violation compares, but if you think it does, OK.
I think I'll just skip out on the 'Information wants to be free!' rallying cry of uber-nerds everywhere with regards to public information.
I will give you props, though for not posting as an AC...
Well, all I can say is that I've been moderated up to five and so have most of the intelligent replies to my comment - whether they agree with me or not...
Sure you can - live on a farm and raise hogs. Farm equipment generally doesn't require a driver's license unless you're driving significant distances on public (notice that - public) roads. If that doesn't appeal to you, well, you can take public transportation. Nothing at all preventing you from working, unless you feel you have some God-given right to be able to do whatever you want without having to balance that opportunity against living in the real world where your actions impact other people.
Frankly I'm suspect of most instances of people claiming they were stopped for DWB. I don't by any means deny that it happens, but I've worked with literally thousands of police officers in dozens of jurisdictions over the last 20 years, and I can probably count on the fingers of one hand the number of flaming assholes who would make that kind of stop.
I'm white, but I drive a sports car. I can't count the number of times I've been written up for 5, 10 or 20 faster than what I was doing, just because I was in a sports car.
This, however, I'll call complete crap unless you live in some weird Anonymous Coward part of the world I've never visited. I drove a bright red Trans-AM with a big-assed V-8 engine for 6-7 years, and I was NEVER stopped for anything unreasonable. To get written for a higher speed than you were actually going you have ot push pretty hard. Screaming about your rights being violated by The Man is a good start.
Besides that, if you actually can't count the number oftimes you were stopped and charged improperly, you must have been stopped quite a few times and legitimately charged. That mens you're either a liar or a freaking maniac who I'd prefere to see off theroad for the safety of every human being in your path. Exactly the reason I like LEOs to be able to get your history no matter where in the US you were cited.