Police officers are allowed to do it when it's necessary for their job AND they have to have their siren going. Otherwise, they're liable for the same traffic laws as anyone else.
Re:All story titles contain acronyms..
on
P2P Internet Radio
·
· Score: 0, Troll
He's probably off crying about Columbine somewhere.
Re:All story titles contain acronyms..
on
P2P Internet Radio
·
· Score: -1, Flamebait
Jesus, you're right. Has Slashdot lost sight of its noble goal: to bring tech news and discussion to the laymen of the world, the sub-geeks, the help-my-computer's-coffee-holder-stopped-working types? Have we actually started providing nothing but "news for nerds"?
*notices a JonKatz blowjob piece*
Ah, thank god. I was worried there.
Possible security issues
on
P2P Internet Radio
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
While a treatment of security is obviously part of the "tip jar" model, I don't think that P2P networks have evolved enough yet to be easily graftable with actual money transfer. The scheme described uses GPG to sign the payment information so that middlemen can't insert their own paypal account for someone else's song (hmm... does this remind anyone of the earlier story about Kazaa hijacking affiliate payments?) but the authentication is through a "web of trust" which, frankly, is a poor excuse for security when actual money is being thrown around. If I'm going to drop a quarter in the jar, I'm going to make damn sure that some script kiddie isn't tapping it.
A court declaring a particular clause of a EULA invalid on legal terms would not weaken EULAs. On the contrary, it would strenghthen them a huge amount. By ruling that a particular clause was illegal, the court would be implicitly affirming the enforceability of EULAs in general. Compare Marbury vs. Madison, in which the Supreme Courtthrew out a law that would allow them to enforce judicial appointments, and in doing so affirmed their own right to judicial review. Courts, and especially appellate and supreme courts, move in mysterious ways.
The mass media tends to reflect common usage. If MSNBCBS started using "homosexual" to mean "paedophile" tomorrow, they'd just end up confusing everybody. Language changes slowly and nondeliberately; the media actually has relatively little sway. And if they were using it to reflect common usage, then in that scenario it'd be too late anyway.
Moreover, the mass media really has no vested interest here. If the NY Times (registration required) wants to sell papers, they'd damn well better make that headline "HACKER SABOTAGES DEFENSE THINGIES". "CRACKER SABOTAGES DEFENSE THINGIES" wouldn't play to common usage, and would furthermore be somewhat misleading if run next to a picture of John Ashcroft.
Re:"Gaining speeds of up to 140mph"?
on
Skydriving
·
· Score: 1
Yay! You get the "clueless AP" trophy AND the "unclear on the concept of humor" trophy! Yay you! now screw off.
Guess what? The local Burger King has a new kind of burger. But I don't want to try it out because it might have, y'know, DRM in it. Scaaaaary!!!
Seriously. Do you think that DRM applies at all to this situation? The only difference between this and any other communications standard is implementation details. "Plenty of processing power"? What makes you think that UWB devices will have more surplus processing power than anything else? Circuits designed to do UWB will be designed for UWB. Circuits designed for DRM will do DRM. Combination circuits could do both. But what is there about this that couldn't also be done with USB or IEEE 1394?
But really I still think it should be fairly easy to do properly.:)
I'll (partially) agree with you there; the article quotes SIX MINUTES to start up, which IMHO is downright bizarre. The nature of the contract the company is working under--"be really secure and don't let anyone know what's going on"--is basically a license to write the most slipshod system ever, as long as it fulfils basic usability requirements.
...only counts votes that check out, then creates a list of votes that didn't check out and why. The people who made those votes are notified.
And this is where your solution fails. Ya see, voting isn't like compiling a program, where you can just go back and edit the source code if there's an error. Voting is a one-chance thing. And it is absolutely critical that it be completely guaranteed of doing it right the FIRST time. That means that trusting the voting machine not to be tampered with is not an option; it means that if you have to "check" the votes (and if there is no security on the machines themselves, exactly how do you propose to do this?) then your solution has already failed.
1. Because some people prefer not to wade through Kazaa/Gnutella/whatever to get their movies.
2. Because some people have ethics, and choose not to steal.
And please don't start a flamewar about how "piracy isn't stealing". All those have been done to death, at least for the limited case of video downloads. Anyone who thinks piracy is a victimless crime is deluding himself.
Nah, the author of the article is talking out of his ass. There are no so-called "digital locks"; the protection is that, even if you copy it to another computer, that person won't be able to play it, because they won't be able to get the decryption key from MS.
"digital locks" is how you explain DRM to clueless readers who want to feel like they're up on the latest tech fads.
