> In order to pass along the rescue plan to their imprisoned colleague, his compatriots write a travel book that contains the scheme
Given the nature of criminal behaviour, I strongly doubt anyone would rescue their comrades unless they required them for some kind of financial gain, or if they were family (but not even the mafia do this).
The premise is cool, but the foundation appears shaky. Maybe if the guy had the key to a huge treasure or something like that, I could see it, but what kind of power this fellow must have had over his friends to enable them to go to such lengths to save him; and what tactics to have memorized a code and known about a book in advance to pull this off. Now that's trust!
CPOD? Sounds like iPod to me; does that imply Apple was involved? Or a lawsuit is immanent? Call thinkgeek, this would sell like hotcakes because PHB's everywhere would insist we all wear them or embed them into our right arms.
I remember studying Thomas Pynchon in school, and upon hearing how his military records and university records were lost, I often wondered if his books were some kind of method of covert messaging, due to the code-like writing style he has, and the ominous history he has. Using spam as a method of communication is useful in the sense that it can be hard to tell who the real message is going to; making it impossible to identify the two points of connection, and therefore limiting accountability and obscuring who is doing the talking; so if Pynchon's books are like this... it would also be impossible to tell who the books were intended to (and therefore the US Mil could contact spies who could be in a tight spot, or informants who may be in a tight spot). The books could also contain a bunch of different messages using different cryptographies, in plain sight, to communicate with multiple agents. This is likely incorrect and way off the tin-foil-hat scale of reason, but the thought did occur to me when I read The Crying of Lot 49, and even more so when I read Mason and Dixon.
I think Orleans is as much a part of Ottawa as Gloucester or Vanier is. I've lived in Ottawa before and that's really not saying much. Downtown Ottawa is really a city by itself. Sure places like Kanata are part of Ottawa, but they are really *not* part of Ottawa... but maybe a few minutes away. They each have their own style, design, and municipal gov'ts.
> All the sudden, it's magically proven that P2P has no effect on sales simply because their are online music stores.
I think that you, and the RIAA for that matter, would be significantly overlooking the facts if you believe P2P is the root of a 7.6% demand reduction, so rather than trolling slashdot about how I might be making magic bullet theories, you should take a hard look at your own magic bullet theories, and the theories of a largely corrupt and morally inept organization such as the RIAA, who sue children and have stormtroopers on their payroll (thugs, really).
Online music stores, such as Apple's store, have contributed to about 150% of that 7.6%, so if anything these downloaders have driven a global increase in music sales in the last five years, and not the other way around.
Not really. 7.6% is not that much, considering how many companies have moved to an online sales model. If anything this refutes the RIAA's claim that P2P has any significant effect at all. What kinda depresses me was the point in the article that the reduction of top acts helps to boost sales; that the reduction of variety means more concentrated gains in that particular market, is actually bad for the market in the long run, IMHO.
> Conveniently located in the top-level directory in a file cryptically named README.Feedback.
You missed my point entirely: an email address is not infrastructure. My point is that these companies that try this shit just want the benefit from the Open Source community, without any of the cost or accountability. It's bogus and I call bullshit.
> They released it so that the source could be audited by anyone who cared to do so, and the framework they provided is sufficent for this.
It's obvious; audits won't happen, so the holes will remain in the final release because the Open Source community won't help because there's no incentive for them to be involved. This company is trying to get the benefits from the Open Source community without paying the price... which is opening the structure of the code to audit follow-up, open research and open development.
> How about Easy-Linux? Lindos won't work either, because it's got DOS in it...
To clarify, I mean that DOS is a step backward, not that there would be any legal reasons for not going this way. From Lindows to Lindos would be a step in the wrong direction! It's like the OS is aging or something...
From 2003, when Robertson (of Lindows fame) answered/. questions he said, "When we started Lindows.com we believed that software installation was extremely difficult for most users".
To me this shows that Robertson is making his money on the connection between Linux, Windows and Lindows; by bridging the gap between the ease of windows and the better systemic designs of Linux. Therefore without the perfect name, Lindows may vanish into obscurity; but is a name that important? I think so, I don't think so... it doesn't matter really, does it? What to call it? How about Easy-Linux? Lindos won't work either, because it's got DOS in it...
