Fair use is a defence. It doesn't come into play until after lawyers are hired and court is attended. A DMCA exemption also doesn't automatically make something legal - it's only an exemption from the DMCA, not plain old-fashioned copyright law.
The whole point of a public key is that it's public. The bank doesn't need to give you the key on a USB stick - they can just put it on their website. If someone actually tries to impersonate a bank website, then you can let loose the lawyers of war.
It's hard to measure. It's hard even when looking at simple retail issues - how many downloaders would buy it? But when you try to factor in things like reduced TV viewership lowering the value of advertising time, it soon reaches the point where you can just make up any number you want.
And your description reminds me of the websites that promise to give you drivers, only to instead lead you into a maze of search pages that find other search engines, all laden with ads, through which you quest in the slender hope that the next link may be to an actual download to make your old hardware work.
There are a lot of pirate services operating under the radar - just a few tens of users, but very dedicated ones. I have also heard of (and once actually found) super-seedboxes hosted in IPv6 space only on academic networks. The old tradition of the dorm pirate network scaled up. The enforcement people don't monitor IPv6 yet, as there is hardly anyone there.
If it were just a matter of electrical connections, that wouldn't be hard - you can address that space easily, if you don't need to write it all at once. The problem I see is durability. Wallpaper takes kicks and hits, nails being driven through it for shelves and pictures, knocks from sharp-cornered furniture and thrown objects. So to be practical, this possible future-wallpaper needs to be able to keep on working even if someone knocks a hole in it. All electrical connections would need to be massively redundant, and the circuitry built in able to route around damaged sections while keeping the down-area to no more than a few centimeters from the site of the damage.
How big can these e-paper displays be made, and how cheap? I rather like the idea of e-wallpaper. Not only would it allow for instant redecoration of a room, but you could use them as giant wall displays for reading news or showing alerts, and have the option of instantly changing themes for visitors or special occasions. Just need to make e-ink displays better until they are cheaper, bigger, and durable enough to withstand a few pieces of furniture banging into them over the years.
It can get messy sometimes when there are multible trademark holders. The WWF (wrestling) and the WWF (wildlife) ended up in court over the rights to wwf.com and.org. Then there are some popular business names - there must be thousands called 'phoenix' because I've got a taxi company and two takeaways in my local area using that one.
They got the business because they were the company that proposed it. He who writes the proposal, gets the contract. They also spent years in court fighting for approval - the whole affair got rather dirty. Long story short: ICANN rejected the proposal, but there was widespread suspicion that they were pressured by the US DOC (This being during the Dubya years). ICM appealed, and won the right to resubmit. They resubmitted, and that time it got through.
That would be a couple of hundred bucks with renewal (Either annual or three-year I imagine). Still nothing to a megacorp, yes. But to a small business or a startup, that can be significent.
And if it's that valuable, reclamation. You'd have to put some type of covering over the plants to prevent the soil being contaminated by salty ocean spray, so why not just enclose in poly-tents? Then the plants suck water through the roots, it goes into contained vapor through transpiration, you condense it back into water. It wouldn't quite be a closed cycle (Have to get in there to plant/harvest/fertilise/etc) and there would be a few leaks, but it would still reduce water needs significantly.
Exactly. You can only see the dystopian aspects from the outside. The people of the BNW society would consider us barbaric, uncontrolled animals. Savages. Just as we would consider them to be willingly oppressed slaves to the system.
Let's check the map. Here's an easy one: http://www.mapsofworld.com/images/middle-east-map.jpg Don't forget Egypt - they are just off the edge there, but certainly a significent player in the politics of the region. So what do we see?
