He's asserting that the consumption of cg child porn increases the market for child porn as a whole, which includes both cg and non-cg. If the cg and non-cg child porn markets were independent, sales of cg child porn would have no effect on the harming of children.
Even if they're not independent (which is probably true), that's a fairly indirect link. You don't see the makers of snack foods lobbying for and end on the war on drugs because it hurts their business.
I spend most of my time debating creationists, not laypersons who misunderstand quantum physics, but I bet physicists get as tired of shouting "IT DOESN'T WORK LIKE THAT" at people like you as I do at creationists. All the time.
You'll remember Feynman once compared our understanding of quantum physics to measuring the distance between New York and Los Angeles to within the width of a human hair. I'd say anything with that kind of predictive power is probably accurate enough to trust your life with. That's actually quantum electrodynamics. QED was "solved" by Feynman using approximations that involve shady cancellations of infinite quantities. It's accepted as an approximate solution, but the quality of the approximation is good. Simple quantum mechanics, like what quantum cryptography is based on, is much better-understood.
Of course, with encrypted data, you need to ensure that nobody in the future will be able to defeat the cryptography.
The process of quantum "cryptography" is such that you need to ensure that nobody *now* (when you are transmitting the data) will be able to eavesdrop successfully.
You're mixing two ideas. You do need a good antenna to get good reception. You also need a good antenna to transmit effectively, which is what you seem to be talking about.
However, implementing radio hardware in software will not remove the requirement of needing an effective antenna; this requirement is physical. Further, triangulation is fairly accurate -- unless the person is really clever, you should be able to find the transmitter by triangulation even if they have a very difficult-to-spot antenna.
While this is interesting software, as far as I know, the hardware necessary to transmit/receive on arbitrary frequencies is not legally controlled. Nor is it difficult to build. (I don't know if it's legal to sell.)
Because there's no way to predict in advance what something that we have absolutely no experience with (life that is in no way like any form of life on Earth) would be like. As such, looking for radically different life is like looking for "anything" -- it's not very productive.
No, lightning is less of a threat than pedophilia. You just threw that reference in, with a "statistically speaking", without bothering to look up the statistics.
No, "intent to arouse" refers to the intent of the person taking the picture, not the potential effect on someone who views the picture in the future. In your scenario, the image does not qualify as child porn. (Unless, of course, it was distributed on the Internet with the intent that it be downloaded by pedos.)
Frankly, it sounds like you're inventing this with no evidence. I'm not even familiar with a case that's been brought against a corporation by an OSS group that's gone to trial.
The CEO bit is some misinformation, though -- part of the point of a corporation is to limit liability. If a corporation was responsible for criminal acts, the investors and most employees (at least, those not directly involved in the wrongdoing) would be free of liability.
You have to do one of the three, not all of the three. As such, copyright infringement where you profit from the result always qualifies, regardless of the value of the material.
Giving something away for free is only criminal if its value is over $1000 (total) or it's prerelease. So giving away free software against the copyright agreement after it's been released will never be criminal, but using free software in something that is for profit is.
There have been a lot of advances in hot fusion -- just not enough to make engineering a fusion power plant worthwhile. Nobody has sufficient economic incentive to make a working fusion plant.
Very odd. To be fair, I haven't tested it on a Mac. My SWT applications run just fine on the Mac, but who knows. Runs fine for me on XP and Ubuntu, though. Blue-screening would be a definite downside. (That's not really Azureus's fault, though. Generally Java programs that fail do so very gracefully. The Java VM, on the other hand...)
That's very vulnerable to multiple versions, losing information, wasting bandwidth, and poisoning.
Basically this system is to make a fancy decentralized way of having "the network" as a whole maintain a giant list of all torrent files. You could actually emulate your solution (have clients download all torrent files available) by using a neighbor-discovery system to essentially "search for everything". But most people are going to want to have effective searching without downloading a large metadata file that probably contains a lot of junk.
There are multiple solutions to having no servers, no trackers, and a decentralized system. There is still the "bootstrap problem", where you need to find some nodes that are members of the network to connect.
Gnutella is one decentralized system. They moved to semi-centralized to efficiency. Freenet is decentralized. The decentralization approach here is most like distributed hash tables (I think the Wikipedia entry is pretty decent).
I'm no Azureus fan, but once this tool gets to be a bit more refined, they are very well-situated to deal with the possibility of most major torrent sites being shut down. You can route data over I2P and Tor, there are decentralized tracking schemes, and there are decentralized searching schemes.
No. The decentralized-tracker problem is a ton easier than this problem, and there are already multiple decentralized-tracker solutions. Decentralized trackers are just done with simple distributed hash tables. What they've done is make a fancier DHT system for finding "near matches".
It seems to work the other way. It'll get shut down about a year after a better solution is developed and about a month before everyone starts using that better solution.
Slashdot Mirror
He's asserting that the consumption of cg child porn increases the market for child porn as a whole, which includes both cg and non-cg. If the cg and non-cg child porn markets were independent, sales of cg child porn would have no effect on the harming of children.
