I call upon the designers of moz, IE, Nutscrape and Opera to disable this horrible pop-up abuse!
AFAIK, Opera has. I haven't tried it (I'm runnint Tru64), but according to their press release on 5.12 for windoze it has "Enhanced pop-up window handling". In Norwegian newspapers, this was portrayed as letting you disable annoying ads. I'll install it on moms and dads computer to see next time I go there.
Well, I had this funny idea the other day. E-mail is easily forged, so serving a nastygram pr. unsigned e-mail shouldn't have any implications.
Well, they do send stuff pr. s-mail as well, but lets not go into that.
If you get a nastygram, tell them you will only assume the nastygram is real given that it carries a verifyable PGP signature. Make sure you are in the large strong set, then I would say they have a reasonable chance of get keys signed so that they can serve you a nastygram pr. signed e-mail, wouldn't you?
Well, if they start getting PGP and set it up, sit back and enjoy the confusion....:-)
IANAL, but I thought you didn't need to register a trademark for it to be yours. Just making it publicly known is sufficient. And that [tm] is different from (R).
you're not allowed to say 'Our car has a higher top speed, better acceleration, and a lower price than the BMW 325i, the Volvo S60, and the Mercedes 230.'
I thought Norwegian law was identical to german law in that respect, and it is certainly not tru in Norway: You just have to prove it. If you can't prove it, it's illegal, if you can prove it, it's prefectly fine. I think this is a Good Thing[tm], because you can to a large degree depend on advertising that compares one product to another. It's very easy to strike down on if it isn't true, and it is regularily being issued fines for those who do. It makes advertising more valuable for the consumer.
BTW, do folks here remember what made opened Dell's eyes for Linux: A lot of people searched their site about it. So folks, head over to Kodak and search for Linux, maybe it works...:-)
Re:Forgetting something?
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 2
It depends on what you mean by "environment". If you're an ant, you bet a human can come in and change your environment. And on a larger scale,
the environment is changing every day. It may not be because you and I do something (yeah, I'm in the global-warming skeptics camp, I think the geophysicists are underestimating the uncertainty in their models). Besides, I only talked about the goals of environmentalism, and how eco-terrorism is opposed to that. I never said we are going to kill everything living on the planet.
Mom and Dad went to China, and bought each a North Face jacket with a Gore-Tex label on for a very small amount of money. While they realized it wasn't a real North Face jacket, I have still to convince them there is no Gore-Tex membran in there. It most certainly isn't you can see it very clearly.
That's what trademarks are for, to protect Mom and Dad from being ripped off.
This is an entirely different issue: Here Adobe is doing the rip-off: They are trying to deprive us of the use of the word "Illustrator". That's what's wrong with trademarks today, they are not any longer a mean to protect us from rip-offs, they are used to deprive us of our natural language, our common cultural heritage.
You don't seriously think that anybody will konfuse Killustrator with Adobe Illustrator, do you? Really?
OK, I agree that Killustrator isn't the most kreative name, but hell, Adobe could have been more kreative too, if they wouldn't want anybody else to use the same word.
Wrote something about that long ago
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 2
I remember this clearly: It was many, many years ago, it was September, I was a newbie, and went onto the USENET, and subscribed to all the groups that I had an interest in. I have always regarded myself an environmentalist, and besides, I'm pretty left-wing too. So,
I got subscribed to a bunch of environmentalism groups, such as talk.environmentalism.
To my huge surprise, I found myself arguing against most of the folks there almost all the time. What a bunch of wackos.
I wrote some stuff, among those, this thing I put on my web site titled "Environmental terrorism is just terrorism!"
Re:Forgetting something?
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 2
That's different. Environmentalism is all about using earth's resources in a way that does not harm the environment. Eco-terrorism harms the environment by destroying resources. So, eco-terrorism is directly opposed to the fundamental goals of environmentalism.
Re:2001 Excursion, 1997 Accord, which pollutes mor
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 2
Yes, a 1997 Honda Accord pollutes more than a 2001 Ford Excursion.
You're missing something very fundamental here: Production costs. The production costs for producing a car, in terms of pollution, you should drive it a long time before this becomes a relevant problem. I don't know how long, but the math should be done.
Is torching an SUV dealership justifiable?
Of course it isn't. Eco-terrorists are not enviromentalists, it's as simple as that. There's nothing left-wing about that.
Surpise, they happened to be "looking the other way" at the time... he's apparently talking of sueing them (IIRC it's a criminal offence not to respond in such a situation)
That's interesting!
