Human rights? How does restricting people from looking at porn in a library have anything to do with human rights? I just don't think it is anywhere said that we should be able to look at porn in a library or school.
Besides, the report did say that the panel "recommends that government should encourage the use of filtering technology to protect children from the Internet's seedier neighborhoods." Why they're not applying this to porn, though, seems kinda confusing. I wouldn't be any happier about my kid looking at porn at school than I would about learning how to make a bomb.
Besides, even if looking at porn at a public institution was a human right, congress is still going to pass this anyway. Just because their panel failed to recommend it, doesn't mean that congress will follow that lack of advice.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
During my time at Michigan State, they adopted a policy similar to this one. At first they required laptops for all incoming students, but then they decided that was probably inconvenient for many people, and instead just required a computer of some sort. I think that program starts this year, if I'm not mistaken.
If everybody had the time and the desire to learn how to use one properly (not to mention the money to buy one), it could be great. But, in reality, a lot of people are going to be wasting a lot of money. There are still just too many people that are either incapable or consider themselves incapable of learning how to use a computer even close to it's full potential. I think for now they (universities) should worry about replacing the old 486's they still have in many of their computer labs. That way students can use them as they need them, and don't have to worry about upkeep. And seriously, what would an astro-turf major, or a hotel & restaurant management major *really* need a computer for??
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
Okay, seriously...+1 insightful? I am not posting in support of any candidate. I just think statements like that are really stupid. People call bush an idiot, and people call gore a habitual liar. And it seems that whatever party you belong to, that ususally determines which of those statements you agree with. It's ridiculous. Not so much that you made that post -- I expect that kind of worthless crap from time to time -- but that somebody actually modded it up as insightful? What the hell kind of moderation is that? How about modding it down as offtopic or as flamebait or even as a troll? The point of this news item was to talk about the politicians' views of the internet and the entertainment industry, not to bash any particular candidate. Do you think gore or cheney or lieberman are any different than bush in that he's ignorant as to the true nature of the internet and what it "causes" people to do? I don't think so. So why don't you think about what your motives are for modding up such a stupid useless statement before you do it next time.
btw, kudos to the one person that did mod it -1 flamebait.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
I'm not worried about the ethics of it or any copyright violations that it may involve. I just know that it irritated the CRAP out of me every time I'd go to a lecture and there was somebody shoving a flyer in my face urging me to take notes for them so they could sell them. And of course, when the class was over, there'd be hundreds of flyers littering the floor and the hallways. And of course there's the 50 people that insist on crumpling them up loudly while class is in session. That always pissed me off. It would have been nice not to have been bothered by those people and their flyers.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
Although I'm not completely satisfied with icq, they have been pretty good about adding features and coming out with new versions fairly frequently. What will the new product be like, though? Are they going to take icq and "dumb it down" for aol users?
I admit I've never used AIM, but I've seen others use it and it kinda reminds me of yahoo instant messanger. And I've had to manually remove it from every version of netscape I've had over the last couple years, which is a PITA.
That said, I'm kinda weary over this new product...but I suppose as long as I don't have to recreate my contact list, and I can use the same message database (so I can browse through my same message history), and it doesn't put advertisements in the main window, then it should be okay with me.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
I certainly hope they work through all their problems. As it was, many of the EFnet servers I've tried to connect to wouldn't let me ("Your domain not allowed...too much abuse."). Having a home.com domain name, I'm probably the first to go if they're restricting access even more.
EFnet has been a great resource for me for computer help, etc....though I've been told once or twice to RTFM. But the people there have been generally more helpful than irritating, so I'm upset to see them getting DoS attacks, etc.
I hope for everyone's sake that they can push through the "turbulence" and get things back in good order.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
Sorry if this is redundant...too many posts to read through:)
I had the displeasure of owning a copy of windows ME for a short period of time, and this "whistler" looks a LOT like it. Similar icons, control panel, exploring features, etc. The shutdown menu was different though...it was actually a MENU...so if you want to, say, shut down this time instead of restart, you can't simply hit the 'down' key and enter. You have to give focus to the menu, go down, and then hit enter. That extra step pissed me off. Also, the start menu is still the "traditional" grey.
