The four people you listed didn't do the things they did BECAUSE they were Atheists or to advance an Atheistic viewpoint, they did it to advance their own cause, which usually equals "Staying alive and in total control".
OTOH, the far-right "Batshit Crazy" evangelicals (Be they Muslims, Christians or Jews) seem to take the positions that they do precisely BECAUSE, in their view, their religion requires them to take the action(s) that they do. If they weren't "Batshit Crazy", they wouldn't do the things that they do or advocate the things that they advocate.
After only 2 years (from the perspective of the crew.. 3.75 years from the ground) at a constant 1g acceleration (you know, nice to have a sense of gravity for at least half of the trip..), you'll have traveled 2.9 light years.
After 5 years (using that same perspective) you'll have traveled nearly 83 light years (and nearly 84 years on the ground) and reached.99993 of c.
All of this is to say that from the perspective of the crew, this isn't necessarily a multi-lifetime trip.
Yes, normally, FTP is an insecure protocol, with known weaknesses including a clear-text password.
I would have to assume, however, that the actual CONTENT that was being transmitted was encrypted prior to transmission.
Is there something about the data we're talking about that would make it somehow impossible to encrypt?
I do realize that the original poster didn't actually say anything about it one way or the other, but I'd have to assume that any hospital with a legal or compliance department would be ensuring that any data that would be covered under HIPA would be sujbect to that laws data security standards (See here ).
I'd give them $500 a year too, if only they would provide me with the secret side-band frequency that would let me bypass the quarterly Beg-A-Thon that they do here in eastern Pennsylvania (on WHYY..). Instead, I give my $60/year, and when they're in begging mode, I just switch to WNYC or WBEZ.
Jokes about "Flight of the Conchords" (and sheep) aside, New Zealand is a modern, English speaking, very politically free and open country.. They are very much a part of the "First World", but so far have avoided many of the more "Police State-y" laws and regulations that you seem eager to be away from.
They have a "Quality of Life" score just below the US and considerably better than the UK.
Doubletake software makes an enterprise ready, real time replication suite.
It does block level replication, so only the changed bits of, say, a 10Gb databse gets changed.. It uses on the fly en/decryption so that the data streams are somewhat smaller than they would be otherwise..
I work for a Fortune 10 company, and when we have a need for real-time data replication, this is what we use.
Yep.. I tried installing it last night on my (Intel based) Mac Book Pro, along with about 6 other things (an airport update, a new version of Safari, a camera update and a few other, less memorable ones..), and all but the Java update worked fine.. The Java update abended.
In the sense that at the time this theoretical subpoena was served, I'd hope that the file(s) in question would certainly NOT contain any infringing content, and would have matching CRC/MD5 data and time/date information to whatever file(s) were claimed to have been infringing, assuming this infringer had the tiniest bit of common sense and sense of self-preservation.
The real thing here is that so far, it does not appear that the RIAA or their MediaSentry stooges have actually been downloading the actual files from a single peer seed, instead relying broadly on the meta-data (tags and file sizes/dates) to substantiate their claims of infringement.
To be clear, I'm not a lawyer (nor am I even a "1L", for that matter..) nor do I have a particularly favorable opinion about broad copyright infringement, but at the same time, I really feel like I need to decry the fright tactics employed by the ??AA against broad swaths of people that they feel are vulnerable to this sort of blackmail. Anything that can be done to make their jobs more difficult is fine by me. The tactics that the ??AA use are perfect examples of "The ends do NOT justify the means".
I think you might have that backwards.. At least in the US court system (your experience may differ if you're not a USian...) THEY have to prove the offense, not the other way around (as your sentence seems to assert). I "could" assert that the file tagged as "Metallica" was in fact something completely innocent and non-infringing, and (in theory) THEY would have to PROVE it wasn't.
I do realize you said "best defense", but in the situation we're positing here, that may be one of the ONLY defenses, along with "I admit that it WAS my connection, your honor, but it wasn't ME that downloaded that song..".
>>In court you don't need mathematical proof, you need evidence. Arguing that an mp3 tagged as "metallica" was in fact a recording of >>you singing in the bathtub is not the best defense.
>Anyway, the RIAA cannot use my IP to incriminate me, because the tags my scrobbler send to them are not proof that I listened to that >music because plenty of music is mistagged.
#1.. I'm still not convinced that this is real.. Seems entirely too much like a prank to me.
#2. To your point regarding the Texas Penal Code, I'm not sure how relevant that is, assuming this is NOT a hoax. The TSA and DHS are Federal agencies, and as such are not overly constrained in the performance of their duties by STATE law... I'm pretty sure there are a whole slew of things that would be perfectly legal in a venue that was NOT controlled by federal (as opposed to state...) law that are thoroughly ILLEGAL under it. For example, around (not just within.. but on the roads immediately around it as well..) an airport, the TSA/DHS has the more or less absolute right to stop and THOROUGHLY search your car without individualized suspicion or probable cause, where outside of the confines of an airport (and its surrounds) that would require a warrant or probable cause.
