"Interrogator: "Liar! Our brain wave scanner says you do! Off to the waterboard with you!"
Waterboards are crude (not that applied stress coupled with sophisticated analysis of interrogation results is a bad idea) and the ideal would be to bypass the need to stress subjects at all.
If responses to imagery can be evaluated without stressing the subject, that well get more information. The enemy subjects experience (pain, pleasure, neutral) is a side issue.
Anyone who has ever taught any group of people understands that their resources are limited and that some students don't give a shit and never will. Helping the smart and motivated is a good use of those resources, not wasting extra effort on the rockheads. There is such a thing as "watering a dead plant".
Slashdot is of course going to favor students over teachers, given its user base.
While we are noting teachers that are pieces of shit let's not forget the vast number of students that cannot be reached because they are unmotivated AND stupid AND lazy AND indifferent to their own future AND will stay that way into adulthood because they LIKE it. Many of those same students are the ones who made life hell for those of us who were much brighter than they were because they resented their betters. Fuck 'em.
"Sounds like it may have been the previous user that got the machine infected."
Sounds like a good reason to either demand a clean install when being issued a machine (and check it yourself anyway) or (if dealing with clueless types) wipe it, hand it back, and play the luser:
"If it's good enough for large passenger planes, then it's good enough for cars."
Only if they get identical inspection and maintenance!
Aircraft are maintained by AMTs or equivalent who are trained and experienced. Strict maintenance and inspection schedules are (supposed) to be followed. Almost no one does a preflight or postflight or phased inspection in their wheeled vehicle.
This is not remotely how the average schlub maintains his car or truck.
(I speak from plenty of aircraft experience to, including 21-ish years of F-16 maintenance (engines and crew chief).
"Being near the equipment quite defines the 'use' test. And this argument does not apply when your not near stuff to steal."
There is no need for the imprecise definition of near if access to the land is banned completely. In the Shire they may not have the large distances between unmanned equipment they do in the US. The way to ensure no one screws with it is to keep everyone out. They have no valid reason to be where they don't own or have permission to be. Illegal immigrant traffic is yet another problem one doesn't have in the Shire. Farmers have to deal with cut fences, etc. Being able to bust someone for trespass is a convenient way to interdict such folk before they get to steal useful items on their way.
"You sure are going a long way convincing me most US citizens are total assholes..."
NOW you are getting it! Lots of them ARE assholes, which is why I support laws that help keep them away from what is mine.
Theft and vandalism are common in many areas here, and have utterly eliminated any logical reason to let people roam on what one owns. It really is a reasonable assumption that if someone is on an area they don't own, they are up to no good. The country folk all know the proper etiquette. When we visit, we stop in the driveway, honk our horns, and stand near our vehicles to await a response. No response, we leave with perhaps a note to call us later.
In the Shire everything may be wonderful, but don't project YOUR reality into MY country whose rural environment you appear to know little about. YOUR situation is DIFFERENT (and if it is as you describe you are fortunate so be happy!) than that elsewhere. I don't assume to know how things are best run over there.
"A thief is undeterred by laws against stealing (which carry greater punishment than trespassing) - so why is s/he going to be deterred by laws against trespassing?"
Anti-trespassing laws allow _punishment_ for merely being on posted property. That allows interdiction of people before they act. It may be difficult to prove stealing if nothing has been successfully removed from the property, which is why making presence on the posted property an offence is useful. Anti-trespass laws are not just about deterrence, they are a way to lock up or fine those who break them and give them an appropriate criminal record, which they are obviously eager to have as demonstrated by their choice to trespass.
"Because thiefs and other criminals will obviously never get onto your land when it is illegal. It's only after you allow them onto your land they will steal stuff and kill you..."
What drivel. Being able to have detected trespassers removed by law enforcement, and to defend your land allows you to deter the bad folks from acting. The land is yours, not theirs, so it makes no sense to allow them on it in the first place. For example, under a "right to roam", all a thief need do is come onto isolated land and wait for the opportunity to steal fuel or equipment (tractors and harvesters are very expensive). Farmers may own thousands of acres, and have many acres un-farmed but in use for other purposes like wildlife conservation or left fallow between farming cycles. The "active use" test is absurd.
Why should property rights and personal security on ones own ground be thrown away because someone else might like to wander about what isn't theirs?
"And nevermind the fact that this right to roam is generally about the part of your land where you don't live (hard to kill you there) and which you don't actively use (hard to steal anything there)."
That still allows access, and potential liability if the trespasser, er, "roamer" gets hurt climbing a fence or falls into a ditch. BTW, why should I give anyone who wants it the opportunity to build a still or meth lab on my unused property? They have plenty of room for that on public lands!:)
The right to "roam" may work nicely in the Shire among friendly Hobbit-like people, but the US and much of the world isn't the fucking Shire.
