If this is the best you can do I'm outta here. BTW, I suggest for every 5 moderator points you should allow +1 self-aggrandizement points. I'd use them in a heartbeat on this sad-sack farce of a story.
I can tell you that your priority list is slightly skewed. The first claim on any money at all belongs to the lawyers. Whether they be government lawyers or otherwise. They all get their fill before anyone else.
There is no issue about how the money gets divided, dude. I'll tell you right now that I, Ping Xao, am the ONLY deserving victim. Primal, Schlimal, I deserve to have MY REPARATIONS.
I have an idea that is patent-pending to make a load of cash. Here's the plan...
After watching the Discovery Channel's "Neanderthal" this week it occurred to me that it should be a simple matter to declare myself a "Neanderthal-American". Then, using solid scientific research, I will file a lawsuit demanding reparations from all living descendents of the Cromagnon barbarians who had the temerity to oust my Neanderthal anscestors from the majority gene pool.
I will ask for actual and punitive damages of, oh, say one cent (USD) from every living sucker^H^H^H^H^H^H person on the face of the earth. That should be enough to let me carry on in fine Neanderthal tradition. Anyone interested in joining me in a class-action suit? Please reply below.
No wise-cracking remarks about this idea, please. It's "patent pending", not "patently stupid"!
I agree wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, re-testing drivers every year is not practical. Even every 5 years wouldn't work IMO.
Having the most severe consequences for "at fault" accidents is long overdue. Again, I don't think it will fly. Even the mindless one-size-fits-all laws take up thousands of words.
Actually, Suffolk County on Long Island has already done it. NYC will not "go first". Wireless companies were against the Suffolk County law, preferring a statewide law instead. The state is considering just that: a ban on handheld cellphone usage while driving a motor vehicle. In Suffolk, you must have a hands-free setup if you're driving. I don't have it right at hand before me, but I believe the fines are pretty steep.
Byron's telepaths ruined the last season of B5 without a doubt. I think everyone was expecting outright cancellation after 4 years and JMS had pretty much wrapped everything up by then. When TNT decided to ppurchase a 5th season, JMS had to scramble to fill episodes. I couldn't wait for Byron to get offed. That would have been satisfying. I never got too excited during the last year of B5. I even missed a couple of episodes and if I ever see them in reruns, fine, but if not it's not going to bother me too much.
I was an OS/2 early adopter. IBM really messed that one up. It was GOOD and they pissed it away. All talk and no action is what you can expect from IBM in the Linux area.
This info about Broadcast 2000 is one of the reasons I visit/. regularly. Good post and thanks for the pointer. For every thousand crap posts here, you find a golden nugget. Maybe it's not news to everybobdy but some of us - at least 1 - appreciate the insght.
There were 12 men who walked on the Moon. If there was friggin GOLD there we very likely would have gone back. But there was no gold and the surface of the moon was described - by eyewitness testimony - as "essentially grey". Or is it "gray"? Whatever.
"... whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
We have been very fortunate in America. The time is coming when all men and women, American or not, will have to re-assert this basic RIGHT.
I couldn't agree more. Which was the point I originally tried to make.
The gubmint wants to enact 3 thousand anti-law bills a year in the US. WTF? Why doesn't the Congress just mandate IPV6? Within 5 years that's all the router mfgrs are allowed to sell. Period.
Yes, it's called "indemnity" and any business to business sale has a contract with at least 5 pages devoted to it. Why shouldn't the customers be aware of it?
"How are those of us who do understand computer security and could evaluate the security of an e-commerce site supposed to determine the security of the sites we purchase products from?"
Exsqueeze me? He didn't say anything about online security? He hasn't asked a good question is what my original post was about but what you say I didn't ask about was what he was talking about in the first place unless...
This is far-out stuff that is many years away from being implemented.
Something much closer to actually getting implemented is the next generation of aircraft where there are no windows for the pilots to look out of! Because of the need to streamline the fuselage in order to reduce drag, pilots will look at video screens for their visual cues when taking off and landing. As an additional benefit, the displayed view can be overlaid with infrared and radar images so fog, rain and darkness will not impede safety. Wish I had a link for it, but it's true.
Ever since the 2.4 kernel came out I've been hitting Red Hat's site daily waiting for new kernel RPMs to be released. All I saw was references to 'Pinstripe' and that was the latest beta. I managed to get the 2.4 kernel running nicely with RH 7.0 by manually using tarballs, but the "official" 2.4 kernel RPMs for RH 7 will be nice to have.
I agree 100%. I thought they were confusing as well. The circles roughly indicate levels of infringement but "Above the line" and "Below the line" mean absolutely nothing that I could see. What do those phrases mean, exactly? I was confused. I know a few lawyers who love to use charts and models to demonstrate complex relationships in easy-to-understand, visual ways. The use of those diagrams is only going to confuse the judges, IMO.
