Let's make it something genetically definite, like hermaphrodism -- are we then justified in deciding that "this life is not worth living", and killing off the baby?...based on not being able to clearly categorize its sex into male or female??? (I know it was hypothetical, but still)
Well, if you let your e-mail address expire, and someone else registers it later on, they won't have trouble doing a password request which will allow them into your account, which will contain your personal information.
Isn't the real problem that the e-mail provider recycles usernames? Probably best to sign up with an e-mail provider who won't ever allow re-use of an expired e-mail address.
> [...] I figured it was in my best interest to avoid finding out why metal and power-over-RFID don't mesh.
Well there's a sentence that sure didn't end the way I wanted it to... Where's his sense of adventure?
His co-worker was originally assigned to the article, but he met an... unfortunate end and his half-written article was never published. This journalist wasn't about to make the same mistake.
Neat, I hadn't ever looked at which articles I post to. I doubt it matters since most of my comments are pure junk (moderation gives me feedback on how I'm doing, which so far isn't very good). Sorry for getting under your skin, I just think it's stupid to complain that you're being suppressed by the masses. At some point you have to allow for people's own choice to choose what they read. I've read of a few instances of silent removal of comments by admins, but that this is very rare.
When I get moderator points I almost always use them to moderate posts up, not down (I know what I think is good, but am conservative in deciding what's bad).
Regarding the handle, I choose it a long time ago and then didn't use the account for years. I didn't see any easy way to change it without creating a new account.
This is probably the same attitude that some had towards the year 2000 efforts after nothing significant happened. "What a waste. Look, nothing happened!"
Something isn't scientific until it's had the scientific method applied to it. The point of testing the obvious is to find out about reality. We already know about our perception ("obvious!"), but that's not the point of testing.
You hope that something that could be useful to many people will fail, just because you like something else? You want to see money wasted, just to feel superior?
Why does this rollout succeeding, stop you from contributing to community efforts? Maybe you should make an effort to do better yourself, with your community ideas, rather than simply hoping that others fail. What an attitude!
Your attitude? Re-read what was written; the poster hopes that the commercial rollout isn't successful so that there's a better opportunity for a community-based effort. If the commercial rollout is successful, it would be harder to get a community-based effort together because it wouldn't make as much as a difference to as many people (no wifi->wifi versus commercial wifi->community wifi).
Why yes it is. What is also permitted is labeling of each post by the group and filtering based on the label. Perhaps you'd rather Slashdot strip everything from a post but the content, and forbid users from creating an external comment moderation system.
I'm not a big famous coffeeshop but I have my share of customers. Even though I like to occasionally surf the web to see if I can chat with other coffeeshops (it's lonely being a coffeeshop), it's really affected my self-esteem. I feel very used, like people forgot why I'm here (hint: coffee, you idiot!). I suppose they were always here just because of some or other product, I felt like I was a part of giving coffee to my customers, via my slav..employees. Now they just come to hook up and tune out. I'm left watching the little lights on the router flash. I'm tempted to pour coffee in their fucking laptops, but pulling the plug on their connection has made them realize that I do matter and that I am in control.
Good citizens have nothing to hide, after all. Why don't we just ban encryption entirely? And we'll install the cameras here and here...
People use encryption to hide data from entities other than law enforcement. I have a social security number, credit card number, etc. that is worth hiding, but not from the government or even credit profile companies, since they already have the information.
Anyway, I don't see this as a suggestion that encryption is bad per se. I see it as an extension of basic evidence rules -- if there is other evidence suggesting you have bad files and you have intentionally made those file unreadable, the tools you used to do that are possibly relevant. Kind of like pointing out the defendant owned a shredder, there was huge pile of shredded paper by it, and the "smoking gun" documents are no where to be found.
Wait a minute... if they had the "smoking gun" documents already, why would it matter if he shredded his copies? If they did not have the "smoking gun" documents, how do they know they even exist? If they knew they existed, wouldn't that have allowed them to make copies?
The case was also bolstered by a box of envelopes, found on the premisis, which are used to conceil information and leave evidence in case of interception.
A PIN is bad for this since its format is so restricted, usually a fixed number of numeric characters only. I offered this for storing passwords where there is little restriction on what it can be (and where there is some kind of lockout if too many incorrect attempts are made).
In the abstract, the idea is to encode the information at a different level, or even make the password a "hash" of information easily available. It's not actively placed in the environment, but does exist there.
There a joke about the increasing frequency that a user is required to change his password nowdays, eventually crackers just need to keep on trying the same password and the system will change to match it.
In Soviet Russia, the system dictionary attacks YOU!
You could use passwords that appear to be normal bits of information you'd have laying around, so that you can leave the passwords laying around (as long as you remember which are passwords and which are what they appear to be!). For example: phone number, website address, e-mail address, etc.
If this virus ever holds your files hostage, remember that the DMCA makes it illegal to try to circumvent the protection scheme. Don't break the law, it's bad 'mkay!
Slashdot Mirror
Could "eval" be a misspelling of "evil", proving that Google has been knowingly "eval" all along? Time to switch search engines!!!
Let's make it something genetically definite, like hermaphrodism -- are we then justified in deciding that "this life is not worth living", and killing off the baby? ...based on not being able to clearly categorize its sex into male or female??? (I know it was hypothetical, but still)
[...] the school yard piracy, is a huge issue for us...
It's those damn first-graders with their laptops, burning copies of Eminem for each other at recess!
Well, if you let your e-mail address expire, and someone else registers it later on, they won't have trouble doing a password request which will allow them into your account, which will contain your personal information.
Isn't the real problem that the e-mail provider recycles usernames? Probably best to sign up with an e-mail provider who won't ever allow re-use of an expired e-mail address.