My land is bought, paid for, not a group asset, and anyone I don't invite there is unwelcome. Those wanting land are welcome to amount to something and buy it as I did. Otherwise, they are cordially invited to stay out of what _I_ own. The idea that property rights make for un-freedom is literally Communist nonsense and not true in nations that have land reform and a free market. Anyone wanting land in the US is free to buy it at market prices, and there is AMPLE cheap land to be had.
The argument for "roaming" really boils down to people wanting things from other people they haven't paid for.
"Probably we don't have any major car manufacturer sued because nobody ever cares to examine cars electronics after accidents. It's so easy to blame the drunk/distract/incompetent driver."
Especially when they ARE drunk/distracted/incompetent.
Automobile systems are very well designed to fail gracefully or just not matter much when they crap out. (That's also why drive-by-wire is a stupid idea.)
The average car is driven by a mechanical illiterate who barely maintains it (washing does not count) and is designed accordingly. I am an experienced mechanic and know whereof I speak.:)
Do note that simply taking photographs and being visible is not menacing nor is it harassment. When public land borders ones property it is entirely reasonable to be interested in who is there and what they are doing.
" Now France in the mother of western civilization, but they don't have two wide oceans protecting them from monsters."
WAS the mother of some of it...
The people who accomplished that which we admired France for are long ago dead, and their beliefs are not passed genetically.
As for "monsters", now that our particular choice of ideological propaganda against German Fascism has permanently discredited the idea of asserting that ANY culture is better, or even different, than another it is our duty as "civilzed" people to surrender to "monsters" (lest we be told by monsters that we have become one).
All that is not us is good, all that is exotic and non-European is superior, and all that that Europe ever accomplished is inferior to the Quran. Our modern "civilization" has reached the conclusion that it is not worth fighting for.
"Drop that, and you lose binary compatibility (a small loss for this application)"
Sell THAT idea to people who want the convenience of running the same binaries on all their machines. What do you think makes small x86 computers so popular?
"I'm going to wait another year for it all to solidify."
I'll just wait until something interesting pops up used and cheap! I'd wait if buying a truck or other high value asset, but there are so many computer choices making a quick, economic decision is easy. So is dumping it if I make a mistake.
"It's just an attempt to get rid of all discussion, which is what the governments want, especially "democracies" under pretext of terror or in this case a certain type of "porn"."
There are ample alternatives for "discussion" which are more popular than usenet, and have a lower signal-to-pronspam ratio.
Usenet has no powerful defenders because most of it sucks and it's too much bother to play whack-a-mole deleting questionable content.
"The right to roam" may be fine in isolated instances of ethnically homogeneous countries with no appreciable rural crime rate.
The US is not that, and allowing it would be absurd and instantly exploited by criminals. There is ample historic support for protecting rural property from rustlers, theft, etc. Remember that the special conditions which apply in tiny areas like Scotland have no bearing on the rest of the world which faces MUCH different realities.
Indeed. Guns are tools, and ranchers have ample use for them such as killing critters (feral dogs, etc) that threaten their livestock. Fuel and equipment thieves are another good reason for ranchers to be armed. Diesel theft from irrigation pumps can threaten their ability to make a living, and thieves may be armed. In isolated areas the police can't be there on the spot to help.
Remember kids: If it isn't your land and you don't have permission to be there, stay the hell off. There is plenty of public land to play silly games on.
Country folk are often very good at looking out for their neighbors. If you don't belong there, expect to be checked out. I'd be delighted to have a neighbor who would observe and photograph any questionable visitors. Being visibly armed deters violence, and cameras preserve potential evidence.
Slashdot Mirror
"Including breaking and entering, stealing, and how to receive stolen property."
Yep. If he broke in and changed dead-tree records it would not have made Slashdot.
I say crush him and make an example to others. He was smart enough to know what he was doing was
illegal.
"Interrogator: "Liar! Our brain wave scanner says you do! Off to the waterboard with you!"
Waterboards are crude (not that applied stress coupled with sophisticated analysis of interrogation results is a bad idea) and the ideal would be to bypass the need to stress subjects at all.
If responses to imagery can be evaluated without stressing the subject, that well get more information. The enemy subjects experience (pain, pleasure, neutral) is a side issue.
Anyone who has ever taught any group of people understands that their resources are limited and that some students don't give a shit and never will. Helping the smart and motivated is a good use of those resources, not wasting extra effort on the rockheads. There is such a thing as "watering a dead plant".
Slashdot is of course going to favor students over teachers, given its user base.
