The last time I intsalled NetBSD on a machine, we had to boot it off of a boot tape! So, relative to the typical Linux installation, I'd say it was pretty tough.:) I also remember having to do math to calculate the number of blocks or cylinders or something in order to get the partitions just the way I wanted them. Ofcourse, that was like a decade ago, so, I'm guessing that things have changed a bit since then...
Believe it or not, most people do not use peer to peer networks to get their music. Most people do not read Slashdot. Most people do not even have Internet access. Even if you could download all the music from P2P netowrks, people would still buy CDs. You can tape all the music off of the Radio and people still bought tapes. You could record the music off of MTV and people still bought the CDs. CDs are not going to go away just because of P2P netowrks. They may go down in price, but they will not stop being sold.
If the legal clouds lifted, you could subscribe to a legitimate file sharing service who could ensure that the songs had the correct metadata and were what they said they were.
Or, if you chose not to, you could accept some risk, and you could download them from some other source. Or, you could chose to mitigate some of that risk and use checksums or a Slashdotseque rating system to rate downloads as to their authenticity or any number of other trivial schemes like that. The only reason you don't see more of that is that people value being anonymous when they are illegally sharing copyrighted files than they value proving that the files are legitimately illegal (go figure).
When you are doing just in time manufacturing, having the lowest cost is not always the primary factor in choosing your supplier. You need to have a long term relationship with your supplier. You need to have a supplier that can deliever parts to you at a moments notice. It has to be synchronized very closely with your operation. You might be able to get a slightly better cost on paper by buying parts from another supplier, but did that supplier build a warehouse down the street from you just so they could get you your parts quicker? Does the other supplier have their computer sysems linked into yours, so that they can see your trends in your orders and forcast what parts you will be needing so that they can order them as soon as possible?
It's not as simple as just buying from the loweest cost supplier.
This is exactly the problem w/ free trade. Conservatives want it for obvious reasons and progressives want it since they mistakenly believe it will bring up the standards of living in the target countries. Although it does (bring up the std of living), it does so through achieving equilibrium. The problem with that is to achieve equilibrium, two sides need to meet in the middle and that means decrease in the std of living for the higher income group. To prevent this it requires a smart plan, one which is sorely lacking in this case. In the absence of this plan, the only people who benefit from free trade are the really rich as they income gap increases.
You do not understand the how Free Trade works. Bascially, Free Trade benefits both contries. It does not bring down the richer contry as you have suggested.
Let me explain how it works. Highly industrialized countries like the US are good at innovating. We are good at making new products. We are great at high tech. But once we have products to the point of mass-producing them, we are not so great. Our society is past the point of being able to provide cheap labor that can compete with 3rd world countries. But, even though some manufacturing jobs go to Mexico, say for example, Mexico's economy improves, and their middle class improves. As that occures, their demand for our products improves. Also, we make more profit on our products because they cost us less to produce. Overall, both countries benefit. Economically, at least.
Now, you can make a case that this does not really address human rights concerns. And you would be right about that. What about child factory workers and issues like that? What about the enviornment? What aboout mad cow disease? These issues concern me. But, I thinnk Free Trade is still a GOOD IDEA (TM). These other issues have to be worked out via whatever treaties/UN stuff/wars/etc we can use to work them out.
The U.S. Military out-sources all most all of their software development. I spent many years in the Air Force doing software development and now work as a contractor who is doing software development for a major Department of Defense personel system.
What the military does is require background checks of all the people working on such projects ranging from simple National Agency Checks, to more detailed background investigations required for a security clearence.
I don't think that there was always a constant ratio of good to bad books published. There was a time when the Bible was one of the few books you vould get your hands on. So, if you lived around that time, the ratio was pretty badly scewed (or goodly scewed, depending on your viewpoint).
The same is probably true of different generes. Unless you think that the first instance of any genre is always average, then you cannot support the claim that there was always the same ratio of good to bad.
Finally, there were probably always a lot of potential writers/movie makers/musicians that were bad. But, with increases in technology, the skill level and capital investment to create your own book/movie/web site/album has decreased. Hence, the ratio has probably went more towards there being more bad published artists over time.
But this is probably good overall, as this might lead to some kind of evolutionary leap in art. Like for every zillion lame independent film directors, there is going to be one Alfred Hitchcock who gets a shot at changing their art forever.
