"You're kidding, right? This letter is completely unrelated to the matter at hand concerning Microsoft's request for censorship."
Perhaps our guy felt the censorship issue was a no-brainer if it goes to court whereas the letter from MS gave an opportunity to see if MS would answer some meatier questions. Besides, if you've seen enough letters from law firms you already know that requested information often leaves the other side scratching their head as to the pertinence of said information to the issues at hand.
Heck, how many times did that prosecutor object to Perry Mason's line of questioning in the final two minutes of a murder trial? Every week. Every week.
Ad Astra Per Aspera? Thought that was better translated as, "To the stars through difficulty." Hopefully that doesn't describe Transmeta's rise to stardom.
"Contrary to what you have written, you're website does not give me the URL of the page that I am going to. One link, the one to alistapart.com, does, but that is the only link that reveals the URL and then it is only because you included it as part of the description. Netscape Navigator never shows a URL."
Navigator shows no URL's on alistapart either, but several show up on webstandards.org (but not all).
"Please take a look at alistapart and see if you have the same complaints. Also, what do you think of webstandards.org?"
While I think the overall design is better on these two sites, his color choices lead me to believe he has some unresolved Halloween issues to deal with.
"....what makes him think he's someone to be taken seriously?"
So, we shouldn't take you seriously either?
I think he should be taken seriously because he states his case well, regardless of his moment of glory. By what standard should we grant someone our attention - to say that what they have to say is worth hearing? Should we listen to Richard Gere in reference to Tibet simply because of his greater public exposure as an actor (or perhaps the gerbil stories would have been enough for that)?
"I use MS mail programs and have never had any security problems. I never open attachments from strangers either!"
That's the kind of instruction that gets those who don't know what they're doing into trouble. The whole success of these virii is that they appear to be from someone you know, someone who has your email address in their address book.
"MS e-mail has been insecure because it has been customary to allow users to easily open attachments of any type. Period. Not because MS mail programs are poorly written or anything of that nature."
I would argue that the insecurity lies not in the accessibility of attachments, but from a combination of the automatic opening of attachments and, more importantly, the complete lack of security in allowing other software unsupervised access to the address book and mail privileges.
"As to the ILOVEYOU stuff - to the best of my knowledge, you had to click on the.vbs file to activate it. You don't go around running executables do you? So this virus/trojan is nothing more than a case of uneducated users trusting something they shouldn't."
You have to set an option to keep Outlook from automatically running.vbs files I believe. I don't think, for security's sake, that should even be an option.
If the best these folks could do is give the client an incomplete or broken web page, perhaps that represents the sum total of their dizzying intellect. In that light, I can see where they'd want to protect it. But then, I always try to see the other guy's point of view.
"If slashdot removes those comments, the DMCA has a precedent, and this site will be the place that set that precedent. I think it is of utmost importance not to do that."
No right is secure if there is no one willing to risk exposure to defend it. No right has ever been retained in the face of a threat without a champion.
"Amazing how quickly arrests were made. Unlike most cases in the US. I'm sure the suspect being little brown fellow from a third world country has nothing to do with it."
Why would you jump to that conclusion as opposed to the probability that the ratio of computers to population might be significantly lower in a 'third world country'? I don't suppose the fact that the virus practically came with a return address was a factor either. With that kind of rationale do you suppose that the DDOS investigation might have included the following exchange?
Fed 1: "(Sigh) Well, we just found out 'mafiaboy' is a white kid. Guess we'll have to look for another suspect."
Fed 2: "Yeah. But he's a Canadian white kid. For all we know he speaks French! Oui, mon ami?"
Fed 1: "Saaaayy... That's right! Let's go, and stop calling me Amy."
"I have no idea how it got through the firewall," Ghesquiere said. "It's supposed to be protected."
What gets me is that there were a couple of these quotes from spokespersons. Don't they bother to check with a geek before making statements? Do they expect current blood tests to check for previously unknown pathogens as well? Perhaps they expect their car radio presets to adjust themselves when a new station carrying a format they would like starts broadcasting.
"Just because you can't see doesn't mean you have no concept of a two dimensional surface!"