This kind of system will necessarily have a problem with false positives and false negatives. False positives are going to be very annoying, as it will lead to unjust harassment by police of innocents. For example, if you scan 100000 people, and the probability of a false positive is one pr. 1000, police will wrongly accuse one hundred people.
Eventually, having a lot of false positives will lead to that police officers isn't responding to real situations, false negatives. Now, that's interesting, is this really going to improve handling of crimes? Given all the noise?
Instead of fighting more crimes, we may have more cases with police officers on the stand in court, saying: "No, your honor, it didn't look like rape to me"...
You do have a point here. Cloning isn't easy, but given that Raelians are nuts (they are nuts, believe me), it is entirely possible that they could find enough willing people to attempt to work on hundreds of embryos, most of which will fail, some of which might become a child. But it is not very likely to be a healthy child. People who are as nutty as the Raelians often lack the ability to think carefully about what they are doing, and that's a real problem.
Yeah. $cientologists are rational: They want to make money by faking a religion, and it's working pretty well....;-)
BTW, Rael is the favorite religion of a historian of religion friend of mine, who is studying modern religious movements. Raelians are so nuts, they've got it all...:-)
I'm beginning to wonder where our moral responsibility to protect an idiot from himself kicks in...
That is a very interesting and very difficult question. I was thinking about the same thing.
The critical issue is whether he understands the risks he are taking. There are many people going to different kinds of terapeuts every day, that are little more than swindlers. Many are of course unaware that they are being lifted of their money, and we do have a responsibility to educate them. What if they don't want to be educated? I've met people who are very sick, and that I can see are being taken advantage of, who will not listen to reason. Then, it gets very, very difficult.
In this case, I don't think it is very difficult. Crazy as he may be, he still seems to be aware of the risks he are taking.
If he blows himself up, well, at least he died while doing what he loved the most. Not many people do that... And, he seems like the kind of guy who would cheerfully accept a Darwin Award, at least as far as it is possible to accept a Darwin Award...:-)
And if he comes back from space in one piece, I would be the first to pat him on the back.
If I understand it correctly, that document wasn't written by RMS, but by Bradley M. Kuhn.
It is nevertheless very well written.
And I agree completely with your point, the suggestions made by the FSF will do far more good than braking up the company (which is something I don't think makes much sense anyway), and I certainly hope this will receive some attention.
Well, I can't look upon this as a really bad thing. While some might have to remove some content, there is also the possibility that a freelancer wants to put an article on his web site (for free, or for micropayments or something), but then you have this Evil[tm] big media company who goes "no, you can't do that, it's in our contract, we 0\/\/n j00".
Still to be seen is if people will go to freelancer's websites though.
Just in case somebody still reads this stuff: I just signed up for Salon Premium, with the main motivation of supporting Salon. I really don't have the time to read that much, and for magazines like Salon, I would prefer to pay by micropayments. But then, $30 a year isn't that much, and I would hate to see Salon going down.
Well, there are a few things I don't get, and that I couldn't see mentioned.
Well, the problem is that you have this 50 Hz sinus, and you try to piggyback another signal on the top of it. This signal might need to be in the MHz range. Now, the problem is that if you put a MHz signal in a wire, then you have an antenna. It radiates electromagnetic radiation... And that's bad.
The response has been to keep the amplitude of the MHz signal just above noise, but then you'll loose a lot of packets, and from what I've heard, any signal with sufficient amplitude makes the radiation so bad it interferes with just about everything in the sorroundiings...
There was this test of this stuff about a year ago in Norway. They delivered the packets allright, that's easy enough, and the company proclaimed the test was extremely successful, and that they would roll it out to consumers the following month. That was before they got the bill for jamming all the radio stations around, and the communications inspectorate knocking down their doors telling them to shut up.
Obviously, the technology may have improved, but it doesn't sound they have addressed this. All they're writing is
Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing, which keeps connections alive by adjusting to changes in power lines. (In older products, electrical "noise" from vacuum cleaners and radios can easily disrupt data, according to vendors and analysts.)
....but it's the other way around, the noise from packets on the power lines disturbs everything else... (Wow, just imagine the vacuum cleaner running around on it's own...;-) )
Well, they did what the article says in Norway about a year ago. It didn't work, the radio noise was so bad somebody got it shut down after a few hours.... The research done in advance was in that case very bad. OK, it might have improved in Germany, but I don't believe it before I see it. It wasn't that you can't get TCP/IP over it, that's easy enough.
I'm a complete newbie with PGP, up to two months ago, my geek code said PGP-, but I have realized I really should start encrypting e-mail regularily.