> This is not an open source license that would be approved by OSI or SourceForge.
Agreed. And that's the problem with it, really. Yes, it's nice to see where all the gaps are in security, but if we can't do anything about them, what's the point? I would just chalk this up to being evidence that we do not live in a democracy; if the code is open, and people can figure out how to manipulate it, yet there is no public remedy to the gaps, why should anyone report bugs? The beauty of the Open Source Community is the ability for career advancement by proving human resource capitol with demonstrable evidence of successes. Ie: you can work on a project without being paid, and get kudos for it in the workplace. By reporting bugs in an anonymous system, what's the point??? There is no benefit to programmers involved in it, so there is no incentive. The recognition incentive is the only reason Open Source has succeeded thus far; the other benefits are secondary to the career advancements triggered by Open Source, and while it's not always the case, it's the standard.
How is this at all a proper framework for bug submission?????? It reminds me of submitting to Microsoft... where they put you on ignore and go about their business.
RTFA or not, this is not correct framework at all.
Something is really wrong with this move by Votehere. Nowhere on their site is a place to access the revision history of the code, or upload changes, or even contact them about bugs in the code for credit or what-have-you.
Obscured security relies on obscurity; therefore we have a previously obscured source code that is now revealed (as is) and the creator expects the public to be pleased? The key element of Open Source is the insight from a million minds into security, feasibility and programming efficiency; not the wide-open access to the creation of a few minds, who may have conflicts with the management of the company, conflict of design methodology, or flagrant criminal intent (hey you've heard of a silent strike, well programmers do this more than anyone because they are mistreated by management with little recourse at times; read: Microsoft). I think if they are going to release the code, they should at least have a framework for accepting revisions, and base credit upon these revisions from the Open Source community -- bare minimum. This current method is only a public form of espionage without any hopes of maintaining security through accessible revision tree access to the public. Somone might be fired for this? I mean if it were *my* firm, I'd be looking for someone to execute over such a breech, without the necessary systemic functions available for interpretation of risk and absolute recovery system diagnostics, et cetera.
You took the long way pal. Ottawa to Toronto in about 3.5 hours if you drive fast, and 4.5 if you drive slow. Branford? Eeek. That's further than an hour from TO. Ending up in Hull is a bad sign... HEHE Just don't get arrested there!!!!! *pow* *pow*
For those of you who have no idea where Orleans is in Ontario, its very close to Ottawa (minutes away), and about 2 hours from Montreal and 3.5 hrs from Toronto, making it an ideal spot to plan terrorist action in Canada. Ottawa is a couple hours from the US/Canadian border, and for those of you who have never driven the distance, it's a very somber drive, with extremely easy access into the United States. I knew a rum-runner once who would move liquor out of the states at an alarming rate through the St. Lawrence River border; a hardly monitored area concerned more with tourism than security, then. Today, it's a different story, I'm told.
You're right. He does better with less. I really liked his early movies, but all his recent ones reek of Hollywood money-magic. Every shot, every plot, every thought has to rock or forget it, IMHO. Instead of "The Natives take the fort", try actually going into detail about it, and examine the usefullness of shots in their reflection of plots. Metroid movie? Sounds like an easy out, because Woo will only have to film it from the side!
The side effect of this benefit is that surgeons who use video games perform less surgeries than those who do not use them, thus leaving far more patients in need of care. Why? Because video games take a considerable amount of time that surgeons do not have.
Reminds me of Rumsfeld... "Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know."
> will this mean these jobs are headed to India too?
Yeah I can see all the porn stars moving to India. Imagine the next volley of Playboy TV: "Candy Suxxx: Bombay Butts", "Candy Suxxx: Lucky Lucknow"... et cetera.
I do not support the idea of ad-fetching based on a per-sentence reasoning, because it means more ads and interruptions (browser interstitials, really). It's totally inefficient for end users and it only gives the advertisers a hard-on because they get to really psychologically assault surfers (which is a huge turn on to advertisers because they feel like they are super-human if they can fuck with our heads... it's fucking sick if you ask me). I prefer Slashdot's method of bonus features that subscribers can get by chipping in. Why can't advertisers come up with better concepts for selling their product (perhaps by word of mouth because it's a good product, not because we're always tripping over an ad about it).