First, the only cases that can be cited as precedent are those that have been appealed and adjudicated at the Appeals Court level (or higher). Precedent will be set in this case. It's going to be a landmark case, I don't think there's any doubt about it. And no matter the outcome of the court's decision, you can bet it will eventually end up with the U.S. Supreme Court. There's just too much at stake for both sides.
Second, courts don't like to deal with constitutional arguments for a variety of reasons. If there's sufficient precedent or other laws that apply below the level of the U.S. Constitution, courts will seek to avoid arguments that center on it alone. Another reason to think this case will make it all the way up to the Supreme Court because there are no precedent cases that directly relate to the specific facts of this case.
It will be interesting to see what the final outcome will be. Since Copyrights and Patents stem directly from the U.S. Constitution it seems to me that this case richly deserves a hearing before the Supreme Court. Which way will they decide (if they choose to hear it)? Does the RIAA or the MPAA have any major presence in any states where the Governor is the President's brother?
ALSO, if they don't care about you knowing why did they invite the press?
The interview or briefing or whatever it was could have been designed to disseminate the information (or dis-information) to other parties; not necessarily the American public. When the B2 flew over the stadium in Tampa yesterday, I thought about the secondary message it sent out to potential adversaries: "Hey, you guys want to mess with us? CHECK THIS BABY OUT!"
The missile defense system first championed by Ronald Reagan is not a bad idea. There's just one problem: it's not possible. The arguments you hear for it or against it revolve around the question of treaties. Software, as we know it, is just not reliable enough to run this stuff. Identifying and tracking missiles in flight - hundreds or perhaps even thousands at once - is beyond what we know software can do. The treaty problem is a red herring, if you ask me.
A crash program to develop and implement a missile defense system, a Star Wars system, is destined to become a prime example of wasteful government spending and corporate welfare. Sure, the studies and research that will be done will conclude it is possible, but only because that's the conclusion that they will be mandated to achieve (see "Carnivore review team"). Huge profits will be made by firms that get the contracts. You can build all the lasers and pulse cannons and boosters and kinetic energy warheads you want. But if you don't have the software to run them all together with 100% reliability and safety then all those other things mean NOTHING. If it were practical I'd be behind the idea. It's not.
Another thing in the article I found amusing was the "information warfare" aspect. Come on, does anyone seriously think key military command and control computers are going to be vulnerable to state-sponsored script kiddies, for God's sake? What worries me more than battles in space is the absolute clulessness of our elected officials and the gullible nature of the population at large who will be hoodwinked into thinking that these things are even possible. Should we be concerned abuout protecting our assets in space? Yes, absolutely. Should we study these things? Yes, absolutely. But we shouldn't devote huge resources to a pie-in-the-sky project that will never work.
Things run smoothly for a time and everybody has been saying "It ain't broke" and therefore, there's no need to fix it. But over time new requirements will emerge that the original design is no longer suited for. You want to scale it up to handle twice the volume; you want it to run twice as fast, you want to add in new network connections; you want to store more data than it was originally designed to handle.
At some point, a system or piece of software that WASN'T broke last month IS BROKE today. Recognizing when that line is crossed is critical and somewhat subjective. It is difficult to get consensus on exactly when that happens. A clear example of this was the Y2K problem. If nothing was done there WOULD have been severe problems. Management and software people and hardware people KNEW when that line would be crossed ahead of time and STILL a lot of organizations kept putting off the effort needed to fix the problems. It was a given that "not broke" code as of Dec. 31, 1999 all of a sudden would most definitely BE BROKE on Jan 1 2000 and right up until the bitter end people kept putting off the repairs..
So what if it's not going to work in 20 years? It works today so don't worry about it. So what if it's not going to work in 6 years? It's working now so leave it alone. So what if it's not going to work in 6 months? It works now, doesn't it? Etc., etc., etc. It's an example of inertia in the decision making process. It applies to large corporate departments and government agencies. It also applies to you alone, sitting at home wondering if you should buy another hard drive or whether to just bite the bullet and buy a completely new PC. It's a subjective determintation and as such, it's not always cut and dried. Maybe you don't have the cash laying around to buy a new box because you had to get a new muffler last week. Maybe you do have the cash but you don't have a backup system big enough to handle the extra critical data. There are many reasons why you might choose the band-aid approach. At some point, the whole thing will collapse and then you have no choice. Unfortunately, there are no easy answers. You've got to justify it - whether it's just yourself you have to convince or someone up the food chain. Why should it be done and when is the best time to do it?
Slashdot Mirror
I was affected ("effected" - for all the lusers) by this flaw in MSIE. Who's with me?
