Ahhhh, no I didn't know there were problems with the German version. That does suck. Is this the problem? If not, maybe you could file a bug report? Or could tell me what the differences/problems were and I can file the bug report for you.
Gentoo no longer has all of the packages I need. I've found myself having to download software from web pages more and more, which was something I wanted to avoid with Gentoo.
Layman is a tool for managing/sync'ing multiple portage overlays. Project Sunrise is a collection of user submitted ebuilds. Together the two add a fair bit of software to the portage tree. `layman -L` lists 45 overlays including the Project Sunrise overlay.
Not to flame but it sounds like you didn't read any of the documentation first. Just kinda jumped in head first. Bully for you.;)
"Downloaded the Installer" yeah, you have been better off going with the Minimal CD and following the directions in the Handbook for a "stage3" install.
I tried the "installer" for 2006.1 and wasn't impressed. My personal preference is Gentoo is better installed from the command-line.
A few hours and some research later, I learned that the package missing is missing because the version on the installer DVD is outdated. The newer version is, of course, available, though the installer insists in using the old one.
Yeah, that is a common problem because the info on the DVD goes "stale" over time. As you experienced newer versions of software are released in the wild but the DVD's content(portage tree) is static.
I'm pretty sure this issue could be resolved somehow. But I kinda wanted to use the server before it's turned into a heavy paperweight. I know, I'll be flamed for being a noob and whatever, 'cause I couldn't resolve such a simple issue, and I'm pretty sure the workaround is quite easy if you're a Gentoo-wiz, but those things tend to turn people away from a distribution. The newbies, because they can't figure out how to do something, and the Linux vets because they're used to at least working installations.
Reading the install docs before starting off on your adventure probably would have saved you the heart-ache; either would have known what to do or decided you didn't have the time to commit to the adventure. Reading some of the docs for an application or OS is usually a good first step... gives an idea of the level support available for it.
Sorry you had a poor experience with the installer. Try installing from a command-line next you're up for the gentoo install adventure.
Hmmmm - if any other country invests in its military capability, it's equivalent to an attack on the US? That's got to be the most fearful stance I've heard in a long time, and especially perplexing coming from someone in the world's biggest military spender, by some very large margin.
It's an old line... at the beginning of the Cold War it was the "bomber gap".
To borrow a line from Crimson Tide... "the true enemy is war itself". But then maybe I'm just a damn dirty hippie.;)
That is a bad analogy. To kill someone, one generally needs to be in the same physical location as the victim.
What about that point and click hunting website that some Texan nutter tried to (did?) set up? If someone got shot using that then where does juristiction lie? generally != always
Your example is less than optimal. The crime(or accident) clearly happened on US soil, this gives the US jurisdiction.
The individual in the story is an Australian citizen and his crime was committed outside of US borders. What gives the US jurisdiction over an Australian citizen?
Not really. It's been about a year since I last played. I did play AO when it first came out, moved on after that initial year of playing. I still come back to it every now&then. It has been improving over the years, fairly easy to just jump on & play. There is plenty of shopping available; player stores. Crafting is a bit better now, there are stores that sell all the parts up to a certain quality level. Early levels don't have to depend on drops to get their parts.
The Alien Invasion expansion adds a raid-type event; a timed "capture the flag" type event against mobs(aliens). Fun & good loot.:)
Sounds like Anarchy Online is what you are looking for. Free client download and free to play. If you want to explore/play their expansion areas, then you'll need to pay. But the original area is large enough to keep one's interest for 30 or 40 levels. Even after that there is still enough content to keep one interested but the expansion areas offer better equipment&xp. The game is well established and well populated. Cedega does support playing AO in Linux.
Another free to play game is Last Chaos. The only time you have to pony up some cash is if you want to buy something from their item mall like an xp potion(+30% xp). The game is fantasy based, so it might not be your cup of tea. It is an interesting game, the devs have done some unique things. Example would be skill points, these are earned along with xp but at an inverse... high xp, low sp/low xp, high sp. They also have events every weekends; friday happy hour(random bonus stuff like double xp during happy hour) and sunday tea time(again random bonus stuff). Last Chaos is playable in Wine.