"I assume you can touch-type. You know, without looking, where you have to put your finger to press a given key, and you can see the result on-screen. Why would it be so terribly difficult to get an image of Netscape's layout in your head instead of the keyboard, and hear the button before you press it??"
I must have missed the part where they said, "Since blind people have no concept of 2 dimensional surfaces....."
I can see (no pun intended) where mousing presents additional challenges to those who are blind. Heck, I lose my cursor on the screen and I've got 20/20 vision or better. This is especially acute when most of the cursor is off the screen along the edge. Knowing the starting point of the cursor makes a difference. If I think the window I want is on the right side of the screen and my cursor is buried along that same side, moving right won't help.
I've worked with some blind friends (they'd turn on lights for me since I was handicapped and tripped over the furniture without them) and they do much better at remembering where things were left than I do. This isn't so much a function of 'enhanced' senses compensating as it is a matter of necessity. Maybe that ability would translate to the screen as well.
I would think a hot-key to center the cursor would be helpful in establishing a reference point to start mousing. Maybe the existing products do something similar already.
"China, India, many African countries, etc are having problems with feeding their current population properly. The land they live upon, apparently, simply can't support the number of people that they have."
I've not had an opportunity to study this subject with regard to China, but the problems in India and some African nations have little to do with the land's ability to provide for the current population.
There are a couple of primary factors behind India's "inability" to feed their population. One that is alluded to in several of these posts is overcrowding. This is different than overpopulation in the sense that there are large masses of people crowded into relatively small geography -- the majority of the people live in urban settings. It is far more difficult to be self-sustaining in an urban environment since you must have skills/goods that may be traded for what you need rather than providing your basic needs yourself. Another factor is that a significant percentage of the population are tied to a belief system that will not allow them to do any harm to other creatures. While this prevents them from eating meat, that is not as much a part of the problem as the refusal to shoo vermin from their grain bins.
Many of the problems we see in Africa are the result of political upheaval, tribal factions and despotic governments. When government tanks destroy acres and actes of crops in an effort to "relocate" portions of the rural population to neighboring countries, blaming lack of food on overpopulation doesn't wash. These same governments often commandeer relief supplies and very little actually gets to those who need it most. A great deal of it rots on the docks or finds its way into the black market at prices too high for the neediest people.
"While it is true that many instances of religiously motivated atrocities have taken place, they do not match the toll by totally irreligious movements."
You replied:
"This is deceptive and inaccurate."
It was an honest assesment.
"The Chinese cultural revolution... was a cult of personality based around chairman Mau. A very religious movement (worshipping a human instead of a god is still worship, and still religion)."
I would think that such hair-splitting would be found by most people to be far more deceptive. Most people are able to interpret the word religion contextually. For example: Exercising religiously is not in the same category as Islam. A vi zeaolot is not generally viewed as the spiritual equivalent of a devout christian.
"Hmmm, you're responding to a guy who's just pointed out the futility of using personal testimonials in these kinds of arguments, and your brilliant rebuttal is... a personal testimonial."
Yeah, and Riddick Bowe thinks he can be a Marine. He's too mentally impaired to know he can't. I know I've lost mental capacity, but maybe that's because I don't do drugs (well, there was that time I was invited to eat some brownies....).
"Can anyone think of a drug user who admits that their favorite drug might have nasty side effects? Or a drug virgin who admits that the government's stance on drugs could be completely wrong? Hmmm..."
Depends on what part of the government's stance we're talking about.
"And this makes the question illegitmate? Stick to the issues, please, and stop stuffing words into other people's mouths - nobody ever said different was bad."
I may not have communicated that as well as I should have. It was obvious from the way the question was framed and the inflection of the speaker and the other objections that they raised that this was not merely a request for information, but a way to legitimize their own belief that we were somehow harming our children (many of them coming right out and saying as much).
And people in fact do say 'different is bad' all the time.
"Well, I guess that's that then - nobody ever makes friends at school... because they're too busy going to school!"
Talk about stuffing words into other peoples mouths....