At least I hope that's how it works out. I'm tired of Britney Spears and the Boy band of the week.
I think that their method of sticking to the surface of a wall would not work very well in space due to the lack of atmosphere. What good is a fan in space?
If you believe that Software Engineering is just like other engineering disciplines, and that software projects could be accurately estimated if only we had qualified people, then you must read Fred Brooks classic "No Silver Bullet" article. This is (and should continue to be) required reading in all Software Engineering classes.
No Silver Bullet
In any case, software engineering is still ill-understand and fundamentally "fuzzy". People have unrealistic expectations about how software can be retrofitted. Despite out best efforts, I do not see software cost estimation becoming more precise in the near future.
Ofcourse, if you do 99% of the software development without coding, and then do clean room development for the coding, you may be able to estimate that phase fairly well. But, the overall project will still take a very difficult to determine ammount of time as a whole.
Given IBM's comitment to Linux, how is IBM's relationship with Microsoft being affected? Is there any pressure from Microsoft to be less committed to Linux?
Keep in mind that there is NO FAIR USE PROVISION in the DMCA. What does this mean? In terms of the law itself, it does not matter whether or not you are violating the copyright by using a tool. It only matters that you are circumventing the technology that the copyright owner is using to protect their copyright. There is no fair-use provision in the DMCA at all. The only provision that has been made at all is an exception for people reverse-engineering lists of banned sites in software that restricts what sites you can go to on the Internet.
Now, the fact that there is no fair-use exception means that when the copyright expires, it will still be illegal to distribute tools that circumvent the copyright-protection mechanisms if the tool also bipasses the copyright protection of other works. If you accept that such tools will be legal in the future, then you must accept that all such tools are legal now, since we can create DVDs and explicitly waive copyright protection.
The best analogy I can come up with that clears up this whole thing is as follows:
Imagine that you write a book, and you print it with a font that is so small that it can not be read without magnification of some kind. Now, someone comes along and invents a magnifying glass, so that they can read your book that they have purchased. If you are worried about illegal copies of your book, then you probably would do better to try to ban photocopiers than magnifying glasses. This is a simple example that I think a layman could understand.
And as far as code being art goes, why not read them some Perl poetry from the Oriely Perl book?
>To all those claiming MS sucks, Linux rules... >Keep in mind that the reason why you don't see >people stealing credit card information off >Linux hosts is because few use Linux for this >purpose. Specifically I'm referring to the data ?>from the Netcraft SSL server report which shows >over 50% of commerce websites run Microsoft, and >only a very small percentage run Linux.
Let's take a closer look.
First of all, note that you are looking at the statistic only for the US, where Microsoft has much more of a monopoly than in other countries. Look at the statistics for Germany, or Japan, for example, and you will see that more SSL sites use Linux than Windows in those countries.
See http://www.netcraft.com/survey/
>If they were all running Linux, the attackers >would be grabbing root instead and sifting to >MySQL databases.
Well, I'm not sure about Linux specifically, but it is clear from the data that as of Feb 2001 59.99 of the web servers out there are running Apache. Only 19.63 are running Mircosodt-IIS.
It is probably true that more servers that are processing credit card transactions are running Windows. I base this on the statistics from the Netcraft Survey where it says,"English speaking countries make up the lion's share of secure servers, with around 75% of ecommerce sites registered in the US, UK, Canada, and Australia."
Since the hackers are presumably looking for a combination of weak security and $ to be earned,they are targeting Windows machines that process credit card transactions.
Ofcourse, what is surprising is the fact that the FBI says that these hackers are being extremely successful. Yes, they probably are targeting a disproportionate number of Windows machines. But, simply saying that if they were targeting Linux e-commerce servers, they would get the same results is not logically compelling. Mabey they would. Then again, mabey they wouldn't.
What is clear is that running an e-commerce site using Windows, and not patching your software with the latest security fixes poses a very significant risk to your customers.
