What browser companies need to do is to meld the browser with the UI, like (dare I say it) Microsoft does. You have to admit there's some value in being able to type c:\mp3 or http://slashdot.org into the same window in a MS operating system and receiving the results you want. KDE has an advantage with Konquerer in that they have already spent a good amount of time learning how to handle files and applications and all they need to do is drop in a few more components to meet the level that IE is at. Netscape/Mozilla dont have that. They're designed as standalone utilities not integrated components. The web browser has become the consistent pervasive UI for computers, and the KDE folks are looking to capitalize on it. People on/. will always seek out niche utilities to do what we want. People who are not hackers will be able to flock to something like a KDE/Browser two-headed monster.
I have a G200 that I use with a NeXT (Hitachi) 21" monitor. I bought a fixed frequency card from Software Integrators but the X support for Sync On Green is not there. I tried the Matrox and it works great with X, but I dont use (or have) any console modes at all. Interestingly enough the SI card wokrs great in my NT box. There's a site here with good information on fixed freq monitors out there. Since I have two machines that will talk to the NeXT monitor I hooked up a KVM switch (Belkin OmniCube) so I can browse between the two of them. I still keep an old multisync hooked up A/B though for console mode on the Linux box. I dont know how many KVM's will work right with sync on green, but mine does not have a problem.
I just thought of somnething else that might make this more clear. Technically one could make bit for bit copies of a DVD, which would be illegal. But the software that has done this, has not defeated any protection mechanism so that software maker is not liable. The software maker has not not allowed the product (the digital video stream) to be stored, saved, or served in any non licensed way as it has never actually even touched the digital video stream, it just read in a bunch of bits.
A DVD that is viewable means that the software now has access to the digital video stream. If this software allows a person to save the video stream, it has defeated technical measures designed to protect the video stream from being used without a proper licensed disk. If it were to save the encrypted video stream, it doesn't matter since the DVD disk will still be required to decrypt it, and the data has not been stored in any redistributable way.
But none of those actually defeat any copy protection. They are merely means of copying something that is already copyable. To get a functional copy of a DVD to play in a non licensed way, you have to defeat some weak encryption. To get a CD to play in a non licensed way you are not required to do anything, it's already able to be played in a non licensed way. So by this argument CD software makers are not liable for anything as their software is merely reading a datastream. They have not defeated any form of protection to get their software to work properly. DVD software on linux however, needs to be able to decrypt the information on the disc to obtain the datastream. Morover it needs to decrypt it in a way that has not been licensed by the DVD consortium or whoever they are. This is defeating a technical measure that was put in place by the manufacturer to prevent copying. This is the source of the legal dilemma.
This whole thing is real confusing. I didn't get it either at first.
The part I was missing is that it doesn't matter how the software works it's decryption of the video is still in violation of the UK law. Damn shame. Did css-auth need a valid dvd to work?
It's also illegal (in the UK) to circumvent copy protection no matter what sort of clean room development you've done. That's what is happening to Derek.
But mke2fs does not defeat anyone's copy protection, from what I've read css-auth does. This is where it differs from the plethora of examples being cited in this thread. His software actually defeats the copy protection.
'm a little confused as to where copyright violations end in your view.
*Sigh*
It's not his view, it's the legal fact. If you distribute a tool that is designed to circumvent copy protection then you are liable. Crappy law? Maybe. But it's the law, if you're in the UK you have to follow it, or change it.
Basically to view a DVD you have to decrypt it. Decrypting is defeating the copy protection. Defeating the copy protection is illegal in the UK if your methods could knowingly be used to pirate the object in question.
I'm not here to argue whether this is a good law or not, just trying to clear this up.
1) From what I've gathered there are two things going on here, once is the Linux dvd project that distributed software that could play dvd movies if a user had the original DVD disc (That's Derek in the UK right?) The other is these guys in Norway who distributed code that's clearly for cracking. Why are both of these groupd getting picked on, it seems to me only one was trying to pirate content.
2) What does DeCSS have to do with users who just want to play their disks in their computers? Does making a player cause CSS to be defeated?