As an aside, that phrase ("Kill them all, let god sort it out") dates back to the year 1209.. It was the answer given to the soldier during the sack of a city (Beziers) in France during the Albigensian Crusades.
The soldier reportedly asked the papal legate in charge of the military force that was chasing down a group of "heretics" (known as the Cathars) how they could tell the "good folks" (Catholics) of the city from the "bad" (Cathars).
The answer reportedly given was "Caedite eos! Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius" ("Kill them all! Surely the Lord discerns which ones are his").
That's because they're NOT pirates, except in the most strict of senses (Meaning in the verb sense of the word "To attack and rob (a ship at sea)").
These people are KIDNAPPERS. They hold the CREW hostage until they're paid off.. In most cases, they have absolutely no use for the cargo, as you mentioned above. People that hold other people captive until they're paid off are NOT pirates, they're kidnappers, plain and simple.
Stop calling these people "Pirates" (Yaar!) and start calling them "Kidnappers", and their whole air of being rogues slips away fairly rapidly.
It has always been a mantra of people that think about these things that a given PC laptop will be worth at least [the initial price delta] LESS in 2 years than a comparably (as much as possible) configured Mac.
Meaning:
$600 (when new) PC laptop is worth maybe $200 after 2 years.
$1000 (when new) MacBook is worth at lest $600 after that same 2 years.
If you believe that (And I do, personally.. based on Ebay prices of used laptops), then the whole thing is a wash.
The really neat question will be, IMO, things like the on-demand/live streaming service from places like Netflix and Comcast. I believe that they have physical infrastructure in NY, so that would mean they are impacted.
The movies and TV shows that they stream DO have a value, even if that value is calculated as a fraction of the monthly subscription one pays. How much of that monthly subscription should be the basis for the tax that NY wants to collect?
TFA is silent on this point, but I'm curious how they'd be able to implement something like that via legislation..
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but that misses the point.
The four people you listed didn't do the things they did BECAUSE they were Atheists or to advance an Atheistic viewpoint, they did it to advance their own cause, which usually equals "Staying alive and in total control".
OTOH, the far-right "Batshit Crazy" evangelicals (Be they Muslims, Christians or Jews) seem to take the positions that they do precisely BECAUSE, in their view, their religion requires them to take the action(s) that they do. If they weren't "Batshit Crazy", they wouldn't do the things that they do or advocate the things that they advocate.
Are you seriously quoting Wikipedia as an authoritative source?
Not that I necessarily doubt the veracity of the entry, but in an discussion such as this, a "real" source would really be preferable.
Wait.. How do these trucks fit into the tubes?
Swoosh!
Here, fixed that for you.. :)
http://lifehacker.com/348653/install-os-x-on-your-hackintosh-pc-no-hacking-required/
After only 2 years (from the perspective of the crew.. 3.75 years from the ground) at a constant 1g acceleration (you know, nice to have a sense of gravity for at least half of the trip..), you'll have traveled 2.9 light years.
After 5 years (using that same perspective) you'll have traveled nearly 83 light years (and nearly 84 years on the ground) and reached .99993 of c.
All of this is to say that from the perspective of the crew, this isn't necessarily a multi-lifetime trip.
See http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/rocket.html for more details
Yes, normally, FTP is an insecure protocol, with known weaknesses including a clear-text password.
I would have to assume, however, that the actual CONTENT that was being transmitted was encrypted prior to transmission.
Is there something about the data we're talking about that would make it somehow impossible to encrypt?
I do realize that the original poster didn't actually say anything about it one way or the other, but I'd have to assume that any hospital with a legal or compliance department would be ensuring that any data that would be covered under HIPA would be sujbect to that laws data security standards (See here ).
I'd give them $500 a year too, if only they would provide me with the secret side-band frequency that would let me bypass the quarterly Beg-A-Thon that they do here in eastern Pennsylvania (on WHYY..). Instead, I give my $60/year, and when they're in begging mode, I just switch to WNYC or WBEZ.
They have a "Quality of Life" score just below the US and considerably better than the UK.
Doubletake software makes an enterprise ready, real time replication suite.
It does block level replication, so only the changed bits of, say, a 10Gb databse gets changed.. It uses on the fly en/decryption so that the data streams are somewhat smaller than they would be otherwise..
I work for a Fortune 10 company, and when we have a need for real-time data replication, this is what we use.
Yep.. I tried installing it last night on my (Intel based) Mac Book Pro, along with about 6 other things (an airport update, a new version of Safari, a camera update and a few other, less memorable ones..), and all but the Java update worked fine.. The Java update abended.