As a side note, windows ME, as far as I can tell, is a big fat piece of crap. I had so many problems that I actually had to call tech support, and the techs with whom I spoke couldn't even understand half the shit that ms did with it.
What I would like to know though, is this: Why in the world is MS releasing yet another OS? When they just released 2 of them?!?? *SIGH* It's just unbelievable how they operate. What, win 95 is unstable and full of bugs? Well, let's make a new version. What, win 98 is unstable and full of bugs? Well, let's just make a new version. etc. etc. etc.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
Heh...well, I suppose it's impossible to know unless I could actually ask BNL what their intentions were, what they hoped to accomplish, etc. But I'm not going to think of them as napster hackers...it's not like the band was sitting at some computers and said, "let's show those napster people a thing or two!" No. This wasn't done by people who were just helping napster to find it's system flaws. It was done by people who were trying to frustrate those trying to download their MP3s by putting a bunch of what are basically fakes into the system. Now, regardless of the actual effect, which is probably not too great, I am irritated that another band doesn't want us to have MP3s of their music. If these bands really don't want it to be legal, then they should be going after legislators to pass laws instead of going after music listeners. IMHO, what they're doing is going to just piss off a lot of people, which surely isn't good for record sales.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
My above comment was 40% real, 40% tongue in cheek, and 20% wanting to get the first post.
Of course I'm not going to dislike them *just* because of this. But frankly it's irritating. When I have no bad feelings or dislikes for a band, I like it to stay that way, so when they do something I might not like, well, it tarnishes their image in my mind. Now, if they were being total jerks like metallica, then I *would* have to totally dislike them for it.
Here is where I could go on and on about the recent increases in record sales, but I won't do that. But there isn't currently any proof that I know of that shows that mp3s are hurting sales. So, until then, I don't think there's much reason for bands to get upset. Now, if BNL is truly using this just as a means of advertising, then nevermind. Though that's still kinda irritating.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
but doesn't AOL more or less own netscape? I have never heard AOL even *mention* netscape since their "partnership" (or whatever it is) took place. This seems like a pretty good sign that AOL doesn't expect anything worthwhile out of netscape. Or perhaps they're just waiting for mozilla? Either way, netscape is in poor shape, a nd I'm distraught over what seems to be its impending doom. I really *don't* want to have to use IE.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
YES! I just posted about that! I was friends with that kid in high school! We were in boy scouts together too. Wow, I feel almost famous now.
He didn't get too sick, but he had burns on him. Shit, I probalby got radioactive poisoning from him. To avoid jail he joined the navy, and is still there as far as I know.
I had a friend in high school and in boy scouts years back who made a makeshift nuclear reactor using americanum extracted from smoke detectors. This is no joke...the story was featured in Harpers magazine a couple years ago. When the EPA found out about it, it cost them like around $50,000 to clean it up. Just a nuclear reactor in a shed in a suburban backyard. Crazy, isn't it??!
I agree with most of this. I would truly love to see a good Civil War game. There are many that exist, but even the best of them are mediochre. The thing with war games, if they're going to be realistic, is there would have to be a LOT of soldiers. Not just a few rectangles with pics of lots of soldiers mapped on to them. I mean lots of little independent soldiers. Kinda like CnC, but on a larger scale. Have you ever played CnC 2 against 7 AI opponents? It gets realllyyy slllooowwwwwww. I don't think really good war games will be possible for a few years yet, until the computers are that much faster. I want to command an army of 150,000 troops against another army with 150,000 troops. That's not gonna be possible for quite some time. Of course, many people like war games that are focused more on special fighting units/robots/vehicles/weapons of mass destruction. But even for those types of games, it just isn't possible right now to do anything truly large-scale like that.
Yes, that is also sad but true. I cannot count how many times I've formatted & reinstalled since I've had my computer. On a side note, I just bought a gateway (should arrive today), and they claim that a windows install disk "should come with the system." But, people I know who have recently bought gateways didn't get theirs. I'm going to call them and have a fit when mine doesn't come with one. Fortunately I've already got more windows disks than I'll ever need.
Great...I certainly hope the memory of the future doesn't have that characteristic....or at least, I hope computers are stable enough in the future that it won't matter. Being a *gasp* user of windows myself, I would be totally screwed if I couldn't reboot every now & then to clear out all the crap & garbage that windows puts in my memory. I personally think the memory of the future will involve fiber optics...I heard that someone once tried to build a computer using fiber. So, if it's possible to reinvent the transistor to store light (possible with mirrors? I don't know, I'm no computer engineer), then I think that is what we'll ultimately be using.
