So? The legitimacy of any government depends on the consent of the people. For consent to be valid, it must be given freely, which also means that it can be withdrawn. Any laws that prohibit a group of people from withdrawing their consent to be governed are therefore illegitimate.
It's not that the Constitution prohibits laws against sedition. It's that valid laws against sedition are a logical impossibility.
Giving the same people who would put a man to death for letting someone speak out about what the US is actually up to, the power to shut down communications, is only good for those people, not the rest of the population.
There's no "giving" here. The Obama administration claims that they already have that authority under section 706 of the Communications Act. Here is the relevant part, with emphasis added:
(d) Upon proclamation by the President that there exists a state or threat of war involving the United States, the President, if he deems it necessary in the interest of the national security and defense, may, during a period ending not later than six months after the termination of such state or threat of war and not later than such earlier date as the Congress by concurrent resolution may designate,
(1) suspend or amend the rules and regulations applicable to any or all facilities or stations for wire communication within the jurisdiction of the United States as prescribed by the Commission,
(2) cause the closing of any facility or station for wire communication and the removal therefrom of its apparatus and equipment, or
(3) authorize the use or control of any such facility or station and its apparatus and equipment by any department of the Government under such regulations as he may prescribe, upon just compensation to the owners.
Considering that we are in an endless state of war, the president could exercise this authority at any time.
Not being a security guru, why would you even give someone 10k or 100k attempts/second?
He's talking about an attacker that has the password hash already, and can go about breaking it on any system he pleases. As a sysadmin you have no control over how many attempts per second he can make in that situation. All you can do is make the calculation more computationally complex.
Displays are insanely cheap any more. I picked up a very nice looking 23" 1920x1080 monitor for $150. You can get them for around $100 if you're willing to hunt. That's crazy.
I picked up a very nice looking 21" 1600x1200 CRT for free. Spending $1 on a display with fewer lines of resolution would be crazy.
It's more the input than anything else. DoDonPachi is great on the PC with a Saturn USB pad. Quake 3 is great on the Dreamcast with a keyboard and mouse.
Unfortunately, this is not being decided by network engineers. It's being decided by rich, corrupt, lawyers and judges. The technical merit of the situation is irrelevant.
True! What conclusions do you expect us to draw from that? That the corrupt and powerful will abuse the legal system to damage their enemies? If so, you're right.
The fact that we know who anyone is at Wikileaks means that they did a shitty job of leaking documents.
Sure, and the fact that we know who anyone is at the New York Times means they did a shitty job of leaking documents too.
So far, Congress has forbidden the Executive from moving detainees from Guantanamo[3,4] by huge supermajority votes (90-6 in the Senate, for instance). The actual statutory language[5] is quite clear (quoted below).
The statutory language is quite clear. They have not prohibited the closure of Guantanamo. They have not prohibited Obama from moving detainees from Guantanamo. They have prohibited him from using budgeted funds to move detainees to the US.
There are any number of ways to deal with this. First, you could just unlock the doors, shut off the lights, and walk away. This option is free! Alternatively, he could find other ways to fund the closure of Guantanamo. Set up a collection plate and I'll donate.
If you're using a remote app to resize your files, then the remote app can apply this filter at the same time. No big deal. The point is that there's no reason for the end user to have the source file, especially if you're only delivering a low res copy of it.
The only images you're going to want to protect are the ones you've distributed on the web.* Those are going to be the ones that are already scaled down. You do scale down your images before you host them, right?
*if you've decided to be a dick about copying, you're probably not going to be distributing your high res source image
A text only/. would be a vast improvent. From a UI standpoint, no web forum I've ever seen has come close to matching the convenience of a good USENET client.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a great idea, but how is he going to pay for it?
They don't even need to write the upgrade. Ship dd-wrt.
So? The legitimacy of any government depends on the consent of the people. For consent to be valid, it must be given freely, which also means that it can be withdrawn. Any laws that prohibit a group of people from withdrawing their consent to be governed are therefore illegitimate.