In the sense that at the time this theoretical subpoena was served, I'd hope that the file(s) in question would certainly NOT contain any infringing content, and would have matching CRC/MD5 data and time/date information to whatever file(s) were claimed to have been infringing, assuming this infringer had the tiniest bit of common sense and sense of self-preservation.
The real thing here is that so far, it does not appear that the RIAA or their MediaSentry stooges have actually been downloading the actual files from a single peer seed, instead relying broadly on the meta-data (tags and file sizes/dates) to substantiate their claims of infringement.
To be clear, I'm not a lawyer (nor am I even a "1L", for that matter..) nor do I have a particularly favorable opinion about broad copyright infringement, but at the same time, I really feel like I need to decry the fright tactics employed by the ??AA against broad swaths of people that they feel are vulnerable to this sort of blackmail. Anything that can be done to make their jobs more difficult is fine by me. The tactics that the ??AA use are perfect examples of "The ends do NOT justify the means".
Oh, rest assured that it would be by the time they got their hands on it. :)
I think you might have that backwards.. At least in the US court system (your experience may differ if you're not a USian...) THEY have to prove the offense, not the other way around (as your sentence seems to assert). I "could" assert that the file tagged as "Metallica" was in fact something completely innocent and non-infringing, and (in theory) THEY would have to PROVE it wasn't.
I do realize you said "best defense", but in the situation we're positing here, that may be one of the ONLY defenses, along with "I admit that it WAS my connection, your honor, but it wasn't ME that downloaded that song..".
>>In court you don't need mathematical proof, you need evidence. Arguing that an mp3 tagged as "metallica" was in fact a recording of >>you singing in the bathtub is not the best defense.
>Anyway, the RIAA cannot use my IP to incriminate me, because the tags my scrobbler send to them are not proof that I listened to that >music because plenty of music is mistagged.
So...
2 things.
#1.. I'm still not convinced that this is real.. Seems entirely too much like a prank to me.
#2. To your point regarding the Texas Penal Code, I'm not sure how relevant that is, assuming this is NOT a hoax. The TSA and DHS are Federal agencies, and as such are not overly constrained in the performance of their duties by STATE law... I'm pretty sure there are a whole slew of things that would be perfectly legal in a venue that was NOT controlled by federal (as opposed to state...) law that are thoroughly ILLEGAL under it. For example, around (not just within.. but on the roads immediately around it as well..) an airport, the TSA/DHS has the more or less absolute right to stop and THOROUGHLY search your car without individualized suspicion or probable cause, where outside of the confines of an airport (and its surrounds) that would require a warrant or probable cause.
As an aside, that phrase ("Kill them all, let god sort it out") dates back to the year 1209.. It was the answer given to the soldier during the sack of a city (Beziers) in France during the Albigensian Crusades.
The soldier reportedly asked the papal legate in charge of the military force that was chasing down a group of "heretics" (known as the Cathars) how they could tell the "good folks" (Catholics) of the city from the "bad" (Cathars).
The answer reportedly given was "Caedite eos! Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius" ("Kill them all! Surely the Lord discerns which ones are his").
They don't need a "Safe Room", they need an "Escape Pod".
That's because they're NOT pirates, except in the most strict of senses (Meaning in the verb sense of the word "To attack and rob (a ship at sea)").
These people are KIDNAPPERS. They hold the CREW hostage until they're paid off.. In most cases, they have absolutely no use for the cargo, as you mentioned above. People that hold other people captive until they're paid off are NOT pirates, they're kidnappers, plain and simple.
Stop calling these people "Pirates" (Yaar!) and start calling them "Kidnappers", and their whole air of being rogues slips away fairly rapidly.
Nobody is going to post the obvious "SkyNet Lives" comment?
What kind of geeks are you (we)?
Meaning:
$600 (when new) PC laptop is worth maybe $200 after 2 years. $1000 (when new) MacBook is worth at lest $600 after that same 2 years.
If you believe that (And I do, personally.. based on Ebay prices of used laptops), then the whole thing is a wash.
Pretty sure Modell's is a sporting goods store in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic.. :)
Because I pay X dollars a month for Y speed (and am possibly subject to a monthly bandwith cap of W).
Nothing in that equation allows them to vary X or Y because the content (Z) is one they do not approve of.
End of story.
Unless you're in: India, Pakistan, Nepal or certain parts of New Zealand.
The really neat question will be, IMO, things like the on-demand/live streaming service from places like Netflix and Comcast. I believe that they have physical infrastructure in NY, so that would mean they are impacted.
The movies and TV shows that they stream DO have a value, even if that value is calculated as a fraction of the monthly subscription one pays. How much of that monthly subscription should be the basis for the tax that NY wants to collect?
TFA is silent on this point, but I'm curious how they'd be able to implement something like that via legislation..
Where you might very well get eaten by a grue.