He's talking about what they look like not the "idea" of how they work together. It's amazing how, in a world full of copyrights and trademarks and patents and intellectual "property" and all sorts, that people just don't understand any. - hey look I'm unique I left off the last word!!!!
I can't believe I'm reading this on the front page of/.!
A simple consult from an IP lawyer will cost you about $400ish per hour....but it's not going to take them that long to tell you what's obvious. As others have noted this is in violation of copyright law for being a derivative work. Functionality can not be copyrighted...but we're not talking about that we're talking about a game that acts and looks EXACTLY like another game that was written a long time ago. Images and look and feel can be copyrighted. If I have a website and put copyright on the bottom and then you put up another website with the exact same images you just created yourself...it is in violation of copyright law. The same is for games.
If you want to go into business for yourself and strike it rich on some code you wrote you need to take at least an intro course to IP law. This can be found at just about any 2 year college and up for paralegals. It honestly should be included in most CS courses along with ethics relating to software development.
Let's reverse the roles here. Say you made your pacman and then some larger company came along redid all your work in a fraction of the time it took you...made their app look and feel exactly like yours and then out marketed you. What is your fall back? How would you defend yourself? Using your logic it's all fair game so to speak.
I would do what someone else above suggested. Get rid of all the images you're currently using. Redo the mazes. Call it zombie eating lawyers as some one suggested...and even then you might be at risk if you still got dots all over the maze. If you coded it right though this should be doable. Maybe make the score based on how long you can stay alive or how much of the maze you can cover instead of how many pez bits you eat.
Seriously this seems obvious...and it's a shame that a developer wasted his time recreating something and thinking he could sell it. Take an IP class...redo all the graphics to something unique...change up the rules a bit and the mazes and cross your fingers no one notices you're a pacman derivative work under the hood.
LOL. uhm, no. Go study people who have been _dead_ for 30 mins to over an hour. There was NO EEG waveform.
So either you didn't read the links you posted or you didn't understand them. No one has been brain dead for 30 min to an hour. What they stated is memories could not be formed without blood flow. And they based this belief on what exactly? Let's see here...person A has NDE and says they remember it, there was no blood flow to the brain at that time....logic concludes that yes you can form memories without blood flow to the brain...yet they state the opposite...go figure.
The rest of your babble is mostly religious fervor. I knew a guy once in college like you that taught critical thinking...which was a joke. He threw pseudo science at us everyday like "well a fern plan has more chromosomes than you so it must be more advanced than you".
Some people can read exactly the same things and still only see the world through their wonderfully painted eyeglasses. In many ways I pity you...but I'm also glad there are people like you.
Yes cause as we saw it worked so well for Microsoft...Some things can not be redesigned...they will require a complete rewrite. We're not talking about adding a new feature here or there. We're talking about a fundamental design flaw.
They should provide a secure digital communication system, encryption and the rule of law stating the same as with snail mail. The government can't read it without warrant.
I know you're all thinking this is retarded and everything but just hear me out for a second.
Legal documents and countless other non physical items still are transferred through the post office. I should be able to send a message to the post office in a method that verifies my identity for the receiver. I shouldn't have to sign things by hand there should be a method to digitally sign everything with a specific time stamp using a time based encryption algo. GPG should be adopted and new features should be included to allow public keys/certificates private keys to be controlled by the sender and provided by the post office.
If I don't own a computer I should still be able to go into a post office with letter in hand. That letter should be scanned into the system with my identity verified at the post office either with biometrics or other means. The letter should be encrypted using my key system. The law should protect the sender from what technology can not...someone opening up the envelope to read what it says before sending it forward. How much mail would this reduce or remove? Once the receiving Post office gets the digital package if the receiver owns a computer it is available to them by the post office verifying by IP or pushing it out to the system for delivery. If the receiver does not own a computer it should be printed off or alternatively provided in a portable digital transfer by simply hooking up your USB key at a local Post Office.
Spam is mute when you know the senders identity 100%. Even if it wasn't you can follow systems out there now that will not accept a digital package until the receiver accepts it from the user (return to sender).
There is no reason for anyone to live with spam today and there is no reason to fear the government if laws protect the citizens from corruption of our Rights. The USPO has an opportunity here to make huge changes...in addition to funding the broadband in every home ideal. That would be looking forward.