3) I'm all for free information here, but there seems to be a lot of people whining about some guys who knew damn well their work would be used to rip off content.
Sort of like the hard deadline of having HDTV transmitters in place by the end of last year in the major markets. To my knowlege (I could be wrong) there are stil no HDTV stations in Chicago, although they did install the antennaes a few months ago. Maybe they'll have them by the end of this year. I'm sure the dozens of people who own compatible sets will be thrilled.
Talking about shooting another kid is not a crime, regardless of what school administrators say. Shooting someone is. Writing about violence is not a crime, and should not be.
I agree, He should have never been treated like a criminal. Both the school's and his best interests would have been better served by dealing with him personally and trying to figure out what motivated him to name classmates by name in a fictional shooting spree. No person on/. can know what he was thinking, but he does. Talk to him, talk to his parents, figure out what it is he is getting at, and get him on the right track if something is wrong. Maybe nothing is. Maybe not. It's gonna be a hell of a lot harder to figure that out now as everyone backpedals away from the facts to pretect their interests.
I remember the Baker case too and IIRC, there was some off usenet stalking going on between Baker and the girl as well. Regardless, Baker was an adult who should know the consequences. Beamon may not know better, so his case is a bit different.
Personally I think disciplinary action and a national media frenzy are not going to help anyone. What should have happened is the teacher/principal/counselor/shrink/whoever should have sat him down and got to the bottom of it, and then handled the situation with some tact.
I'm sure he wasn't the only one to change the premise of the story. Happened all the time when I was in school.
He did make an abrupt jump from waiting at home for his drugs and killing 20 people. That's sort of a red flag.
There are always kids who are "disciplinary problems." That doesn't mean they should be tossed in jail. He was asked to write a fictional story. He did that. Somehow they decide that it's not really a fictional story, but a terrorist threat. Who made that leap of logic?
I agree with you here. It's not a terrorist threat. But it is either 1) A big red flag that someone should help this kid before he hurts himself or others, or 2) a nasty joke that he should be disciplined for. Either way we shouldn't be reading about it on/., that's only going to fuel the fire if it's a prank, and it will only hurt him if he really needs help.
You know I was thinking the same thing. Someone who writes a story about failing to score an ounce and then going outside to do makeshift inhalants should probably be under supervision for different reasons. Especially if he's a known discipline problem. Sounds to me like this kid needs a lot more help than a lockup is going to provide.
I've had people tell me this before. This assumption can be an illusion. While it's true that you are limited on a per connection basis in many cases, it's also true that the number of requests that can be processed at a given instant in time is also a bottleneck at that instant.
This cant be stressed enough. I used to run a webserver with about 1000 virtual hosts, about a hundred or so of those which were high traffic, complex, sites that were big moneymakers for us and the respective customers. A badly written CGI essentially would kill performance for ALL servers on that machine so we were very in tune with what our boxes could do at any given time, and when it came down to it, it was NOT bandwidth defining the performance of the servers. They were slow becasue of poorly written or badly implemented CGI's. They did not discriminate against languages either. Bad code in C is just as slow as bad code in Perl or bad code in TCL or bad code in sh.
If you are a sysadmin, or become one in the future, eventually it will be the case that you'll get hacked by someone who will destroy your data (usually out of carelessness and stupidity), will create extra work for you, and will put you in the hot seat for not closing the door on unauthorized access. It's amazing how much perception of hackers changes when that happens.
That being said, most hacking is more along the lines of simple pranks. Any law enforcement official can tell you how pranks turn into felonies in the hands of a inept prankster, but for the most part pranksters go along their merry way, doing their work in the face of authority, and most people dont really care all too much.
The fact that we tell our children not to tag the walls of buildings or drive over the speed limit, or sneak into bars, or smoke weed, or whatever probably wont stop them from trying it. But that's not going to stop us from telling them.
Under windows 95/98/NT any USER can install a trojan, making the entire system vulnerable to attack.
