I'm afraid that one can only rarely take my responses to spelling correction posts over seriously.
I can't recall that I've ever made one intended as such.
I own any number of grammar and etymological books by the way, although this one area is a place where the net tends to shine obviating the need for most such books if you are wired.
Watch any politician respond to a question in public. They don't actually answer the question, per se, they say what they wish the wider audience to hear.
It doesn't matter if they sneak an RFID tag in if it's signal can't get out. That's the very point of a Faraday Cage.
One of the interesting things learned by the NSA selling off some of its old facilities into private hands is how they handled their computers. Really sensitive date was kept in a standalone computer in a room that amounted to a vault. That room had a Faraday Cage impebeded in the concrete it was made from. No RF signal could get in, but more importantly, none of the RF produced by the computer could get out to anyone who wished to try to gather what data they could from those signals.
RF is just electromagnetic radiation. EM is extremely easy to block entirely. You just put up a wall that's opaque at its frequency. This what the walls of your house and your window curtains do.
No, blocking RF from getting out (or in) is comparitively easy if you really want to. The hard part is letting out what you want to let out, like your phone call, without "betraying" yourself.
"The first rule of not being seen is to not stand up."
A hard rule to comply with if you feel the need to have a look around.
Just look around you at all the things that are considered perfectly normal that our great grandparents (or great-great grandparents if you're under 30) wouldn't have put with for a second. You can start with the very existence of the Federal Income Tax and the FBI.
You are mistaking the point of most of the new "anti-terrorist" laws and technologies.
They have nothing to do with anti-terrorism, and never have.
They are for catching the guy who grows a few weed plants in his basement to suppy his friends and send him up for 20 years instead of the 3 months they could previously nail him for.
Ashcroft is actually now teaching local law enforcement how to misapply anti-terror legislation to petty crime.
And he's pulicly proud of the fact.
None of these initiatives are ever likely to catch a terrorist and they know it. They've always known it. The terrorists will simply work around them and start passing encrypted coded messages on flash paper "post-its", or take out coded classified ads in the papers or call "home" and ask, "You want me to stop for some chicken on my way home from work?"
No, anti-terrorism was, is and always shall be nothing more than an end run around the Bill of Rights for perfectly normal crime.
You can have my Picket N4-ES when you pry it from my cold dead fingers. I've got a little N 200-ES as well. That's the little pocket model in a leather sheath with pocket clip. Anytime I want to be instantly recongnized as the onsite Ubergeek I wear that thing.
I'm still regreting not picking up a Teledyne circular rule when they were blowing them out for a couple bucks apiece, but I'm keeping my eyes open.
Someone actually stole my K&E bamboo rule. The bastard is plasma if I ever catch him.
If you've got anything interesting lying around that you're not using Cliffy Stoll is willing to trade for one of his Klein Bottles.
"Your Honor, when he asked me what I thought of that, I realized that lying to him - even though neither under oath nor arrest - was obstruction of justice. That's when I told him he could either bite me, or go fuck himself. And that's why I'm here as plaintiff in a civil suit for medical expenses to for the stitches from the bite marks outa my arm, and why he's countersuing me for his dental bills."
I don't even want to know what the outcome might have been had he taken the other alternative.
The copyright is only on the photograph, not the grafitti.
Under current law such a photograph might even be held to be in violation of the creator's copyright.
Did you know that if you buy an original work of art all you own is the physical object? Just like a book.
If your home is photographed and those photographs contain images of that art and the photographs are distributed you are in violation of the artists copyright.
Print magazines have to deal with this issue all the time and either obtain written consent from the artist or remove the art before the photographs are taken.
"Now looky here boy. Ya ain't under oath. Hell, we ain't even accused ya of a crime yet, so ya can just stuff all that Fifth Ammendment malarky. Ya gots to tell us whether ya did it or not."
That doesn't mean simply the expression of ideas, but also in what manner I express those ideas.
That includes whatever particular language or encoding system I desire to use.
If the FBI wishes to to figure out what my speach means, well, that's up to them kid.
I also have the right to be secure in my papers. Even if those "papers" are digital and I cannot be forced to testify against myself.