It's not that the Constitution prohibits laws against sedition. It's that valid laws against sedition are a logical impossibility.
Moral standing is better than legal standing.
The Supreme Court is wrong.
Giving the same people who would put a man to death for letting someone speak out about what the US is actually up to, the power to shut down communications, is only good for those people, not the rest of the population.
There's no "giving" here. The Obama administration claims that they already have that authority under section 706 of the Communications Act. Here is the relevant part, with emphasis added:
Considering that we are in an endless state of war, the president could exercise this authority at any time.
Not being a security guru, why would you even give someone 10k or 100k attempts/second?
He's talking about an attacker that has the password hash already, and can go about breaking it on any system he pleases. As a sysadmin you have no control over how many attempts per second he can make in that situation. All you can do is make the calculation more computationally complex.
I'm not sure Kevin Butler actually understood what he was doing. He's a marketer, he probably wouldn't recognize an encryption key when he sees one.
So the challenge is to create a user interface that's friendly and usable to "noobs" but also able to augment pros/experts to their limits.
Why's that the challenge? Make one that's powerful for experts, and those worthy will adapt.
Hell yeah I am.
Displays are insanely cheap any more. I picked up a very nice looking 23" 1920x1080 monitor for $150. You can get them for around $100 if you're willing to hunt. That's crazy.
I picked up a very nice looking 21" 1600x1200 CRT for free. Spending $1 on a display with fewer lines of resolution would be crazy.
It's more the input than anything else. DoDonPachi is great on the PC with a Saturn USB pad. Quake 3 is great on the Dreamcast with a keyboard and mouse.
All the rational criminals must be moving to more lucrative sources of ill-gotten gains.
Like finance.
Unfortunately, this is not being decided by network engineers. It's being decided by rich, corrupt, lawyers and judges. The technical merit of the situation is irrelevant.
Is that the "full fledged jail break code" mentioned in the article? It's unclear whether they mean the key, or the source code to CFW or whatever.
How are they going to replace the revenue from the sales lost because their bloatware is driving away customers?
Get rid of that MS Windows POS too.
UNIX was always idiot proof. It's hard for an idiot to damage much when there's nothing to click on.
Your logic is astounding.
He's currently in jail.
True! What conclusions do you expect us to draw from that? That the corrupt and powerful will abuse the legal system to damage their enemies? If so, you're right.
The fact that we know who anyone is at Wikileaks means that they did a shitty job of leaking documents.
Sure, and the fact that we know who anyone is at the New York Times means they did a shitty job of leaking documents too.
So far, Congress has forbidden the Executive from moving detainees from Guantanamo[3,4] by huge supermajority votes (90-6 in the Senate, for instance). The actual statutory language[5] is quite clear (quoted below).
The statutory language is quite clear. They have not prohibited the closure of Guantanamo. They have not prohibited Obama from moving detainees from Guantanamo. They have prohibited him from using budgeted funds to move detainees to the US.
There are any number of ways to deal with this. First, you could just unlock the doors, shut off the lights, and walk away. This option is free! Alternatively, he could find other ways to fund the closure of Guantanamo. Set up a collection plate and I'll donate.
If you're using a remote app to resize your files, then the remote app can apply this filter at the same time. No big deal. The point is that there's no reason for the end user to have the source file, especially if you're only delivering a low res copy of it.
The only images you're going to want to protect are the ones you've distributed on the web.* Those are going to be the ones that are already scaled down. You do scale down your images before you host them, right?
*if you've decided to be a dick about copying, you're probably not going to be distributing your high res source image
A text only /. would be a vast improvent. From a UI standpoint, no web forum I've ever seen has come close to matching the convenience of a good USENET client.
I like those advantages. What I really want to know is what the disadvantages are. Is all my software likely to work on Debian FreeBSD?
Depending on the lake, 2 hours might not even be enough time to get across. It's only vertical distance that's tethered. Horizontal movement is free.
I mean, when you think about it "why would anyone want or need to walk around on the surface of the ground for two hours nonstop"?