Wait a second here. Have you ever actually used Windows NT? You know they do have this thing called an 'Administrator' account, quite analogous to root on a UNIX. When properly configured you can have as much control over a user as any UNIX. I know, I run NT at home (along side my Linux and NeXT boxen) and I've had plenty of instances where I could not install something because of the fact I was not Administrator. I mean I hate NT as much as the next guy (I only run it because windows is the only non-Mac OS I can use for my apps) but we dont need to make up lies and half-truths to talk about how crappy it is. There's plenty of real reasons for that.
Sure, having the best tech is great, but Playstation kicked N64, because it had the better games.
I dont know if I agree with you on that. I have a lot of hard core gamer friends, and their playstations are all collecting dust as the N64 is getting beat up from overuse. Rgardless though, where N64 has an easy win is in games like Mario and Zelda. These have always been games that sell consoles, they have a reputation for quality and gameplay that will move units no matter how late into the game they come. They also (IMHO) are more engrossing than your run of the mill playstation games. I bought a NES for Super Mario Brothers, I bought a N64 for Ocarina of time. As for the playstation, the only games I saw were shooting, fighting, driving, and killing. They seemed very one dimensional, like alot of PC games. No rewards the second time you play it. Or the third. Dont get me wonrg I like brainless carnage sometimes (mmm Quake), but it wont keep my coming back. With games like Mario and Zelda, there's always a new trick to learn or secret to find.
/etc/inetd.conf: only allow telnet so you can do remote administration.
The important thing is that you cater the system to what he needs, there's a million ways to do this with Linux, and if you get it right you'll never have to worry about him again. Of course it will be a lot of work for you up front:-)
Windows is a do-all system for everyone. What you need is a do-a-few-things system for one guy. It'll be tough to get that out of windows.
replace one or more of the existing devices I carry around. I dont want to walk around with some sort of sci-fi utility belt. When it can replace my pager and/or cell phone I'll have room for it on my person and will consider buying one. I could care less about color.
I got the idea from the article that they were not talking about screening for diseases, or correcting physical ailments. It seemed more geared towards saying parents should increase the chances of social success for their children through genetic engineering. Make the kids prettier, stronger, smarter. Some of that sounds like vanity to me:-)
I'm all for getting rid of disease, but there's issues here where people may start goofing with mental aspects of a person towards the goal of getting rid of "undesired" traits. That scares the crap out of me.
I know there's no WAY I'd be around. Absolutely zero chance. According to the doctors I'm lucky to have been born in the first place.
This whole concept of engineering children sickens me. Not becasue of the social problems but that parents could be so vain as to want to engineer a child. What's the point of having a kid if you already know how it's going to turn out? Why not just adopt an adult?
I watched A&E's top 100 people of the millenium yesterday and I noticed a great deal of the people on the list exhibited strange and compulsive behavior, often at the expense of common sense. Shakespeare, Einstein, Newton, Gallieo, all of these guys had weird personality traits that may have contributed to their unique genius.
Did anyone ever stop to think that maybe the reason these people were all incredible thinkers is because they were NOT thinking like everyone else?
I almost hope this happens, and after a few generations of cookie cutter people, some non-engineered child grows up to take over them all.
-Rich
Re:Everything is Censorship! The sky is falling!
on
Dirty Domains
·
· Score: 1
Yeah I do have a question, since I've always loved how that quote sums up how Hitler came to power, and it's important people understand that he became what he was becasue no one was willing to complain.
My question is what do Nazi's have to do with domain names? Really. I'd love to know. If you want to talk about the big bad man taking control of our lives through censorship lets talk about TV or Radio. These are both censored mediums, yet somehow we still manage to have a free society. You want hard core porno or KKK marches? Go somewhere else. Hell, movies have some pretty nasty shit in them too, they're rated, which a lot of/. people equate with censored. None of it is on TV or Radio, but it's not illegal either. It might not be in my face every day, but it's still out there. Someone is selling it, someone is buying it. It is possible to have a free society and show some responsible restraint when it comes to something that is exposed to the entire populace.
Personally I dont think the government will ever directly censor anything, because people like the ACLU and EFF and assorted other organizations will fight for our free speech. What the Government will do is encourage ratings, that way the industries can take responsibility. It's not the best solution, but it's a decent compromise.
-Rich
Everything is Censorship! The sky is falling!
on
Dirty Domains
·
· Score: 3
Take a step back people.
