This short and highly readable work can be regarded as opening the doors on the age of enlightenment. For related info, read Descartes' Bones an interesting read about Descartes was viewed in successive generations.
Without the war, FDR would have been voted out of office in 1940, and the recession would have stretched through most of the 1940s.
Nice theory, except we weren't attacked until the end of 1941. Most people were opposed to the war before then while FDR was actively trying to get us into the war.
Further, as for the theory that Obama will be hated in four years because he can't fix it, why was FDR reelected continuously through the depression which he allegedly couldn't/didn't fix?
I tend to agree but would also add (speculatively of course) that the satellite was carrying highly sensitive equipment that couldn't be risked being discovered. Protecting people was a convenient excuse.
Why do they need concrete barriers? What's wrong with normal metal rails?
"Jersey" barriers are designed so that a tire striking the bottom of the barrier will push the car back into the traffic lane more easily and avoid a rigid collision in many instances.
Not many people may realize this but the State of NY uses the same type of approach for management promotion exams. They were implemented about 10 years ago and they usually comprise at least half of your score on civil service promotion exams (the other half being job-specific scoring). The idea is that these interactive management tests are standardized ways of evaluating people's "management skills."
So far these tests are not very consistent and are not truly standardized or normalized. I personally have done very well and poorly just taking the same test twice. They seem to be more of random-number generators than anything.
Having said that, they're probably more benign than the usual promotion mechanisms in civil service or elsewhere. At least you get some good qualified people promoted as frequently as the poorly qualified incompetents.
One of the observations I have personally made about abortion and fetal rights is how the mainstream society handles naturally-occurring miscarriages. I don't know of anyone who names an early-term miscarriage. However, if it is a person, shouldn't receive a proper religious funeral? Similarly, the Catholic Church (with which I am most familiar) won't baptize an in-utero fetus, so again, if it were a person, shouldn't it be eligible?
I'm not sure where the line needs to be drawn and I have a deeply unsettled mind regarding abortion. However, I'd like some consistency in the logic being forced upon society by the religious right.
The poster is ignorant of a simple fact. Way more half of the jobs historically held by humans have already been replaced by technology. Think of all the manual labor of agriculture, hunting and gathering, textiles, etc. that have been replaced by technology. We do not have 50% unemployment today as a result. People will move on to new fields, using the technology to perform the routine and mechanical aspects of work. Read Robert Reich's (Clinton's first Labor Secretary) excellent book, The Work of Nations. He describes the need for better education today so we can all become "symbolic analysts" - i.e., people who think for work, not people who work for work.
The copyright infringement suit, filed in Manhattan federal court, seeks a court order requiring the defendants to block Internet communications that travel through their systems to and from the Listen4ever site.
I am a RoadRunner user and have no problem accessing the site. If AOLTW is going to sue somebody to block communications, why haven't they taken this "simple" measure within their own systems?
Everyone here is posting that this will cause major lawsuits in USA because some doctor will miss an important call and somebody will die. Hasn't anyone eaten is a nice restaurant recently? You know, the kind that doctors and lawyers frequent? Most of these restaurants these days require you to shut off your phone or even leave it at the coat check. They have been apparently immune to these (alleged) lawsuits or they wouldn't have the policy in place. And this from places with doctors and lawyers for a clientelle.
Come to think of it, these panels should be installed in restaurants, too. Not to mention classrooms, bathrooms, and lots of other places.
I wonder why EFF wants to know if Sega approves of amateur development on the platform? Isn't that irrelevant? Reverse engineering is supposedly covered under Fair Use, right?
It's not clear to me, did UPS internally flag this as a customs violation or did the the US Customs Agency do it? Does anyone out there know how this works? If it was US Customs, then it would seem to me that there would have to be an official appeal mechanism in place. However, if UPS did it internally, that would explain why they don't offer an appeal and why they won't give out info on who to contact.
I had a similar problem with my RoadRunner account a few years ago. The local sysadmin decided that a file I posted to a newsgroup was a copyright violation and cancelled my service. In fact, the file I posted was not copyright protected, but RR refused to hear my appeal and just ignored me.
