Uh, the article isn't specifically about the United States. What gave you that silly idea? Hell, the second link in the summary is to a Canadian blog, ffs.
Well, the alternative is that Canadian privacy law is amended as part of the process of implementing the treaty provisions as domestic law. And given the Conservatives' tendency to kowtow to our American brethren to the south, I'd be surprised if they didn't attempt to do just that. The real question is what the other parties would do...
The thing with US Federal law though is that treaties override constitutional laws.
Well, then it's a good thing the OP was talking about Canada. Here in Canada, treaties are not law, and domestic law must be amended to fall in line with treaties. (citation). As such, in Canada, treaties have no legal force until domestic laws are implemented, and those laws are subject to the usual restrictions imposed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
It is a bit of a stretch. You use the clutch to change gears or to stop, not every time you brake.
Oh please, now you're just being an idiot. If the throttle on my manual suddenly got stuck open, you can be damned sure I'd be jamming on the clutch and break because, guess, what? I'm trying to stop the car.
If the leads to the potentiometer have cracked insulation and get shorted out by dirty water or contact with metal, you have a hard open throttle. I know which I'd rather have.
Yes, because you can't possibly test for such a condition in software and close the throttle...
As a member of one of those "groups who have the power" I (as an individual) don't feel very powerful, wealthy or in control of much of anything.
Go visit a slum some day, then tell me again how difficult your life is. Trust me, you have plenty of power and wealth. But, like so many other Slashdot nerds, your worldview is so narrow (probably thanks to a lifetime spent in a basement) that you don't even realize it. Which is probably while libertarianism is so popular around here...
but I get by much better and work a 40 to 50 hour week and raise kids.
Dude, just FYI: regularly working 40-50 hours a week is absurd, even for a healthy person. I'd strongly suggest finding an employer that doesn't expect your job to be your life.
Bullshit. Tell a person a cream kills pain, apply it, and then observe that the spinal cord no longer shows the nerve activity associated with pain. I'd call that a pretty impressive effect, wouldn't you? No, we don't know how it works. But it's absolutely real and is a unique, distinct phenomenon, and most definitely not simply a measurement artifact.
Just do a reinstall. I put a fresh copy of 9.10 on my laptop and everything worked straight out of the box, just like Jaunty. My only complaint is higher power consumption... other than that, it works great.
For the record, I really really do like piracy. It means I get the content in a format I want, whenever I want it, with the freedom to watch it on whatever device I want to watch it on.
Frankly, if the studios would give me the option of buying an unencumbered copy of their product in a standard format (H.264 encoded AVI would be fine) at a decent price via an easy-to-use online outlet where I could max out my bandwidth, damn right I'd use it (particularly for lesser-known content that's tough to find via bittorrent). But it doesn't exist. So, until then, I pirate. If that makes me a bad person, well fuck it, I really don't give a crap.
Noooo... their system is built to brute-force passwords. That has basically nothing at all to do with cracking an SSL session.
See, SSL uses asymmetric encryption to generate a large-ish session key between two parties, which can then be used in conjunction with a symmetric cipher to protect the session. So, while brute-forcing passwords is really just a matter of throwing hardware at the problem, brute-forcing an SSL session key likely requires more energy than is available in the known universe, which means you're forced to find a weakness in the cipher that you can exploit to reduce the computational complexity of the problem.
That's easy to say when you haven't had your life savings wiped-out, or previous years of your life spent in prison, as a result of these illegal searches. Those people want justice for the harm caused to them, not Obama's "jus'fuhgedd'abou'it" platitudes.
Yeah, I never said I agreed with the man.:) I'm just telling you what Obama has been saying from the get-go. He has *never* said he would prosecute those involved in the wiretapping program. The quote selected by the OP reflects that. Rather, his public statements regarding the previous administration have *always* been along the lines of "we should be looking forward, not backward, upwards, not forwards, and always twirling twirling twirling towards freedom!".
So if any of this surprises you, you simply haven't been paying attention.
I'm don't think it is fundamentally broken, I think that it just doesn't scale up to the size of the country. We should have long ago scaled out rather than up.
I'm sorry, but that's a flat out bullshit excuse. The difference between 30M and 300M, when it comes to election dynamics, is minimal.
The real problem, in the US, is that according to the courts, money == speech, and the electoral system only allows for two parties. The result is literally legalized bribery and corruption (in the form of "campaign contributions"), where the two dominant players can't be removed from power.