If this is the best you can do I'm outta here. BTW, I suggest for every 5 moderator points you should allow +1 self-aggrandizement points. I'd use them in a heartbeat on this sad-sack farce of a story.
I thought Katz was a putz. April Shithead Prize goes to you, I guess.
I can tell you that your priority list is slightly skewed. The first claim on any money at all belongs to the lawyers. Whether they be government lawyers or otherwise. They all get their fill before anyone else.
There is no issue about how the money gets divided, dude. I'll tell you right now that I, Ping Xao, am the ONLY deserving victim. Primal, Schlimal, I deserve to have MY REPARATIONS.
Who's with me?
I have an idea that is patent-pending to make a load of cash. Here's the plan...
After watching the Discovery Channel's "Neanderthal" this week it occurred to me that it should be a simple matter to declare myself a "Neanderthal-American". Then, using solid scientific research, I will file a lawsuit demanding reparations from all living descendents of the Cromagnon barbarians who had the temerity to oust my Neanderthal anscestors from the majority gene pool.
I will ask for actual and punitive damages of, oh, say one cent (USD) from every living sucker^H^H^H^H^H^H person on the face of the earth. That should be enough to let me carry on in fine Neanderthal tradition. Anyone interested in joining me in a class-action suit? Please reply below.
No wise-cracking remarks about this idea, please. It's "patent pending", not "patently stupid"!
I agree wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, re-testing drivers every year is not practical. Even every 5 years wouldn't work IMO.
Having the most severe consequences for "at fault" accidents is long overdue. Again, I don't think it will fly. Even the mindless one-size-fits-all laws take up thousands of words.
Actually, Suffolk County on Long Island has already done it. NYC will not "go first". Wireless companies were against the Suffolk County law, preferring a statewide law instead. The state is considering just that: a ban on handheld cellphone usage while driving a motor vehicle. In Suffolk, you must have a hands-free setup if you're driving. I don't have it right at hand before me, but I believe the fines are pretty steep.
Byron's telepaths ruined the last season of B5 without a doubt. I think everyone was expecting outright cancellation after 4 years and JMS had pretty much wrapped everything up by then. When TNT decided to ppurchase a 5th season, JMS had to scramble to fill episodes. I couldn't wait for Byron to get offed. That would have been satisfying. I never got too excited during the last year of B5. I even missed a couple of episodes and if I ever see them in reruns, fine, but if not it's not going to bother me too much.
I was an OS/2 early adopter. IBM really messed that one up. It was GOOD and they pissed it away. All talk and no action is what you can expect from IBM in the Linux area.
This info about Broadcast 2000 is one of the reasons I visit /. regularly. Good post and thanks for the pointer. For every thousand crap posts here, you find a golden nugget. Maybe it's not news to everybobdy but some of us - at least 1 - appreciate the insght.
There were 12 men who walked on the Moon. If there was friggin GOLD there we very likely would have gone back. But there was no gold and the surface of the moon was described - by eyewitness testimony - as "essentially grey". Or is it "gray"? Whatever.
Gold on Mars? Let's go!
I couldn't agree more. Which was the point I originally tried to make.
The gubmint wants to enact 3 thousand anti-law bills a year in the US. WTF? Why doesn't the Congress just mandate IPV6? Within 5 years that's all the router mfgrs are allowed to sell. Period.
End of story.
Yes, it's called "indemnity" and any business to business sale has a contract with at least 5 pages devoted to it. Why shouldn't the customers be aware of it?
Alright, I'm near first! You cannot be sure of any online security. BBBBZZZZZTTTTTTT. The warm fuzzies ain't there.
I'd rather go into a Radio Shack and give the 17-yr old geek my CC number - and look him in the eye - than put my Amex # on the big I.
This is far-out stuff that is many years away from being implemented.
Something much closer to actually getting implemented is the next generation of aircraft where there are no windows for the pilots to look out of! Because of the need to streamline the fuselage in order to reduce drag, pilots will look at video screens for their visual cues when taking off and landing. As an additional benefit, the displayed view can be overlaid with infrared and radar images so fog, rain and darkness will not impede safety. Wish I had a link for it, but it's true.
Ever since the 2.4 kernel came out I've been hitting Red Hat's site daily waiting for new kernel RPMs to be released. All I saw was references to 'Pinstripe' and that was the latest beta. I managed to get the 2.4 kernel running nicely with RH 7.0 by manually using tarballs, but the "official" 2.4 kernel RPMs for RH 7 will be nice to have.
