A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
I suppose you can argue that the 2nd amendment was conceived in the age of the single shot musket so should not be applied to more lethal weapons. But the arms the founders had in mind were also the most lethal weapons of the time and the wording is intentionally vague. It does not say "muskets" but "Arms".
ANAL, but my interpretation of the 2nd amendment is that I should be allowed to own ("keep") an ICBM ("Arms") and carry it around ("bear"). Although it is unclear if need to be part of a "well regulated militia" or if it is enough that I am part of the"people". I know that the courts don't agree with me, and in fact I am strongly in favor of gun control, but I believe that there needs to be a constitutional amendment to reverse the 2nd amendment first. IMHO, it is better to uphold an anachronistic 2nd amendment (and support it's repeal by democratic means) than to selectively apply it at the whim of the courts and thus create precedent for selectively applying our other freedoms.
So to recap, I'm not a gun nut. In fact I have never owned a gun, but the 2nd amendment is part of the US Constitution and should not be shifted by political winds if the Constitution as a whole is to have any meaning.
Wassenaar "harmonization" threatens to make this true, but currently Finland atleast has very liberal encryption laws and hence is the source of ssh and the host of many open source encryption servers. --
Slashdot moderators may indeed be racist. But at best (and at worst) they reflect the users of slashdot. Moderators are chosen largely at random. In my opinion this is the greatest weakness of the moderation system since it amplifies conformist views. The net effect is
This is indeed a great article. The printable version is easier to read, IMHO, since it doesn't involve relentless clicking. --
Re:From the folks who brought you light from pickl
on
The Factoid
·
· Score: 1
That's some funny stuff. And suprisingly good technical writing as well. --
Happy lawyers? Maybe not.
on
The Factoid
·
· Score: 1
Or not. Consider the lawyers at Microsoft who probably wish that email was not archived, or the White House advisory staffwhich tries to write down and record as little as possible to avoid the evidence being subpoenaed.
Remember that there are lawyers are on both sides of every case and that hard facts, even if exculpatory in the matter at hand, are often embarrassing or damaging in other ways. --
Read "Funes the Memorious" a short story by Jorge Luis Borges. In it he descirbes a person, Funes, who not only rembers everything he has seen, his perception is so acute that he sees each moment as separate and disjoint from all others. In short he had infinite perception and retention but no association. It is contained in Ficciones. I highly recommend the entire book and all of his work. If you have ever pondered infinity or parallel existences, you need to read Borges. --
The GPL only requires that the source code is available at the cost of the physicsal medium, not that it accompanies the executable.
From the GPL
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
So if the LSL provide a pointer to a FTP server or optional physical source distribution they are fine. --
MS has a very simple paradigm...to be at the top of every software category. Until a company comes along with that same paradigm, MS will be the top SW company in the world.
MS will not be beaten at it's own game. It will be beaten when the paradigm shift.
BTW, eBay runs off Sun...I guess that means they put the 'o' in DOH!.
While this is true, I don't believe that eBay's troubles were blamed on hardware or OS failure. It is arguable that E10K's are too hard to administer, but I don't know how hard it would be to administer an NT solution with near the reliablity and power.
The slashdot article on Starbridge systems is here. You can find all the slashdot archives at older stuff.
As with most of the Slashdot commenters, I dont find Starbridge very credible. I'll believe it when it's sitting on my desk crunching one of my programs and not until then. --
here's van Eck's original paper from Computers & Security, 1985 Vol. 4.
You will find a lot more information under "Tempest radiation" from the TEMPEST standards for EMF emmission reductions.
I found an article from the December 98 Scientific American which mentions a Microsoft connection. It was featured on Slashdot but only has one remaining comment attached to it (bit rot or conspiracy?)
here's van Eck's original paper from Computers & Security, 1985 Vol. 4.
You will find a lot more information under "Tempest radiation" named for the TEMPEST standards for EMF emmission reductions.
I found an article from the December 98 Scientific American which mentions a Microsoft connection. It was featured on Slashdot but only has one remaining comment attached to it (bit rot or conspiracy?)
If you accept faster than light travel and instantaneous holographic communications accross vast distances, surely you can accept that quantum computing (or some unforseen technology) has made encryption obsolete. Science fiction is seldom about real technological progression, it us usually a projection of society and myth onto a new landscape so that we can see a different side of ourselves.
I like Star Wars in general because it does not attempt to explain the technologies that are in use. Star Trek tends to explain the technologies which IMHO brings unnecessary attention to their inplausibility. I was annoyed that Lucas felt it necessary to go against this trend to give a (rather weak) explanation of the force, but I'm quite glad he didn't give psuedo-science explanations to other things like force shields and those magic blue balls. --
Not to be a wet blanket, but it seems to me that there is no definitive difference between 700 IT users and 700 computer users, the former just being a fancy word for the latter. --
As many have pointed out, there is no OS currently in wide use that would prevent ill-informed users from damaging themselves and others. There have been several proposals including.