For a purely cooperative game, you might check out A Tale in the Desert. There is no combat in the game. It does offer a a native linux client. It has been a while since I played this one.
There are a wide variety of mmorpg out there, some just take a bit of effort to find. Maybe start your search at mmorpg.com.
If someone kills another person they shouldn't be able to be untouchable by crossing some imaginary barrier That is a bad analogy. To kill someone, one generally needs to be in the same physical location as the victim.
The Australian in question has never physically been in the US until he was extradited. The crime(from the view of US law) was committed wholly outside of US borders.
Just because we don't agree with the law being enforced doesn't mean we should complain about common laws being enforced across borders, it means we should be against that common law. Since the crime occurred in Australia, then it follows that Australia should be the entity that prosecutes the law breaker. Yes?
This extradition is dangerously close to Australia subjecting their sovereignty to the US.
Actually, there was a recent article in either New Scientist or The Scientist (can't recall which) that discussed the possibility that laws are evolving over time, meaning they may be changing in response to deeper laws. Very bizarre stuff.
Interesting. I also vaguely remember an article where they were questioning whether universal constants(e.g. speed of light) were actually constant.
How does one apply Occam's Razor to an infinite system such as the universe?
In a system without bounds wouldn't Occam's Razor imply that all possibilities exist?
Maybe our universe is like Schrödinger's Cat... existing in all states simultaneously. If you have curved, maybe looping dimension of time the same piece of matter/energy could exist in multiple states at the same time from our perspective. Instead of "cloning" matter, you just have multiple "time-lines".
The problem I've always had with the many worlds theory is that each split would presumably spawn a new universe containing matter and energy. Where, exactly does the matter comes from? Where does the energy come from?
Where did the matter/energy for this universe come from?
I live in Denmark, which is not exactly Netherlands, but I'm sure it is a wonderful place to live regardsless:) Funnily, I'm going to visit a friend there this summer, so I suppose I will see for myself:)
Opps... ok add Denmark to possible locations.
Denmark is nice if you don't mind cold and rainy weather:o)
Coming from Minnesota I'm used to varying weather conditions and actually enjoy having different seasons. Might also be why Sweden, Norway & Finland are on the list of places worth living in.:)
I like to think of it as more healthly scepticism.:)
Never ment to call ya a liar, just found it odd that an ISP didn't have their AUP online. When reporting abuse to an ISP, I like to check their AUP. Never came across one that didn't have it online. I formally apologize.:p
Hmmm, reasonable ISPs is yet another reason to consider moving to the Netherlands.
Cafe, hotel, joe sixpack, whatever... there are still certain requirements that to be met before protections are afforded. For example posting TOS/AUP, registering a (DMCA) point of contact, etc.
Yeah, anybody can be an ISP in the US. My question/comment boils down to 1) are ISP/common carriers afford safe harbor provisions. It's the DMCA that grants this to ISP 2) How does the law identify entities that are ISP/common carriers? see agibbs' reply & sancho's reply
You bring up a good point with hotels, cafes, etc. They would have to meet the requirements&eligibilities of the law to be afforded the same protections. It looks like section 512 of dmca is broad enough to over them, too.
My point was I don't believe joe sixpack randomly providing an open AP is going to be afforded the same protections as an ISP or common carrier. One must be recognized as an ISP or common carrier aka meet the legal requirements before being afforded those protections.
Acting as something is different than being legally recognized as that something.
Almost. The question is does operating an open AP without the upstream provider's permission(i.e. against their AUP) help or harm the person's chances of be recognized as an ISP/common carrier under the law?
I am of the opinion that it does not help, in fact it works against him.
Acting like something and being legally recognized as something are two entirely different things.
Safe Harbor won't help him if the RIAA can show that he did it himself, it's not a license to violate copyright.
Agreed. From my US-centric view his "if an isp can, why not me" comment meant he was thinking safe harbor applied to him because he intentionally was offering internet access.
I maintain that someone else abusing my deliberatly open AP still woundn't reasonably attach liability to me, though as a practical matter, it COULD cause me to spend time in court defending against an allegation that I was the downloader.