I agree 100%. I thought they were confusing as well. The circles roughly indicate levels of infringement but "Above the line" and "Below the line" mean absolutely nothing that I could see. What do those phrases mean, exactly? I was confused. I know a few lawyers who love to use charts and models to demonstrate complex relationships in easy-to-understand, visual ways. The use of those diagrams is only going to confuse the judges, IMO.
Two things to keep in mind:
First, the only cases that can be cited as precedent are those that have been appealed and adjudicated at the Appeals Court level (or higher). Precedent will be set in this case. It's going to be a landmark case, I don't think there's any doubt about it. And no matter the outcome of the court's decision, you can bet it will eventually end up with the U.S. Supreme Court. There's just too much at stake for both sides.
Second, courts don't like to deal with constitutional arguments for a variety of reasons. If there's sufficient precedent or other laws that apply below the level of the U.S. Constitution, courts will seek to avoid arguments that center on it alone. Another reason to think this case will make it all the way up to the Supreme Court because there are no precedent cases that directly relate to the specific facts of this case.
It will be interesting to see what the final outcome will be. Since Copyrights and Patents stem directly from the U.S. Constitution it seems to me that this case richly deserves a hearing before the Supreme Court. Which way will they decide (if they choose to hear it)? Does the RIAA or the MPAA have any major presence in any states where the Governor is the President's brother?
ALSO, if they don't care about you knowing why did they invite the press?
The interview or briefing or whatever it was could have been designed to disseminate the information (or dis-information) to other parties; not necessarily the American public. When the B2 flew over the stadium in Tampa yesterday, I thought about the secondary message it sent out to potential adversaries: "Hey, you guys want to mess with us? CHECK THIS BABY OUT!"
The missile defense system first championed by Ronald Reagan is not a bad idea. There's just one problem: it's not possible. The arguments you hear for it or against it revolve around the question of treaties. Software, as we know it, is just not reliable enough to run this stuff. Identifying and tracking missiles in flight - hundreds or perhaps even thousands at once - is beyond what we know software can do. The treaty problem is a red herring, if you ask me.
A crash program to develop and implement a missile defense system, a Star Wars system, is destined to become a prime example of wasteful government spending and corporate welfare. Sure, the studies and research that will be done will conclude it is possible, but only because that's the conclusion that they will be mandated to achieve (see "Carnivore review team"). Huge profits will be made by firms that get the contracts. You can build all the lasers and pulse cannons and boosters and kinetic energy warheads you want. But if you don't have the software to run them all together with 100% reliability and safety then all those other things mean NOTHING. If it were practical I'd be behind the idea. It's not.
Another thing in the article I found amusing was the "information warfare" aspect. Come on, does anyone seriously think key military command and control computers are going to be vulnerable to state-sponsored script kiddies, for God's sake? What worries me more than battles in space is the absolute clulessness of our elected officials and the gullible nature of the population at large who will be hoodwinked into thinking that these things are even possible. Should we be concerned abuout protecting our assets in space? Yes, absolutely. Should we study these things? Yes, absolutely. But we shouldn't devote huge resources to a pie-in-the-sky project that will never work.
Things run smoothly for a time and everybody has been saying "It ain't broke" and therefore, there's no need to fix it. But over time new requirements will emerge that the original design is no longer suited for. You want to scale it up to handle twice the volume; you want it to run twice as fast, you want to add in new network connections; you want to store more data than it was originally designed to handle.
At some point, a system or piece of software that WASN'T broke last month IS BROKE today. Recognizing when that line is crossed is critical and somewhat subjective. It is difficult to get consensus on exactly when that happens. A clear example of this was the Y2K problem. If nothing was done there WOULD have been severe problems. Management and software people and hardware people KNEW when that line would be crossed ahead of time and STILL a lot of organizations kept putting off the effort needed to fix the problems. It was a given that "not broke" code as of Dec. 31, 1999 all of a sudden would most definitely BE BROKE on Jan 1 2000 and right up until the bitter end people kept putting off the repairs..
So what if it's not going to work in 20 years? It works today so don't worry about it. So what if it's not going to work in 6 years? It's working now so leave it alone. So what if it's not going to work in 6 months? It works now, doesn't it? Etc., etc., etc. It's an example of inertia in the decision making process. It applies to large corporate departments and government agencies. It also applies to you alone, sitting at home wondering if you should buy another hard drive or whether to just bite the bullet and buy a completely new PC. It's a subjective determintation and as such, it's not always cut and dried. Maybe you don't have the cash laying around to buy a new box because you had to get a new muffler last week. Maybe you do have the cash but you don't have a backup system big enough to handle the extra critical data. There are many reasons why you might choose the band-aid approach. At some point, the whole thing will collapse and then you have no choice. Unfortunately, there are no easy answers. You've got to justify it - whether it's just yourself you have to convince or someone up the food chain. Why should it be done and when is the best time to do it?