Not everything is about curtailing your personal freedom.
We do live in a civilized (so I'm told) society with rules and values and norms. Not everyone is supposed to be allowed to run around and say whatever they want about anyone. Just becasue I can say "Eat shit and die" does not mean I'm supposed to. Just because there can be hard core porn on the net doesn't mean there should be. Just because the net can be used for just about anything does not mean that it should. We are giving access to our kids and third world countries here. Not everyone has the right to be anonymous.
I'm not saying to start stomping all over the 1st ammendment, just to think about what you people are talking about. Not being able to register donkeysack.com or whatever is NOT the same as being shot because you say you hate the government. That's real censorship. There's real people in this world being opressed for real beliefs and people on/. are all bitching and moaning about not being able to register a domain name with the big bad man.
Because somewhere you have to draw the line. Is blindness a reason to be murdered?
This is why it worries me.
My parents were told when my mother was pregnant that if I came to term it was likely I'd be missing limbs, or at least severly retarded. Needless to say I came out with all the parts intact, (2 months premature) but they were instructed to baptise me as it was assumed I would not live very long. Well I lived. I grew. Despite a rash of strange illnesses and happenings in my first couple years on this planet, I did Ok. I was born at 2 pounds, now I'm 6'1" 260. Shows what they know. I know that medical science has ways of telling if babies are okay by testing their response to stimuli and certian milestones in their deveopment, but it's not like medical science is never wrong. Do we really understand enough of the brain to not give these kids the chance? Of course for every Stephen Hawking there are sadly sadly retarded children, and that sucks, but I've seen plenty of retarded people in my life who are making a contribution to society. They may not be writing novels or building spacecraft but they're not making crack babies or doing smack either. I just cant support something like this for ANY level of retardation, severe or otherwise. The next wonderdrug may be just around the corner for all we know. Then how stupid would we look?
Slashdot Mirror
What browser companies need to do is to meld the browser with the UI, like (dare I say it) Microsoft does. You have to admit there's some value in being able to type c:\mp3 or http://slashdot.org into the same window in a MS operating system and receiving the results you want. KDE has an advantage with Konquerer in that they have already spent a good amount of time learning how to handle files and applications and all they need to do is drop in a few more components to meet the level that IE is at. Netscape/Mozilla dont have that. They're designed as standalone utilities not integrated components. The web browser has become the consistent pervasive UI for computers, and the KDE folks are looking to capitalize on it. People on /. will always seek out niche utilities to do what we want. People who are not hackers will be able to flock to something like a KDE/Browser two-headed monster.
-Rich
I have a G200 that I use with a NeXT (Hitachi) 21" monitor. I bought a fixed frequency card from Software Integrators but the X support for Sync On Green is not there. I tried the Matrox and it works great with X, but I dont use (or have) any console modes at all. Interestingly enough the SI card wokrs great in my NT box. There's a site here with good information on fixed freq monitors out there. Since I have two machines that will talk to the NeXT monitor I hooked up a KVM switch (Belkin OmniCube) so I can browse between the two of them. I still keep an old multisync hooked up A/B though for console mode on the Linux box. I dont know how many KVM's will work right with sync on green, but mine does not have a problem.
Good Luck...
-Rich
I just thought of somnething else that might make this more clear. Technically one could make bit for bit copies of a DVD, which would be illegal. But the software that has done this, has not defeated any protection mechanism so that software maker is not liable. The software maker has not not allowed the product (the digital video stream) to be stored, saved, or served in any non licensed way as it has never actually even touched the digital video stream, it just read in a bunch of bits.
A DVD that is viewable means that the software now has access to the digital video stream. If this software allows a person to save the video stream, it has defeated technical measures designed to protect the video stream from being used without a proper licensed disk. If it were to save the encrypted video stream, it doesn't matter since the DVD disk will still be required to decrypt it, and the data has not been stored in any redistributable way.