> [...] I figured it was in my best interest to avoid finding out why metal and power-over-RFID don't mesh.
Well there's a sentence that sure didn't end the way I wanted it to... Where's his sense of adventure?
His co-worker was originally assigned to the article, but he met an... unfortunate end and his half-written article was never published. This journalist wasn't about to make the same mistake.
I, for one, welcome our new pre-biotic lifeform overlords!
You're a fucking dumbass (and you even use your karma bonus... lame).
Neat, I hadn't ever looked at which articles I post to. I doubt it matters since most of my comments are pure junk (moderation gives me feedback on how I'm doing, which so far isn't very good). Sorry for getting under your skin, I just think it's stupid to complain that you're being suppressed by the masses. At some point you have to allow for people's own choice to choose what they read. I've read of a few instances of silent removal of comments by admins, but that this is very rare.
When I get moderator points I almost always use them to moderate posts up, not down (I know what I think is good, but am conservative in deciding what's bad).
Regarding the handle, I choose it a long time ago and then didn't use the account for years. I didn't see any easy way to change it without creating a new account.
This is probably the same attitude that some had towards the year 2000 efforts after nothing significant happened. "What a waste. Look, nothing happened!"
Something isn't scientific until it's had the scientific method applied to it. The point of testing the obvious is to find out about reality. We already know about our perception ("obvious!"), but that's not the point of testing.
You hope that something that could be useful to many people will fail, just because you like something else? You want to see money wasted, just to feel superior?
Why does this rollout succeeding, stop you from contributing to community efforts? Maybe you should make an effort to do better yourself, with your community ideas, rather than simply hoping that others fail. What an attitude!
Your attitude? Re-read what was written; the poster hopes that the commercial rollout isn't successful so that there's a better opportunity for a community-based effort. If the commercial rollout is successful, it would be harder to get a community-based effort together because it wouldn't make as much as a difference to as many people (no wifi->wifi versus commercial wifi->community wifi).
[...] wired it up and began talking 300 meters away from his computer on MSN.
Waht, was he talking to his computer 300 meters away, or was he talking to someone hundreds or thousands of miles away?
Dissodance is not permitted!
Why yes it is. What is also permitted is labeling of each post by the group and filtering based on the label. Perhaps you'd rather Slashdot strip everything from a post but the content, and forbid users from creating an external comment moderation system.
No program that accepts input is safe.
The worst program is the user... even if you give him a secure web browser he'll still divulge his credit number and social security number if asked.
Even some programs that don't accept input aren't safe either.
If a program is insecure, by definition it accepts input. If a program truely accepts no input, by definition its output is always the same.
Compensation versus prevention (punishment). If the suit were only for compensation, it might not be worth it for businesses to change their ways.
I'm not a big famous coffeeshop but I have my share of customers. Even though I like to occasionally surf the web to see if I can chat with other coffeeshops (it's lonely being a coffeeshop), it's really affected my self-esteem. I feel very used, like people forgot why I'm here (hint: coffee, you idiot!). I suppose they were always here just because of some or other product, I felt like I was a part of giving coffee to my customers, via my slav..employees. Now they just come to hook up and tune out. I'm left watching the little lights on the router flash. I'm tempted to pour coffee in their fucking laptops, but pulling the plug on their connection has made them realize that I do matter and that I am in control.
Good citizens have nothing to hide, after all. Why don't we just ban encryption entirely? And we'll install the cameras here and here...
People use encryption to hide data from entities other than law enforcement. I have a social security number, credit card number, etc. that is worth hiding, but not from the government or even credit profile companies, since they already have the information.
Anyway, I don't see this as a suggestion that encryption is bad per se. I see it as an extension of basic evidence rules -- if there is other evidence suggesting you have bad files and you have intentionally made those file unreadable, the tools you used to do that are possibly relevant. Kind of like pointing out the defendant owned a shredder, there was huge pile of shredded paper by it, and the "smoking gun" documents are no where to be found.
Wait a minute... if they had the "smoking gun" documents already, why would it matter if he shredded his copies? If they did not have the "smoking gun" documents, how do they know they even exist? If they knew they existed, wouldn't that have allowed them to make copies?
The case was also bolstered by a box of envelopes, found on the premisis, which are used to conceil information and leave evidence in case of interception.
A PIN is bad for this since its format is so restricted, usually a fixed number of numeric characters only. I offered this for storing passwords where there is little restriction on what it can be (and where there is some kind of lockout if too many incorrect attempts are made).
In the abstract, the idea is to encode the information at a different level, or even make the password a "hash" of information easily available. It's not actively placed in the environment, but does exist there.
There a joke about the increasing frequency that a user is required to change his password nowdays, eventually crackers just need to keep on trying the same password and the system will change to match it.
In Soviet Russia, the system dictionary attacks YOU!
You could use passwords that appear to be normal bits of information you'd have laying around, so that you can leave the passwords laying around (as long as you remember which are passwords and which are what they appear to be!). For example: phone number, website address, e-mail address, etc.
the ambitious project will violate copyrights and stifle future sales
Errr... shouldn't that be "stifling the flow of knowledge," the basic reason for printing books? Oh, wait, Google is helping that.
[...] there are very few books that I have read in digital format that I have bought to have as a hard copy.
Same here, but note that I only read books in digital form that I can't read/find in dead-tree form; the latter is so much more pleasant to read.
If this virus ever holds your files hostage, remember that the DMCA makes it illegal to try to circumvent the protection scheme. Don't break the law, it's bad 'mkay!
I got infected by that virus once. It printed this:
I hold files kidnap: "GPL.TXT" is one
To buy decoder mail: n781567@yahoo.com
with subject: PGPcoder 000000000032
Oh, darn...