In order to determine the Constitutionality of this law, we should follow a well-defined process. I'm basing my anaylsis of this on the general guidelines at
http://www.ssrn.com/update/lsn/cyberspace/csl_less ons.html
under the free speech section
First, we must determine the role that the government is acting under. Is the government acting as a subsidizer? Or is it acting as a sovereign? An argument can be made that it is merely acting as a subsidizer. However, I doubt that will fly in the case of a library. The government has more freedom when it is paying someone to create speech on behalf of the government. For example, if the government pays someone to develop an anti-drugs campaign, they have the freedom to do so. However, no one would reasably consider the materials in a library to represent the government's viewpoint. Instead, libraries traditionally represent a wide range of ideas. Hence, I think the court would give full protection to the library. Now, as it was mentioned before, in the case of ordering books, the library has only limited resources. Hence, that is a lot different than actually placing a content-based restriction on the use of the Internet.
Next, we must consider whether the restriction is based on content. Clearly in this case, there is a content-based restriction. Because this law makes a content-based restriction on free speech, it is presumptively unconstitutional. To justify it, the government must show that there is a compelling government interest, and that the restriction is the least restrictive alternative to maintaining that interest.
Now, in terms of preventing obscenity, the government can do that. There is no question that the government can prohibit obscenity.
However, speech that is "harmful to minors" is another story alltogether. I think a careful reading of ACLU v Reno is in order here. I'll let you make up your own mind. However, the way I read it, in order for such a provision to be constitutional, it must contain a clause that specifically exempts material that has "serious social, scientific, or literary value." (This is one of the prongs of the obscenity test established in Miller v California.)
The case where indecency standards are upheld have been in forums that recieve only the most limited forms of 1st Ammendment protection (such as broadcasting), or cases where the law was not targeted at limiting the speech itself, but rather at the secondary effects of the speech (such as in the case of a zoning ordinance prohibiting adult theatres in residential neighborhoods in order to preserve the property value in those neighborhoods.)
Why is broadcasting (i.e. radio) different from the Internet? Because you are pretty likely to have kids inadvertantly hear a radio broadcast, but the Internet requires affirmitive steps in order for that to happen. So, although it is constitutional for the FCC to require indecent material to be played after 10PM, it is not constitutional to prohibit people from calling dial-a-porn numbers (because the dial-a-porn numkbers have little risk of someone accidently hearing their contents.) In ACLU v Reno, the supreme court felt that the Intrernet gets full protection, and that it requires affirmative steps for someone to reach indecent content on the Internet. Thus, the Internet is given full 1st Ammendment protection.
Also, requireing filtering software is not the least restrictive alternative. Library's could just as easily educate their users that accessing obscene content was not permissable. Finally, it would be pretty easy to show that filtering software was too restrictive. Hence, any kind of balancing test would work against the government.
Unlike libraries, I think schools could be forced to install filtering software. Because they are acting on behalf of the parents.
I could spell out what cases I'm basing my analysis on if anyone is interested.
Randy
P.S. I'm not a lawyer.
Say I write an application that asks for a password and then displays a document. I then send you this program via e-mail. Under this law, it is illegal to make a tool that will decrypt my e-mail without my permission (which ofcourse I won't give to the NSA or whoever.)
OK. So, now you get to flip all of the governments arguments against encryption against them. Now terrorists, child pornographers, etc. have a legal means to prevent you from decrypting their communications! Let's see how the government likes that...
There was once a case where even though the military had properly licensed some software, they did not ship the correct license file with the machines and so all around the world, machines in a military computer system started refusing to function. Luckily, in this case, the componet was just a word processor and spreadsheet application. But, what if it had been something more mission critical?
Make Individual Rights your first concern
on
Should You Vote?
·
· Score: 1
I am concerned about our government and our society sacrificing individual rights. From what I've heard, the next president will probably get the oppurtunity to appoint several Supreme Court justices. Who gets appointed to the Supreme Court will have a huge impact on our country. It will quite possibly have a bigger impact on individual rights than any presidential policies or campaign promises.
Whatever candidate you support, I was wondering if/. readers could agree that concerns over individual rights should be the chief issue that people use to make the decision over who gets elected.
If we could agree on that much at least, then we would go a long way towards safeguarding our freedoms.
Make Individual Rights your first concern
on
Should You Vote?
·
· Score: 1
I am concerned about our government and our society sacrificing individual rights. From what I've heard, the next president will probably get the oppurtunity to appoint several Supreme Court justices. Who gets appointed to the Supreme Court will have a huge impact on our country. It will quite possibly have a bigger impact on individual rights than any presidential policies or campaign promises.