I've thought about doing this too. Even if you don't directly use the vacuum cleaner, the HEPA filters for vacuums are likely to be much cheaper than the industrial dealies. Just make sure it's HEPA, and not "HEPA-compliant".
That was stupid of you, so here's a short, easy response.
When you START blowing air out of the room, for a few nanoseconds, a small vacuum is generated. That vacuum is then filled, partially from other bathroom air, partially from outside. So gradually the humid air is replaced by dusty air.
Come to think of it, that was way too much time spent humoring you. I'll have my secretary bill you.;-)
This is idiocy. When you blow the steam out of the bathroom using the box fan, do you have a vacuum left in the bathroom? Temporarily, yes! And the air to fill it has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is (gasp) outside the bathroom. So while you've steamed up the bathroom air but good, you immediately discard it, and replace it with nice, dusty room air? Duh.
If you want to use the water vapor trick, you have to wait for the vapor to subside. And you still have a problem with high humidity, which can be hell on hard drives. Even if you don't notice anything for the first couple of weeks, there's still water particles banging around in your drive, just waiting to corrode things.
Bottom line? Don't do this. If you absolutely MUST mod your hard drive, construct a mini clean room from a plastic aquarium, latex gloves, a fan, and a HEPA and an ULPA filter working in concert (the HEPA filter first, then the ULPA). It's cheap, and your hard drive won't, you know, DIE.
Hmm... no doubt this neatly sidesteps any FTC sanctions against them. Clever; I suppose bad corporations never die, they just restructure. Right now, the inchoate fragments of Enron are slowly converging into a new, trendily-named whole. Oh brave new world, that has such businesses in it.
Jesus, Andersen changed their name already? What, do they have a small army of business card printers and sign-repainters standing by in case of corporate scandal?
"Hey, aren't you from Ande-" "Hmm? Nope! Nope, never heard of them! I'm from *checks card* uhh, Accenture, and I am a *checks card*...quality promotion liaison."
What is the process of interaction between a SFX team and a director? The director has a creative vision, and the SFX team has the expertise on what can be done, what will look good, etc. Obviously there would be a fair amount of variation, but what tends to be the process of creation and refinement?
Slashdot Mirror
Police officers are allowed to do it when it's necessary for their job AND they have to have their siren going. Otherwise, they're liable for the same traffic laws as anyone else.
He's probably off crying about Columbine somewhere.
Jesus, you're right. Has Slashdot lost sight of its noble goal: to bring tech news and discussion to the laymen of the world, the sub-geeks, the help-my-computer's-coffee-holder-stopped-working types? Have we actually started providing nothing but "news for nerds"?
*notices a JonKatz blowjob piece*
Ah, thank god. I was worried there.
While a treatment of security is obviously part of the "tip jar" model, I don't think that P2P networks have evolved enough yet to be easily graftable with actual money transfer. The scheme described uses GPG to sign the payment information so that middlemen can't insert their own paypal account for someone else's song (hmm... does this remind anyone of the earlier story about Kazaa hijacking affiliate payments?) but the authentication is through a "web of trust" which, frankly, is a poor excuse for security when actual money is being thrown around. If I'm going to drop a quarter in the jar, I'm going to make damn sure that some script kiddie isn't tapping it.
A court declaring a particular clause of a EULA invalid on legal terms would not weaken EULAs. On the contrary, it would strenghthen them a huge amount. By ruling that a particular clause was illegal, the court would be implicitly affirming the enforceability of EULAs in general. Compare Marbury vs. Madison, in which the Supreme Courtthrew out a law that would allow them to enforce judicial appointments, and in doing so affirmed their own right to judicial review. Courts, and especially appellate and supreme courts, move in mysterious ways.
The mass media tends to reflect common usage. If MSNBCBS started using "homosexual" to mean "paedophile" tomorrow, they'd just end up confusing everybody. Language changes slowly and nondeliberately; the media actually has relatively little sway. And if they were using it to reflect common usage, then in that scenario it'd be too late anyway.
Moreover, the mass media really has no vested interest here. If the NY Times (registration required) wants to sell papers, they'd damn well better make that headline "HACKER SABOTAGES DEFENSE THINGIES". "CRACKER SABOTAGES DEFENSE THINGIES" wouldn't play to common usage, and would furthermore be somewhat misleading if run next to a picture of John Ashcroft.
Yay! You get the "clueless AP" trophy AND the "unclear on the concept of humor" trophy! Yay you! now screw off.
Jesus Christ.
Guess what? The local Burger King has a new kind of burger. But I don't want to try it out because it might have, y'know, DRM in it. Scaaaaary!!!