Stuff like this was getting old a long time ago. I don't know many details of what was happening to kuro5hin, but it really seems like shit that websites just shouldn't have to put up with. But what can be done? Make content filters? That's just a pain in the ass, and shouldn't be necessary. I would have liked to think that people were past this kind of behavior by now. I hope they do find the culprits, and make a nice big shiny example out of them.
that makes a lot more sense. I have only basic networks knowledge (only took 1 class), but it seems that this type of thing would be farily simple. I'm sure there wouldn't be too much of a performance decrease, and the fact that it's dropping those foreign packets instead of processing them further would likely make up for any extra overhead. But, how effective would this strategy be? From what I've read, many of the DoS attacks merely send so many packets toward a computer that it can't handle them all. Couldn't this happen whether the packets are dropped or not? Perhaps an attempt to restrict the 'from' addresses would be futile.
Okay, maybe I misunderstood, but if all ISPs were restricting packets coming through their routers (ie disallowing anything from an external source whose IP starts with a certain number, for instance), wouldn't that restrict the ability for data to flow smoothly across networks? Or is this simply to restrict packets coming from a computer using their ISP but have a different 'from' IP? I am not an expert with networks, so forgive my naivite.
I personally wouldn't be surprised to see ISPs start taking that kind of action, but once it does start happening, who knows what the limit will be? If enough ISP start to do somehting like that, then why would it even be called the internet? It just seems like more ways for our rights online to be restricted. But maybe that's just me...I tend to be more paranoid than the average geek.
whoop-de-doo...another vbs worm being sent around. wow, this is really something new. First of all, nobody is impressed by this kind of thing. second of all, it is not original or amusing. So why must people keep making these stupid worms?
Slashdot Mirror
Human rights? How does restricting people from looking at porn in a library have anything to do with human rights? I just don't think it is anywhere said that we should be able to look at porn in a library or school.
Besides, the report did say that the panel "recommends that government should encourage the use of filtering technology to protect children from the Internet's seedier neighborhoods." Why they're not applying this to porn, though, seems kinda confusing. I wouldn't be any happier about my kid looking at porn at school than I would about learning how to make a bomb.
Besides, even if looking at porn at a public institution was a human right, congress is still going to pass this anyway. Just because their panel failed to recommend it, doesn't mean that congress will follow that lack of advice.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
During my time at Michigan State, they adopted a policy similar to this one. At first they required laptops for all incoming students, but then they decided that was probably inconvenient for many people, and instead just required a computer of some sort. I think that program starts this year, if I'm not mistaken.
If everybody had the time and the desire to learn how to use one properly (not to mention the money to buy one), it could be great. But, in reality, a lot of people are going to be wasting a lot of money. There are still just too many people that are either incapable or consider themselves incapable of learning how to use a computer even close to it's full potential. I think for now they (universities) should worry about replacing the old 486's they still have in many of their computer labs. That way students can use them as they need them, and don't have to worry about upkeep. And seriously, what would an astro-turf major, or a hotel & restaurant management major *really* need a computer for??
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
Okay, seriously...+1 insightful? I am not posting in support of any candidate. I just think statements like that are really stupid. People call bush an idiot, and people call gore a habitual liar. And it seems that whatever party you belong to, that ususally determines which of those statements you agree with. It's ridiculous. Not so much that you made that post -- I expect that kind of worthless crap from time to time -- but that somebody actually modded it up as insightful? What the hell kind of moderation is that? How about modding it down as offtopic or as flamebait or even as a troll? The point of this news item was to talk about the politicians' views of the internet and the entertainment industry, not to bash any particular candidate. Do you think gore or cheney or lieberman are any different than bush in that he's ignorant as to the true nature of the internet and what it "causes" people to do? I don't think so. So why don't you think about what your motives are for modding up such a stupid useless statement before you do it next time.
btw, kudos to the one person that did mod it -1 flamebait.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
I'm not worried about the ethics of it or any copyright violations that it may involve. I just know that it irritated the CRAP out of me every time I'd go to a lecture and there was somebody shoving a flyer in my face urging me to take notes for them so they could sell them. And of course, when the class was over, there'd be hundreds of flyers littering the floor and the hallways. And of course there's the 50 people that insist on crumpling them up loudly while class is in session. That always pissed me off. It would have been nice not to have been bothered by those people and their flyers.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
Is this going to be a serious list, or can I suggest something like gift certificates for therapy for windows users?