-Rich
But none of those actually defeat any copy protection. They are merely means of copying something that is already copyable. To get a functional copy of a DVD to play in a non licensed way, you have to defeat some weak encryption. To get a CD to play in a non licensed way you are not required to do anything, it's already able to be played in a non licensed way. So by this argument CD software makers are not liable for anything as their software is merely reading a datastream. They have not defeated any form of protection to get their software to work properly. DVD software on linux however, needs to be able to decrypt the information on the disc to obtain the datastream. Morover it needs to decrypt it in a way that has not been licensed by the DVD consortium or whoever they are. This is defeating a technical measure that was put in place by the manufacturer to prevent copying. This is the source of the legal dilemma.
This whole thing is real confusing. I didn't get it either at first.
-Rich
I get it now.
The part I was missing is that it doesn't matter how the software works it's decryption of the video is still in violation of the UK law. Damn shame. Did css-auth need a valid dvd to work?
-Rich
It's also illegal (in the UK) to circumvent copy protection no matter what sort of clean room development you've done. That's what is happening to Derek.
-Rich
But mke2fs does not defeat anyone's copy protection, from what I've read css-auth does. This is where it differs from the plethora of examples being cited in this thread. His software actually defeats the copy protection.
-Rich
'm a little confused as to where copyright violations end in your view.
*Sigh*
It's not his view, it's the legal fact. If you distribute a tool that is designed to circumvent copy protection then you are liable. Crappy law? Maybe. But it's the law, if you're in the UK you have to follow it, or change it.
Basically to view a DVD you have to decrypt it. Decrypting is defeating the copy protection. Defeating the copy protection is illegal in the UK if your methods could knowingly be used to pirate the object in question.
I'm not here to argue whether this is a good law or not, just trying to clear this up.
-Rich
1) From what I've gathered there are two things going on here, once is the Linux dvd project that distributed software that could play dvd movies if a user had the original DVD disc (That's Derek in the UK right?) The other is these guys in Norway who distributed code that's clearly for cracking. Why are both of these groupd getting picked on, it seems to me only one was trying to pirate content.
2) What does DeCSS have to do with users who just want to play their disks in their computers? Does making a player cause CSS to be defeated?
3) I'm all for free information here, but there seems to be a lot of people whining about some guys who knew damn well their work would be used to rip off content.
Anyone have any answers?
-Rich
Sort of like the hard deadline of having HDTV transmitters in place by the end of last year in the major markets. To my knowlege (I could be wrong) there are stil no HDTV stations in Chicago, although they did install the antennaes a few months ago. Maybe they'll have them by the end of this year. I'm sure the dozens of people who own compatible sets will be thrilled.
-Rich
Talking about shooting another kid is not a crime, regardless of what school administrators say. Shooting someone is. Writing
/. can know what he was thinking, but he does. Talk to him, talk to his parents, figure out what it is he is getting at, and get him on the right track if something is wrong. Maybe nothing is. Maybe not. It's gonna be a hell of a lot harder to figure that out now as everyone backpedals away from the facts to pretect their interests.
about violence is not a crime, and should not be.
I agree, He should have never been treated like a criminal. Both the school's and his best interests would have been better served by dealing with him personally and trying to figure out what motivated him to name classmates by name in a fictional shooting spree. No person on
-Rich
I remember the Baker case too and IIRC, there was some off usenet stalking going on between Baker and the girl as well. Regardless, Baker was an adult who should know the consequences. Beamon may not know better, so his case is a bit different.
Personally I think disciplinary action and a national media frenzy are not going to help anyone. What should have happened is the teacher/principal/counselor/shrink/whoever should have sat him down and got to the bottom of it, and then handled the situation with some tact.
-Rich
I'm sure he wasn't the only one to change the premise of the story. Happened all the time when I was in school.
/., that's only going to fuel the fire if it's a prank, and it will only hurt him if he really needs help.
He did make an abrupt jump from waiting at home for his drugs and killing 20 people. That's sort of a red flag.
There are always kids who are "disciplinary problems." That doesn't mean they should be tossed in jail. He was asked to write a
fictional story. He did that. Somehow they decide that it's not really a fictional story, but a terrorist threat. Who made that leap of
logic?