Again, the FBI can go scratch.
Once upon a time until a judge agreed that there was sufficient evidence that I had actually commited a crime the FBI had no right to even question my speach or papers in the first place.
Ah, thank God we're fighting for "freedom" now and homey don't play that shit anymore, eh?
# COPYRIGHTS AND OTHER DELUSIONS # # The BSD ancestor of this file had a standard Regents of the University of # California copyright with dates from 1980 to 1993. # # Some information has been merged in from a terminfo file SCO distributes. # It has an obnoxious boilerplate copyright which I'm ignoring because they # took so much of the content from the ancestral BSD versions of this file # and didn't attribute it, thereby violating the BSD Regents' copyright. # # Not that anyone should care. However many valid functions copyrights may # serve, putting one on a termcap/terminfo file with hundreds of anonymous # contributors makes about as much sense as copyrighting a wall-full of # graffiti -- it's legally dubious, ethically bogus, and patently ridiculous. # # This file deliberately has no copyright. It belongs to no one and everyone. # If you claim you own it, you will merely succeed in looking like a fool. # Use it as you like. Use it at your own risk. Copy and redistribute freely. # There are no guarantees anywhere. Svaha! #
They've been caught at this many times, most recently in obfuscated slides they showed to the press.
Many of their copyright violations claims come from taking BSD code, stripping the copyright notices from it and adding their own.
This is how they come about "ownership" of code in Linux.
I really don't what what could be lower than stealing code that is free for anybody to "steal" at will.
Unless it's. ..Ohhhhhhhhhhh, plagerism and deliberate commercial fraud based on same?
They seem to have invented hypocrisy to the second power.
Well let's just say that creating an OS by hybridizing the least desirable features of two others isn't the optimum engineering solution.
The same is likely to to be true of a VoIP "solution" that piggybacks a propriatary format onto a propriatary p2p network.
The only "problem" that this is a solution for is the problem of how to transfer our money into their pockets.
The very idea should make people break out in a rash.
DARPA, Thompson and Joy created packets with alienable rights and created they all packets equal; and it was good.
I myself resolve the issue by making my communications over the internet without interfacing with the telephony infrastructure. When everyone else can do the same (and it's now no more expensive than some phones and service. I have purchased used computers and loaded free software on them for less than I payed for my phone. Cable where available is about $50/month for unlimited worldwide use) these sorts of VoIP schemes will be largely redundant.
Wouldn't that violate the "no internet taxes" law?
No more than paying your ISP for access is a "tax." Or paying for things you buy from Amazon is a "tax."
This isn't a tax or "use fee" type plan. It's a straight purchase.
You can very simply avoid the "tax" by using other means to obtain your music, just as you can swap books and CDs with friends instead of buying them new from stores.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm afraid that one can only rarely take my responses to spelling correction posts over seriously.
I can't recall that I've ever made one intended as such.
I own any number of grammar and etymological books by the way, although this one area is a place where the net tends to shine obviating the need for most such books if you are wired.
As I assume all of us here are.
KFG
As it happens certain words have more than one standard and acceptable form.
Showed/Shown is one of them. (Proved/Proven is another).
As such the spelling is correct.
Look it up.
You might also want to look up "grammar" as there is some possible question as to whether you've used it grammatically.
KFG
They're working at being able to put a nanobug in that corner.
KFG
Watch any politician respond to a question in public. They don't actually answer the question, per se, they say what they wish the wider audience to hear.
KFG
Well, first off, thank you.
Secondly, I'm prone to using a post to speak to the "peanut gallery" more than the post I'm "responding to" myself.
KFG
It doesn't matter if they sneak an RFID tag in if it's signal can't get out. That's the very point of a Faraday Cage.
One of the interesting things learned by the NSA selling off some of its old facilities into private hands is how they handled their computers. Really sensitive date was kept in a standalone computer in a room that amounted to a vault. That room had a Faraday Cage impebeded in the concrete it was made from. No RF signal could get in, but more importantly, none of the RF produced by the computer could get out to anyone who wished to try to gather what data they could from those signals.