For some time, the Slashdot crowd has been arguing that DVDs are software, not movies. They involve encryption schemes that are software driven and also include menus and extras that are also software driven. The reason its such a big deal is that if it is software, you have a legal right to make a backup copy for your archive. If it is a movie, you don't necessarily have that legal right. If it is software and you have a legal right to make a backup, then you might want to decrypt the disc in order to copy it. DeCSS allows you to do that, but the MPAA is fighting DeCSS with a vengeance. So you have a legal right to make a backup copy, but it is against the law to circumvent the copy protection device that is included with the disc. A classic Catch-22. Which law takes precedence? This whole issue just highlights the need for some clear definition of what constitutes fair use and what rights the consumer has over something they pay for.
The article states that e is the "best" notational base, and that three is really good. But how much better is "3" than "2"? How does "3" compare with "4"? If the improvement is only a small percentage, then we're probably looking at a purely academic discussion. However, if the improvement were truly significant, then maybe we should explore ways of improving circuit design... Based on one of the graphs in the article, the curves depicting base versus "compactness" seemed pretty flat around 2, 3, and e. That tells me that there's only a small improvement to be gained from a much more complicated system.
My only exception to stwilwebm's comment above is the phrase "quite possibly". IMNSHO, "not bloody likely" is the correct adverbial phrase.
Actually it is quite likely. People do it all the time. There are numerous instances of US POWs and hostages being filmed for propaganda purposes, but when the tape is analyzed, it becomes clear that they are blinking in Morse Code or some similar communication technique. Decoding their blinking usually indicates where/by whom they are being held, how many people are there, how they are being treated, etc. It would be very easy for a few key phrases to be codes telling some terrorist cell to activate. I know it sounds like a low-probability method of communicating, but I've heard a terrorist quoted that they only need a 10% success rate to be successful, whereas the USA needs a 100% success rate to prevent an attack. Even with low probability and low tech, the odds are in their favor over the long term.
You can now write anonymous messages on the web, not just brick walls and bathroom stalls.
Yeah, but now the poem "Here I sit broken hearted, tried to shit but only farted." just loses its comedic value. I say there is still a need to deface bathroom stalls.
This is clearly an interstate law enforcement issue, which is solely the role of the federal government.
Um.. no, it isn't. The "federal" goverment regulates interstate commerce, patents, and a very few other things. (Though they have this rather nasty tendency to shove a number of things under "interstate commerce", or to tax the states to force them to do their bidding.)
Let's read the eleventh amendment to The Constitution of the United States.
The judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by citizens of another state, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign state.Well, IANAL, but I'd say that the law cannot possibly do anything at all to him.
You clearly are NAL. The eleventh amendment simply prevents me from suing the state of California in a federal court. I must sue the State of California in a state court. This has nothing to do with a state filing criminal charges against a person who resides outside the state and committed an act outside the state. Further, the alleged violation of a California trade secrets law (which is what he's charged with) does fall under interstate commerce when the alleged action takes place outside the state.
suppose I pollute the Colorado River in Nevada or Arizona within levels granted by a state permit.
A caveat, but one of supreme importance. The states do not permit anything. They just happen to be able to make it illegal. The Declaration of Independence, and the ninth and tenth ammendments make this abundantly clear. No, it's not abuntantly clear. You're right, the states do make it illegal, but then grant permits for small amounts that are considered legal. In any event, what I'm allowed to do in one state cannot be prosecuted by a different state when the action occurs outside its borders. This is simply a question about jurisdiction. Since this is all about DeCSS, a federal case revolving around the DMCA is the appropriate forum, not a state law outside its jurisdiction.
This story was posted last night.
My post from that article follows:I would hope that a federal judge would exempt this guy from the case if he were to appeal it. This is clearly an interstate law enforcement issue, which is solely the role of the federal government. What is legal in one state but illegal in another opens you up to completely unreasonable attempts at applying jurisdiction. Making an analogy to the physical world, suppose I pollute the Colorado River in Nevada or Arizona within levels granted by a state permit, but a California permit would be more stringent, and that pollution then enters California territorial waters. The State of California has absolutely no jurisdiction whatsoever, so why do they think they do in this case? Doing so is a violation of the US Constitution.