It doesn't necessarily follow that because there are opportunities outside of class that nobody, ever makes friends at school. That's your inference rather than my implication. You seem to want to hold me to a standard you're not willing to accept yourself. Sticking to the issues is fine, but you don't explain why my 'bottom line' statement is wrong. You just take exception to it. It seems to me that you are the one taking an either or stance on this issue. Mine was not the absolute statement you are making it out to be.
"I guess talking to the professor after class, or asking a cute guy/girl out, never happens. People never meet other people with similar ambitions and become friends. Nope, none of that happens in college.. that's not the real world! Instead, people go out and get a job.. and then don't work and socialize instead?!"
All I said was that there are ample opportunities outside of the academic system to socialize. I went on to say that someone who can't or won't avail themselves of opportunities in one venue will likely find themselves unable to do so in the other.
It may be that over the last 20 years I've had the socialization issue waved in my face so often that I'm a little quick on the draw, but I certainly don't see why my words would have elicited this response.
"All of those atrocities have occurred in the 20th century. While Religious atrocities have been happening since the beginning of human existence. Actually, I'll tell you what kills people; it isn't religion per se, its ideologies. People who believe in something so much, that anything is worth it to acquire their goals."
You're not really making the assumption that since the examples cited were all taken from a relatively recent timeframe (historically speaking) that there were only religious despots in prior centuries are you? I think you come a little closer to the truth when you mention that ideologies might be a better term to use than religions, but I'd press still further to find a root cause. Certainly ideologies give a group something to wrap its collective thoughts around and may become a rallying point, but I don't think that ideologies in themselves can bear the blame. There are many ideologies (including religious teachings) in which such activites would be anathema. I would consider myself a fanatic (based on the definitions of others) but my beliefs would never allow me to participate in a single killing, much less massive destruction.
All of these incidents may even carry a 'religious' fervor, but doesn't it really boil down to one (or a few) greedy individual exploiting the fears of others to create an atmosphere that makes the unthinkable seem-in the minds of the followers-inevitable. That greed may be for wealth, or power, or something else entirely, but isn't that really the common denominator in all of these large-scale human atrocities?
The Spanish Inquisition didn't really have anything to do with religion. Those in power were corrupt and either wanted to preserve or expand their power. Theirs was not a quest for God, but a lust for more power. Religion was simply the springboard for them to accomplish their goals. The 'church' was the politics of that day. Today one might use politics or business or even, yes, religion to further their own personal goals. And we blame the ideology.
Slashdot Mirror
Incidentally, that last throws the Fundies into a real snit. Which i think is good for them.'
I'd probably consider myself a fundamentalist, but I don't have a problem with your statement. It happens to be true.
carlos
Um. You may mean 1st and 2nd Chronicles as there is only one Judges. carlos
Perhaps our guy felt the censorship issue was a no-brainer if it goes to court whereas the letter from MS gave an opportunity to see if MS would answer some meatier questions. Besides, if you've seen enough letters from law firms you already know that requested information often leaves the other side scratching their head as to the pertinence of said information to the issues at hand.
Heck, how many times did that prosecutor object to Perry Mason's line of questioning in the final two minutes of a murder trial? Every week. Every week.
carlos
and right below that......
"Have you read the Moderator Guidelines yet?"
Sure, I've read Marx....
"....how the elephant got into my pajamas I'll never know."
carlos
Navigator shows no URL's on alistapart either, but several show up on webstandards.org (but not all).
carlos
While I think the overall design is better on these two sites, his color choices lead me to believe he has some unresolved Halloween issues to deal with.
carlos
So, we shouldn't take you seriously either?
I think he should be taken seriously because he states his case well, regardless of his moment of glory. By what standard should we grant someone our attention - to say that what they have to say is worth hearing? Should we listen to Richard Gere in reference to Tibet simply because of his greater public exposure as an actor (or perhaps the gerbil stories would have been enough for that)?
carlos
That's the kind of instruction that gets those who don't know what they're doing into trouble. The whole success of these virii is that they appear to be from someone you know, someone who has your email address in their address book.
"MS e-mail has been insecure because it has been customary to allow users to easily open attachments of any type. Period. Not because MS mail programs are poorly written or anything of that nature."