These all are valid and have their place. I think that most users have no need to run any executable that is not provided by their network adminstrator. Those that do are probably intelligent enough to take reasonable precautions.
Hence the following precautions would be reasonable:
Restrict the executable loader to only load programs owned by root. (For extra points, integrate a virus checker in the loader).
All user owned executables would run in a Java-like sandbox which would not allow file access. This would have to include any scripting or macro functions as well.
Clearly, well designed OSes and programs are essential for any solution to work and infinite undo is great for other reasons, but it is important to change our view of the OS and realize that most users in a business setting do not need, nor should they have, full access to a general use OS. --
Think about this though. If you write a program and spent a lot of time on it, and somebody finds out it's got a bug that prevented them from saving a large document and they lost it, should you be sued?
Absolutely. If there is a bug that was due to clear negligence on the part of the programming/QA team then they should be held responsible. At very least you should have to obtain a signed disclaimer of warranty if you want to sell software without the legal protection.
If the industry worked like this, nobody would program anything out of fear of being sued by some litigous clown.
While I agree that some limits (Perhaps only actual damages etc.) would be in order, the system now is terrible since it shifts the cost for bad software to the user. If the cost of bad software were on the hands of the programmer, then less software would be written, but the software that was written would be of far greater quality. I'm tired of the notion that software is impossible to get right since there are so many variables. Civil Engineering in Los Angeles is difficult too, but an engineer that negligently designed a bridge that collapsed in an earthquake would be sued. Engineers have malpractice insurance, perhaps programmers should get it too.
You seem to have support in the legislative system. UCITA threatens to make it trivially easy for a company to produce software that does not work even as claimed in advertising or documentation, and as long as he disclaims the warranty on shrinkwrap, the user has no legal recourse. --
Probably not. The Wall Street Journal had and article the other day about courts dismissing cases that use dubious logic ("I'm a citizen of the state, not the US", "income taxes are illegal/immoral etc.") to challenge tax laws (federal ones) and even fining the plaintiffs. But then again IANAL. --
Slashdot Mirror
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
I suppose you can argue that the 2nd amendment was conceived in the age of the single shot musket so should not be applied to more lethal weapons. But the arms the founders had in mind were also the most lethal weapons of the time and the wording is intentionally vague. It does not say "muskets" but "Arms".
ANAL, but my interpretation of the 2nd amendment is that I should be allowed to own ("keep") an ICBM ("Arms") and carry it around ("bear"). Although it is unclear if need to be part of a "well regulated militia" or if it is enough that I am part of the"people". I know that the courts don't agree with me, and in fact I am strongly in favor of gun control, but I believe that there needs to be a constitutional amendment to reverse the 2nd amendment first. IMHO, it is better to uphold an anachronistic 2nd amendment (and support it's repeal by democratic means) than to selectively apply it at the whim of the courts and thus create precedent for selectively applying our other freedoms.
So to recap, I'm not a gun nut. In fact I have never owned a gun, but the 2nd amendment is part of the US Constitution and should not be shifted by political winds if the Constitution as a whole is to have any meaning.
--
Wassenaar "harmonization" threatens to make this true, but currently Finland atleast has very liberal encryption laws and hence is the source of ssh and the host of many open source encryption servers.
--
[Castigation]mQGiBDdhX80RBADms5jreO0TqJabNLw6KkhaS pkTsYvUbZ3itr/acrpOIy4C8Agq[/Cast igation]
--
Slashdot moderators may indeed be racist. But at best (and at worst) they reflect the users of slashdot. Moderators are chosen largely at random.
In my opinion this is the greatest weakness of the moderation system since it amplifies conformist views. The net effect is
--
This is indeed a great article. The printable version is easier to read, IMHO, since it doesn't involve relentless clicking.
--
That's some funny stuff. And suprisingly good technical writing as well.
--
Or not. Consider the lawyers at Microsoft who probably wish that email was not archived, or the White House advisory staffwhich tries to write down and record as little as possible to avoid the evidence being subpoenaed.
Remember that there are lawyers are on both sides of every case and that hard facts, even if exculpatory in the matter at hand, are often embarrassing or damaging in other ways.
--
Read "Funes the Memorious" a short story by Jorge Luis Borges. In it he descirbes a person, Funes, who not only rembers everything he has seen, his perception is so acute that he sees each moment as separate and disjoint from all others. In short he had infinite perception and retention but no association.
It is contained in Ficciones. I highly recommend the entire book and all of his work. If you have ever pondered infinity or parallel existences, you need to read Borges.
--
The GPL only requires that the source code is available at the cost of the physicsal medium, not that it accompanies the executable.
From the GPL
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
So if the LSL provide a pointer to a FTP server or optional physical source distribution they are fine.