No, for the US government to function again, it deeply needs campaign finance reform, stronger ethics laws, and a change in it's electoral system. Until those things happened, I'm sorry, but the US is destined for fascism disguised as a poorly functioning democracy.
Why? Because they're being more regulated, more taxed, more taken over by the government?
Make no mistake. The US government is currently structured the way it is because it works well for business. It certainly has nothing to do with what people actually want (one need only look at the public option in the healthcare bill to see that... >60% of the US public want it, and yet it's all but dead).
So in other words the United States government is covering-up its previous crimes. Gee. Golly. Thanks for clearing that up for me. I guess that makes it okay then.
I never said it was okay. But there's a *vast* chasm between endorsing, and continuing, illegal wiretapping activities, and refusing to prosecute previous lawbreakers. The latter is US tradition, and goes back at least to Nixon, and probably much further, particularly when state secrets are in play.
In short: In a case like this, you should've expected little else. To do so his hilariously naive, not to mention indicative of a supreme ignorance of US history.
I agree with your view of a hybrid system, but lost you at the "Americans can't seem to figure it out" schtick. Please, Canuck, it's getting old hearing Canadians generalize like this. I'd guess that 30-40% of us *do* get it, it's the red state retards and the rabid anti-capitalists that can't figure it out.
Heh, no offense, but if 60-70% of a population fits a given trait, then I'd say the generalization is sufficiently valid.;)
That said, when I said "Americans can't seem to figure it out", by it, I meant "how to build a working hybridized, socialized system". And, again, I think the reason for that is because the American political system is so deeply, fundamentally broken, thanks to institutionalized bribery and corruption, that any attempts to create such a system are corrupted by corporate influence. Worse, the very fact that the US system of government is deeply *deeply* flawed means that more and more people are being trained to distrust, and even fear, government, which further destroys any chance for meaningful reform.
The law is not a matter of opinion. The law is clear. Warrantless wiretaps are illegal, and anyone who endorses them is a criminal. First it was Bush who was the criminal, now AG Holder, and if Obama supports his AG then he too will be a criminal. The law is the law.
Well, it's a good thing neither Obama nor his AG are "endoring" warrantless wiretapping.
What they're doing is blocking the prosecution of past wiretapping activities based on the state secrets privilege.
But don't let the facts get in the way of your frothing.
The quote "since going forward would compromise "ongoing intelligence activities." makes me think the Obama administration is still doing this.
Not necessarily. For example, suppose the Bush administration was tracking the activities of terrorist group X, and doing so using warrantless wiretaps. Obama takes over, cancels the wiretapping program, but continues to investigate terrorist group X using other means. Well, now, if a trial about warrantless wiretapping goes forward, it's possible that sensitive information about the investigation of terrorist group X will be exposed, despite that being an "ongoing intelligence activity".
Now, the other side..the people who actually think Socialism can work even though it has never before and big Government can solve our problems, have their own rabid beliefs.
Umm, just FYI, as a Canadian who is perfectly happy living in a nation that most Americans would consider virtually communist, I have to disagree rather strongly with this. And I'm sure your average European would agree with me.
Socialism, hybridized with a liberal democracy and a free (but regulated) market *does* work, and works every single day all over the world. Just because Americans can't seem to figure it out, doesn't mean the idea is flawed. It just means the American system of government is so fundamentally fucked up it's hamstrung from the get-go.
To be clear, I'm not trying to apologize for Obama, but you should pay very close attention to what that says:
Eliminate Warrantless Wiretaps. Barack Obama opposed the Bush Administration's initial policy on warrantless wiretaps because it crossed the line between protecting our national security and eroding the civil liberties of American citizens. As president, Obama would update the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to provide greater oversight and accountability to the congressional intelligence committees to prevent future threats to the rule of law.
Note, there is nothing in there about allowing existing lawsuits to go forward in order to punish those who violated the rights of Americans during the previous administration. In fact, Obama has stated, time after time, that he feels we should all just, you know, move on and get over it...
Hilarious! But the least you could do is cite the original source. Well, unless your goal was uncredited plagiarism, in which case, bravo, mission accomplished!
Just my opinion, I'm not right or wrong but thats how I feel about it. If you enjoy these books thats great, different strokes for different folks, but this is a big non-story to me
Well, isn't it nice of you, then, to take some precious time out of your day to comment on this non-story...
