I'm not to sure on the exact specifications of the speedpass system, but it would seem to me that anything that can transmit a signal to another unit (the reader) would also, in theory, be able to transmit the signal to an interceptor. It's only a matter of time before someone thinks up a way in which to pick up the speedpass xfers and reprogram/program 'new' ones with the information from others. These watches would mean that people could snipe the information in other locations (the office... or any other place someone might wear a watch, but normally not have their speedpass button available) and not just at gas stations. Anyone?
if we could use this newly found phenomina to help educate thoes coming up in the world (as well as thoes already here) more about the science of the stars. Getting people interested in things like this doesn't happen to easy now-a-days, tell your friends and neighbors, get them to see it them-selves if you can.
the might have just chosen to call it an iCEBOX because it's a box, they wanted to use jargon (i-). and being for the kitchen wanted to give it some sort of name that would fit in with the rest of your everyday stuff. Ice, commonly found in freezers, or an ice-box, a name for a freezer type thing; iCEBOX or i-cebox, fits right in. Follow?
What a great way to get some user-not-so-friendly words to be spoken in court...
"In the manner of Fuck-general-motors{dot}com linking...."
I would have loved to have been there to see the justices face.
Ok so to my understanding M.L. comes in the form of a virus.... Wouldn't that be considered on the same grounds as other virus' that have been released using major holes etc...?
Granted we're all going to hear about how they'll only use it with a warrant... but just the fact that they can use it in the first place, warant or not, should be enough to raise some serious questions. This is more along the lines of 1984 than Brave New World by the way...
What's to stop some random FBI hot-shot from logging keys of random people just to see what he/she can find?
The one good thing now is that since they have admited to it's existance, now it should be slightly harder to implement, and also have a few more sets of eyes watching the watchers.
Oh yes, I almost forgot... now inherancy must be expalined too... To be inherant, it must be self-evident and have no need to be explained. Taking into account the fact that the framers of the U.S. Constitution felt the need to actually say that these truths were/are self-evident suguests that they feared that in actuallity these truths weren't so clear/inherant. Need me to explain further?
To me this seems to be a good case of an attempt to give credit where credit is due. Nothing like having the satisfaction that thousands, if not millions (or i guess billions) of people will now understand the origins of some of our vernacular.
This could come in handy for future generations as well... An interesting insight to add to analyze within the context of the "Whorfian Hypothesis" Having to do with studying how a language evolves, and becomes structured, even words that were 'made-up' have a bit of relevance to them. When a new word is formed it must have a base (to allow for proper edict realizations) or more specifically a history. That's sort-of how the Klingon Language got it's gears going; taking the words that were used (in context - disecting sentences) and applying the rules to form the rest of what has become Klingon. English (even bastardized American English [the sort I use]) follows the same sort of process.
I would guess that this new attempt of Oxford's will be even more revolutionary than many percieve at this time.
You are correct in that the Bill of Rights in the Constitution only acknowledges these existing rights, and i'm not arguing the language and issues with the construction of the basic tennants of the U.S. rights structure. What I am saying is that by even allowing these issues to be brought to court it admits that there is a question of if the rights that are extended in the BoR are really there. Sure the way the BoR was structured may not be harmfull, but the ability to even have a need to question these rights is flawed. And beyond the BoR the constitution is full of granting rights....
This issue (libel) comes essentially down to if the journalist/news-source knew it was false to begin with. Also: people in the public domain (in the pulic's eye, or people with a status, as granted by the public, elevated even slightly from the general populus) are not always protected against libel and slander, infact in cases such as this it has been ruled on prior occasion that a person who has a public image and is slandered or libeled against should be able to conceivably defend themselves on their own in public. (thank you U.S. Consitutional law class)
Why must we have laws taht grant us rights and freedoms? I know that question is above, but i will elaborate on why it must be asked.
Does anyone feel the need to have a law granting us the right to have qwerty keyboards? More than likely not. The reasoning, it could be assumed, is that we already have that right and there is no need to make a law saying so. If a person really has the right to be treated equal, or the right to free speach... WHY does there need to be a law that says it is so? Granted there might be people that would infringe on these rights, but by setting the example that we must give these rights and that they are not explicitly given anyway goes to show that we DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHTS TO BEGIN WITH.
Is a law saying it is wrong (thus illegal) to kill a person needed for our society (as a majority) to actually believe it's wrong? Furthermore, I am willing to conceid that there might be people (such as my mother) who's only excuse for following some laws is merely that they exist, but does that make the laws (or the things the laws are supposed to protect) any more or less valid?
