I was going to write something about how surprising it was that a corp. was standing up for rights, but:
1. That's kinda knee-jerk, isn't it?
2. It's in their interest, part 1: the article mentioned how corps like AOL and Yahoo have to respond to "hundreds" of subpoenas for their records every year.
3. It's in their interest, part 2: we'd be perfectly accepting of the New York Times stepping into a lawsuit like this, because we've got noble ideas (say) about their interest in Free Speech, The Greater Good, Rights of Man/Woman, etc. But really, AOL is, substantially, in the same business; cynical/true observations about the use of content to provide eyes for ads aside, both are publishers, and both have a certain interest -- ideal and practical -- in free speech.
In fact, in light of these points, I wonder why it hasn't happened before. I mean, I'm sure some ISP somewhere has done something similar -- but I don't recall hearing about an ISP on the scale of AOL doing this before. Or am I on crack?
It is very clear (as evidenced by sites such as
whitehouse.com) that porn operators perceive a disadvantage to
pigeonholing themselves in obviously-porny domains.
Then why don't I get a faceful of pr0n every time I type in some random URL
like www.whateverifeelliketyping.com? Why can I be guaranteed of coming up with a pr0n site
if I type in www.somevariationontits.com, but not somecombinationofrandomwords.com?
This was a great book. I picked it up for 50 cents when I was five -- the library was selling off a bunch of older books, and this was one of them. Never went so far as to actually build anything inside, mind, but it was like pr0n to me: how to build your own cloud chamber, or solid-fuel rocket, or grind your own mirror for a Newtonian reflector telescope. They even offered to send you a "radioactive speck" for use with the cloud chamber.
Of course, it was a perfect match to the encyclopedias I grew up with: Our Wonderful World, published circa 1953, that had been my mother's when she was growing up. A wonderfully eclectic set, and filled with electronics projects that I was never able to get off the ground. Just imagine me in 1982 saying, "Dad, where can I get a 9X232H vacuum tube? I want to make this radio."
Anyhow, glad to see that someone's put it up on the web; the book is much better, yes, but there can't be too many copies left in the libraries.
Man, here I am with 5 moderator points...
on
CowboyNeal Speaks
·
· Score: 5
I dunno...maybe it's just me, but I didn't see any notes of bitterness in his email. It just looked like a polite
"They wanna do this, and I wanna do that" explanation of a decision to leave. And the comments about backdoors -- that just sounds like one more assurance for the (overly?) concerned that
there *weren't* any.
And as for whether or not he should stick around: There's only so much you can do at a job you don't like/enjoy any more (whatever that job is) before you're simply not in the mood to try anymore -- at which point
your effectiveness is going to head 'way down, and you might as well just leave anyway. There was the article here a while back with the question from the CTO of a sinking company: Do I stick around to save my friends, since everything is riding on me, or do I leave this job that I no longer enjoy and head for greener pastures? The response was pretty much unanimous then: Go, 'cos sticking around in a job you don't like is no fun, and you won't be any good anyway. I'd say the same advice applies here.
And anyway, if you've trusted him on the no-backdoors thing this long, why switch now to less-secure products just because he's leaving? He's already given his word (which presumably you've already trusted, in combination w/code reviews, peer opinions, etc) on version whatever-it-was -- why not just keep using that? Or is NAI going to reach out and put some kind of backdoor in your already-downloaded, already-compiled software?
He hasn't "cut and run at the first hurdle". The guy was gonna get sued by the US Gov't for publishing his software. If you require more of him, I suggest you at least provide the crucifix yourself.
First tech support job was at a local community ISP (Let's hear it for the VCN!).
Among other things, they provide free access to community groups, a lot of whom weren't terribly knowledgeable about their computers (fair enough, I don't know the ins and outs of handicapped bus access either).
So one day I get asked to call this one group and give them a hand setting up their email. And it's a group for the blind. Fortunately they had a sighted volunteer there, though, so I talked to him. Unfortunately, he was...um..."developmentally challenged"...and this group had just moved into new offices, and the computer desk wasn't completely set up yet (let alone anything else in the office by the sound of it).
I was trying to talk this guy through setting his DNS servers in Win95, and it was painful. It took 1h40m -- no lie -- and the conversation was full exchanges like this:
Me: Okay, now move the mouse over to the window that's just popped up. Him: [strange grunting sounds, lasting a full minute] Uh...okay. Me: [switch back from reading Slashdot] Okay, now look for the button that says "Properties". Him: [strange grunting noises, and the sound of the mouse moving against his pants...the desk isn't set up yet, remember] Me: [bored] Have you found it yet? Him: [strange grunting noises that last a full minute] Um...what?
I got him to put in one DNS number; after that I just gave up. I think it worked, though...
I gotta admit, that was my first thought when I read this. I went to university
for physics thinking I would go into particle physics and maybe do exactly this...didn't work out that way,
but boy does the excitement stay.