Slashdot Mirror
Uh, the article isn't specifically about the United States. What gave you that silly idea? Hell, the second link in the summary is to a Canadian blog, ffs.
Well, the alternative is that Canadian privacy law is amended as part of the process of implementing the treaty provisions as domestic law. And given the Conservatives' tendency to kowtow to our American brethren to the south, I'd be surprised if they didn't attempt to do just that. The real question is what the other parties would do...
The thing with US Federal law though is that treaties override constitutional laws.
Well, then it's a good thing the OP was talking about Canada. Here in Canada, treaties are not law, and domestic law must be amended to fall in line with treaties. (citation). As such, in Canada, treaties have no legal force until domestic laws are implemented, and those laws are subject to the usual restrictions imposed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
It is a bit of a stretch. You use the clutch to change gears or to stop, not every time you brake.
Oh please, now you're just being an idiot. If the throttle on my manual suddenly got stuck open, you can be damned sure I'd be jamming on the clutch and break because, guess, what? I'm trying to stop the car.
If the leads to the potentiometer have cracked insulation and get shorted out by dirty water or contact with metal, you have a hard open throttle. I know which I'd rather have.
Yes, because you can't possibly test for such a condition in software and close the throttle...
As a member of one of those "groups who have the power" I (as an individual) don't feel very powerful, wealthy or in control of much of anything.
Go visit a slum some day, then tell me again how difficult your life is. Trust me, you have plenty of power and wealth. But, like so many other Slashdot nerds, your worldview is so narrow (probably thanks to a lifetime spent in a basement) that you don't even realize it. Which is probably while libertarianism is so popular around here...
but I get by much better and work a 40 to 50 hour week and raise kids.
Dude, just FYI: regularly working 40-50 hours a week is absurd, even for a healthy person. I'd strongly suggest finding an employer that doesn't expect your job to be your life.
The placebo effect is not an effect per se.
Bullshit. Tell a person a cream kills pain, apply it, and then observe that the spinal cord no longer shows the nerve activity associated with pain. I'd call that a pretty impressive effect, wouldn't you? No, we don't know how it works. But it's absolutely real and is a unique, distinct phenomenon, and most definitely not simply a measurement artifact.
Just do a reinstall. I put a fresh copy of 9.10 on my laptop and everything worked straight out of the box, just like Jaunty. My only complaint is higher power consumption... other than that, it works great.
For the record, I really really do like piracy. It means I get the content in a format I want, whenever I want it, with the freedom to watch it on whatever device I want to watch it on.
Frankly, if the studios would give me the option of buying an unencumbered copy of their product in a standard format (H.264 encoded AVI would be fine) at a decent price via an easy-to-use online outlet where I could max out my bandwidth, damn right I'd use it (particularly for lesser-known content that's tough to find via bittorrent). But it doesn't exist. So, until then, I pirate. If that makes me a bad person, well fuck it, I really don't give a crap.
Yeah, except it isn't open. Thanks, but I prefer to go with a solution that I can hack, and these days, that means XBMC or Myth.
Noooo... their system is built to brute-force passwords. That has basically nothing at all to do with cracking an SSL session.
See, SSL uses asymmetric encryption to generate a large-ish session key between two parties, which can then be used in conjunction with a symmetric cipher to protect the session. So, while brute-forcing passwords is really just a matter of throwing hardware at the problem, brute-forcing an SSL session key likely requires more energy than is available in the known universe, which means you're forced to find a weakness in the cipher that you can exploit to reduce the computational complexity of the problem.
That's easy to say when you haven't had your life savings wiped-out, or previous years of your life spent in prison, as a result of these illegal searches. Those people want justice for the harm caused to them, not Obama's "jus'fuhgedd'abou'it" platitudes.
Yeah, I never said I agreed with the man. :) I'm just telling you what Obama has been saying from the get-go. He has *never* said he would prosecute those involved in the wiretapping program. The quote selected by the OP reflects that. Rather, his public statements regarding the previous administration have *always* been along the lines of "we should be looking forward, not backward, upwards, not forwards, and always twirling twirling twirling towards freedom!".
So if any of this surprises you, you simply haven't been paying attention.
I'm don't think it is fundamentally broken, I think that it just doesn't scale up to the size of the country. We should have long ago scaled out rather than up.
I'm sorry, but that's a flat out bullshit excuse. The difference between 30M and 300M, when it comes to election dynamics, is minimal.