The ruling that online press too have freedom of the press just shows us that it isn't a right, and could be (and in the future, might be) taken away.
non-sig: Let's ban all books, and call it free speach!
Be concerned about places where the fiber woul;d have to take a bend (elbow).... the curve will upset the full potenial of bandwidth that can be carried over the fiber (light likes to travel in straight lines). The way that a signle gets around bend in fiber is that the light-beams refract/reflect (i can't remember, i'm dumb) off the sides of the cabling repeatedly until they can get back to what they like. this added latency will have only a minor draw on what it can fully hold, but it will none-the-less have an effect.
Dropping wire down the inside of a wall isn't a hard task (even with drywall up); all that needs to be done is to first find a spot (inbetween studs) that you want the wire to come thru, put a hole in the wall (small hole, about the size of an american quarter), get above the wall (this is hard with a ceiling, but i have seen it done from crawl-spaces) to the desired location along with a nut and some string (fishing line works great).
Tie the nut to the line, and lower it down to aprox. the location of the hole. Tie the other end of the line to your wire/fiber etc... and get yo' ass back to your hole. Now fish (thru the hole) your line/nut and pull it out of the hole. Eventually your wire will come following along. So hypothetically, if you didn't lay fiber now and wanted to put it down later (or whatever other new fangled cable types we discover in the next 10-20 years) all you would need is to have some way of getting above the walls.
As far as co-running your lines with the phone lines, you might want to inform anyone else working on your house as to what you've put in, you wouldn't want to later discover that some phone-co employee has removed your extra wires thinking that they were mistakenly laid phone line. (get the idea?)
I'd say run fiber now, it's fairly cheap and even if you never hook it up to a computer you could always have cool looking dots of light scattered about your house to really confuse others in the dark.
As far as filtering and time zones go:
The world has twenty-four timezones; if, by some messed up sort of complete world agreement, Germany begot enforcement from other countries would it be enforced on a continual twenty-four basis? Or would everyone need to filter access at their different, local, times (five hours earlier with eastern standard time, etc)?
This is of course all hypothetical as we all know all world countries interested in filtering pr0n will insist on world enforcement of their own, unique, anti-freedom laws. I mean come on, can anyone see the French in agreance with any law that the United States would ever try to persue?
/philosophy
Anyone remember the movie Hackers? Just a quick ref...
Anyhow it seems as tho if one had a 3-D layout of their computer navigating would be similar to traversing the "real" world. Truely this might be the answer to right-brained computer users. A Left brainer can take the 'standard' gui and use it to the fullest extent as if they were given writen instructions to a new location... Where as a right-brainer type would fair much better off by having a map drawn, or being able to 'walk' around in a city.
Me thinks that the use of a non-traditional navigation device would be in order, something along the lines of a joystick (ideas anyone?), also this would be a great time to switch over to a new keyboard (I loved that pyramid shaped one).. You know, if you're gonna have to re-think the way a computer is used, might as well do it all at once. I'm interested to see how this turns out.
New acronym?: GIDBOS
Graphically Integrated Data Base Operating System
the case decision was that the tribe members could NOT use peyote as the law prohibiting it's use was intended for enfocement among all people, and was not made specificaly to promote or prohibit a specific religion. I don't remember the name of the case but i'll be sure to post it as soon as i look it up.
actually the who religion and constitutionality thing, although you got part of it right, is that No religion can be founded/followed for the specific purpose of violating a law(s). Also that no law specifcaly can be made to inhibit religion. It's a 2 sided sword... however as the intent of the DMCA wasn't to promote or proibit a religion then it is constitutional. Now if somehow we could prove that Microsoft or other companies are religions and that the DMCA was made to directly benifit them we might have some sort of loose (and i use that term strictly) case.
Related: TOOL CD is copy protected too...
on
NSync Copy Protected CD
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Ever since the initial release, (any copy of Tool: Lateralus, that has the correctly spelled title track) the album has been vandalized with the new copy protection (same as the new puff daddy, M. Jackson, and i guess now N*sync). It's not just pop that has been struck with the plauge,
Taco Save us.
Slashdot Mirror
the sheep have started to stray, i wonder if this will catch on like fire or like some underground movement..?
First thing we should be looking at is the credibility.... ok moving on...
Are the steps taken in creating the cloned fetus repeatable?