First off, you see Saudi Arabia. It's huge. It's massive. It dominates the map. Ok, it's largely desert, but it's still a bloody big country by middle-eastern standards. If you want to talk human rights issues, Saudi Arabia is the very definition of an oppressive islamic theocracy. That's a country where it's not just illegal for a woman to go to school, it's illegal for her to so much as leave her house without permission from the man in charge of her life. A country which, once a year, starts throwing anyone who sells red items in jail - just to make sure that the Christian tradition of valantines day doesn't get imported. Nor is just just religious - they are almost as good at political oppression. Next up? Iran, second largest. In terms of oppression, they aren't *quite* up there with Saudi Arabia, but the are in the same league. Plus they also have semi-open ambitions of getting nuclear weaponry too, whereas Saudi Arabia is content to fight through the comparatively peaceful means of economics and propaganda. Third in the importance rankings, and we've got Iraq. You can't really rank them right now, as they are in the process of regaining control of their own country and prior to that were under the total control of one person. It wouldn't be fair to pass judgement. It certainly isn't looking hopeful though, with their new constitution already making it quite clear that women are to be considered one level above property. We're down to the bit-players now. Syria, Jordan, Yemen, Oman. In human rights terms? Better. But still not good. Gender quality is still a distant prospect, non-Muslims face severe discrimination. The UAE does fair a little better - they actually have achieved a fairly decent standard of gender equality, religious freedom, etc. It didn't come easy, and they really don't have any power in the region beyond the massive economic clout that their oil reserves give.
So inconclusion: There are Good states in the middle east, and there are Bad states... but all the big ones are very, very Bad.
Some of us are more than happy to pay to support the BBC. They actually provide some good programs, and their documentories are some of the best in the world. Unlike the commercial broadcasters, they don't have to dumb things down to achieve mass-appeal and maximum ad revenue.
Brave New World showed a society controlled by luxury and trivia - the bread and circuses approach. Rather than keep people in their assigned place through the threat of violence, BNWs model kept people in their place by making them so happy there that they would not want to consider rebellion. The system gave them food, comfort, a culture of sexual liberation, and all the shallow and vapid entertainment they could ever want - even the promise of a recreational drug to relieve any feelings of futility coming from living a life pre-scripted by the government. As dystopias go, it's one of the better ones - even those who are most 'oppressed,' the deltas, are manufactured and conditioned in such a manner that they are happy. There are almost no need to stop people from rejecting the society of that world, because very few people had any reason to.
There is an inverse law: Whenever those wanting to restrict rights mention pedophiles, they win automatically. It's an unbeatable argument, because no matter how stupid their proposal may be few people of any influence will dare to criticise it for fear of being seen as endangering children.
Whereas here in the UK, we replace webpages with 404 errors so that not only are they censored, but most viewers wouldn't realise the censorship was occuring.
I find this applies best to gun control. They lived in a time when the rifled barrel was known, but yet to see mass production, and there were no bullets. When they wrote about the right to bear arms, they were not considering that today we have combat shotguns that can take a door of it's hinges in two shots, and can carry twenty cartridges in their semi-automatic barrels - and still be so light that a reasonably trained person can duel-wield.
That might be what they say they want, but American politics is a game of factions. The tea party movement is so intimatly tied to the religious right that there is, for practical purposes, no distinguishing them. If you take a group of self-identified tea-party supporters, you'd probably find that upwards of 95% of them want a federal ban on gay marriage, the ten commandments in every courthouse, Christian prayer in schools, criminalisation of abortion with the absolute narrowist of exceptions, and all the other positions you know to associate.
The religious right and the tea party both know that only in unity can they stand up to their shared nemesis, the liberals.
The US supports Israel because it's a state with a good diplomatic relationship and a poor human rights record in a region full of states that consider 'death to the western devils' to be a good basis for foreign policy and 'human right' just a specification of which hand they need to cut off a thief first.
You forgot the bit about getting to the far-away access point via public transport or taxi paid for with cash. If you are leaking something that important, there are probably only a few thousand suspects at most - and the investigator will be getting information from numberplate-reading camera to see where they all went, and checking financial records for purchasing of tickets, looking for any suspicious journeys.
Not everyone has reason to be that paranoid, and I think most leakers hugely overestimate the importance of their data and the effort that will be spent to find them. In the case of something like the cable leaks though, panaoia is justified.
Slashdot Mirror
Fair use is a defence. It doesn't come into play until after lawyers are hired and court is attended. A DMCA exemption also doesn't automatically make something legal - it's only an exemption from the DMCA, not plain old-fashioned copyright law.
You mean copy the ROMs from the hardware without the permission of the copyright holder? No, that's still piracy.