"look at my website and see my code", they'll tell their contacts "we've got a live one here, you want him/her!"
Um, no. HR isn't going to understand anything you put on your website. The manager that interviews you might not understand it either. The developer that interviews you isn't going to waste their time learning some new app that has absolutely NO impact on their current work load other than to possibly get you hired. In fact you'd be very very lucky to ever get anyone to look at your code and in most cases they'd use it as a reason to rule you out as an applicant. There is nothing you can put on a website that honestly says "I wrote this"...at most it says you know how to copy and paste. The only exception would be if you created something unique that can't already be found in countless textbooks or in any web search...and if you did create something unique then you'd probably be Interviewing on that project alone and not on something that has no relation to your code.
Throwing a bunch of code at someone that is going to hire you on isn't going to get you hired on. It may even give them a reason to nit pick your coding style as it probably wouldn't follow their standards anyway. It's a nice little thing to be able to include but seriously don't expect it to make a difference.
did you consider she was just trying to watch you flex your muscles as you lifted up that floppy and inserted it slowly into the drive? Girls have to get a guy's attention some how you know.
no but there is a chance that Chuck Norris will be involved in the process. The idea is to combine the die hard quality of Bruce Willis and the selfless brute that blew up the asteroid with the awsome round kick power of Chuck Norris. yes, you should be fearful of the potential for a Chuck Noris/Bruce Willis clone hybrid thing. But if you want we can have Demi Moore suck the needed DND from the two applicants.
There is this belief by many that scientific advancement does not depend on an individual. Many advancements were done in parallel in the past by multiple people all over the planet. The belief that only one company is working on a given solution is somewhat absurd. The point is someone somewhere would have come to the same conclusion.
In the end scientific advancement belongs to society, not an individual or a company. Just because you do a lot of the work it does not mean you truly own the idea. The idea would not be possible if it wasn't for countless other advancements. As such, returning the idea to the public domain is your repayment for all the training and countless other ideals you would not have even considered if it wasn't for society in the first place.
I think it's important for everyone to accept this and to believe that patents are only to reward those that have achieved a breakthrough in order to help fund their next breakthrough...not so they can sit in their pool every weekday afternoon and have back rubs by nude chinese women...
If you don't have the skills or time to build it yourself you should release your information under a creative commons license. No point in it collecting dust in your drawer if it never gets implimented or has a chance to be.
I don't know if I was just tired or what but I didn't even notice that the bug in the background was supposed to scale the models until after I took the test...they were all so short!
That's called rape in some countries. And it's a good way to get a restraining order against you. Look the simple fact is for many many women there is nothing you can do and nothing you can change about yourself to win her...she is just out of your league...never settle...just don't waste your time on snobs.
That's one thing I don't get. Why do we believe these other worlds somehow have the answer to all our Earthly problems. We can't even create a self sustaining environment here on Earth, what makes you think we know how to do it on another planet? Getting there is not the hard part...yet it seems so very hard right now.
Assuming we do reach a stage where we can have a self sustaining environment here on Earth...suddenly all the horrid things that can happen to you here on Earth are no longer so important as you could survive without end regardless of what happens to the planet even if all life on the planet dies.
The first step is getting something like the biodome to actually work with NO SUNLIGHT...then and only then could we even consider another planet...unless you plan on eating rocks, breathing toxic gas, and bathing in a sun with no EM protection.
The time of the sale though is a question. With the exception of major corps like MS, how do you prove when they became aware of a security issue in their product? What about already distributed copies that have not yet been sold at retails...do you want them to do a recall on all of those everytime there is a flaw.
Say some company is notified that they product has a security flaw. They now have to stop all sales online or otherwise until that product is patched. The flaw maybe based on a library the product depends on in which case the company would have to take on development of that library to fix the issue before the product is released. What about in the case of GPL software? Oh that's right they get a free pass...
Your seed stores other people's encrypted private data as well to ensure availability. When you accept a "friend" request, you transmit the public key directly to the other person's seed. (I assume over yet another encrypted link.) Your "friend" can then request your data from the DHT and then decrypt it.
I just don't understand why you think the replicated data needs to be encrypted yet again, let alone decrypted before being re-encrypted.