I've always wondered about finger prints.. perhaps this will shed some light.
just thoughts.
I'm not to sure on the exact specifications of the speedpass system, but it would seem to me that anything that can transmit a signal to another unit (the reader) would also, in theory, be able to transmit the signal to an interceptor. It's only a matter of time before someone thinks up a way in which to pick up the speedpass xfers and reprogram/program 'new' ones with the information from others. These watches would mean that people could snipe the information in other locations (the office... or any other place someone might wear a watch, but normally not have their speedpass button available) and not just at gas stations.
Anyone?
if we could use this newly found phenomina to help educate thoes coming up in the world (as well as thoes already here) more about the science of the stars. Getting people interested in things like this doesn't happen to easy now-a-days, tell your friends and neighbors, get them to see it them-selves if you can.
the might have just chosen to call it an iCEBOX because it's a box, they wanted to use jargon (i-). and being for the kitchen wanted to give it some sort of name that would fit in with the rest of your everyday stuff. Ice, commonly found in freezers, or an ice-box, a name for a freezer type thing; iCEBOX or i-cebox, fits right in. Follow?
What a great way to get some user-not-so-friendly words to be spoken in court...
"In the manner of Fuck-general-motors{dot}com linking...."
I would have loved to have been there to see the justices face.
Ok so to my understanding M.L. comes in the form of a virus.... Wouldn't that be considered on the same grounds as other virus' that have been released using major holes etc...?
Granted we're all going to hear about how they'll only use it with a warrant... but just the fact that they can use it in the first place, warant or not, should be enough to raise some serious questions. This is more along the lines of 1984 than Brave New World by the way...
What's to stop some random FBI hot-shot from logging keys of random people just to see what he/she can find?
The one good thing now is that since they have admited to it's existance, now it should be slightly harder to implement, and also have a few more sets of eyes watching the watchers.
I nomenate CowboyNeil.
Oh yes, I almost forgot... now inherancy must be expalined too... To be inherant, it must be self-evident and have no need to be explained. Taking into account the fact that the framers of the U.S. Constitution felt the need to actually say that these truths were/are self-evident suguests that they feared that in actuallity these truths weren't so clear/inherant. Need me to explain further?
To me this seems to be a good case of an attempt to give credit where credit is due. Nothing like having the satisfaction that thousands, if not millions (or i guess billions) of people will now understand the origins of some of our vernacular.
This could come in handy for future generations as well...
An interesting insight to add to analyze within the context of the "Whorfian Hypothesis"
Having to do with studying how a language evolves, and becomes structured, even words that were 'made-up' have a bit of relevance to them. When a new word is formed it must have a base (to allow for proper edict realizations) or more specifically a history. That's sort-of how the Klingon Language got it's gears going; taking the words that were used (in context - disecting sentences) and applying the rules to form the rest of what has become Klingon. English (even bastardized American English [the sort I use]) follows the same sort of process.
I would guess that this new attempt of Oxford's will be even more revolutionary than many percieve at this time.
You are correct in that the Bill of Rights in the Constitution only acknowledges these existing rights, and i'm not arguing the language and issues with the construction of the basic tennants of the U.S. rights structure. What I am saying is that by even allowing these issues to be brought to court it admits that there is a question of if the rights that are extended in the BoR are really there. Sure the way the BoR was structured may not be harmfull, but the ability to even have a need to question these rights is flawed. And beyond the BoR the constitution is full of granting rights....
This issue (libel) comes essentially down to if the journalist/news-source knew it was false to begin with. Also: people in the public domain (in the pulic's eye, or people with a status, as granted by the public, elevated even slightly from the general populus) are not always protected against libel and slander, infact in cases such as this it has been ruled on prior occasion that a person who has a public image and is slandered or libeled against should be able to conceivably defend themselves on their own in public. (thank you U.S. Consitutional law class)
Why must we have laws taht grant us rights and freedoms? I know that question is above, but i will elaborate on why it must be asked.
Does anyone feel the need to have a law granting us the right to have qwerty keyboards? More than likely not. The reasoning, it could be assumed, is that we already have that right and there is no need to make a law saying so. If a person really has the right to be treated equal, or the right to free speach... WHY does there need to be a law that says it is so? Granted there might be people that would infringe on these rights, but by setting the example that we must give these rights and that they are not explicitly given anyway goes to show that we DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHTS TO BEGIN WITH.