For sure, you'll be spending resources defending yourself. The child porn & presidential threat examples in this sub-thread will cause a great many hassles&headaches.
Deliberately providing an open AP before consulting with a lawyer on the liabilities is fool-hearty at best.
There's really no other qualification to being a "service provider", and I see no reason to disqualify anyone from using that defense.
There is a little more than the bit you quoted that separates us mere morals from common carrier status.
As agibbs pointed out in his reply there are conditions to elibility.
(i) Conditions for eligibility.
(1) Accommodation of technology. The limitations on liability established by this section shall apply to a service provider only if the service provider--
(A) has adopted and reasonably implemented, and informs subscribers and account holders of the service provider's system or network of, a policy that provides for the termination in appropriate circumstances of subscribers and account holders of the service provider's system or network who are repeat infringers; and
(B) accommodates and does not interfere with standard technical measures.
(2) Definition. As used in this subsection, the term "standard technical measures" means technical measures that are used by copyright owners to identify or protect copyrighted works and--
(A) have been developed pursuant to a broad consensus of copyright owners and service providers in an open, fair, voluntary, multi-industry standards process;
(B) are available to any person on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms; and
(C) do not impose substantial costs on service providers or substantial burdens on their systems or networks.
And as Sancho pointed outcommon carriers must register a point of contact for DMCA violation complaints.
You still have to show a preponderance of evidence that you only acted like an ISP and that 512(a) applies.
So, yes you agree with me that to be afforded safe harbor protection one needs to be recognized as an ISP/common carrier under the law. The grey area is whether violating the terms of your ISP and offering an open AP allows the individual to claim common carrier status.
I think the individual would have a difficult time claiming common carrier status. The prudent thing to do would be to consult with a lawyer before opening oneself up to the possible liabilities involved.
Forgive my ignorance on this subject, but what does the ISP's service agreement have to do with the actual crime of copyright infringement?
The safe harbor provisions limit the ISP's liabilities; they're not liable for the copyright infringement.
To qualify for the safe harbor protections, one needs to be recognized as an ISP under the applicable law(dmca).
My US-centric reply was because the upstream provider's AUP forbid the subscriber from sharing or selling his internet access he would have a difficult time claiming he was an ISP. And that leads to he wouldn't be able to claim safe harbor protections if someone on his willingly open wifi connection violate the law either child porn or copyright.
1.) If a person with an unrestricted wireless access point can be held responsible for not practicing due diligence in stopping a crime of copyright infringement, why couldn't the same be said for anyone with an "unsecured" copier, fax, telephone, or printer? Why is one person considered irresponsible and a facilitator of all sorts of nasty crimes (invariably involving child porn), and the other not?
short answer, because the law isn't perfect. I believe there have been cases bought against university student facilities about the copier issue you brought up. I am not a lawyer. You bring up good questions, if you find answers I'd be interested in them.
2.) Since when does one need a license to freely distribute information? Isn't this a first amendment issue? I can understand why an ISP might be upset with a customer redistributing their service, and why that might lead to a termination of service or even private lawsuit. But why should the fact that you are breaking a private contract make you automatically liable? I suspect the answer is "because the lobbyists wrote the DMCA that way," but that still seems to be in violation of the first amendment in that some entities (namely, ISPs) have greater legal capacity for communication than everyone else. Isn't that a form of relative restriction on free speech and thus unconstitutional?
I never commented on the ability to distribute information. I only stated safe harbor protections are only afforded to ISPs. You'll need to ask a lawyer for an answer to your question.
3.) If (1) is true and a customer can be considered irresponsible and a participant in the crime of copyright infringement because he or she failed to adequately secure their network, why shouldn't an ISP be held responsible for the presence of unsecured wireless networks as well? It would be trivial for an ISP to drive around and identify their customers with unsecured wireless access points, and yet, I have only in 5 years of following and being involved in the ISP industry heard of ONE case where that has ever happened. If the ISPs can't be bothered to protect their own networks, why joe sixpack? Why should responsibility for the task of ultimately securing the network fall solely onto the non-experts of the general public?