Whatever candidate you support, I was wondering if/. readers could agree that concerns over individual rights should be the chief issue that people use to make the decision over who gets elected.
If we could agree on that much at least, then we would go a long way towards safeguarding our freedoms.
I've been working with Linux (as a hobby mostly) for about the last 6 years. I have a MS in Computer Science. However, very little of my actual work experience uses Linux. So, eventually, when I leave my current job, I'd like to do some software development under Linux. The problem is I'm not really getting enough experience in my current job doing Linux stuff.
My solution to the problem was to get my RHCE certification as well as start a website for people studying for the RHCE certification (www.rhce2b.com). As I develop software for my website (mostly in Perl) I'm gaining experience that hopefully employers will value when I look for a new job. I think that there are many people who use Linux mainly as a hobby, that are stuck with Windows NT at work and would like to switch to a job where they could do more work with Linux. The problem is that it is difficult to gain the kind of experience that shows up on a resume.
You can always do Linux as a hobby, but it is difficult for an employer to tell if you really know what you are doing or not when your resume has no direct experience. Hence, for people in my position, I think getting a certification such as the RHCE certification could be useful. But, at the same time, people should do everything they can to increase their experience in other ways as well. That way,you have both the certification and the skills, as opposed ot just having the certification.
OK, so 7.0 has USB support, and a new gcc. What else does it have? Does it include the new KDE? Helix Gnome? The articles linked to from this discussion seem to be extremelt sketchy. Does it come with Star Office (or something like it)?
I first heard about PayPal when someone who like my website offered to send me a few dollars if I had a PayPal account. So I signed up and they sent me money! (They actually sent me $10, which made me really feel good.)
I put up a link to PayPal on my site, but it hasn't generated any referrals yet. So far no one else has tipped me either.:(
What PayPal should do next is set up some kind of interface for nonprofit organizations. So, let's say you go to the website of a non-profit organization and you send them money via PayPal. PayPal should be able to keep track of all the donations that you have made and generate reports that indicate that it went to a non-profit organization and have their little number thingy. That way, it would increase people's ability to easily support charity.
I agree. This is not big news. I think it was a good move on Corel's part. What they sold off was all the expense of having to manage that part of the business. What they kept was rights to use all the images anyway, as well as getting a stake in the portential profits. See, Cowpland is not as stupid as we thought. As far as their distribution goes... Well, according to some, it is the Second most popular Linux distribution. That's pretty impressive. Personally, I don't trust Cowpland farther than I can throw him. But, I do think that Corel's Linux distribution is pretty good.
Slashdot Mirror
The last time I intsalled NetBSD on a machine, we had to boot it off of a boot tape! So, relative to the typical Linux installation, I'd say it was pretty tough. :) I also remember having to do math to calculate the number of blocks or cylinders or something in order to get the partitions just the way I wanted them. Ofcourse, that was like a decade ago, so, I'm guessing that things have changed a bit since then...
Believe it or not, most people do not use peer to peer networks to get their music. Most people do not read Slashdot. Most people do not even have Internet access. Even if you could download all the music from P2P netowrks, people would still buy CDs. You can tape all the music off of the Radio and people still bought tapes. You could record the music off of MTV and people still bought the CDs. CDs are not going to go away just because of P2P netowrks. They may go down in price, but they will not stop being sold.
If the legal clouds lifted, you could subscribe to a legitimate file sharing service who could ensure that the songs had the correct metadata and were what they said they were.
Or, if you chose not to, you could accept some risk, and you could download them from some other source. Or, you could chose to mitigate some of that risk and use checksums or a Slashdotseque rating system to rate downloads as to their authenticity or any number of other trivial schemes like that. The only reason you don't see more of that is that people value being anonymous when they are illegally sharing copyrighted files than they value proving that the files are legitimately illegal (go figure).
When you are doing just in time manufacturing, having the lowest cost is not always the primary factor in choosing your supplier. You need to have a long term relationship with your supplier. You need to have a supplier that can deliever parts to you at a moments notice. It has to be synchronized very closely with your operation. You might be able to get a slightly better cost on paper by buying parts from another supplier, but did that supplier build a warehouse down the street from you just so they could get you your parts quicker? Does the other supplier have their computer sysems linked into yours, so that they can see your trends in your orders and forcast what parts you will be needing so that they can order them as soon as possible?