In my books, the more ads I see about a product, the less I want the product, because the product must be sold at an inflated cost to pay for advertising, or it must be a poor product if they are pushing it so hard. Word of mouth is best.
Slashdot Mirror
> In order to pass along the rescue plan to their imprisoned colleague, his compatriots write a travel book that contains the scheme
Given the nature of criminal behaviour, I strongly doubt anyone would rescue their comrades unless they required them for some kind of financial gain, or if they were family (but not even the mafia do this).
The premise is cool, but the foundation appears shaky. Maybe if the guy had the key to a huge treasure or something like that, I could see it, but what kind of power this fellow must have had over his friends to enable them to go to such lengths to save him; and what tactics to have memorized a code and known about a book in advance to pull this off. Now that's trust!
CPOD? Sounds like iPod to me; does that imply Apple was involved? Or a lawsuit is immanent? Call thinkgeek, this would sell like hotcakes because PHB's everywhere would insist we all wear them or embed them into our right arms.
> Funny? Mod: Interesting, please.
And that'd make you a troll. At least we've got our species, genus and phylum in check. Anything else?
I remember studying Thomas Pynchon in school, and upon hearing how his military records and university records were lost, I often wondered if his books were some kind of method of covert messaging, due to the code-like writing style he has, and the ominous history he has. Using spam as a method of communication is useful in the sense that it can be hard to tell who the real message is going to; making it impossible to identify the two points of connection, and therefore limiting accountability and obscuring who is doing the talking; so if Pynchon's books are like this... it would also be impossible to tell who the books were intended to (and therefore the US Mil could contact spies who could be in a tight spot, or informants who may be in a tight spot). The books could also contain a bunch of different messages using different cryptographies, in plain sight, to communicate with multiple agents. This is likely incorrect and way off the tin-foil-hat scale of reason, but the thought did occur to me when I read The Crying of Lot 49, and even more so when I read Mason and Dixon.
I think Orleans is as much a part of Ottawa as Gloucester or Vanier is. I've lived in Ottawa before and that's really not saying much. Downtown Ottawa is really a city by itself. Sure places like Kanata are part of Ottawa, but they are really *not* part of Ottawa... but maybe a few minutes away. They each have their own style, design, and municipal gov'ts.
> All the sudden, it's magically proven that P2P has no effect on sales simply because their are online music stores.
I think that you, and the RIAA for that matter, would be significantly overlooking the facts if you believe P2P is the root of a 7.6% demand reduction, so rather than trolling slashdot about how I might be making magic bullet theories, you should take a hard look at your own magic bullet theories, and the theories of a largely corrupt and morally inept organization such as the RIAA, who sue children and have stormtroopers on their payroll (thugs, really).
Online music stores, such as Apple's store, have contributed to about 150% of that 7.6%, so if anything these downloaders have driven a global increase in music sales in the last five years, and not the other way around.
> More grist for the RIAA mill on P2P
Not really. 7.6% is not that much, considering how many companies have moved to an online sales model. If anything this refutes the RIAA's claim that P2P has any significant effect at all. What kinda depresses me was the point in the article that the reduction of top acts helps to boost sales; that the reduction of variety means more concentrated gains in that particular market, is actually bad for the market in the long run, IMHO.
If the USA can ignore the UN and attack Iraq, then they can sure as shit ignore the UN for *any* reason.
> Conveniently located in the top-level directory in a file cryptically named README.Feedback.
You missed my point entirely: an email address is not infrastructure. My point is that these companies that try this shit just want the benefit from the Open Source community, without any of the cost or accountability. It's bogus and I call bullshit.
> They released it so that the source could be audited by anyone who cared to do so, and the framework they provided is sufficent for this.
It's obvious; audits won't happen, so the holes will remain in the final release because the Open Source community won't help because there's no incentive for them to be involved. This company is trying to get the benefits from the Open Source community without paying the price... which is opening the structure of the code to audit follow-up, open research and open development.
> How about Easy-Linux? Lindos won't work either, because it's got DOS in it...
To clarify, I mean that DOS is a step backward, not that there would be any legal reasons for not going this way. From Lindows to Lindos would be a step in the wrong direction! It's like the OS is aging or something...