I agree with you here. It's not a terrorist threat. But it is either 1) A big red flag that someone should help this kid before he hurts himself or others, or 2) a nasty joke that he should be disciplined for. Either way we shouldn't be reading about it on
-Rich
You know I was thinking the same thing. Someone who writes a story about failing to score an ounce and then going outside to do makeshift inhalants should probably be under supervision for different reasons. Especially if he's a known discipline problem. Sounds to me like this kid needs a lot more help than a lockup is going to provide.
-Rich
I've had people tell me this before. This assumption can be an illusion. While it's true that you are limited on a per connection basis in many cases, it's also true that the number of requests that can be processed at a given instant in time is also a bottleneck at that instant.
This cant be stressed enough. I used to run a webserver with about 1000 virtual hosts, about a hundred or so of those which were high traffic, complex, sites that were big moneymakers for us and the respective customers. A badly written CGI essentially would kill performance for ALL servers on that machine so we were very in tune with what our boxes could do at any given time, and when it came down to it, it was NOT bandwidth defining the performance of the servers. They were slow becasue of poorly written or badly implemented CGI's. They did not discriminate against languages either. Bad code in C is just as slow as bad code in Perl or bad code in TCL or bad code in sh.
-Rich
If you are a sysadmin, or become one in the future, eventually it will be the case that you'll get hacked by someone who will destroy your data (usually out of carelessness and stupidity), will create extra work for you, and will put you in the hot seat for not closing the door on unauthorized access. It's amazing how much perception of hackers changes when that happens.
That being said, most hacking is more along the lines of simple pranks. Any law enforcement official can tell you how pranks turn into felonies in the hands of a inept prankster, but for the most part pranksters go along their merry way, doing their work in the face of authority, and most people dont really care all too much.
The fact that we tell our children not to tag the walls of buildings or drive over the speed limit, or sneak into bars, or smoke weed, or whatever probably wont stop them from trying it. But that's not going to stop us from telling them.
-Rich
-Rich
You really don't get it, do you?
Under windows 95/98/NT any USER can install a trojan, making the entire system vulnerable to attack.
Wait a second here. Have you ever actually used Windows NT? You know they do have this thing called an 'Administrator' account, quite analogous to root on a UNIX. When properly configured you can have as much control over a user as any UNIX. I know, I run NT at home (along side my Linux and NeXT boxen) and I've had plenty of instances where I could not install something because of the fact I was not Administrator. I mean I hate NT as much as the next guy (I only run it because windows is the only non-Mac OS I can use for my apps) but we dont need to make up lies and half-truths to talk about how crappy it is. There's plenty of real reasons for that.
-Rich
Sure, having the best tech is great, but Playstation kicked N64, because it had the better games.
I dont know if I agree with you on that. I have a lot of hard core gamer friends, and their playstations are all collecting dust as the N64 is getting beat up from overuse. Rgardless though, where N64 has an easy win is in games like Mario and Zelda. These have always been games that sell consoles, they have a reputation for quality and gameplay that will move units no matter how late into the game they come. They also (IMHO) are more engrossing than your run of the mill playstation games. I bought a NES for Super Mario Brothers, I bought a N64 for Ocarina of time. As for the playstation, the only games I saw were shooting, fighting, driving, and killing. They seemed very one dimensional, like alot of PC games. No rewards the second time you play it. Or the third. Dont get me wonrg I like brainless carnage sometimes (mmm Quake), but it wont keep my coming back. With games like Mario and Zelda, there's always a new trick to learn or secret to find.
-Rich
All of these are valid, and important reasons.
:-)
/etc/rc:
su - grandpa;startx
/etc/inetd.conf:
only allow telnet so you can do remote administration.
The important thing is that you cater the system to what he needs, there's a million ways to do this with Linux, and if you get it right you'll never have to worry about him again. Of course it will be a lot of work for you up front
Windows is a do-all system for everyone. What you need is a do-a-few-things system for one guy. It'll be tough to get that out of windows.
-Rich
replace one or more of the existing devices I carry around. I dont want to walk around with some sort of sci-fi utility belt. When it can replace my pager and/or cell phone I'll have room for it on my person and will consider buying one. I could care less about color.