The real problem, in the US, is that according to the courts, money == speech, and the electoral system only allows for two parties. The result is literally legalized bribery and corruption (in the form of "campaign contributions"), where the two dominant players can't be removed from power.
No, for the US government to function again, it deeply needs campaign finance reform, stronger ethics laws, and a change in it's electoral system. Until those things happened, I'm sorry, but the US is destined for fascism disguised as a poorly functioning democracy.
Why? Because they're being more regulated, more taxed, more taken over by the government?
Make no mistake. The US government is currently structured the way it is because it works well for business. It certainly has nothing to do with what people actually want (one need only look at the public option in the healthcare bill to see that... >60% of the US public want it, and yet it's all but dead).
I never said it was okay. But there's a *vast* chasm between endorsing, and continuing, illegal wiretapping activities, and refusing to prosecute previous lawbreakers. The latter is US tradition, and goes back at least to Nixon, and probably much further, particularly when state secrets are in play.
In short: In a case like this, you should've expected little else. To do so his hilariously naive, not to mention indicative of a supreme ignorance of US history.
I agree with your view of a hybrid system, but lost you at the "Americans can't seem to figure it out" schtick. Please, Canuck, it's getting old hearing Canadians generalize like this. I'd guess that 30-40% of us *do* get it, it's the red state retards and the rabid anti-capitalists that can't figure it out.
Heh, no offense, but if 60-70% of a population fits a given trait, then I'd say the generalization is sufficiently valid. ;)
That said, when I said "Americans can't seem to figure it out", by it, I meant "how to build a working hybridized, socialized system". And, again, I think the reason for that is because the American political system is so deeply, fundamentally broken, thanks to institutionalized bribery and corruption, that any attempts to create such a system are corrupted by corporate influence. Worse, the very fact that the US system of government is deeply *deeply* flawed means that more and more people are being trained to distrust, and even fear, government, which further destroys any chance for meaningful reform.
OTOH, the corporatists must be *loving* it.
The law is not a matter of opinion. The law is clear. Warrantless wiretaps are illegal, and anyone who endorses them is a criminal. First it was Bush who was the criminal, now AG Holder, and if Obama supports his AG then he too will be a criminal. The law is the law.
Well, it's a good thing neither Obama nor his AG are "endoring" warrantless wiretapping.
What they're doing is blocking the prosecution of past wiretapping activities based on the state secrets privilege.
But don't let the facts get in the way of your frothing.
The quote "since going forward would compromise "ongoing intelligence activities." makes me think the Obama administration is still doing this.
Not necessarily. For example, suppose the Bush administration was tracking the activities of terrorist group X, and doing so using warrantless wiretaps. Obama takes over, cancels the wiretapping program, but continues to investigate terrorist group X using other means. Well, now, if a trial about warrantless wiretapping goes forward, it's possible that sensitive information about the investigation of terrorist group X will be exposed, despite that being an "ongoing intelligence activity".
Now, the other side..the people who actually think Socialism can work even though it has never before and big Government can solve our problems, have their own rabid beliefs.
Umm, just FYI, as a Canadian who is perfectly happy living in a nation that most Americans would consider virtually communist, I have to disagree rather strongly with this. And I'm sure your average European would agree with me.
Socialism, hybridized with a liberal democracy and a free (but regulated) market *does* work, and works every single day all over the world. Just because Americans can't seem to figure it out, doesn't mean the idea is flawed. It just means the American system of government is so fundamentally fucked up it's hamstrung from the get-go.
To be clear, I'm not trying to apologize for Obama, but you should pay very close attention to what that says:
Note, there is nothing in there about allowing existing lawsuits to go forward in order to punish those who violated the rights of Americans during the previous administration. In fact, Obama has stated, time after time, that he feels we should all just, you know, move on and get over it...
Thank you thank you thank you! Christ, I spent *years* trying to remember the name of that damn show!
Hilarious! But the least you could do is cite the original source. Well, unless your goal was uncredited plagiarism, in which case, bravo, mission accomplished!
Just my opinion, I'm not right or wrong but thats how I feel about it. If you enjoy these books thats great, different strokes for different folks, but this is a big non-story to me
Well, isn't it nice of you, then, to take some precious time out of your day to comment on this non-story...
USB 3.0 does away with polling and introduces an interrupt-based transfer model, so CPU usage should no longer be an issue.