While we are noting teachers that are pieces of shit let's not forget the vast number of students that cannot be reached because they are unmotivated AND stupid AND lazy AND indifferent to their own future AND will stay that way into adulthood because they LIKE it. Many of those same students are the ones who made life hell for those of us who were much brighter than they were because they resented their betters. Fuck 'em.
"It doesn't have to be that way. NASA certainly has shown that long term projects can have spectacular results."
Vista is the Challenger of operating systems?
"maybe smart geeks are, well, not stupid, and don't want to get sent of to die in some other country?"
In what alternate universe does DARPA deploy?
OTOH, your troll post may just be proof-testing of the DARPA "exploding clue" project.
"Sounds like it may have been the previous user that got the machine infected."
Sounds like a good reason to either demand a clean install when being issued a machine (and check it yourself anyway) or (if dealing with clueless types) wipe it, hand it back, and play the luser:
"Uhh, I can't log on..."
"This is a clear case of a large company making what they want and totally ignoring consumer demand."
:)
This generates a clear case of me giggling like the proverbial schoolgirl when a company I dislike makes a customer-unfriendly decision.
Extra e-hugs for making all those "XP" machines "obsolete". More cheap stuffs for me to load with Linux.
"If it's good enough for large passenger planes, then it's good enough for cars."
Only if they get identical inspection and maintenance!
Aircraft are maintained by AMTs or equivalent who are trained and experienced. Strict maintenance and inspection schedules are (supposed) to be followed. Almost no one does a preflight or postflight or phased inspection in their wheeled vehicle.
This is not remotely how the average schlub maintains his car or truck.
(I speak from plenty of aircraft experience to, including 21-ish years of F-16 maintenance (engines and crew chief).
"Being near the equipment quite defines the 'use' test. And this argument does not apply when your not near stuff to steal."
There is no need for the imprecise definition of near if access to the land is banned completely.
In the Shire they may not have the large distances between unmanned equipment they do in the US. The way to ensure no one screws with it is to keep everyone out. They have no valid reason to be where they don't own or have permission to be. Illegal immigrant traffic is yet another problem one doesn't have in the Shire. Farmers have to deal with cut fences, etc. Being able to bust someone for trespass is a convenient way to interdict such folk before they get to steal useful items on their way.
"You sure are going a long way convincing me most US citizens are total assholes..."
NOW you are getting it! Lots of them ARE assholes, which is why I support laws that help keep them away from what is mine.
Theft and vandalism are common in many areas here, and have utterly eliminated any logical reason to let people roam on what one owns. It really is a reasonable assumption that if someone is on an area they don't own, they are up to no good. The country folk all know the proper etiquette. When we visit, we stop in the driveway, honk our horns, and stand near our vehicles to await a response. No response, we leave with perhaps a note to call us later.
In the Shire everything may be wonderful, but don't project YOUR reality into MY country whose rural environment you appear to know little about. YOUR situation is DIFFERENT (and if it is as you describe you are fortunate so be happy!) than that elsewhere. I don't assume to know how things are best run over there.
"A thief is undeterred by laws against stealing (which carry greater punishment than trespassing) - so why is s/he going to be deterred by laws against trespassing?"
Anti-trespassing laws allow _punishment_ for merely being on posted property. That allows interdiction of people before they act. It may be difficult to prove stealing if nothing has been successfully removed from the property, which is why making presence on the posted property an offence is useful.
Anti-trespass laws are not just about deterrence, they are a way to lock up or fine those who break them and give them an appropriate criminal record, which they are obviously eager to have as demonstrated by their choice to trespass.
"Because thiefs and other criminals will obviously never get onto your land when it is illegal. It's only after you allow them onto your land they will steal stuff and kill you..."
:)
What drivel. Being able to have detected trespassers removed by law enforcement, and to defend your land allows you to deter the bad folks from acting. The land is yours, not theirs, so it makes no sense to allow them on it in the first place. For example, under a "right to roam", all a thief need do is come onto isolated land and wait for the opportunity to steal fuel or equipment (tractors and harvesters are very expensive). Farmers may own thousands of acres, and have many acres un-farmed but in use for other purposes like wildlife conservation or left fallow between farming cycles. The "active use" test is absurd.
Why should property rights and personal security on ones own ground be thrown away because someone else might like to wander about what isn't theirs?
"And nevermind the fact that this right to roam is generally about the part of your land where you don't live (hard to kill you there) and which you don't actively use (hard to steal anything there)."
That still allows access, and potential liability if the trespasser, er, "roamer" gets hurt climbing a fence or falls into a ditch. BTW, why should I give anyone who wants it the opportunity to build a still or meth lab on my unused property? They have plenty of room for that on public lands!