In a word... lobbyists. ISPs are common carriers and as such a different set of rules apply to them than joe six-pack.
A common principle in law is that you are not liable for mis-appropriations of your property for criminal purposes so long as you used ordinary care. Given that the vast majority of all people never change the default allow everything configs on their AP (and don't even know how to change it), that IS ordinary care.
But he is not using ordinary care, he is intentionally&actively sharing his internet connection via open wifi. Those are his words. He believes that act classifies him as an ISP and grants him the same protections(i.e. safe harbor). I disagree with that opinion. What are your thoughts on a subscriber relying on safe harbor protections?
I am not interested in getting into a discussion about whether technical ignorance is an "out" for criminal or civil matters. Equally dis-interested in talking about default configs of APs. I know they are lacking. They are slowly improving, the newer APs I've seen have a setup wizard that take the user thru changing the default stuff.
The very fact that you have to agree not to do so implies that it is technically possible to act as an ISP, so I'd think that would help support a defense that you were acting as an ISP. The violation of your contract with the ISP is a separate issue.
Wishful thinking at best. Acting as an ISP and being recognized as an ISP under the law are two different beasts. One will grant you safe harbor protections and the other not so much.
I can act like a cop, does that mean I can be afford all of the protections&privileges of a cop?
Slashdot Mirror
Ahhhh, no I didn't know there were problems with the German version. That does suck. Is this the problem? If not, maybe you could file a bug report? Or could tell me what the differences/problems were and I can file the bug report for you.
:)
Good luck with your next attempt.
You might want to give Project Sunrise and layman a look.
Layman is a tool for managing/sync'ing multiple portage overlays.
Project Sunrise is a collection of user submitted ebuilds.
Together the two add a fair bit of software to the portage tree. `layman -L` lists 45 overlays including the Project Sunrise overlay.
"Downloaded the Installer" yeah, you have been better off going with the Minimal CD and following the directions in the Handbook for a "stage3" install.
I tried the "installer" for 2006.1 and wasn't impressed. My personal preference is Gentoo is better installed from the command-line.
Yeah, that is a common problem because the info on the DVD goes "stale" over time. As you experienced newer versions of software are released in the wild but the DVD's content(portage tree) is static.
The solution to your problem was in the Handbook; Installing Portage or from the 2006.1 installer handbook The Portage Tree
Reading the install docs before starting off on your adventure probably would have saved you the heart-ache; either would have known what to do or decided you didn't have the time to commit to the adventure. Reading some of the docs for an application or OS is usually a good first step... gives an idea of the level support available for it.
Sorry you had a poor experience with the installer. Try installing from a command-line next you're up for the gentoo install adventure.
cheers
It's an old line... at the beginning of the Cold War it was the "bomber gap".
To borrow a line from Crimson Tide... "the true enemy is war itself". But then maybe I'm just a damn dirty hippie.
Option 2 is commonly called Payola and is illegal.
What about that point and click hunting website that some Texan nutter tried to (did?) set up? If someone got shot using that then where does juristiction lie? generally != always
Your example is less than optimal. The crime(or accident) clearly happened on US soil, this gives the US jurisdiction.
The individual in the story is an Australian citizen and his crime was committed outside of US borders. What gives the US jurisdiction over an Australian citizen?
Not really. It's been about a year since I last played. I did play AO when it first came out, moved on after that initial year of playing. I still come back to it every now&then. It has been improving over the years, fairly easy to just jump on & play. There is plenty of shopping available; player stores. Crafting is a bit better now, there are stores that sell all the parts up to a certain quality level. Early levels don't have to depend on drops to get their parts.
:)
The Alien Invasion expansion adds a raid-type event; a timed "capture the flag" type event against mobs(aliens). Fun & good loot.
You might want to check out VNBoard's AO forums and AO's own forums to get a better idea on the state of things.
Sounds like Anarchy Online is what you are looking for. Free client download and free to play. If you want to explore/play their expansion areas, then you'll need to pay. But the original area is large enough to keep one's interest for 30 or 40 levels. Even after that there is still enough content to keep one interested but the expansion areas offer better equipment&xp. The game is well established and well populated. Cedega does support playing AO in Linux.