Ok if they are using GPG that says to me the standard two key system. Excuse me if I repeat the obvious here...but I just want to make sure we're on the same page. You use someone else's public key and your private key to encrypt something. That data is then only available to the two people that own the private keys. A 3rd party can not use the data. How do you expect other seeds to store the encrypted data? Two key system...
PersonAPrivateKey+PersonBPublicKey = DataSeg1AB(let's say the user's phone number?)
DataSeg1AB gets put onto seed 2 for replication. Now who on the network can even read DataSeg1AB? 1 person. It doesn't matter how much you duplicate the data unless you duplicate it for all users.
DataSeg1AC
DataSeg1AD
If you then have 1 shared private key for all users of your data...how secure is that? The entire point of GPG encryption was to keep the private key off the network and to never transmit it anywhere. The more you duplicate the private key the more chances there are for it to be captured by a malicious user or bot. In this sense there is no point in even using GPG encryption for this model. If I send someone my public key they can't do jack with data I send them because I don't have their public key. I need THEIR public key to encrypt data for them. And when I do encrypt the data for THEM the replication of this data is again mute as it has no advantage that simple cache for offline viewing that wouldn't solve.
These guys are going into this spouting off GPG encryption and a distributed model....the ONLY way that would work SECURELY is if you duplicated data for every user and distributed all of that data onto the network meaning the data storage would be huge for just one profile.
SO in your example...I accept a friend request and I(A) send Person B a public key. Assume I have Person B's public key in the request as well. I use Person B's public key to encrypt the data and I distribute that data to the other nodes...only person B can read that data even on the other nodes. In order for anyone else to ever read that same data they would then need to send in another key/friend request. A location with the original unencrypted data Person A's node or Person B's node (which can unencrypt the data on the network) would need to be contacted in order to encrypt the data for new person C. The data for person C would then need to be distributed again onto the network...which AGAIN is no better than simply giving person C a cache on their local system on say a USB drive?
My point is encryption is great and all...but the way they are describing it and the way they want to use it...it's not GPG/PGP. Either you follow GPG/PGP and have duplication of data on the network for every friend connection or you have a one key system...or you have a shared GPG private key being transmitted on the network (bad...horrible...pointless idea). If you think a single server is a horrible point of failure...imagine countless of your idiot computer using friends having on their hard drives a key that can decrypt all of your profile information. All of this doesn't even consider revoking the data from the network. My point is they can have GPG and massive amounts of data. Or they can call it what they plan on using it like just standard 1 key encryption distributed onto the network in which anyone anywhere can get their greedy little paws on it if even 1 node that has your private key is jacked. Think that's beyond the scope of what spammers can do?
if you give them the key for that data then the data is again free to anyone that has the key. Hardly anything secure. The only way to ensure secure communication would be either to encrypt the data from A for just person B's key. Or have a method to encrypt the data again on the stored server using person's B's public key...but again you'd need to decrypt the data first for that and doing that on a remote server you have no control over again puts the data at risk. Point is the second the data leaves your node it is no longer yours the second you hand the key to anyone...and this ignores the obvious issue of the data still being out there with no way to revoke it in which time will surely solve the problem of someone trying to look at data without the key. A 1024 GPG key today is great and all but will it be 10 years from now?
The bottom line is without a centralized server that has control over the data or is known and accepted as "trusted"...the only thing that keeps the data secure is the difficulty in reaching it...I give it a year before wide spread viruses and spam take it over.
Everything you just said is right on the dot. In fact so much so that you'll find the ones getting promoted over the outspoken newbs are not the revolutionaries telling everyone how things should work...but the ones that just do their job. Most managers do not want to look like a fool. It doesn't matter if you're wrong or right, what matters is if the manager is right...because they are right regardless if you want to believe that or not. They are the ones that make the decisions and if you get on their bad side by telling them they don't know what they're talking about then you're going no where fast. In all cases your manager has many more points with the company that you work for than you do. It doesn't matter if you can bring their entire system down with one key stroke or if you're the only coder in the company that can fix xyz...you're not what matters to the upper management.
In larger companies its very easy to be just a number and stats. The only people that actually know the kind of work you do is your immediate manager and your coworkers. The only person that can get you promoted though is most likely your manager. The bottom line is most managers would rather have idiots under them that can meet their stats and meet their deadlines rather than have an expert coder that could develop the next corporate wide money maker application. An expert makes middle management and upper management look like retards...know your place...and accept that change isn't exactly possible for many companies. If you want to change things or design things the way you think they should be designed then start your own company...cause if you're just starting out with them then chances are you'll be there 20 more years before they'll ever listen to you...and by then the shoe is on the other foot and your ideas are outdated and old anyway!