It's not as simple as just buying from the loweest cost supplier.
You do not understand the how Free Trade works. Bascially, Free Trade benefits both contries. It does not bring down the richer contry as you have suggested.
Let me explain how it works. Highly industrialized countries like the US are good at innovating. We are good at making new products. We are great at high tech. But once we have products to the point of mass-producing them, we are not so great. Our society is past the point of being able to provide cheap labor that can compete with 3rd world countries. But, even though some manufacturing jobs go to Mexico, say for example, Mexico's economy improves, and their middle class improves. As that occures, their demand for our products improves. Also, we make more profit on our products because they cost us less to produce. Overall, both countries benefit. Economically, at least.
Now, you can make a case that this does not really address human rights concerns. And you would be right about that. What about child factory workers and issues like that? What about the enviornment? What aboout mad cow disease? These issues concern me. But, I thinnk Free Trade is still a GOOD IDEA (TM). These other issues have to be worked out via whatever treaties/UN stuff/wars/etc we can use to work them out.
Randy
I believe that most acts of terrorism in the U.S. are caused by U.S. citizens. Does anyone have any statistics on this?
Keep in mind that terrorism includes things like spiking trees and bombing abortion clinics...
The U.S. Military out-sources all most all of their software development. I spent many years in the Air Force doing software development and now work as a contractor who is doing software development for a major Department of Defense personel system.
What the military does is require background checks of all the people working on such projects ranging from simple National Agency Checks, to more detailed background investigations required for a security clearence.
I don't think that there was always a constant ratio of good to bad books published. There was a time when the Bible was one of the few books you vould get your hands on. So, if you lived around that time, the ratio was pretty badly scewed (or goodly scewed, depending on your viewpoint).
The same is probably true of different generes. Unless you think that the first instance of any genre is always average, then you cannot support the claim that there was always the same ratio of good to bad.
Finally, there were probably always a lot of potential writers/movie makers/musicians that were bad. But, with increases in technology, the skill level and capital investment to create your own book/movie/web site/album has decreased. Hence, the ratio has probably went more towards there being more bad published artists over time.
But this is probably good overall, as this might lead to some kind of evolutionary leap in art. Like for every zillion lame independent film directors, there is going to be one Alfred Hitchcock who gets a shot at changing their art forever.
At least I hope that's how it works out. I'm tired of Britney Spears and the Boy band of the week.
Randy
I think that their method of sticking to the surface of a wall would not work very well in space due to the lack of atmosphere. What good is a fan in space?
If we really wanted realism, we'd use the Dance Dance Revolution footpad and reall landmines.
Now that would be realistic!
No Silver Bullet In any case, software engineering is still ill-understand and fundamentally "fuzzy". People have unrealistic expectations about how software can be retrofitted. Despite out best efforts, I do not see software cost estimation becoming more precise in the near future.
Ofcourse, if you do 99% of the software development without coding, and then do clean room development for the coding, you may be able to estimate that phase fairly well. But, the overall project will still take a very difficult to determine ammount of time as a whole.
I was just wondering what the next step is?
Will the company release thier code? Can the FSF sue for damages?
Given IBM's comitment to Linux, how is IBM's relationship with Microsoft being affected? Is there any pressure from Microsoft to be less committed to Linux?
:)
Keep in mind that there is NO FAIR USE PROVISION in the DMCA. What does this mean? In terms of the law itself, it does not matter whether or not you are violating the copyright by using a tool. It only matters that you are circumventing the technology that the copyright owner is using to protect their copyright. There is no fair-use provision in the DMCA at all. The only provision that has been made at all is an exception for people reverse-engineering lists of banned sites in software that restricts what sites you can go to on the Internet.
Now, the fact that there is no fair-use exception means that when the copyright expires, it will still be illegal to distribute tools that circumvent the copyright-protection mechanisms if the tool also bipasses the copyright protection of other works. If you accept that such tools will be legal in the future, then you must accept that all such tools are legal now, since we can create DVDs and explicitly waive copyright protection.
The best analogy I can come up with that clears up this whole thing is as follows:
Imagine that you write a book, and you print it with a font that is so small that it can not be read without magnification of some kind. Now, someone comes along and invents a magnifying glass, so that they can read your book that they have purchased. If you are worried about illegal copies of your book, then you probably would do better to try to ban photocopiers than magnifying glasses. This is a simple example that I think a layman could understand.