I would hope that a federal judge would exempt this guy from the case if he were to appeal it. This is clearly an interstate law enforcement issue, which is solely the role of the federal government. What is legal in one state but illegal in another opens you up to completely unreasonable attempts at applying jurisdiction. Think of an analogy to the physical world, suppose I pollute the Colorado River in Nevada or Arizona within levels granted by a state permit, but a California permit would be more stringent, and that pollution then enters California territorial waters. The State of California has absolutely no jurisdiction whatsoever, so why do they think they do in this case? Doing so is a violation of the US Constitution.
Being a son of two high school teachers, I have to appreciate this clause in the law. Numerous times in the past year, one or both of my teachers has received either blatant threats, hate mail, or nuisance emails to their personal email accounts, after giving them out as a way to encourage kids to ask for help when stuck on homework. Police can/will/should do nothing unless there is a threat of harm, but it's a shame. I hope this law becomes widespread, well known, and strengthened by numerous precedents to the point that this kind of abuse declines substantially. Educators should not need to take the abuse they are often faced with. Why don't teachers set up a separate email account dedicated to homework issues? That way they can isolate their personal account from this sort of thing. Why is overly broad legislation necessary when much simpler, straight-forward measures will suffice? Further, if they are mostly just kids being stupid, then how is it different form the everyday world of teachers? What makes electronic communication deserving of any more regulation than other forms of communication? I just can't be convinced it's really necessary for the federal government to investigate these petty offenses with the Secret Service. If a real threat were to be sent, then the authorities can already act on it without any new laws or new powers.
Read up on his problems with fund raising irregularities. His bill is clearly pandering to the media for some headlines. One has to think about the disproportionate sentencing for a "cyber crime" when compared with things like illegal guns. Why is harrassment/vandalism/etc. a federal priority? Has this really become so widespread that a federal law is required? It reminds me of the supposed need for a flag burning amendment because of all those rampant flag burners running through the streets.
I don't know why everyone is surprised that nothing happened. Last night was just when the worm would turn itself back on. It's only beginning its propagation phase now. Even the article says we really won't know anything for up to three days. Since the worm spreads in a geometric progression, after a few days the growth will become unmanageable. That won't happen immediately though.....
Slashdot Mirror
This short and highly readable work can be regarded as opening the doors on the age of enlightenment. For related info, read Descartes' Bones an interesting read about Descartes was viewed in successive generations.
Without the war, FDR would have been voted out of office in 1940, and the recession would have stretched through most of the 1940s.
Nice theory, except we weren't attacked until the end of 1941. Most people were opposed to the war before then while FDR was actively trying to get us into the war.
Further, as for the theory that Obama will be hated in four years because he can't fix it, why was FDR reelected continuously through the depression which he allegedly couldn't/didn't fix?
I tend to agree but would also add (speculatively of course) that the satellite was carrying highly sensitive equipment that couldn't be risked being discovered. Protecting people was a convenient excuse.
Why do they need concrete barriers? What's wrong with normal metal rails?
"Jersey" barriers are designed so that a tire striking the bottom of the barrier will push the car back into the traffic lane more easily and avoid a rigid collision in many instances.
Not many people may realize this but the State of NY uses the same type of approach for management promotion exams. They were implemented about 10 years ago and they usually comprise at least half of your score on civil service promotion exams (the other half being job-specific scoring). The idea is that these interactive management tests are standardized ways of evaluating people's "management skills."
So far these tests are not very consistent and are not truly standardized or normalized. I personally have done very well and poorly just taking the same test twice. They seem to be more of random-number generators than anything.
Having said that, they're probably more benign than the usual promotion mechanisms in civil service or elsewhere. At least you get some good qualified people promoted as frequently as the poorly qualified incompetents.
Wading into the quagmire here...
One of the observations I have personally made about abortion and fetal rights is how the mainstream society handles naturally-occurring miscarriages. I don't know of anyone who names an early-term miscarriage. However, if it is a person, shouldn't receive a proper religious funeral? Similarly, the Catholic Church (with which I am most familiar) won't baptize an in-utero fetus, so again, if it were a person, shouldn't it be eligible?