I would argue that the insecurity lies not in the accessibility of attachments, but from a combination of the automatic opening of attachments and, more importantly, the complete lack of security in allowing other software unsupervised access to the address book and mail privileges.
carlos
My IQ is too high to test, my Metachlorian count is off the charts, my nasal passages are clear, and I run a fractional second 440 meters.
carlos
You have to set an option to keep Outlook from automatically running .vbs files I believe. I don't think, for security's sake, that should even be an option.
carlos
If the best these folks could do is give the client an incomplete or broken web page, perhaps that represents the sum total of their dizzying intellect. In that light, I can see where they'd want to protect it. But then, I always try to see the other guy's point of view.
carlos
No right is secure if there is no one willing to risk exposure to defend it. No right has ever been retained in the face of a threat without a champion.
carlos
Guy wants to call his mommy and Linux is developed and advocated by 14 year olds.... OK.
"MS either makes standards, or follows them."
MS usually adopts standards and then implements them with a twist that makes everyone who follows the 'standard' incompatible.
"a global ...uneducated [for the most part] group of hackers...."
I'm trying to decide which attribute makes this statement an insult (reading contextually).
Please, don't moderate me up (hey, it worked so far for this guy).
carlos
Why would you jump to that conclusion as opposed to the probability that the ratio of computers to population might be significantly lower in a 'third world country'? I don't suppose the fact that the virus practically came with a return address was a factor either. With that kind of rationale do you suppose that the DDOS investigation might have included the following exchange?
Fed 1: "(Sigh) Well, we just found out 'mafiaboy' is a white kid. Guess we'll have to look for another suspect."
Fed 2: "Yeah. But he's a Canadian white kid. For all we know he speaks French! Oui, mon ami?"
Fed 1: "Saaaayy... That's right! Let's go, and stop calling me Amy."
carlos
Nah. Worms are asexual. Although..... You might want to check the other end of the script....
What gets me is that there were a couple of these quotes from spokespersons. Don't they bother to check with a geek before making statements? Do they expect current blood tests to check for previously unknown pathogens as well? Perhaps they expect their car radio presets to adjust themselves when a new station carrying a format they would like starts broadcasting.
carlos
"I assume you can touch-type. You know, without looking, where you have to put your finger to press a given key, and you can see the result on-screen. Why would it be so terribly difficult to get an image of Netscape's layout in your head instead of the keyboard, and hear the button before you press it??"
I must have missed the part where they said, "Since blind people have no concept of 2 dimensional surfaces....."
I can see (no pun intended) where mousing presents additional challenges to those who are blind. Heck, I lose my cursor on the screen and I've got 20/20 vision or better. This is especially acute when most of the cursor is off the screen along the edge. Knowing the starting point of the cursor makes a difference. If I think the window I want is on the right side of the screen and my cursor is buried along that same side, moving right won't help.
I've worked with some blind friends (they'd turn on lights for me since I was handicapped and tripped over the furniture without them) and they do much better at remembering where things were left than I do. This isn't so much a function of 'enhanced' senses compensating as it is a matter of necessity. Maybe that ability would translate to the screen as well.
I would think a hot-key to center the cursor would be helpful in establishing a reference point to start mousing. Maybe the existing products do something similar already.
carlos
I've not had an opportunity to study this subject with regard to China, but the problems in India and some African nations have little to do with the land's ability to provide for the current population.
There are a couple of primary factors behind India's "inability" to feed their population. One that is alluded to in several of these posts is overcrowding. This is different than overpopulation in the sense that there are large masses of people crowded into relatively small geography -- the majority of the people live in urban settings. It is far more difficult to be self-sustaining in an urban environment since you must have skills/goods that may be traded for what you need rather than providing your basic needs yourself. Another factor is that a significant percentage of the population are tied to a belief system that will not allow them to do any harm to other creatures. While this prevents them from eating meat, that is not as much a part of the problem as the refusal to shoo vermin from their grain bins.