Seriously. Do you think that DRM applies at all to this situation? The only difference between this and any other communications standard is implementation details. "Plenty of processing power"? What makes you think that UWB devices will have more surplus processing power than anything else? Circuits designed to do UWB will be designed for UWB. Circuits designed for DRM will do DRM. Combination circuits could do both. But what is there about this that couldn't also be done with USB or IEEE 1394?
It's rather funny to watch AMD and Intel battle it out in the R&D departments, arguing over whose silicon dick is smaller.
But really I still think it should be fairly easy to do properly. :)
I'll (partially) agree with you there; the article quotes SIX MINUTES to start up, which IMHO is downright bizarre. The nature of the contract the company is working under--"be really secure and don't let anyone know what's going on"--is basically a license to write the most slipshod system ever, as long as it fulfils basic usability requirements.
...only counts votes that check out, then creates a list of votes that didn't check out and why. The people who made those votes are notified.
And this is where your solution fails. Ya see, voting isn't like compiling a program, where you can just go back and edit the source code if there's an error. Voting is a one-chance thing. And it is absolutely critical that it be completely guaranteed of doing it right the FIRST time. That means that trusting the voting machine not to be tampered with is not an option; it means that if you have to "check" the votes (and if there is no security on the machines themselves, exactly how do you propose to do this?) then your solution has already failed.
1. Because some people prefer not to wade through Kazaa/Gnutella/whatever to get their movies.
2. Because some people have ethics, and choose not to steal.
And please don't start a flamewar about how "piracy isn't stealing". All those have been done to death, at least for the limited case of video downloads. Anyone who thinks piracy is a victimless crime is deluding himself.
Nah, the author of the article is talking out of his ass. There are no so-called "digital locks"; the protection is that, even if you copy it to another computer, that person won't be able to play it, because they won't be able to get the decryption key from MS.
"digital locks" is how you explain DRM to clueless readers who want to feel like they're up on the latest tech fads.
Perhaps, but it also reflects badly on your psyche.
And we cooperated with Al Qaida. Funny how that works, no?
I've thought about doing this too. Even if you don't directly use the vacuum cleaner, the HEPA filters for vacuums are likely to be much cheaper than the industrial dealies. Just make sure it's HEPA, and not "HEPA-compliant".
That was stupid of you, so here's a short, easy response.
;-)
When you START blowing air out of the room, for a few nanoseconds, a small vacuum is generated. That vacuum is then filled, partially from other bathroom air, partially from outside. So gradually the humid air is replaced by dusty air.
Come to think of it, that was way too much time spent humoring you. I'll have my secretary bill you.
This is idiocy. When you blow the steam out of the bathroom using the box fan, do you have a vacuum left in the bathroom? Temporarily, yes! And the air to fill it has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is (gasp) outside the bathroom. So while you've steamed up the bathroom air but good, you immediately discard it, and replace it with nice, dusty room air? Duh.
If you want to use the water vapor trick, you have to wait for the vapor to subside. And you still have a problem with high humidity, which can be hell on hard drives. Even if you don't notice anything for the first couple of weeks, there's still water particles banging around in your drive, just waiting to corrode things.
Bottom line? Don't do this. If you absolutely MUST mod your hard drive, construct a mini clean room from a plastic aquarium, latex gloves, a fan, and a HEPA and an ULPA filter working in concert (the HEPA filter first, then the ULPA). It's cheap, and your hard drive won't, you know, DIE.
Oh, boy, VeriSign wants ICANN to give up some of its regulatory power. Out of the frying pan, into the fire.
Maybe the Swiss could do it; they seem like nice folks. Very private. Kickass knives, too.
yyyeah, that almost cries out for a (+1, funny). Except that it's ignorant as all heck.
Hmm... no doubt this neatly sidesteps any FTC sanctions against them. Clever; I suppose bad corporations never die, they just restructure. Right now, the inchoate fragments of Enron are slowly converging into a new, trendily-named whole. Oh brave new world, that has such businesses in it.
Jesus, Andersen changed their name already? What, do they have a small army of business card printers and sign-repainters standing by in case of corporate scandal?
...quality promotion liaison."
"Hey, aren't you from Ande-"
"Hmm? Nope! Nope, never heard of them! I'm from *checks card* uhh, Accenture, and I am a *checks card*
What is the process of interaction between a SFX team and a director? The director has a creative vision, and the SFX team has the expertise on what can be done, what will look good, etc. Obviously there would be a fair amount of variation, but what tends to be the process of creation and refinement?
AOL bought Mirabilis, and ICQ and AIM still aren't integrated.
"So, what's the difference between ICQ and AIM?"
"Well, for one thing, AIM is owned by AOL, and ICQ is... um... well, actually, owned by AOL too."
What, you don't think MS will ever release a new version of Office, and with it, update .DOC to be harder to interpret?