-Rich
I got the idea from the article that they were not talking about screening for diseases, or correcting physical ailments. It seemed more geared towards saying parents should increase the chances of social success for their children through genetic engineering. Make the kids prettier, stronger, smarter. Some of that sounds like vanity to me :-)
I'm all for getting rid of disease, but there's issues here where people may start goofing with mental aspects of a person towards the goal of getting rid of "undesired" traits. That scares the crap out of me.
-Rich
Where would YOU be under such a system?
I know there's no WAY I'd be around. Absolutely zero chance. According to the doctors I'm lucky to have been born in the first place.
This whole concept of engineering children sickens me. Not becasue of the social problems but that parents could be so vain as to want to engineer a child. What's the point of having a kid if you already know how it's going to turn out? Why not just adopt an adult?
I watched A&E's top 100 people of the millenium yesterday and I noticed a great deal of the people on the list exhibited strange and compulsive behavior, often at the expense of common sense. Shakespeare, Einstein, Newton, Gallieo, all of these guys had weird personality traits that may have contributed to their unique genius.
Did anyone ever stop to think that maybe the reason these people were all incredible thinkers is because they were NOT thinking like everyone else?
I almost hope this happens, and after a few generations of cookie cutter people, some non-engineered child grows up to take over them all.
-Rich
Yeah I do have a question, since I've always loved how that quote sums up how Hitler came to power, and it's important people understand that he became what he was becasue no one was willing to complain.
/. people equate with censored. None of it is on TV or Radio, but it's not illegal either. It might not be in my face every day, but it's still out there. Someone is selling it, someone is buying it. It is possible to have a free society and show some responsible restraint when it comes to something that is exposed to the entire populace.
My question is what do Nazi's have to do with domain names? Really. I'd love to know. If you want to talk about the big bad man taking control of our lives through censorship lets talk about TV or Radio. These are both censored mediums, yet somehow we still manage to have a free society. You want hard core porno or KKK marches? Go somewhere else. Hell, movies have some pretty nasty shit in them too, they're rated, which a lot of
Personally I dont think the government will ever directly censor anything, because people like the ACLU and EFF and assorted other organizations will fight for our free speech. What the Government will do is encourage ratings, that way the industries can take responsibility. It's not the best solution, but it's a decent compromise.
-Rich
Take a step back people.
/. are all bitching and moaning about not being able to register a domain name with the big bad man.
Not everything is about curtailing your personal freedom.
We do live in a civilized (so I'm told) society with rules and values and norms. Not everyone is supposed to be allowed to run around and say whatever they want about anyone. Just becasue I can say "Eat shit and die" does not mean I'm supposed to. Just because there can be hard core porn on the net doesn't mean there should be. Just because the net can be used for just about anything does not mean that it should. We are giving access to our kids and third world countries here. Not everyone has the right to be anonymous.
I'm not saying to start stomping all over the 1st ammendment, just to think about what you people are talking about. Not being able to register donkeysack.com or whatever is NOT the same as being shot because you say you hate the government. That's real censorship. There's real people in this world being opressed for real beliefs and people on
-Rich
Because somewhere you have to draw the line. Is blindness a reason to be murdered?
This is why it worries me.
My parents were told when my mother was pregnant that if I came to term it was likely I'd be missing limbs, or at least severly retarded. Needless to say I came out with all the parts intact, (2 months premature) but they were instructed to baptise me as it was assumed I would not live very long. Well I lived. I grew. Despite a rash of strange illnesses and happenings in my first couple years on this planet, I did Ok. I was born at 2 pounds, now I'm 6'1" 260. Shows what they know. I know that medical science has ways of telling if babies are okay by testing their response to stimuli and certian milestones in their deveopment, but it's not like medical science is never wrong. Do we really understand enough of the brain to not give these kids the chance? Of course for every Stephen Hawking there are sadly sadly retarded children, and that sucks, but I've seen plenty of retarded people in my life who are making a contribution to society. They may not be writing novels or building spacecraft but they're not making crack babies or doing smack either. I just cant support something like this for ANY level of retardation, severe or otherwise. The next wonderdrug may be just around the corner for all we know. Then how stupid would we look?
-Rich