The argument that there shouldn't any different rules for digital data is flawed because it's so much cheaper to harvest large amounts of digital data, store it for a long time, and search it for anything you don't like (even if it's legal). It's the same flaw with arguments that large-scale license plate tracking or video cameras are nothing different than was possible in the past. In a way, modern digital systems bring out things that were effectively hidden an inaccessible before, not by nature of privacy laws or true invisibility, but simply being buried in so much other data or noise and quite costly to extract.
They should have allowed secure communication without certificates
What good is secure communication with an unknown third party? The data you receive can't tell you whether it's the party you think it is, because a third party can stand in the middle and simply relay things both ways.
Yes but everyone expects closed software to have problems, and to have restrictions. Open-source, on the other hand, is a panacea, without flaws, perfection itself! What, it has limitations, a license for God's sake?!? This seems to be the attitude of late by companies just discovering it.
Blame the environmentalists for this. Maybe this slight reduction in lead is a benefit, but not if it means devices break much sooner than before. I don't look forward to getting my next computer, as it will have this lead-free crap in it.
One possible option for this contest is to hide information in the lower bounds of each pixel (stenography like), there isn't much space, but you could recover some information from the original.
Unless you steal an entire article, but just excerpt reasonable snippets, you are exercising your 'Fair Use' right under copyright law.
If you steal the article, it's a theft issue, not copyright at all, because when you steal it, the original is gone. Did you mean make an unauthorized copy?
Furthermore, it's extra work to avoid taking all of one's data if one keeps it all on the laptop. Sure, one can encrypt it and even leave the key at home (effectively leaving the data at home), but then they'll just claim encryption is evidence of wrong doing.
So you're saying that if something were claimed to be 50% stronger than something else, then it'd be half as strong, rather than 1.5 times as strong? I don't think so!
Recently found an old newspaper ad, circa mid-1890s, for my great-grandfather's grocery store. Despite living in semi-rural Indiana, they apparently had one of the newfangled phones, as the ad listed their phone number. It was "12".
Ahh yes, those were the days of POTSv2, before we had POTSv7 for local calls and POTSv10 for long-distance. You should have heard the arguments against something more than POTSv2... the idea of every person having his own POTS "address" was odd back then.
Some of us simply take the position that we don't know, and only people present at the complete trial are closest to knowing (besides Reiser himself, and his wife if alive, who both know for sure).
Slashdot Mirror
The argument that there shouldn't any different rules for digital data is flawed because it's so much cheaper to harvest large amounts of digital data, store it for a long time, and search it for anything you don't like (even if it's legal). It's the same flaw with arguments that large-scale license plate tracking or video cameras are nothing different than was possible in the past. In a way, modern digital systems bring out things that were effectively hidden an inaccessible before, not by nature of privacy laws or true invisibility, but simply being buried in so much other data or noise and quite costly to extract.
What good is secure communication with an unknown third party? The data you receive can't tell you whether it's the party you think it is, because a third party can stand in the middle and simply relay things both ways.
Educate yourself on what Vista was supposed to be, then you'll understand.
A Slashdotted image, that is.
Yes but everyone expects closed software to have problems, and to have restrictions. Open-source, on the other hand, is a panacea, without flaws, perfection itself! What, it has limitations, a license for God's sake?!? This seems to be the attitude of late by companies just discovering it.
What about perpetual motion? That's the most promising!
So that's what the Pentium's floating-point unit was trying to simulate digitally.
In Soviet America, uploads download YOU! Or something...
And my neighbor to use mine. Then we'll both be safe, right?
Oh, wait...
It's even simpler in the USA to find out if the line is tapped. If the year is 2000 or later, it is.
And let's not get into finding the bugs in it...
If it gets too discreet, it's called a bug.
Oh cool, so they have a Slashdot comment ripper as well?
Blame the environmentalists for this. Maybe this slight reduction in lead is a benefit, but not if it means devices break much sooner than before. I don't look forward to getting my next computer, as it will have this lead-free crap in it.
Why would shorthand writing help?
If you ever want to link to (or even just read) Associated Press news stories without all the clutter of most websites, use Google. For example: news.google.com search for roma tomatoes source:"associated press" and an example AP story found.
If you steal the article, it's a theft issue, not copyright at all, because when you steal it, the original is gone. Did you mean make an unauthorized copy?
Furthermore, it's extra work to avoid taking all of one's data if one keeps it all on the laptop. Sure, one can encrypt it and even leave the key at home (effectively leaving the data at home), but then they'll just claim encryption is evidence of wrong doing.
Your one-size-fits-all statement isn't true in some universes, you insensitive clod!
But then you're supporting groups who attack others unjustly, just for money! Why don't you support the RIAA instead?
So you're saying that if something were claimed to be 50% stronger than something else, then it'd be half as strong, rather than 1.5 times as strong? I don't think so!
Well I found it surprising.. well, the gay part. All the rest, that's expected, duh.
Ahh yes, those were the days of POTSv2, before we had POTSv7 for local calls and POTSv10 for long-distance. You should have heard the arguments against something more than POTSv2... the idea of every person having his own POTS "address" was odd back then.
0.6 times stronger. The word "stronger" adds 1 to the factor.
Some of us simply take the position that we don't know, and only people present at the complete trial are closest to knowing (besides Reiser himself, and his wife if alive, who both know for sure).