Lobbyists are an exceptionally effective means for people to communicate with their elected representatives
That's great and all. I'm all for that. But why should any money be permitted to be used as a form of that communication. In my book NO money should be paid to the people I vote into any office. My taxes should pay for their funds for everything. I'm fairly sure another 40-50 years from now we'll look back at this erra as a time of great government corruption by the corporate world. They hold our jobs over the heads of congress as blackmail to create laws...they make horrid decisions that cause countless people to go bankrupt and in no way shape or form are they ever held liable for it because they own congress...because they direct our world. We may have the power to vote but a long time ago corporations have had the power to vote their own laws into congress. Hell many bills aren't even written by the law makers. And to top it all off they cheat as much as they can on their taxes sometimes paying a big fat check of ZERO to the government and their excuse is that everyone else is doing it. They are the problem with the system but that's because they are the system.
I'll be happy when congress is filled with moral people that have the guts to stand up for what's in the people's best interest and stopping anyone from ever bribing congress the way it is now...because as we've all seen that is just one small step away from blackmailing them into doing everything they desire.
There is a huge difference there though. Do you honestly believe everyone's iPod is filled with legal music? When did you have the extra money to dump 45k into music for your ipod? The difference is the number of people involved and the difference is breaking vs fair use.
This is one thing I always hate to hear. anyone who doesn't really like it simply hasn't been properly introduced. I've know a few Gay men that make the suggestion about certain sexual situations...
So let me be clear, you're wrong...some things just rub people the wrong way. It's not how you were introduced to it...we are honestly that different from each other. I hate Sushi and it makes me want to throw up just looking at it.
Slashdot Mirror
He's talking about what they look like not the "idea" of how they work together. It's amazing how, in a world full of copyrights and trademarks and patents and intellectual "property" and all sorts, that people just don't understand any. - hey look I'm unique I left off the last word!!!!
I can't believe I'm reading this on the front page of /.!
A simple consult from an IP lawyer will cost you about $400ish per hour....but it's not going to take them that long to tell you what's obvious. As others have noted this is in violation of copyright law for being a derivative work. Functionality can not be copyrighted...but we're not talking about that we're talking about a game that acts and looks EXACTLY like another game that was written a long time ago. Images and look and feel can be copyrighted. If I have a website and put copyright on the bottom and then you put up another website with the exact same images you just created yourself...it is in violation of copyright law. The same is for games.
If you want to go into business for yourself and strike it rich on some code you wrote you need to take at least an intro course to IP law. This can be found at just about any 2 year college and up for paralegals. It honestly should be included in most CS courses along with ethics relating to software development.
Let's reverse the roles here. Say you made your pacman and then some larger company came along redid all your work in a fraction of the time it took you...made their app look and feel exactly like yours and then out marketed you. What is your fall back? How would you defend yourself? Using your logic it's all fair game so to speak.
I would do what someone else above suggested. Get rid of all the images you're currently using. Redo the mazes. Call it zombie eating lawyers as some one suggested...and even then you might be at risk if you still got dots all over the maze. If you coded it right though this should be doable. Maybe make the score based on how long you can stay alive or how much of the maze you can cover instead of how many pez bits you eat.
Seriously this seems obvious...and it's a shame that a developer wasted his time recreating something and thinking he could sell it. Take an IP class...redo all the graphics to something unique...change up the rules a bit and the mazes and cross your fingers no one notices you're a pacman derivative work under the hood.
LOL. uhm, no. Go study people who have been _dead_ for 30 mins to over an hour. There was NO EEG waveform.
So either you didn't read the links you posted or you didn't understand them. No one has been brain dead for 30 min to an hour. What they stated is memories could not be formed without blood flow. And they based this belief on what exactly? Let's see here...person A has NDE and says they remember it, there was no blood flow to the brain at that time....logic concludes that yes you can form memories without blood flow to the brain...yet they state the opposite...go figure.
The rest of your babble is mostly religious fervor. I knew a guy once in college like you that taught critical thinking...which was a joke. He threw pseudo science at us everyday like "well a fern plan has more chromosomes than you so it must be more advanced than you".