Anyway, about PRZ and incompatibility: Will there be incompatibility between OpenPGP applications? I mean, will NAI really have any option but to comply with OpenPGP? After all, most PGP users thinks of PRZ as a man with very high integrity, and will not use anything that comes out of NAI if it isn't completely OpenPGP compliant. If businesses still trust closed source, that's their problem, but wouldn't widespread use of OpenPGP force compliance?
(I haven't read the RFC, so I must admit I don't know if it does....)
According to the FAQ, the analysis is based on keys in the pgp.net ring. I haven't been able to figure out for sure if the pgp.net ring also syncs with the servers in the keyserver.net ring. Do anybody here know this for sure?
I have been trying to use gpg v-1.0.6 to send my key(s) to Keyserver.net as it seems to be the preferred keyserver for OpenPGP applications. While I have successfully submitted my key through the web interface, I can't get it to work through gpg.
I have e-mailed the webmaster, but no respons. I had a few responses from the gnupg-users mailing lists, but nobody knows anything to resolve the problem. I have even tried to talk HTTP to it. It seems like it just won't listen. Is the server broken?
Everything works fine with wwwkeys.pgp.net, though.
Slashdot Mirror
AFAIK, Opera has. I haven't tried it (I'm runnint Tru64), but according to their press release on 5.12 for windoze it has "Enhanced pop-up window handling". In Norwegian newspapers, this was portrayed as letting you disable annoying ads. I'll install it on moms and dads computer to see next time I go there.
Dunno, I thought I had it from Mark Twain, but I heard it was older than that.
If you get a nastygram, tell them you will only assume the nastygram is real given that it carries a verifyable PGP signature. Make sure you are in the large strong set, then I would say they have a reasonable chance of get keys signed so that they can serve you a nastygram pr. signed e-mail, wouldn't you?
Well, if they start getting PGP and set it up, sit back and enjoy the confusion.... :-)
Point them here.
IANAL, but I thought you didn't need to register a trademark for it to be yours. Just making it publicly known is sufficient. And that [tm] is different from (R).
I thought Norwegian law was identical to german law in that respect, and it is certainly not tru in Norway: You just have to prove it. If you can't prove it, it's illegal, if you can prove it, it's prefectly fine. I think this is a Good Thing[tm], because you can to a large degree depend on advertising that compares one product to another. It's very easy to strike down on if it isn't true, and it is regularily being issued fines for those who do. It makes advertising more valuable for the consumer.
BTW, do folks here remember what made opened Dell's eyes for Linux: A lot of people searched their site about it. So folks, head over to Kodak and search for Linux, maybe it works... :-)
It depends on what you mean by "environment". If you're an ant, you bet a human can come in and change your environment. And on a larger scale, the environment is changing every day. It may not be because you and I do something (yeah, I'm in the global-warming skeptics camp, I think the geophysicists are underestimating the uncertainty in their models). Besides, I only talked about the goals of environmentalism, and how eco-terrorism is opposed to that. I never said we are going to kill everything living on the planet.
That's what trademarks are for, to protect Mom and Dad from being ripped off.
This is an entirely different issue: Here Adobe is doing the rip-off: They are trying to deprive us of the use of the word "Illustrator". That's what's wrong with trademarks today, they are not any longer a mean to protect us from rip-offs, they are used to deprive us of our natural language, our common cultural heritage.
You don't seriously think that anybody will konfuse Killustrator with Adobe Illustrator, do you? Really?
OK, I agree that Killustrator isn't the most kreative name, but hell, Adobe could have been more kreative too, if they wouldn't want anybody else to use the same word.
I remember this clearly: It was many, many years ago, it was September, I was a newbie, and went onto the USENET, and subscribed to all the groups that I had an interest in. I have always regarded myself an environmentalist, and besides, I'm pretty left-wing too. So, I got subscribed to a bunch of environmentalism groups, such as talk.environmentalism.
To my huge surprise, I found myself arguing against most of the folks there almost all the time. What a bunch of wackos.
I wrote some stuff, among those, this thing I put on my web site titled "Environmental terrorism is just terrorism!"
That's different. Environmentalism is all about using earth's resources in a way that does not harm the environment. Eco-terrorism harms the environment by destroying resources. So, eco-terrorism is directly opposed to the fundamental goals of environmentalism.
You're missing something very fundamental here: Production costs. The production costs for producing a car, in terms of pollution, you should drive it a long time before this becomes a relevant problem. I don't know how long, but the math should be done.
Of course it isn't. Eco-terrorists are not enviromentalists, it's as simple as that. There's nothing left-wing about that.
That's interesting!