And as far as code being art goes, why not read them some Perl poetry from the Oriely Perl book?
Randy
http://www.rhce2b.com
>To all those claiming MS sucks, Linux rules... >Keep in mind that the reason why you don't see >people stealing credit card information off >Linux hosts is because few use Linux for this >purpose. Specifically I'm referring to the data ?>from the Netcraft SSL server report which shows >over 50% of commerce websites run Microsoft, and >only a very small percentage run Linux. Let's take a closer look. First of all, note that you are looking at the statistic only for the US, where Microsoft has much more of a monopoly than in other countries. Look at the statistics for Germany, or Japan, for example, and you will see that more SSL sites use Linux than Windows in those countries. See http://www.netcraft.com/survey/ >If they were all running Linux, the attackers >would be grabbing root instead and sifting to >MySQL databases. Well, I'm not sure about Linux specifically, but it is clear from the data that as of Feb 2001 59.99 of the web servers out there are running Apache. Only 19.63 are running Mircosodt-IIS. It is probably true that more servers that are processing credit card transactions are running Windows. I base this on the statistics from the Netcraft Survey where it says ,"English speaking countries make up the lion's share of secure servers, with around 75% of ecommerce sites registered in the US, UK, Canada, and Australia."
Since the hackers are presumably looking for a combination of weak security and $ to be earned,they are targeting Windows machines that process credit card transactions.
Ofcourse, what is surprising is the fact that the FBI says that these hackers are being extremely successful. Yes, they probably are targeting a disproportionate number of Windows machines. But, simply saying that if they were targeting Linux e-commerce servers, they would get the same results is not logically compelling. Mabey they would. Then again, mabey they wouldn't.
What is clear is that running an e-commerce site using Windows, and not patching your software with the latest security fixes poses a very significant risk to your customers.
In order to determine the Constitutionality of this law, we should follow a well-defined process. I'm basing my anaylsis of this on the general guidelines at http://www.ssrn.com/update/lsn/cyberspace/csl_less ons.html
under the free speech section
First, we must determine the role that the government is acting under. Is the government acting as a subsidizer? Or is it acting as a sovereign? An argument can be made that it is merely acting as a subsidizer. However, I doubt that will fly in the case of a library. The government has more freedom when it is paying someone to create speech on behalf of the government. For example, if the government pays someone to develop an anti-drugs campaign, they have the freedom to do so. However, no one would reasably consider the materials in a library to represent the government's viewpoint. Instead, libraries traditionally represent a wide range of ideas. Hence, I think the court would give full protection to the library. Now, as it was mentioned before, in the case of ordering books, the library has only limited resources. Hence, that is a lot different than actually placing a content-based restriction on the use of the Internet.
Next, we must consider whether the restriction is based on content. Clearly in this case, there is a content-based restriction. Because this law makes a content-based restriction on free speech, it is presumptively unconstitutional. To justify it, the government must show that there is a compelling government interest, and that the restriction is the least restrictive alternative to maintaining that interest.
Now, in terms of preventing obscenity, the government can do that. There is no question that the government can prohibit obscenity.
However, speech that is "harmful to minors" is another story alltogether. I think a careful reading of ACLU v Reno is in order here. I'll let you make up your own mind. However, the way I read it, in order for such a provision to be constitutional, it must contain a clause that specifically exempts material that has "serious social, scientific, or literary value." (This is one of the prongs of the obscenity test established in Miller v California.)
The case where indecency standards are upheld have been in forums that recieve only the most limited forms of 1st Ammendment protection (such as broadcasting), or cases where the law was not targeted at limiting the speech itself, but rather at the secondary effects of the speech (such as in the case of a zoning ordinance prohibiting adult theatres in residential neighborhoods in order to preserve the property value in those neighborhoods.)
Why is broadcasting (i.e. radio) different from the Internet? Because you are pretty likely to have kids inadvertantly hear a radio broadcast, but the Internet requires affirmitive steps in order for that to happen. So, although it is constitutional for the FCC to require indecent material to be played after 10PM, it is not constitutional to prohibit people from calling dial-a-porn numbers (because the dial-a-porn numkbers have little risk of someone accidently hearing their contents.) In ACLU v Reno, the supreme court felt that the Intrernet gets full protection, and that it requires affirmative steps for someone to reach indecent content on the Internet. Thus, the Internet is given full 1st Ammendment protection.