Is a law saying it is wrong (thus illegal) to kill a person needed for our society (as a majority) to actually believe it's wrong? Furthermore, I am willing to conceid that there might be people (such as my mother) who's only excuse for following some laws is merely that they exist, but does that make the laws (or the things the laws are supposed to protect) any more or less valid?
The ruling that online press too have freedom of the press just shows us that it isn't a right, and could be (and in the future, might be) taken away.
non-sig: Let's ban all books, and call it free speach!
Be concerned about places where the fiber woul;d have to take a bend (elbow).... the curve will upset the full potenial of bandwidth that can be carried over the fiber (light likes to travel in straight lines). The way that a signle gets around bend in fiber is that the light-beams refract/reflect (i can't remember, i'm dumb) off the sides of the cabling repeatedly until they can get back to what they like. this added latency will have only a minor draw on what it can fully hold, but it will none-the-less have an effect.
Dropping wire down the inside of a wall isn't a hard task (even with drywall up); all that needs to be done is to first find a spot (inbetween studs) that you want the wire to come thru, put a hole in the wall (small hole, about the size of an american quarter), get above the wall (this is hard with a ceiling, but i have seen it done from crawl-spaces) to the desired location along with a nut and some string (fishing line works great).
Tie the nut to the line, and lower it down to aprox. the location of the hole. Tie the other end of the line to your wire/fiber etc... and get yo' ass back to your hole. Now fish (thru the hole) your line/nut and pull it out of the hole. Eventually your wire will come following along. So hypothetically, if you didn't lay fiber now and wanted to put it down later (or whatever other new fangled cable types we discover in the next 10-20 years) all you would need is to have some way of getting above the walls.
As far as co-running your lines with the phone lines, you might want to inform anyone else working on your house as to what you've put in, you wouldn't want to later discover that some phone-co employee has removed your extra wires thinking that they were mistakenly laid phone line. (get the idea?)
I'd say run fiber now, it's fairly cheap and even if you never hook it up to a computer you could always have cool looking dots of light scattered about your house to really confuse others in the dark.
As far as filtering and time zones go:
The world has twenty-four timezones; if, by some messed up sort of complete world agreement, Germany begot enforcement from other countries would it be enforced on a continual twenty-four basis? Or would everyone need to filter access at their different, local, times (five hours earlier with eastern standard time, etc)?
This is of course all hypothetical as we all know all world countries interested in filtering pr0n will insist on world enforcement of their own, unique, anti-freedom laws. I mean come on, can anyone see the French in agreance with any law that the United States would ever try to persue?
/philosophy
So these things question whether we can proove what type of platform is running?
I'd have to vote for CowBoyNeil!
(maybe for more of a hero type...{grin})
Anyone remember the movie Hackers? Just a quick ref...
Anyhow it seems as tho if one had a 3-D layout of their computer navigating would be similar to traversing the "real" world. Truely this might be the answer to right-brained computer users. A Left brainer can take the 'standard' gui and use it to the fullest extent as if they were given writen instructions to a new location... Where as a right-brainer type would fair much better off by having a map drawn, or being able to 'walk' around in a city.
Me thinks that the use of a non-traditional navigation device would be in order, something along the lines of a joystick (ideas anyone?), also this would be a great time to switch over to a new keyboard (I loved that pyramid shaped one).. You know, if you're gonna have to re-think the way a computer is used, might as well do it all at once. I'm interested to see how this turns out.
New acronym?: GIDBOS
Graphically Integrated Data Base Operating System
the case decision was that the tribe members could NOT use peyote as the law prohibiting it's use was intended for enfocement among all people, and was not made specificaly to promote or prohibit a specific religion. I don't remember the name of the case but i'll be sure to post it as soon as i look it up.
actually the who religion and constitutionality thing, although you got part of it right, is that No religion can be founded/followed for the specific purpose of violating a law(s). Also that no law specifcaly can be made to inhibit religion. It's a 2 sided sword... however as the intent of the DMCA wasn't to promote or proibit a religion then it is constitutional. Now if somehow we could prove that Microsoft or other companies are religions and that the DMCA was made to directly benifit them we might have some sort of loose (and i use that term strictly) case.
Ever since the initial release, (any copy of Tool: Lateralus, that has the correctly spelled title track) the album has been vandalized with the new copy protection (same as the new puff daddy, M. Jackson, and i guess now N*sync). It's not just pop that has been struck with the plauge,
Taco Save us.