I'm not sure where the line needs to be drawn and I have a deeply unsettled mind regarding abortion. However, I'd like some consistency in the logic being forced upon society by the religious right.
No, No, No!
It should be Zep-XP. But the professional version will cost you extra!
Just purchase the laptop online and have it shipped to my house. I'll meet you in NYC and hand it over. Really. Trust me.
The poster is ignorant of a simple fact. Way more half of the jobs historically held by humans have already been replaced by technology. Think of all the manual labor of agriculture, hunting and gathering, textiles, etc. that have been replaced by technology. We do not have 50% unemployment today as a result. People will move on to new fields, using the technology to perform the routine and mechanical aspects of work. Read Robert Reich's (Clinton's first Labor Secretary) excellent book, The Work of Nations. He describes the need for better education today so we can all become "symbolic analysts" - i.e., people who think for work, not people who work for work.
The copyright infringement suit, filed in Manhattan federal court, seeks a court order requiring the defendants to block Internet communications that travel through their systems to and from the Listen4ever site.
I am a RoadRunner user and have no problem accessing the site. If AOLTW is going to sue somebody to block communications, why haven't they taken this "simple" measure within their own systems?
Read the article! The flywheels are not stored on the train, but are attached to the tracks.
Come to think of it, these panels should be installed in restaurants, too. Not to mention classrooms, bathrooms, and lots of other places.
I wonder why EFF wants to know if Sega approves of amateur development on the platform? Isn't that irrelevant? Reverse engineering is supposedly covered under Fair Use, right?
I had a similar problem with my RoadRunner account a few years ago. The local sysadmin decided that a file I posted to a newsgroup was a copyright violation and cancelled my service. In fact, the file I posted was not copyright protected, but RR refused to hear my appeal and just ignored me.
For some time, the Slashdot crowd has been arguing that DVDs are software, not movies. They involve encryption schemes that are software driven and also include menus and extras that are also software driven. The reason its such a big deal is that if it is software, you have a legal right to make a backup copy for your archive. If it is a movie, you don't necessarily have that legal right. If it is software and you have a legal right to make a backup, then you might want to decrypt the disc in order to copy it. DeCSS allows you to do that, but the MPAA is fighting DeCSS with a vengeance. So you have a legal right to make a backup copy, but it is against the law to circumvent the copy protection device that is included with the disc. A classic Catch-22. Which law takes precedence? This whole issue just highlights the need for some clear definition of what constitutes fair use and what rights the consumer has over something they pay for.
The article states that e is the "best" notational base, and that three is really good. But how much better is "3" than "2"? How does "3" compare with "4"? If the improvement is only a small percentage, then we're probably looking at a purely academic discussion. However, if the improvement were truly significant, then maybe we should explore ways of improving circuit design... Based on one of the graphs in the article, the curves depicting base versus "compactness" seemed pretty flat around 2, 3, and e. That tells me that there's only a small improvement to be gained from a much more complicated system.
My only exception to stwilwebm's comment above is the phrase "quite possibly". IMNSHO, "not bloody likely" is the correct adverbial phrase.
Actually it is quite likely. People do it all the time. There are numerous instances of US POWs and hostages being filmed for propaganda purposes, but when the tape is analyzed, it becomes clear that they are blinking in Morse Code or some similar communication technique. Decoding their blinking usually indicates where/by whom they are being held, how many people are there, how they are being treated, etc. It would be very easy for a few key phrases to be codes telling some terrorist cell to activate. I know it sounds like a low-probability method of communicating, but I've heard a terrorist quoted that they only need a 10% success rate to be successful, whereas the USA needs a 100% success rate to prevent an attack. Even with low probability and low tech, the odds are in their favor over the long term.
You can now write anonymous messages on the web, not just brick walls and bathroom stalls. Yeah, but now the poem "Here I sit broken hearted, tried to shit but only farted." just loses its comedic value. I say there is still a need to deface bathroom stalls.