Even if they're not independent (which is probably true), that's a fairly indirect link. You don't see the makers of snack foods lobbying for and end on the war on drugs because it hurts their business.
Ken Thompson? Of Unix and C fame?
Or do you mean Jack Thompson?
Of course, with encrypted data, you need to ensure that nobody in the future will be able to defeat the cryptography.
The process of quantum "cryptography" is such that you need to ensure that nobody *now* (when you are transmitting the data) will be able to eavesdrop successfully.
You're mixing two ideas. You do need a good antenna to get good reception. You also need a good antenna to transmit effectively, which is what you seem to be talking about.
However, implementing radio hardware in software will not remove the requirement of needing an effective antenna; this requirement is physical. Further, triangulation is fairly accurate -- unless the person is really clever, you should be able to find the transmitter by triangulation even if they have a very difficult-to-spot antenna.
While this is interesting software, as far as I know, the hardware necessary to transmit/receive on arbitrary frequencies is not legally controlled. Nor is it difficult to build. (I don't know if it's legal to sell.)
They're not actually exposed. What's exposed is a relatively thick layer of plastic that the actual substrate is embedded in.
Fortunately there are protective casings readily and cheaply available for CDs and DVDs when they are not in use.
Because there's no way to predict in advance what something that we have absolutely no experience with (life that is in no way like any form of life on Earth) would be like. As such, looking for radically different life is like looking for "anything" -- it's not very productive.
No logic will stand in the way of your desire to be offended? :-)
There are documented cases of exactly what the article refers to.
No, lightning is less of a threat than pedophilia. You just threw that reference in, with a "statistically speaking", without bothering to look up the statistics.
No, "intent to arouse" refers to the intent of the person taking the picture, not the potential effect on someone who views the picture in the future. In your scenario, the image does not qualify as child porn. (Unless, of course, it was distributed on the Internet with the intent that it be downloaded by pedos.)
Your $1 version would undoubtedly not survive the trip to and landing on Mars and be counted on to work without further human intervention.
Believe it or not, building devices to be transported to and function on other planets does take a fair bit of work.
Frankly, it sounds like you're inventing this with no evidence. I'm not even familiar with a case that's been brought against a corporation by an OSS group that's gone to trial.
The CEO bit is some misinformation, though -- part of the point of a corporation is to limit liability. If a corporation was responsible for criminal acts, the investors and most employees (at least, those not directly involved in the wrongdoing) would be free of liability.
You have to do one of the three, not all of the three. As such, copyright infringement where you profit from the result always qualifies, regardless of the value of the material.
Giving something away for free is only criminal if its value is over $1000 (total) or it's prerelease. So giving away free software against the copyright agreement after it's been released will never be criminal, but using free software in something that is for profit is.
Nuclear reactions, however, are not chemical reactions. In a chemical reaction, 2H + 2H = 4He wouldn't be acceptable, either.
There have been a lot of advances in hot fusion -- just not enough to make engineering a fusion power plant worthwhile. Nobody has sufficient economic incentive to make a working fusion plant.
Very odd. To be fair, I haven't tested it on a Mac. My SWT applications run just fine on the Mac, but who knows. Runs fine for me on XP and Ubuntu, though. Blue-screening would be a definite downside. (That's not really Azureus's fault, though. Generally Java programs that fail do so very gracefully. The Java VM, on the other hand...)
What's your concern with it being Java? I don't see any performance difference between Azureus and other popular BitTorrent clients.
That's very vulnerable to multiple versions, losing information, wasting bandwidth, and poisoning.
Basically this system is to make a fancy decentralized way of having "the network" as a whole maintain a giant list of all torrent files. You could actually emulate your solution (have clients download all torrent files available) by using a neighbor-discovery system to essentially "search for everything". But most people are going to want to have effective searching without downloading a large metadata file that probably contains a lot of junk.
I wholly encourage validating my statements yourself.
:p
However, by now I have read the article, their comments on the implementation, and a little bit of their code.
There are multiple solutions to having no servers, no trackers, and a decentralized system. There is still the "bootstrap problem", where you need to find some nodes that are members of the network to connect.
Gnutella is one decentralized system. They moved to semi-centralized to efficiency. Freenet is decentralized. The decentralization approach here is most like distributed hash tables (I think the Wikipedia entry is pretty decent).
I'm no Azureus fan, but once this tool gets to be a bit more refined, they are very well-situated to deal with the possibility of most major torrent sites being shut down. You can route data over I2P and Tor, there are decentralized tracking schemes, and there are decentralized searching schemes.
No. The decentralized-tracker problem is a ton easier than this problem, and there are already multiple decentralized-tracker solutions. Decentralized trackers are just done with simple distributed hash tables. What they've done is make a fancier DHT system for finding "near matches".
No. All they have to do is use the same network the "pirates" are using and find people willing to send them data.
It seems to work the other way. It'll get shut down about a year after a better solution is developed and about a month before everyone starts using that better solution.