Many of the problems we see in Africa are the result of political upheaval, tribal factions and despotic governments. When government tanks destroy acres and actes of crops in an effort to "relocate" portions of the rural population to neighboring countries, blaming lack of food on overpopulation doesn't wash. These same governments often commandeer relief supplies and very little actually gets to those who need it most. A great deal of it rots on the docks or finds its way into the black market at prices too high for the neediest people.
carlos
No. They just sold the version for the x86 platform which Novell renamed UnixWare. I'm pretty sure they retained the rights to UNIX.
"While it is true that many instances of religiously motivated atrocities have taken place, they do not match the toll by totally irreligious movements."
You replied:
"This is deceptive and inaccurate."
It was an honest assesment.
"The Chinese cultural revolution ... was a cult of personality based around chairman Mau. A very religious movement (worshipping a human instead of a god is still worship, and still religion)."
I would think that such hair-splitting would be found by most people to be far more deceptive. Most people are able to interpret the word religion contextually. For example: Exercising religiously is not in the same category as Islam. A vi zeaolot is not generally viewed as the spiritual equivalent of a devout christian.
carlos
Yeah, and Riddick Bowe thinks he can be a Marine. He's too mentally impaired to know he can't. I know I've lost mental capacity, but maybe that's because I don't do drugs (well, there was that time I was invited to eat some brownies....).
"Can anyone think of a drug user who admits that their favorite drug might have nasty side effects? Or a drug virgin who admits that the government's stance on drugs could be completely wrong? Hmmm..."
Depends on what part of the government's stance we're talking about.
I may not have communicated that as well as I should have. It was obvious from the way the question was framed and the inflection of the speaker and the other objections that they raised that this was not merely a request for information, but a way to legitimize their own belief that we were somehow harming our children (many of them coming right out and saying as much).
And people in fact do say 'different is bad' all the time.
"Well, I guess that's that then - nobody ever makes friends at school... because they're too busy going to school!"
Talk about stuffing words into other peoples mouths....
It doesn't necessarily follow that because there are opportunities outside of class that nobody, ever makes friends at school. That's your inference rather than my implication. You seem to want to hold me to a standard you're not willing to accept yourself. Sticking to the issues is fine, but you don't explain why my 'bottom line' statement is wrong. You just take exception to it. It seems to me that you are the one taking an either or stance on this issue. Mine was not the absolute statement you are making it out to be.
"I guess talking to the professor after class, or asking a cute guy/girl out, never happens. People never meet other people with similar ambitions and become friends. Nope, none of that happens in college.. that's not the real world! Instead, people go out and get a job.. and then don't work and socialize instead?!"
All I said was that there are ample opportunities outside of the academic system to socialize. I went on to say that someone who can't or won't avail themselves of opportunities in one venue will likely find themselves unable to do so in the other.
It may be that over the last 20 years I've had the socialization issue waved in my face so often that I'm a little quick on the draw, but I certainly don't see why my words would have elicited this response.
carlos
You're not really making the assumption that since the examples cited were all taken from a relatively recent timeframe (historically speaking) that there were only religious despots in prior centuries are you? I think you come a little closer to the truth when you mention that ideologies might be a better term to use than religions, but I'd press still further to find a root cause. Certainly ideologies give a group something to wrap its collective thoughts around and may become a rallying point, but I don't think that ideologies in themselves can bear the blame. There are many ideologies (including religious teachings) in which such activites would be anathema. I would consider myself a fanatic (based on the definitions of others) but my beliefs would never allow me to participate in a single killing, much less massive destruction.
All of these incidents may even carry a 'religious' fervor, but doesn't it really boil down to one (or a few) greedy individual exploiting the fears of others to create an atmosphere that makes the unthinkable seem-in the minds of the followers-inevitable. That greed may be for wealth, or power, or something else entirely, but isn't that really the common denominator in all of these large-scale human atrocities?
The Spanish Inquisition didn't really have anything to do with religion. Those in power were corrupt and either wanted to preserve or expand their power. Theirs was not a quest for God, but a lust for more power. Religion was simply the springboard for them to accomplish their goals. The 'church' was the politics of that day. Today one might use politics or business or even, yes, religion to further their own personal goals. And we blame the ideology.
carlos