The right to "roam" may work nicely in the Shire among friendly Hobbit-like people, but the US and much of the world isn't the fucking Shire.
My land is bought, paid for, not a group asset, and anyone I don't invite there is unwelcome. Those wanting land are welcome to amount to something and buy it as I did. Otherwise, they are cordially invited to stay out of what _I_ own. The idea that property rights make for un-freedom is literally Communist nonsense and not true in nations that have land reform and a free market. Anyone wanting land in the US is free to buy it at market prices, and there is AMPLE cheap land to be had.
The argument for "roaming" really boils down to people wanting things from other people they haven't paid for.
"Probably we don't have any major car manufacturer sued because nobody ever cares to examine cars electronics after accidents. It's so easy to blame the drunk/distract/incompetent driver."
:)
Especially when they ARE drunk/distracted/incompetent.
Automobile systems are very well designed to fail gracefully or just not matter much when they crap out. (That's also why drive-by-wire is a stupid idea.)
The average car is driven by a mechanical illiterate who barely maintains it (washing does not count) and is designed accordingly. I am an experienced mechanic and know whereof I speak.
"Being visibly armed is a threat."
No, "pointing and brandishing" arms is a threat.
The distinction matters.
Arms in a gun rack or shouldered on a sling are not a threat, though their potential should be taken into account.
Do note that simply taking photographs and being visible is not menacing nor is it harassment. When public land borders ones property it is entirely reasonable to be interested in who is there and what they are doing.
" Now France in the mother of western civilization, but they don't have two wide oceans protecting them from monsters."
WAS the mother of some of it...
The people who accomplished that which we admired France for are long ago dead, and their beliefs are not passed genetically.
As for "monsters", now that our particular choice of ideological propaganda against German Fascism has permanently discredited the idea of asserting that ANY culture is better, or even different, than another it is our duty as "civilzed" people to surrender to "monsters" (lest we be told by monsters that we have become one).
All that is not us is good, all that is exotic and non-European is superior, and all that that Europe ever accomplished is inferior to the Quran. Our modern "civilization" has reached the conclusion that it is not worth fighting for.
Offer to buy enough units and it's a fair bet they'd sell them to you wholesale.
"Drop that, and you lose binary compatibility (a small loss for this application)"
Sell THAT idea to people who want the convenience of running the same binaries on all their machines.
What do you think makes small x86 computers so popular?
"I'm going to wait another year for it all to solidify."
I'll just wait until something interesting pops up used and cheap!
I'd wait if buying a truck or other high value asset, but there are so many computer choices making a quick, economic decision is easy. So is dumping it if I make a mistake.
"But some of us don't understand why we need to "move on" from a superior technology. "
You don't. You may just have to host what you want yourself. Providers don't have a reason to care if there is not a suitable profit involved.
If you can make a profit, offer what they do not.
The ISPs will just dump them, too. No effort required.
Still a microscopic niche market.
"It's just an attempt to get rid of all discussion, which is what the governments want, especially "democracies" under pretext of terror or in this case a certain type of "porn"."
There are ample alternatives for "discussion" which are more popular than usenet, and have a lower signal-to-pronspam ratio.
Usenet has no powerful defenders because most of it sucks and it's too much bother to play whack-a-mole deleting questionable content.
"The right to roam" may be fine in isolated instances of ethnically homogeneous countries with no appreciable rural crime rate.
The US is not that, and allowing it would be absurd and instantly exploited by criminals. There is ample historic support for protecting rural property from rustlers, theft, etc. Remember that the special conditions which apply in tiny areas like Scotland have no bearing on the rest of the world which faces MUCH different realities.
Indeed. Guns are tools, and ranchers have ample use for them such as killing critters (feral dogs, etc) that threaten their livestock. Fuel and equipment thieves are another good reason for ranchers to be armed. Diesel theft from irrigation pumps can threaten their ability to make a living, and thieves may be armed. In isolated areas the police can't be there on the spot to help.
Remember kids:
If it isn't your land and you don't have permission to be there, stay the hell off. There is plenty of public land to play silly games on.
Country folk are often very good at looking out for their neighbors. If you don't belong there, expect to be checked out. I'd be delighted to have a neighbor who would observe and photograph any questionable visitors. Being visibly armed deters violence, and cameras preserve potential evidence.
"i think this is what they mean by possessions owning the person rather than the other way around."
Nonsense.
I conferred with all my consumer electronic devices and our collective opinion is that you are mistaken.
And what is this "walk" of which you speak?
ISPs see usenet as a niche market they can dump, so they will.
Who isn't surprised it's lasted this long?