Another free to play game is Last Chaos. The only time you have to pony up some cash is if you want to buy something from their item mall like an xp potion(+30% xp). The game is fantasy based, so it might not be your cup of tea. It is an interesting game, the devs have done some unique things. Example would be skill points, these are earned along with xp but at an inverse... high xp, low sp/low xp, high sp. They also have events every weekends; friday happy hour(random bonus stuff like double xp during happy hour) and sunday tea time(again random bonus stuff). Last Chaos is playable in Wine.
For a purely cooperative game, you might check out A Tale in the Desert. There is no combat in the game. It does offer a a native linux client. It has been a while since I played this one.
There are a wide variety of mmorpg out there, some just take a bit of effort to find. Maybe start your search at mmorpg.com.
The Australian in question has never physically been in the US until he was extradited. The crime(from the view of US law) was committed wholly outside of US borders. Just because we don't agree with the law being enforced doesn't mean we should complain about common laws being enforced across borders, it means we should be against that common law. Since the crime occurred in Australia, then it follows that Australia should be the entity that prosecutes the law breaker. Yes?
This extradition is dangerously close to Australia subjecting their sovereignty to the US.
Interesting. I also vaguely remember an article where they were questioning whether universal constants(e.g. speed of light) were actually constant.
How does one apply Occam's Razor to an infinite system such as the universe?
In a system without bounds wouldn't Occam's Razor imply that all possibilities exist?
Maybe our universe is like Schrödinger's Cat... existing in all states simultaneously. If you have curved, maybe looping dimension of time the same piece of matter/energy could exist in multiple states at the same time from our perspective. Instead of "cloning" matter, you just have multiple "time-lines".
The problem I've always had with the many worlds theory is that each split would presumably spawn a new universe containing matter and energy. Where, exactly does the matter comes from? Where does the energy come from?
Where did the matter/energy for this universe come from?
Are the laws of physics the same across "worlds"?
I like to think of it as more healthly scepticism. :)
:p
:)
Never ment to call ya a liar, just found it odd that an ISP didn't have their AUP online. When reporting abuse to an ISP, I like to check their AUP. Never came across one that didn't have it online. I formally apologize.
Hmmm, reasonable ISPs is yet another reason to consider moving to the Netherlands.
cheers
An ISP who's AUP isn't online? Riiight.
:)
So, instead you dug thru your file cabinet to find your ISP's AUP? Riiight.
Cheers
No problem, laws are different the world over.
Cafe, hotel, joe sixpack, whatever... there are still certain requirements that to be met before protections are afforded. For example posting TOS/AUP, registering a (DMCA) point of contact, etc.
Yeah, anybody can be an ISP in the US. My question/comment boils down to
1) are ISP/common carriers afford safe harbor provisions. It's the DMCA that grants this to ISP
2) How does the law identify entities that are ISP/common carriers? see agibbs' reply & sancho's reply
You bring up a good point with hotels, cafes, etc. They would have to meet the requirements&eligibilities of the law to be afforded the same protections. It looks like section 512 of dmca is broad enough to over them, too.
My point was I don't believe joe sixpack randomly providing an open AP is going to be afforded the same protections as an ISP or common carrier. One must be recognized as an ISP or common carrier aka meet the legal requirements before being afforded those protections.
Acting as something is different than being legally recognized as that something.
What no link? ;)
Almost. The question is does operating an open AP without the upstream provider's permission(i.e. against their AUP) help or harm the person's chances of be recognized as an ISP/common carrier under the law?
I am of the opinion that it does not help, in fact it works against him.
Acting like something and being legally recognized as something are two entirely different things.
Safe Harbor won't help him if the RIAA can show that he did it himself, it's not a license to violate copyright.
Agreed. From my US-centric view his "if an isp can, why not me" comment meant he was thinking safe harbor applied to him because he intentionally was offering internet access.
I maintain that someone else abusing my deliberatly open AP still woundn't reasonably attach liability to me, though as a practical matter, it COULD cause me to spend time in court defending against an allegation that I was the downloader.
For sure, you'll be spending resources defending yourself. The child porn & presidential threat examples in this sub-thread will cause a great many hassles&headaches.