The whole point of a public key is that it's public. The bank doesn't need to give you the key on a USB stick - they can just put it on their website. If someone actually tries to impersonate a bank website, then you can let loose the lawyers of war.
It's hard to measure. It's hard even when looking at simple retail issues - how many downloaders would buy it? But when you try to factor in things like reduced TV viewership lowering the value of advertising time, it soon reaches the point where you can just make up any number you want.
And your description reminds me of the websites that promise to give you drivers, only to instead lead you into a maze of search pages that find other search engines, all laden with ads, through which you quest in the slender hope that the next link may be to an actual download to make your old hardware work.
There are a lot of pirate services operating under the radar - just a few tens of users, but very dedicated ones. I have also heard of (and once actually found) super-seedboxes hosted in IPv6 space only on academic networks. The old tradition of the dorm pirate network scaled up. The enforcement people don't monitor IPv6 yet, as there is hardly anyone there.
The polygraph doesn't work very well. It's better than just an unaided human, but it's still not even close to infallable.
If it were just a matter of electrical connections, that wouldn't be hard - you can address that space easily, if you don't need to write it all at once. The problem I see is durability. Wallpaper takes kicks and hits, nails being driven through it for shelves and pictures, knocks from sharp-cornered furniture and thrown objects. So to be practical, this possible future-wallpaper needs to be able to keep on working even if someone knocks a hole in it. All electrical connections would need to be massively redundant, and the circuitry built in able to route around damaged sections while keeping the down-area to no more than a few centimeters from the site of the damage.
How big can these e-paper displays be made, and how cheap? I rather like the idea of e-wallpaper. Not only would it allow for instant redecoration of a room, but you could use them as giant wall displays for reading news or showing alerts, and have the option of instantly changing themes for visitors or special occasions. Just need to make e-ink displays better until they are cheaper, bigger, and durable enough to withstand a few pieces of furniture banging into them over the years.
A quick google, and.... yes, there is indeed a porn actress going by the stage name Phoenix. Plus the furrys too, of course.
It can get messy sometimes when there are multible trademark holders. The WWF (wrestling) and the WWF (wildlife) ended up in court over the rights to wwf.com and .org. Then there are some popular business names - there must be thousands called 'phoenix' because I've got a taxi company and two takeaways in my local area using that one.
They got the business because they were the company that proposed it. He who writes the proposal, gets the contract. They also spent years in court fighting for approval - the whole affair got rather dirty. Long story short: ICANN rejected the proposal, but there was widespread suspicion that they were pressured by the US DOC (This being during the Dubya years). ICM appealed, and won the right to resubmit. They resubmitted, and that time it got through.
That would be a couple of hundred bucks with renewal (Either annual or three-year I imagine). Still nothing to a megacorp, yes. But to a small business or a startup, that can be significent.
And if it's that valuable, reclamation. You'd have to put some type of covering over the plants to prevent the soil being contaminated by salty ocean spray, so why not just enclose in poly-tents? Then the plants suck water through the roots, it goes into contained vapor through transpiration, you condense it back into water. It wouldn't quite be a closed cycle (Have to get in there to plant/harvest/fertilise/etc) and there would be a few leaks, but it would still reduce water needs significantly.
Exactly. You can only see the dystopian aspects from the outside. The people of the BNW society would consider us barbaric, uncontrolled animals. Savages. Just as we would consider them to be willingly oppressed slaves to the system.
Let's check the map. Here's an easy one: http://www.mapsofworld.com/images/middle-east-map.jpg
Don't forget Egypt - they are just off the edge there, but certainly a significent player in the politics of the region. So what do we see?
First off, you see Saudi Arabia. It's huge. It's massive. It dominates the map. Ok, it's largely desert, but it's still a bloody big country by middle-eastern standards. If you want to talk human rights issues, Saudi Arabia is the very definition of an oppressive islamic theocracy. That's a country where it's not just illegal for a woman to go to school, it's illegal for her to so much as leave her house without permission from the man in charge of her life. A country which, once a year, starts throwing anyone who sells red items in jail - just to make sure that the Christian tradition of valantines day doesn't get imported. Nor is just just religious - they are almost as good at political oppression.