This is clearly an interstate law enforcement issue, which is solely the role of the federal government. Um.. no, it isn't. The "federal" goverment regulates interstate commerce, patents, and a very few other things. (Though they have this rather nasty tendency to shove a number of things under "interstate commerce", or to tax the states to force them to do their bidding.) Let's read the eleventh amendment to The Constitution of the United States. The judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by citizens of another state, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign state.Well, IANAL, but I'd say that the law cannot possibly do anything at all to him. You clearly are NAL. The eleventh amendment simply prevents me from suing the state of California in a federal court. I must sue the State of California in a state court. This has nothing to do with a state filing criminal charges against a person who resides outside the state and committed an act outside the state. Further, the alleged violation of a California trade secrets law (which is what he's charged with) does fall under interstate commerce when the alleged action takes place outside the state. suppose I pollute the Colorado River in Nevada or Arizona within levels granted by a state permit. A caveat, but one of supreme importance. The states do not permit anything. They just happen to be able to make it illegal. The Declaration of Independence, and the ninth and tenth ammendments make this abundantly clear. No, it's not abuntantly clear. You're right, the states do make it illegal, but then grant permits for small amounts that are considered legal. In any event, what I'm allowed to do in one state cannot be prosecuted by a different state when the action occurs outside its borders. This is simply a question about jurisdiction. Since this is all about DeCSS, a federal case revolving around the DMCA is the appropriate forum, not a state law outside its jurisdiction.
This story was posted last night. My post from that article follows:I would hope that a federal judge would exempt this guy from the case if he were to appeal it. This is clearly an interstate law enforcement issue, which is solely the role of the federal government. What is legal in one state but illegal in another opens you up to completely unreasonable attempts at applying jurisdiction. Making an analogy to the physical world, suppose I pollute the Colorado River in Nevada or Arizona within levels granted by a state permit, but a California permit would be more stringent, and that pollution then enters California territorial waters. The State of California has absolutely no jurisdiction whatsoever, so why do they think they do in this case? Doing so is a violation of the US Constitution.
I would hope that a federal judge would exempt this guy from the case if he were to appeal it. This is clearly an interstate law enforcement issue, which is solely the role of the federal government. What is legal in one state but illegal in another opens you up to completely unreasonable attempts at applying jurisdiction. Think of an analogy to the physical world, suppose I pollute the Colorado River in Nevada or Arizona within levels granted by a state permit, but a California permit would be more stringent, and that pollution then enters California territorial waters. The State of California has absolutely no jurisdiction whatsoever, so why do they think they do in this case? Doing so is a violation of the US Constitution.
Being a son of two high school teachers, I have to appreciate this clause in the law. Numerous times in the past year, one or both of my teachers has received either blatant threats, hate mail, or nuisance emails to their personal email accounts, after giving them out as a way to encourage kids to ask for help when stuck on homework. Police can/will/should do nothing unless there is a threat of harm, but it's a shame. I hope this law becomes widespread, well known, and strengthened by numerous precedents to the point that this kind of abuse declines substantially. Educators should not need to take the abuse they are often faced with. Why don't teachers set up a separate email account dedicated to homework issues? That way they can isolate their personal account from this sort of thing. Why is overly broad legislation necessary when much simpler, straight-forward measures will suffice? Further, if they are mostly just kids being stupid, then how is it different form the everyday world of teachers? What makes electronic communication deserving of any more regulation than other forms of communication? I just can't be convinced it's really necessary for the federal government to investigate these petty offenses with the Secret Service. If a real threat were to be sent, then the authorities can already act on it without any new laws or new powers.
Read up on his problems with fund raising irregularities. His bill is clearly pandering to the media for some headlines. One has to think about the disproportionate sentencing for a "cyber crime" when compared with things like illegal guns. Why is harrassment/vandalism/etc. a federal priority? Has this really become so widespread that a federal law is required? It reminds me of the supposed need for a flag burning amendment because of all those rampant flag burners running through the streets.
I don't know why everyone is surprised that nothing happened. Last night was just when the worm would turn itself back on. It's only beginning its propagation phase now. Even the article says we really won't know anything for up to three days. Since the worm spreads in a geometric progression, after a few days the growth will become unmanageable. That won't happen immediately though.....
LAME