Only a little OT: It's a shame that there isn't something amateur scientists could do that would be truly useful to particle physics. Amateur astronomers can watch for comets, novas, variable stars; birdwatchers can track migration patterns, watch for species far away from home or count local populations. I'd really like to be able to do something similar for particle physics, but
while building my own cloud chamber would be really neat, the impression I get is that it would be just that: really neat, and not at all useful to science as a whole -- not when TeV accelerators are needed to really crack barriers...
Re:read more about it at
on
Spidergoats
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot Mirror
Sir, you are obviously irrational. Have at you!
1. That's kinda knee-jerk, isn't it?
2. It's in their interest, part 1: the article mentioned how corps like AOL and Yahoo have to respond to "hundreds" of subpoenas for their records every year.
3. It's in their interest, part 2: we'd be perfectly accepting of the New York Times stepping into a lawsuit like this, because we've got noble ideas (say) about their interest in Free Speech, The Greater Good, Rights of Man/Woman, etc. But really, AOL is, substantially, in the same business; cynical/true observations about the use of content to provide eyes for ads aside, both are publishers, and both have a certain interest -- ideal and practical -- in free speech.
In fact, in light of these points, I wonder why it hasn't happened before. I mean, I'm sure some ISP somewhere has done something similar -- but I don't recall hearing about an ISP on the scale of AOL doing this before. Or am I on crack?
Anyone?
Bueller...Bueller...
Send an AynCard today!
"Hey, good looking -- I'll be back to subnet you later!"
Then why don't I get a faceful of pr0n every time I type in some random URL like www.whateverifeelliketyping.com? Why can I be guaranteed of coming up with a pr0n site if I type in www.somevariationontits.com, but not somecombinationofrandomwords.com?
All your GPS satellites are belong to us!
ROFLMAO. Man, you rock.
Of course, it was a perfect match to the encyclopedias I grew up with: Our Wonderful World, published circa 1953, that had been my mother's when she was growing up. A wonderfully eclectic set, and filled with electronics projects that I was never able to get off the ground. Just imagine me in 1982 saying, "Dad, where can I get a 9X232H vacuum tube? I want to make this radio."
Anyhow, glad to see that someone's put it up on the web; the book is much better, yes, but there can't be too many copies left in the libraries.
And as for whether or not he should stick around: There's only so much you can do at a job you don't like/enjoy any more (whatever that job is) before you're simply not in the mood to try anymore -- at which point your effectiveness is going to head 'way down, and you might as well just leave anyway. There was the article here a while back with the question from the CTO of a sinking company: Do I stick around to save my friends, since everything is riding on me, or do I leave this job that I no longer enjoy and head for greener pastures? The response was pretty much unanimous then: Go, 'cos sticking around in a job you don't like is no fun, and you won't be any good anyway. I'd say the same advice applies here.
And anyway, if you've trusted him on the no-backdoors thing this long, why switch now to less-secure products just because he's leaving? He's already given his word (which presumably you've already trusted, in combination w/code reviews, peer opinions, etc) on version whatever-it-was -- why not just keep using that? Or is NAI going to reach out and put some kind of backdoor in your already-downloaded, already-compiled software?
He hasn't "cut and run at the first hurdle". The guy was gonna get sued by the US Gov't for publishing his software. If you require more of him, I suggest you at least provide the crucifix yourself.
Shaft!
You're damn right...
Wuss.
I am *so* getting rid of all those Michael Bolton CDs I bought in the throes of big crack highs. Let those alien bastards suffer...
Whoah, hey everyone, thanks for the suggestions. Some *very* innaresting thoughts there.
I'd like it if both of you could prove your arguments, please -- or at least show that you're not pulling it out of your ass.
So one day I get asked to call this one group and give them a hand setting up their email. And it's a group for the blind. Fortunately they had a sighted volunteer there, though, so I talked to him. Unfortunately, he was...um..."developmentally challenged"...and this group had just moved into new offices, and the computer desk wasn't completely set up yet (let alone anything else in the office by the sound of it).
I was trying to talk this guy through setting his DNS servers in Win95, and it was painful. It took 1h40m -- no lie -- and the conversation was full exchanges like this:
Me: Okay, now move the mouse over to the window that's just popped up.
Him: [strange grunting sounds, lasting a full minute] Uh...okay.
Me: [switch back from reading Slashdot] Okay, now look for the button that says "Properties".
Him: [strange grunting noises, and the sound of the mouse moving against his pants...the desk isn't set up yet, remember]
Me: [bored] Have you found it yet?
Him: [strange grunting noises that last a full minute] Um...what?
I got him to put in one DNS number; after that I just gave up. I think it worked, though...
So help me, I saw "nudie ISPs" in the first line of your post. Now I'd buy THAT for a dollar...
Only a little OT: It's a shame that there isn't something amateur scientists could do that would be truly useful to particle physics. Amateur astronomers can watch for comets, novas, variable stars; birdwatchers can track migration patterns, watch for species far away from home or count local populations. I'd really like to be able to do something similar for particle physics, but while building my own cloud chamber would be really neat, the impression I get is that it would be just that: really neat, and not at all useful to science as a whole -- not when TeV accelerators are needed to really crack barriers...