Some people can read exactly the same things and still only see the world through their wonderfully painted eyeglasses. In many ways I pity you...but I'm also glad there are people like you.
Now they get to redesign to meet security.....
Yes cause as we saw it worked so well for Microsoft...Some things can not be redesigned...they will require a complete rewrite. We're not talking about adding a new feature here or there. We're talking about a fundamental design flaw.
What's to say he didn't have the mindset to reload it before handing it over to the Nation Guard?
great now the next patch is going to break it. Way to go.
They should provide a secure digital communication system, encryption and the rule of law stating the same as with snail mail. The government can't read it without warrant.
I know you're all thinking this is retarded and everything but just hear me out for a second.
Legal documents and countless other non physical items still are transferred through the post office. I should be able to send a message to the post office in a method that verifies my identity for the receiver. I shouldn't have to sign things by hand there should be a method to digitally sign everything with a specific time stamp using a time based encryption algo. GPG should be adopted and new features should be included to allow public keys/certificates private keys to be controlled by the sender and provided by the post office.
If I don't own a computer I should still be able to go into a post office with letter in hand. That letter should be scanned into the system with my identity verified at the post office either with biometrics or other means. The letter should be encrypted using my key system. The law should protect the sender from what technology can not...someone opening up the envelope to read what it says before sending it forward. How much mail would this reduce or remove? Once the receiving Post office gets the digital package if the receiver owns a computer it is available to them by the post office verifying by IP or pushing it out to the system for delivery. If the receiver does not own a computer it should be printed off or alternatively provided in a portable digital transfer by simply hooking up your USB key at a local Post Office.
Spam is mute when you know the senders identity 100%. Even if it wasn't you can follow systems out there now that will not accept a digital package until the receiver accepts it from the user (return to sender).
There is no reason for anyone to live with spam today and there is no reason to fear the government if laws protect the citizens from corruption of our Rights. The USPO has an opportunity here to make huge changes...in addition to funding the broadband in every home ideal. That would be looking forward.
"look at my website and see my code", they'll tell their contacts "we've got a live one here, you want him/her!"
Um, no. HR isn't going to understand anything you put on your website. The manager that interviews you might not understand it either. The developer that interviews you isn't going to waste their time learning some new app that has absolutely NO impact on their current work load other than to possibly get you hired. In fact you'd be very very lucky to ever get anyone to look at your code and in most cases they'd use it as a reason to rule you out as an applicant. There is nothing you can put on a website that honestly says "I wrote this"...at most it says you know how to copy and paste. The only exception would be if you created something unique that can't already be found in countless textbooks or in any web search...and if you did create something unique then you'd probably be Interviewing on that project alone and not on something that has no relation to your code.
Throwing a bunch of code at someone that is going to hire you on isn't going to get you hired on. It may even give them a reason to nit pick your coding style as it probably wouldn't follow their standards anyway. It's a nice little thing to be able to include but seriously don't expect it to make a difference.
did you consider she was just trying to watch you flex your muscles as you lifted up that floppy and inserted it slowly into the drive? Girls have to get a guy's attention some how you know.
Will Demi Moore be involved in the process?
no but there is a chance that Chuck Norris will be involved in the process. The idea is to combine the die hard quality of Bruce Willis and the selfless brute that blew up the asteroid with the awsome round kick power of Chuck Norris. yes, you should be fearful of the potential for a Chuck Noris/Bruce Willis clone hybrid thing. But if you want we can have Demi Moore suck the needed DND from the two applicants.
There is this belief by many that scientific advancement does not depend on an individual. Many advancements were done in parallel in the past by multiple people all over the planet. The belief that only one company is working on a given solution is somewhat absurd. The point is someone somewhere would have come to the same conclusion.
In the end scientific advancement belongs to society, not an individual or a company. Just because you do a lot of the work it does not mean you truly own the idea. The idea would not be possible if it wasn't for countless other advancements. As such, returning the idea to the public domain is your repayment for all the training and countless other ideals you would not have even considered if it wasn't for society in the first place.
I think it's important for everyone to accept this and to believe that patents are only to reward those that have achieved a breakthrough in order to help fund their next breakthrough...not so they can sit in their pool every weekday afternoon and have back rubs by nude chinese women...