Next up? Iran, second largest. In terms of oppression, they aren't *quite* up there with Saudi Arabia, but the are in the same league. Plus they also have semi-open ambitions of getting nuclear weaponry too, whereas Saudi Arabia is content to fight through the comparatively peaceful means of economics and propaganda.
Third in the importance rankings, and we've got Iraq. You can't really rank them right now, as they are in the process of regaining control of their own country and prior to that were under the total control of one person. It wouldn't be fair to pass judgement. It certainly isn't looking hopeful though, with their new constitution already making it quite clear that women are to be considered one level above property.
We're down to the bit-players now. Syria, Jordan, Yemen, Oman. In human rights terms? Better. But still not good. Gender quality is still a distant prospect, non-Muslims face severe discrimination. The UAE does fair a little better - they actually have achieved a fairly decent standard of gender equality, religious freedom, etc. It didn't come easy, and they really don't have any power in the region beyond the massive economic clout that their oil reserves give.
So inconclusion: There are Good states in the middle east, and there are Bad states... but all the big ones are very, very Bad.
Some of us are more than happy to pay to support the BBC. They actually provide some good programs, and their documentories are some of the best in the world. Unlike the commercial broadcasters, they don't have to dumb things down to achieve mass-appeal and maximum ad revenue.
The islands were not public knowledge.
Brave New World showed a society controlled by luxury and trivia - the bread and circuses approach. Rather than keep people in their assigned place through the threat of violence, BNWs model kept people in their place by making them so happy there that they would not want to consider rebellion. The system gave them food, comfort, a culture of sexual liberation, and all the shallow and vapid entertainment they could ever want - even the promise of a recreational drug to relieve any feelings of futility coming from living a life pre-scripted by the government. As dystopias go, it's one of the better ones - even those who are most 'oppressed,' the deltas, are manufactured and conditioned in such a manner that they are happy. There are almost no need to stop people from rejecting the society of that world, because very few people had any reason to.
Or just look at the image: http://www.recombinantrecords.net/images/2009-05-Amusing-Ourselves-to-Death.png
There is an inverse law: Whenever those wanting to restrict rights mention pedophiles, they win automatically. It's an unbeatable argument, because no matter how stupid their proposal may be few people of any influence will dare to criticise it for fear of being seen as endangering children.
Whereas here in the UK, we replace webpages with 404 errors so that not only are they censored, but most viewers wouldn't realise the censorship was occuring.
Very well. The AA-12. Actually, it's a full auto.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOoUVeyaY_8
I find this applies best to gun control. They lived in a time when the rifled barrel was known, but yet to see mass production, and there were no bullets. When they wrote about the right to bear arms, they were not considering that today we have combat shotguns that can take a door of it's hinges in two shots, and can carry twenty cartridges in their semi-automatic barrels - and still be so light that a reasonably trained person can duel-wield.
That might be what they say they want, but American politics is a game of factions. The tea party movement is so intimatly tied to the religious right that there is, for practical purposes, no distinguishing them. If you take a group of self-identified tea-party supporters, you'd probably find that upwards of 95% of them want a federal ban on gay marriage, the ten commandments in every courthouse, Christian prayer in schools, criminalisation of abortion with the absolute narrowist of exceptions, and all the other positions you know to associate.
The religious right and the tea party both know that only in unity can they stand up to their shared nemesis, the liberals.
The US supports Israel because it's a state with a good diplomatic relationship and a poor human rights record in a region full of states that consider 'death to the western devils' to be a good basis for foreign policy and 'human right' just a specification of which hand they need to cut off a thief first.
You forgot the bit about getting to the far-away access point via public transport or taxi paid for with cash. If you are leaking something that important, there are probably only a few thousand suspects at most - and the investigator will be getting information from numberplate-reading camera to see where they all went, and checking financial records for purchasing of tickets, looking for any suspicious journeys.
Not everyone has reason to be that paranoid, and I think most leakers hugely overestimate the importance of their data and the effort that will be spent to find them. In the case of something like the cable leaks though, panaoia is justified.
They can use their aquired wealth to hire bodyguards.