Also, requireing filtering software is not the least restrictive alternative. Library's could just as easily educate their users that accessing obscene content was not permissable. Finally, it would be pretty easy to show that filtering software was too restrictive. Hence, any kind of balancing test would work against the government.
Unlike libraries, I think schools could be forced to install filtering software. Because they are acting on behalf of the parents.
I could spell out what cases I'm basing my analysis on if anyone is interested.
Randy
P.S. I'm not a lawyer.
Say I write an application that asks for a password and then displays a document. I then send you this program via e-mail. Under this law, it is illegal to make a tool that will decrypt my e-mail without my permission (which ofcourse I won't give to the NSA or whoever.) OK. So, now you get to flip all of the governments arguments against encryption against them. Now terrorists, child pornographers, etc. have a legal means to prevent you from decrypting their communications! Let's see how the government likes that...
There was once a case where even though the military had properly licensed some software, they did not ship the correct license file with the machines and so all around the world, machines in a military computer system started refusing to function. Luckily, in this case, the componet was just a word processor and spreadsheet application. But, what if it had been something more mission critical?
I am concerned about our government and our society sacrificing individual rights. From what I've heard, the next president will probably get the oppurtunity to appoint several Supreme Court justices. Who gets appointed to the Supreme Court will have a huge impact on our country. It will quite possibly have a bigger impact on individual rights than any presidential policies or campaign promises. Whatever candidate you support, I was wondering if /. readers could agree that concerns over individual rights should be the chief issue that people use to make the decision over who gets elected.
If we could agree on that much at least, then we would go a long way towards safeguarding our freedoms.
I am concerned about our government and our society sacrificing individual rights. From what I've heard, the next president will probably get the oppurtunity to appoint several Supreme Court justices. Who gets appointed to the Supreme Court will have a huge impact on our country. It will quite possibly have a bigger impact on individual rights than any presidential policies or campaign promises.
Whatever candidate you support, I was wondering if
If we could agree on that much at least, then we would go a long way towards safeguarding our freedoms.
.rights property intelectual my on infringing companies suing begin can I that so patent my approve Please
.readability increase greatly will This. this like of instead right to left from read text the have to is idea The.
Summary
My solution to the problem was to get my RHCE certification as well as start a website for people studying for the RHCE certification (www.rhce2b.com). As I develop software for my website (mostly in Perl) I'm gaining experience that hopefully employers will value when I look for a new job. I think that there are many people who use Linux mainly as a hobby, that are stuck with Windows NT at work and would like to switch to a job where they could do more work with Linux. The problem is that it is difficult to gain the kind of experience that shows up on a resume.
You can always do Linux as a hobby, but it is difficult for an employer to tell if you really know what you are doing or not when your resume has no direct experience. Hence, for people in my position, I think getting a certification such as the RHCE certification could be useful. But, at the same time, people should do everything they can to increase their experience in other ways as well. That way,you have both the certification and the skills, as opposed ot just having the certification.
Also, How do network installs work with 2 CD's?
Just some sIuNbSlIiGmHiTnFaUlL thoughts.
Randy
Randy.flood@rhce2b.com www.rhce2b.com
I first heard about PayPal when someone who like my website offered to send me a few dollars if I had a PayPal account. So I signed up and they sent me money! (They actually sent me $10, which made me really feel good.) I put up a link to PayPal on my site, but it hasn't generated any referrals yet. So far no one else has tipped me either. :(
What PayPal should do next is set up some kind of interface for nonprofit organizations. So, let's say you go to the website of a non-profit organization and you send them money via PayPal. PayPal should be able to keep track of all the donations that you have made and generate reports that indicate that it went to a non-profit organization and have their little number thingy. That way, it would increase people's ability to easily support charity.
I agree. This is not big news. I think it was a good move on Corel's part. What they sold off was all the expense of having to manage that part of the business. What they kept was rights to use all the images anyway, as well as getting a stake in the portential profits. See, Cowpland is not as stupid as we thought. As far as their distribution goes... Well, according to some, it is the Second most popular Linux distribution. That's pretty impressive. Personally, I don't trust Cowpland farther than I can throw him. But, I do think that Corel's Linux distribution is pretty good.