If you don't have the skills or time to build it yourself you should release your information under a creative commons license. No point in it collecting dust in your drawer if it never gets implimented or has a chance to be.
I don't know if I was just tired or what but I didn't even notice that the bug in the background was supposed to scale the models until after I took the test...they were all so short!
That's called rape in some countries. And it's a good way to get a restraining order against you. Look the simple fact is for many many women there is nothing you can do and nothing you can change about yourself to win her...she is just out of your league...never settle...just don't waste your time on snobs.
That's one thing I don't get. Why do we believe these other worlds somehow have the answer to all our Earthly problems. We can't even create a self sustaining environment here on Earth, what makes you think we know how to do it on another planet? Getting there is not the hard part...yet it seems so very hard right now.
Assuming we do reach a stage where we can have a self sustaining environment here on Earth...suddenly all the horrid things that can happen to you here on Earth are no longer so important as you could survive without end regardless of what happens to the planet even if all life on the planet dies.
The first step is getting something like the biodome to actually work with NO SUNLIGHT...then and only then could we even consider another planet...unless you plan on eating rocks, breathing toxic gas, and bathing in a sun with no EM protection.
We're not there yet...maybe Obama realizes this.
The time of the sale though is a question. With the exception of major corps like MS, how do you prove when they became aware of a security issue in their product? What about already distributed copies that have not yet been sold at retails...do you want them to do a recall on all of those everytime there is a flaw.
Say some company is notified that they product has a security flaw. They now have to stop all sales online or otherwise until that product is patched. The flaw maybe based on a library the product depends on in which case the company would have to take on development of that library to fix the issue before the product is released. What about in the case of GPL software? Oh that's right they get a free pass...
So...you're a COBOL programmer....you know they kinda exist in their own little world right?
Your seed stores other people's encrypted private data as well to ensure availability. When you accept a "friend" request, you transmit the public key directly to the other person's seed. (I assume over yet another encrypted link.) Your "friend" can then request your data from the DHT and then decrypt it.
I just don't understand why you think the replicated data needs to be encrypted yet again, let alone decrypted before being re-encrypted.
Ok if they are using GPG that says to me the standard two key system. Excuse me if I repeat the obvious here...but I just want to make sure we're on the same page. You use someone else's public key and your private key to encrypt something. That data is then only available to the two people that own the private keys. A 3rd party can not use the data. How do you expect other seeds to store the encrypted data? Two key system...
PersonAPrivateKey+PersonBPublicKey = DataSeg1AB(let's say the user's phone number?)
DataSeg1AB gets put onto seed 2 for replication. Now who on the network can even read DataSeg1AB? 1 person. It doesn't matter how much you duplicate the data unless you duplicate it for all users.
DataSeg1AC
DataSeg1AD
If you then have 1 shared private key for all users of your data...how secure is that? The entire point of GPG encryption was to keep the private key off the network and to never transmit it anywhere. The more you duplicate the private key the more chances there are for it to be captured by a malicious user or bot. In this sense there is no point in even using GPG encryption for this model. If I send someone my public key they can't do jack with data I send them because I don't have their public key. I need THEIR public key to encrypt data for them. And when I do encrypt the data for THEM the replication of this data is again mute as it has no advantage that simple cache for offline viewing that wouldn't solve.
These guys are going into this spouting off GPG encryption and a distributed model....the ONLY way that would work SECURELY is if you duplicated data for every user and distributed all of that data onto the network meaning the data storage would be huge for just one profile.
SO in your example...I accept a friend request and I(A) send Person B a public key. Assume I have Person B's public key in the request as well. I use Person B's public key to encrypt the data and I distribute that data to the other nodes...only person B can read that data even on the other nodes. In order for anyone else to ever read that same data they would then need to send in another key/friend request. A location with the original unencrypted data Person A's node or Person B's node (which can unencrypt the data on the network) would need to be contacted in order to encrypt the data for new person C. The data for person C would then need to be distributed again onto the network...which AGAIN is no better than simply giving person C a cache on their local system on say a USB drive?