Deliberately providing an open AP before consulting with a lawyer on the liabilities is fool-hearty at best.
There is a little more than the bit you quoted that separates us mere morals from common carrier status.
As agibbs pointed out in his reply there are conditions to elibility.
And as Sancho pointed out common carriers must register a point of contact for DMCA violation complaints.
So, yes you agree with me that to be afforded safe harbor protection one needs to be recognized as an ISP/common carrier under the law. The grey area is whether violating the terms of your ISP and offering an open AP allows the individual to claim common carrier status.
I think the individual would have a difficult time claiming common carrier status. The prudent thing to do would be to consult with a lawyer before opening oneself up to the possible liabilities involved.
Forgive my ignorance on this subject, but what does the ISP's service agreement have to do with the actual crime of copyright infringement?
The safe harbor provisions limit the ISP's liabilities; they're not liable for the copyright infringement.
To qualify for the safe harbor protections, one needs to be recognized as an ISP under the applicable law(dmca).
My US-centric reply was because the upstream provider's AUP forbid the subscriber from sharing or selling his internet access he would have a difficult time claiming he was an ISP. And that leads to he wouldn't be able to claim safe harbor protections if someone on his willingly open wifi connection violate the law either child porn or copyright.
1.) If a person with an unrestricted wireless access point can be held responsible for not practicing due diligence in stopping a crime of copyright infringement, why couldn't the same be said for anyone with an "unsecured" copier, fax, telephone, or printer? Why is one person considered irresponsible and a facilitator of all sorts of nasty crimes (invariably involving child porn), and the other not?
short answer, because the law isn't perfect. I believe there have been cases bought against university student facilities about the copier issue you brought up. I am not a lawyer. You bring up good questions, if you find answers I'd be interested in them.
2.) Since when does one need a license to freely distribute information? Isn't this a first amendment issue? I can understand why an ISP might be upset with a customer redistributing their service, and why that might lead to a termination of service or even private lawsuit. But why should the fact that you are breaking a private contract make you automatically liable? I suspect the answer is "because the lobbyists wrote the DMCA that way," but that still seems to be in violation of the first amendment in that some entities (namely, ISPs) have greater legal capacity for communication than everyone else. Isn't that a form of relative restriction on free speech and thus unconstitutional?
I never commented on the ability to distribute information. I only stated safe harbor protections are only afforded to ISPs. You'll need to ask a lawyer for an answer to your question.
3.) If (1) is true and a customer can be considered irresponsible and a participant in the crime of copyright infringement because he or she failed to adequately secure their network, why shouldn't an ISP be held responsible for the presence of unsecured wireless networks as well? It would be trivial for an ISP to drive around and identify their customers with unsecured wireless access points, and yet, I have only in 5 years of following and being involved in the ISP industry heard of ONE case where that has ever happened. If the ISPs can't be bothered to protect their own networks, why joe sixpack? Why should responsibility for the task of ultimately securing the network fall solely onto the non-experts of the general public?
In a word... lobbyists. ISPs are common carriers and as such a different set of rules apply to them than joe six-pack.
Thank you for digging that up.
A common principle in law is that you are not liable for mis-appropriations of your property for criminal purposes so long as you used ordinary care. Given that the vast majority of all people never change the default allow everything configs on their AP (and don't even know how to change it), that IS ordinary care.
But he is not using ordinary care, he is intentionally&actively sharing his internet connection via open wifi. Those are his words. He believes that act classifies him as an ISP and grants him the same protections(i.e. safe harbor). I disagree with that opinion. What are your thoughts on a subscriber relying on safe harbor protections?
I am not interested in getting into a discussion about whether technical ignorance is an "out" for criminal or civil matters. Equally dis-interested in talking about default configs of APs. I know they are lacking. They are slowly improving, the newer APs I've seen have a setup wizard that take the user thru changing the default stuff.
Wishful thinking at best. Acting as an ISP and being recognized as an ISP under the law are two different beasts. One will grant you safe harbor protections and the other not so much.
I can act like a cop, does that mean I can be afford all of the protections&privileges of a cop?