--
MS has a very simple paradigm...to be at the top of every software category. Until a company comes along with that same paradigm, MS will be the top SW company in the world.
MS will not be beaten at it's own game. It will be beaten when the paradigm shift.
BTW, eBay runs off Sun...I guess that means they put the 'o' in DOH!.
While this is true, I don't believe that eBay's troubles were blamed on hardware or OS failure. It is arguable that E10K's are too hard to administer, but I don't know how hard it would be to administer an NT solution with near the reliablity and power.
--
Which Sun products are rubbish?
--
Don't forget that LinuxOS 4 is also Linux 1 and runnig uname on Linux 7 reports "LinuxOS 5.7".
Sun's a great company and Solaris is a nice OS but the marketing people need to take a break.
-Mike
--
The slashdot article on Starbridge systems is here. You can find all the slashdot archives at older stuff.
As with most of the Slashdot commenters, I dont find Starbridge very credible. I'll believe it when it's sitting on my desk crunching one of my programs and not until then.
--
Emacs beat you to it.
--
here's van Eck's
original paper from Computers & Security, 1985 Vol. 4.
You will find a lot more information under "Tempest radiation" from the TEMPEST standards for EMF emmission reductions.
I found an article from the December 98 Scientific American which mentions a Microsoft connection. It was featured on Slashdot but only has one remaining comment attached to it (bit rot or conspiracy?)
Finally there is The Complete, Unofficial TEMPEST Information Page
--
here's van Eck's
original paper from Computers & Security, 1985 Vol. 4.
You will find a lot more information under "Tempest radiation" named for the TEMPEST standards for EMF emmission reductions.
I found an article from the December 98 Scientific American which mentions a Microsoft connection. It was featured on Slashdot but only has one remaining comment attached to it (bit rot or conspiracy?)
Finally there is The Complete, Unofficial TEMPEST Information Page which has all you (can|should|need to) know.
--
If you accept faster than light travel and instantaneous holographic communications accross vast distances, surely you can accept that quantum computing (or some unforseen technology) has made encryption obsolete. Science fiction is seldom about real technological progression, it us usually a projection of society and myth onto a new landscape so that we can see a different side of ourselves.
I like Star Wars in general because it does not attempt to explain the technologies that are in use. Star Trek tends to explain the technologies which IMHO brings unnecessary attention to their inplausibility. I was annoyed that Lucas felt it necessary to go against this trend to give a (rather weak) explanation of the force, but I'm quite glad he didn't give psuedo-science explanations to other things like force shields and those magic blue balls.
--
Am I the only one that loved the original Outpost.com ads (tatooing babies,etc) and hate the new ones (obscure monster movie nonsense).
--
Not to be a wet blanket, but it seems to me that there is no definitive difference between 700 IT users and 700 computer users, the former just being a fancy word for the latter.
--
I see that you answered it already
--
These all are valid and have their place. I think that most users have no need to run any executable that is not provided by their network adminstrator. Those that do are probably intelligent enough to take reasonable precautions.
Hence the following precautions would be reasonable:
Clearly, well designed OSes and programs are essential for any solution to work and infinite undo is great for other reasons, but it is important to change our view of the OS and realize that most users in a business setting do not need, nor should they have, full access to a general use OS.
--
Second of all, you mean "viruses". "Virii" is not a word. Details available upon request.
OK, I'll bite. Why is virii not a proper plural of virus.
--
people have to know that running untrusted code is like signing something they did not read!!!
:-)
You'll have to find a better metaphor than that. People sign things they didn't read all the time
--
Think about this though. If you write a program and spent a lot of time on it, and somebody finds out it's got a bug that prevented them from saving a large document and they lost it, should you be sued?
Absolutely. If there is a bug that was due to clear negligence on the part of the programming/QA team then they should be held responsible. At very least you should have to obtain a signed disclaimer of warranty if you want to sell software without the legal protection.
If the industry worked like this, nobody would program anything out of fear of being sued by some litigous clown.
While I agree that some limits (Perhaps only actual damages etc.) would be in order, the system now is terrible since it shifts the cost for bad software to the user. If the cost of bad software were on the hands of the programmer, then less software would be written, but the software that was written would be of far greater quality. I'm tired of the notion that software is impossible to get right since there are so many variables. Civil Engineering in Los Angeles is difficult too, but an engineer that negligently designed a bridge that collapsed in an earthquake would be sued. Engineers have malpractice insurance, perhaps programmers should get it too.
You seem to have support in the legislative system. UCITA threatens to make it trivially easy for a company to produce software that does not work even as claimed in advertising or documentation, and as long as he disclaims the warranty on shrinkwrap, the user has no legal recourse.
--
Probably not. The Wall Street Journal had and article the other day about courts dismissing cases that use dubious logic ("I'm a citizen of the state, not the US", "income taxes are illegal/immoral etc.") to challenge tax laws (federal ones) and even fining the plaintiffs. But then again IANAL.
--