My point is encryption is great and all...but the way they are describing it and the way they want to use it...it's not GPG/PGP. Either you follow GPG/PGP and have duplication of data on the network for every friend connection or you have a one key system...or you have a shared GPG private key being transmitted on the network (bad...horrible...pointless idea). If you think a single server is a horrible point of failure...imagine countless of your idiot computer using friends having on their hard drives a key that can decrypt all of your profile information. All of this doesn't even consider revoking the data from the network. My point is they can have GPG and massive amounts of data. Or they can call it what they plan on using it like just standard 1 key encryption distributed onto the network in which anyone anywhere can get their greedy little paws on it if even 1 node that has your private key is jacked. Think that's beyond the scope of what spammers can do?
if you give them the key for that data then the data is again free to anyone that has the key. Hardly anything secure. The only way to ensure secure communication would be either to encrypt the data from A for just person B's key. Or have a method to encrypt the data again on the stored server using person's B's public key...but again you'd need to decrypt the data first for that and doing that on a remote server you have no control over again puts the data at risk. Point is the second the data leaves your node it is no longer yours the second you hand the key to anyone...and this ignores the obvious issue of the data still being out there with no way to revoke it in which time will surely solve the problem of someone trying to look at data without the key. A 1024 GPG key today is great and all but will it be 10 years from now?
The bottom line is without a centralized server that has control over the data or is known and accepted as "trusted"...the only thing that keeps the data secure is the difficulty in reaching it...I give it a year before wide spread viruses and spam take it over.
Everything you just said is right on the dot. In fact so much so that you'll find the ones getting promoted over the outspoken newbs are not the revolutionaries telling everyone how things should work...but the ones that just do their job. Most managers do not want to look like a fool. It doesn't matter if you're wrong or right, what matters is if the manager is right...because they are right regardless if you want to believe that or not. They are the ones that make the decisions and if you get on their bad side by telling them they don't know what they're talking about then you're going no where fast. In all cases your manager has many more points with the company that you work for than you do. It doesn't matter if you can bring their entire system down with one key stroke or if you're the only coder in the company that can fix xyz...you're not what matters to the upper management.
In larger companies its very easy to be just a number and stats. The only people that actually know the kind of work you do is your immediate manager and your coworkers. The only person that can get you promoted though is most likely your manager. The bottom line is most managers would rather have idiots under them that can meet their stats and meet their deadlines rather than have an expert coder that could develop the next corporate wide money maker application. An expert makes middle management and upper management look like retards...know your place...and accept that change isn't exactly possible for many companies. If you want to change things or design things the way you think they should be designed then start your own company...cause if you're just starting out with them then chances are you'll be there 20 more years before they'll ever listen to you...and by then the shoe is on the other foot and your ideas are outdated and old anyway!
Lobbyists are an exceptionally effective means for people to communicate with their elected representatives
That's great and all. I'm all for that. But why should any money be permitted to be used as a form of that communication. In my book NO money should be paid to the people I vote into any office. My taxes should pay for their funds for everything. I'm fairly sure another 40-50 years from now we'll look back at this erra as a time of great government corruption by the corporate world. They hold our jobs over the heads of congress as blackmail to create laws...they make horrid decisions that cause countless people to go bankrupt and in no way shape or form are they ever held liable for it because they own congress...because they direct our world. We may have the power to vote but a long time ago corporations have had the power to vote their own laws into congress. Hell many bills aren't even written by the law makers. And to top it all off they cheat as much as they can on their taxes sometimes paying a big fat check of ZERO to the government and their excuse is that everyone else is doing it. They are the problem with the system but that's because they are the system.
I'll be happy when congress is filled with moral people that have the guts to stand up for what's in the people's best interest and stopping anyone from ever bribing congress the way it is now...because as we've all seen that is just one small step away from blackmailing them into doing everything they desire.
There is a huge difference there though. Do you honestly believe everyone's iPod is filled with legal music? When did you have the extra money to dump 45k into music for your ipod? The difference is the number of people involved and the difference is breaking vs fair use.
I wonder if that just means it's covered by fair use? Making fun of him? I have no idea...IAMNAL but I play one on the Internet...lol
Yes it would have been better cause then they could have been sued for copyright infringement...now that would have been funny.
This is one thing I always hate to hear. anyone who doesn't really like it simply hasn't been properly introduced. I've know a few Gay men that make the suggestion about certain sexual situations...
So let me be clear, you're wrong...some things just rub people the wrong way. It's not how you were introduced to it...we are honestly that different from each other. I hate Sushi and it makes me want to throw up just looking at it.