RF is just electromagnetic radiation. EM is extremely easy to block entirely. You just put up a wall that's opaque at its frequency. This what the walls of your house and your window curtains do.
No, blocking RF from getting out (or in) is comparitively easy if you really want to. The hard part is letting out what you want to let out, like your phone call, without "betraying" yourself.
"The first rule of not being seen is to not stand up."
A hard rule to comply with if you feel the need to have a look around.
KFG
And you think "they" don't know that?
p ie s/artspies.htm
Just look around you at all the things that are considered perfectly normal that our great grandparents (or great-great grandparents if you're under 30) wouldn't have put with for a second.
You can start with the very existence of the Federal Income Tax and the FBI.
http://www.fbi.gov/libref/historic/history/arts
http://www.taxhistory.org/default.htm
They managed to "slippery slope" their way in, nonetheless, and are now regarded as little more than the natural political landscape.
Anything you can make stick over the objections of the parents eventually just becomes "normal" for the children.
KFG
we'll really need is the personal Faraday Cage.
Think about it. I'm serious.
This is the next entreprenurial niche market for tech. Personal privacy devices.
KFG
You are mistaking the point of most of the new "anti-terrorist" laws and technologies.
They have nothing to do with anti-terrorism, and never have.
They are for catching the guy who grows a few weed plants in his basement to suppy his friends and send him up for 20 years instead of the 3 months they could previously nail him for.
Ashcroft is actually now teaching local law enforcement how to misapply anti-terror legislation to petty crime.
And he's pulicly proud of the fact.
None of these initiatives are ever likely to catch a terrorist and they know it. They've always known it. The terrorists will simply work around them and start passing encrypted coded messages on flash paper "post-its", or take out coded classified ads in the papers or call "home" and ask, "You want me to stop for some chicken on my way home from work?"
No, anti-terrorism was, is and always shall be nothing more than an end run around the Bill of Rights for perfectly normal crime.
KFG
You can have my Picket N4-ES when you pry it from my cold dead fingers. I've got a little N 200-ES as well. That's the little pocket model in a leather sheath with pocket clip. Anytime I want to be instantly recongnized as the onsite Ubergeek I wear that thing.
I'm still regreting not picking up a Teledyne circular rule when they were blowing them out for a couple bucks apiece, but I'm keeping my eyes open.
Someone actually stole my K&E bamboo rule. The bastard is plasma if I ever catch him.
If you've got anything interesting lying around that you're not using Cliffy Stoll is willing to trade for one of his Klein Bottles.
KFG
Marital Arts. Now that would have been something to get, er, excited about.
"Honey, could you come here? I need a lube job."
Ok, even robots get cranky and whine I guess, but they whine about the right things.
KFG
My monitor came with my password already written on it. Is that convienient or what?
KFG
"Your Honor, when he asked me what I thought of that, I realized that lying to him - even though neither under oath nor arrest - was obstruction of justice. That's when I told him he could either bite me, or go fuck himself. And that's why I'm here as plaintiff in a civil suit for medical expenses to for the stitches from the bite marks outa my arm, and why he's countersuing me for his dental bills."
I don't even want to know what the outcome might have been had he taken the other alternative.
KFG
It's a philosophical thing. A contration for "Speech is Peachy." Get hip.
Either that or I'm just huqt on fonix.
KFG
The copyright is only on the photograph, not the grafitti.
Under current law such a photograph might even be held to be in violation of the creator's copyright.
Did you know that if you buy an original work of art all you own is the physical object? Just like a book.
If your home is photographed and those photographs contain images of that art and the photographs are distributed you are in violation of the artists copyright.
Print magazines have to deal with this issue all the time and either obtain written consent from the artist or remove the art before the photographs are taken.
KFG
They skipped flying cars and are going straight for flying underwear.
KFG
"Now looky here boy. Ya ain't under oath. Hell, we ain't even accused ya of a crime yet, so ya can just stuff all that Fifth Ammendment malarky. Ya gots to tell us whether ya did it or not."
"Bite me."
"Damn, we didn't count on that."
KFG
Retaining freedom is only achieved thru constant diligence.. So few people are willing to sacrifice to do this. Are you?