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
Okay, I forwarded the story to 50 of my friends, who are sure to send it on to their friends....when do I get my check?
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
Although I'm not completely satisfied with icq, they have been pretty good about adding features and coming out with new versions fairly frequently. What will the new product be like, though? Are they going to take icq and "dumb it down" for aol users?
I admit I've never used AIM, but I've seen others use it and it kinda reminds me of yahoo instant messanger. And I've had to manually remove it from every version of netscape I've had over the last couple years, which is a PITA.
That said, I'm kinda weary over this new product...but I suppose as long as I don't have to recreate my contact list, and I can use the same message database (so I can browse through my same message history), and it doesn't put advertisements in the main window, then it should be okay with me.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
I certainly hope they work through all their problems. As it was, many of the EFnet servers I've tried to connect to wouldn't let me ("Your domain not allowed...too much abuse."). Having a home.com domain name, I'm probably the first to go if they're restricting access even more.
EFnet has been a great resource for me for computer help, etc....though I've been told once or twice to RTFM. But the people there have been generally more helpful than irritating, so I'm upset to see them getting DoS attacks, etc.
I hope for everyone's sake that they can push through the "turbulence" and get things back in good order.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
Yes...that's a good idea. I can't count the number of times I've tried to go to slashdot.rog.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
Sorry if this is redundant...too many posts to read through :)
I had the displeasure of owning a copy of windows ME for a short period of time, and this "whistler" looks a LOT like it. Similar icons, control panel, exploring features, etc. The shutdown menu was different though...it was actually a MENU...so if you want to, say, shut down this time instead of restart, you can't simply hit the 'down' key and enter. You have to give focus to the menu, go down, and then hit enter. That extra step pissed me off. Also, the start menu is still the "traditional" grey.
As a side note, windows ME, as far as I can tell, is a big fat piece of crap. I had so many problems that I actually had to call tech support, and the techs with whom I spoke couldn't even understand half the shit that ms did with it.
What I would like to know though, is this: Why in the world is MS releasing yet another OS? When they just released 2 of them?!?? *SIGH* It's just unbelievable how they operate. What, win 95 is unstable and full of bugs? Well, let's make a new version. What, win 98 is unstable and full of bugs? Well, let's just make a new version. etc. etc. etc.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
Heh...well, I suppose it's impossible to know unless I could actually ask BNL what their intentions were, what they hoped to accomplish, etc. But I'm not going to think of them as napster hackers...it's not like the band was sitting at some computers and said, "let's show those napster people a thing or two!" No. This wasn't done by people who were just helping napster to find it's system flaws. It was done by people who were trying to frustrate those trying to download their MP3s by putting a bunch of what are basically fakes into the system. Now, regardless of the actual effect, which is probably not too great, I am irritated that another band doesn't want us to have MP3s of their music. If these bands really don't want it to be legal, then they should be going after legislators to pass laws instead of going after music listeners. IMHO, what they're doing is going to just piss off a lot of people, which surely isn't good for record sales.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
My above comment was 40% real, 40% tongue in cheek, and 20% wanting to get the first post.
Of course I'm not going to dislike them *just* because of this. But frankly it's irritating. When I have no bad feelings or dislikes for a band, I like it to stay that way, so when they do something I might not like, well, it tarnishes their image in my mind. Now, if they were being total jerks like metallica, then I *would* have to totally dislike them for it.
Here is where I could go on and on about the recent increases in record sales, but I won't do that. But there isn't currently any proof that I know of that shows that mp3s are hurting sales. So, until then, I don't think there's much reason for bands to get upset. Now, if BNL is truly using this just as a means of advertising, then nevermind. Though that's still kinda irritating.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
but doesn't AOL more or less own netscape? I have never heard AOL even *mention* netscape since their "partnership" (or whatever it is) took place. This seems like a pretty good sign that AOL doesn't expect anything worthwhile out of netscape. Or perhaps they're just waiting for mozilla? Either way, netscape is in poor shape, a nd I'm distraught over what seems to be its impending doom. I really *don't* want to have to use IE.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it."