This kind of system will necessarily have a problem with false positives and false negatives. False positives are going to be very annoying, as it will lead to unjust harassment by police of innocents. For example, if you scan 100000 people, and the probability of a false positive is one pr. 1000, police will wrongly accuse one hundred people.
Eventually, having a lot of false positives will lead to that police officers isn't responding to real situations, false negatives. Now, that's interesting, is this really going to improve handling of crimes? Given all the noise?
Instead of fighting more crimes, we may have more cases with police officers on the stand in court, saying: "No, your honor, it didn't look like rape to me"...
You do have a point here. Cloning isn't easy, but given that Raelians are nuts (they are nuts, believe me), it is entirely possible that they could find enough willing people to attempt to work on hundreds of embryos, most of which will fail, some of which might become a child. But it is not very likely to be a healthy child. People who are as nutty as the Raelians often lack the ability to think carefully about what they are doing, and that's a real problem.
BTW, Rael is the favorite religion of a historian of religion friend of mine, who is studying modern religious movements. Raelians are so nuts, they've got it all... :-)
That is a very interesting and very difficult question. I was thinking about the same thing.
The critical issue is whether he understands the risks he are taking. There are many people going to different kinds of terapeuts every day, that are little more than swindlers. Many are of course unaware that they are being lifted of their money, and we do have a responsibility to educate them. What if they don't want to be educated? I've met people who are very sick, and that I can see are being taken advantage of, who will not listen to reason. Then, it gets very, very difficult.
In this case, I don't think it is very difficult. Crazy as he may be, he still seems to be aware of the risks he are taking.
If he blows himself up, well, at least he died while doing what he loved the most. Not many people do that... And, he seems like the kind of guy who would cheerfully accept a Darwin Award, at least as far as it is possible to accept a Darwin Award... :-)
And if he comes back from space in one piece, I would be the first to pat him on the back.
So, I'd say, let him have fun!
And I agree completely with your point, the suggestions made by the FSF will do far more good than braking up the company (which is something I don't think makes much sense anyway), and I certainly hope this will receive some attention.
Still to be seen is if people will go to freelancer's websites though.
Just in case somebody still reads this stuff: I just signed up for Salon Premium, with the main motivation of supporting Salon. I really don't have the time to read that much, and for magazines like Salon, I would prefer to pay by micropayments. But then, $30 a year isn't that much, and I would hate to see Salon going down.
Well, the problem is that you have this 50 Hz sinus, and you try to piggyback another signal on the top of it. This signal might need to be in the MHz range. Now, the problem is that if you put a MHz signal in a wire, then you have an antenna. It radiates electromagnetic radiation... And that's bad.
The response has been to keep the amplitude of the MHz signal just above noise, but then you'll loose a lot of packets, and from what I've heard, any signal with sufficient amplitude makes the radiation so bad it interferes with just about everything in the sorroundiings...
There was this test of this stuff about a year ago in Norway. They delivered the packets allright, that's easy enough, and the company proclaimed the test was extremely successful, and that they would roll it out to consumers the following month. That was before they got the bill for jamming all the radio stations around, and the communications inspectorate knocking down their doors telling them to shut up.
Obviously, the technology may have improved, but it doesn't sound they have addressed this. All they're writing is
Well, they did what the article says in Norway about a year ago. It didn't work, the radio noise was so bad somebody got it shut down after a few hours.... The research done in advance was in that case very bad. OK, it might have improved in Germany, but I don't believe it before I see it. It wasn't that you can't get TCP/IP over it, that's easy enough.
Yep, that's the port I talked to...
Anyway, about PRZ and incompatibility: Will there be incompatibility between OpenPGP applications? I mean, will NAI really have any option but to comply with OpenPGP? After all, most PGP users thinks of PRZ as a man with very high integrity, and will not use anything that comes out of NAI if it isn't completely OpenPGP compliant. If businesses still trust closed source, that's their problem, but wouldn't widespread use of OpenPGP force compliance? (I haven't read the RFC, so I must admit I don't know if it does....)
According to the FAQ, the analysis is based on keys in the pgp.net ring. I haven't been able to figure out for sure if the pgp.net ring also syncs with the servers in the keyserver.net ring. Do anybody here know this for sure?
I have configured gpg according to to the webpage on the topic, but it just responds:
gpg: error sending to `search.keyserver.net': eof
I have e-mailed the webmaster, but no respons. I had a few responses from the gnupg-users mailing lists, but nobody knows anything to resolve the problem. I have even tried to talk HTTP to it. It seems like it just won't listen. Is the server broken?
Everything works fine with wwwkeys.pgp.net, though.