Yes.
KFG
The problem being, of course, that SCO refuses to identify code that was actually written by them.
Since the bulk of the code was clearly not written by them and their copyright claim is fruadulant it doesn't leave one with many options.
Show us the code, we'll take it out.
Unless, of course, the code has already been released under the GPL, which the code in this file was.
Again, show us the code and we can show proper attribution. The code itself though has already been freed.
KFG
That doesn't mean simply the expression of ideas, but also in what manner I express those ideas.
That includes whatever particular language or encoding system I desire to use.
If the FBI wishes to to figure out what my speach means, well, that's up to them kid.
I also have the right to be secure in my papers. Even if those "papers" are digital and I cannot be forced to testify against myself.
Again, the FBI can go scratch.
Once upon a time until a judge agreed that there was sufficient evidence that I had actually commited a crime the FBI had no right to even question my speach or papers in the first place.
Ah, thank God we're fighting for "freedom" now and homey don't play that shit anymore, eh?
KFG
This from the termcap file which ESR maintains:
.Ohhhhhhhhhhh, plagerism and deliberate commercial fraud based on same?
# COPYRIGHTS AND OTHER DELUSIONS
#
# The BSD ancestor of this file had a standard Regents of the University of
# California copyright with dates from 1980 to 1993.
#
# Some information has been merged in from a terminfo file SCO distributes.
# It has an obnoxious boilerplate copyright which I'm ignoring because they
# took so much of the content from the ancestral BSD versions of this file
# and didn't attribute it, thereby violating the BSD Regents' copyright.
#
# Not that anyone should care. However many valid functions copyrights may
# serve, putting one on a termcap/terminfo file with hundreds of anonymous
# contributors makes about as much sense as copyrighting a wall-full of
# graffiti -- it's legally dubious, ethically bogus, and patently ridiculous.
#
# This file deliberately has no copyright. It belongs to no one and everyone.
# If you claim you own it, you will merely succeed in looking like a fool.
# Use it as you like. Use it at your own risk. Copy and redistribute freely.
# There are no guarantees anywhere. Svaha!
#
They've been caught at this many times, most recently in obfuscated slides they showed to the press.
Many of their copyright violations claims come from taking BSD code, stripping the copyright notices from it and adding their own.
This is how they come about "ownership" of code in Linux.
I really don't what what could be lower than stealing code that is free for anybody to "steal" at will.
Unless it's. .
They seem to have invented hypocrisy to the second power.
Go get 'em Red Hat!
KFG
Lindows (that piece of shit os)
Well let's just say that creating an OS by hybridizing the least desirable features of two others isn't the optimum engineering solution.
The same is likely to to be true of a VoIP "solution" that piggybacks a propriatary format onto a propriatary p2p network.
The only "problem" that this is a solution for is the problem of how to transfer our money into their pockets.
The very idea should make people break out in a rash.
DARPA, Thompson and Joy created packets with alienable rights and created they all packets equal; and it was good.
I myself resolve the issue by making my communications over the internet without interfacing with the telephony infrastructure. When everyone else can do the same (and it's now no more expensive than some phones and service. I have purchased used computers and loaded free software on them for less than I payed for my phone. Cable where available is about $50/month for unlimited worldwide use) these sorts of VoIP schemes will be largely redundant.
So long as we keep packets free, as in freedom.
KFG
To purchase simply punch in your PI Number:
3.141
We're sorry sir. Illegal roundoff error. Please try again.
KFG
Wouldn't that violate the "no internet taxes" law?
No more than paying your ISP for access is a "tax." Or paying for things you buy from Amazon is a "tax."
This isn't a tax or "use fee" type plan. It's a straight purchase.
You can very simply avoid the "tax" by using other means to obtain your music, just as you can swap books and CDs with friends instead of buying them new from stores.
KFG
And if your box ever gets too fast you can always enable all the animations to make it appear slow.
Everything will run "slow" if you just put enough delays in it.
Maybe that's why Microsoft hasn't wanted anyone to see their code. Every other line is:
for i = 1 to Godzillion; next i;
KFG