YES! I just posted about that! I was friends with that kid in high school! We were in boy scouts together too. Wow, I feel almost famous now.
He didn't get too sick, but he had burns on him. Shit, I probalby got radioactive poisoning from him. To avoid jail he joined the navy, and is still there as far as I know.
I had a friend in high school and in boy scouts years back who made a makeshift nuclear reactor using americanum extracted from smoke detectors. This is no joke...the story was featured in Harpers magazine a couple years ago. When the EPA found out about it, it cost them like around $50,000 to clean it up. Just a nuclear reactor in a shed in a suburban backyard. Crazy, isn't it??!
I agree with most of this. I would truly love to see a good Civil War game. There are many that exist, but even the best of them are mediochre. The thing with war games, if they're going to be realistic, is there would have to be a LOT of soldiers. Not just a few rectangles with pics of lots of soldiers mapped on to them. I mean lots of little independent soldiers. Kinda like CnC, but on a larger scale. Have you ever played CnC 2 against 7 AI opponents? It gets realllyyy slllooowwwwwww. I don't think really good war games will be possible for a few years yet, until the computers are that much faster. I want to command an army of 150,000 troops against another army with 150,000 troops. That's not gonna be possible for quite some time. Of course, many people like war games that are focused more on special fighting units/robots/vehicles/weapons of mass destruction. But even for those types of games, it just isn't possible right now to do anything truly large-scale like that.
Yes, that is also sad but true. I cannot count how many times I've formatted & reinstalled since I've had my computer. On a side note, I just bought a gateway (should arrive today), and they claim that a windows install disk "should come with the system." But, people I know who have recently bought gateways didn't get theirs. I'm going to call them and have a fit when mine doesn't come with one. Fortunately I've already got more windows disks than I'll ever need.
Great...I certainly hope the memory of the future doesn't have that characteristic....or at least, I hope computers are stable enough in the future that it won't matter. Being a *gasp* user of windows myself, I would be totally screwed if I couldn't reboot every now & then to clear out all the crap & garbage that windows puts in my memory. I personally think the memory of the future will involve fiber optics...I heard that someone once tried to build a computer using fiber. So, if it's possible to reinvent the transistor to store light (possible with mirrors? I don't know, I'm no computer engineer), then I think that is what we'll ultimately be using.
Stuff like this was getting old a long time ago. I don't know many details of what was happening to kuro5hin, but it really seems like shit that websites just shouldn't have to put up with. But what can be done? Make content filters? That's just a pain in the ass, and shouldn't be necessary. I would have liked to think that people were past this kind of behavior by now. I hope they do find the culprits, and make a nice big shiny example out of them.
Right...if you read the previous responses, you'd see that I misunderstood, and it was explained to me. Thanks -- Mike
that makes a lot more sense. I have only basic networks knowledge (only took 1 class), but it seems that this type of thing would be farily simple. I'm sure there wouldn't be too much of a performance decrease, and the fact that it's dropping those foreign packets instead of processing them further would likely make up for any extra overhead. But, how effective would this strategy be? From what I've read, many of the DoS attacks merely send so many packets toward a computer that it can't handle them all. Couldn't this happen whether the packets are dropped or not? Perhaps an attempt to restrict the 'from' addresses would be futile.
Okay, maybe I misunderstood, but if all ISPs were restricting packets coming through their routers (ie disallowing anything from an external source whose IP starts with a certain number, for instance), wouldn't that restrict the ability for data to flow smoothly across networks? Or is this simply to restrict packets coming from a computer using their ISP but have a different 'from' IP? I am not an expert with networks, so forgive my naivite.
I personally wouldn't be surprised to see ISPs start taking that kind of action, but once it does start happening, who knows what the limit will be? If enough ISP start to do somehting like that, then why would it even be called the internet? It just seems like more ways for our rights online to be restricted. But maybe that's just me...I tend to be more paranoid than the average geek.
whoop-de-doo...another vbs worm being sent around. wow, this is really something new. First of all, nobody is impressed by this kind of thing. second of all, it is not original or amusing. So why must people keep making these stupid worms?