> True, but who'd want their product to be associated with the name DOS, even accidentally? :)
This was more my point than the point about any legal reasons for not naming it lindos. It's like a step in the *wrong* direction!
From 2003, when Robertson (of Lindows fame) answered /. questions he said, "When we started Lindows.com we believed that software installation was extremely difficult for most users".
To me this shows that Robertson is making his money on the connection between Linux, Windows and Lindows; by bridging the gap between the ease of windows and the better systemic designs of Linux. Therefore without the perfect name, Lindows may vanish into obscurity; but is a name that important? I think so, I don't think so... it doesn't matter really, does it? What to call it? How about Easy-Linux? Lindos won't work either, because it's got DOS in it...
> This is not an open source license that would be approved by OSI or SourceForge.
Agreed. And that's the problem with it, really. Yes, it's nice to see where all the gaps are in security, but if we can't do anything about them, what's the point? I would just chalk this up to being evidence that we do not live in a democracy; if the code is open, and people can figure out how to manipulate it, yet there is no public remedy to the gaps, why should anyone report bugs? The beauty of the Open Source Community is the ability for career advancement by proving human resource capitol with demonstrable evidence of successes. Ie: you can work on a project without being paid, and get kudos for it in the workplace. By reporting bugs in an anonymous system, what's the point??? There is no benefit to programmers involved in it, so there is no incentive. The recognition incentive is the only reason Open Source has succeeded thus far; the other benefits are secondary to the career advancements triggered by Open Source, and while it's not always the case, it's the standard.
How is this at all a proper framework for bug submission?????? It reminds me of submitting to Microsoft... where they put you on ignore and go about their business.
RTFA or not, this is not correct framework at all.
> Osama and his guys get it, then hack in and poof, landslide victory for liberals in next election.
Osama? He's Republican.
Something is really wrong with this move by Votehere. Nowhere on their site is a place to access the revision history of the code, or upload changes, or even contact them about bugs in the code for credit or what-have-you.
Obscured security relies on obscurity; therefore we have a previously obscured source code that is now revealed (as is) and the creator expects the public to be pleased? The key element of Open Source is the insight from a million minds into security, feasibility and programming efficiency; not the wide-open access to the creation of a few minds, who may have conflicts with the management of the company, conflict of design methodology, or flagrant criminal intent (hey you've heard of a silent strike, well programmers do this more than anyone because they are mistreated by management with little recourse at times; read: Microsoft). I think if they are going to release the code, they should at least have a framework for accepting revisions, and base credit upon these revisions from the Open Source community -- bare minimum. This current method is only a public form of espionage without any hopes of maintaining security through accessible revision tree access to the public. Somone might be fired for this? I mean if it were *my* firm, I'd be looking for someone to execute over such a breech, without the necessary systemic functions available for interpretation of risk and absolute recovery system diagnostics, et cetera.
You took the long way pal. Ottawa to Toronto in about 3.5 hours if you drive fast, and 4.5 if you drive slow. Branford? Eeek. That's further than an hour from TO. Ending up in Hull is a bad sign... HEHE Just don't get arrested there!!!!!
*pow* *pow*
For those of you who have no idea where Orleans is in Ontario, its very close to Ottawa (minutes away), and about 2 hours from Montreal and 3.5 hrs from Toronto, making it an ideal spot to plan terrorist action in Canada. Ottawa is a couple hours from the US/Canadian border, and for those of you who have never driven the distance, it's a very somber drive, with extremely easy access into the United States. I knew a rum-runner once who would move liquor out of the states at an alarming rate through the St. Lawrence River border; a hardly monitored area concerned more with tourism than security, then. Today, it's a different story, I'm told.
You're right. He does better with less. I really liked his early movies, but all his recent ones reek of Hollywood money-magic. Every shot, every plot, every thought has to rock or forget it, IMHO. Instead of "The Natives take the fort", try actually going into detail about it, and examine the usefullness of shots in their reflection of plots. Metroid movie? Sounds like an easy out, because Woo will only have to film it from the side!
The side effect of this benefit is that surgeons who use video games perform less surgeries than those who do not use them, thus leaving far more patients in need of care. Why? Because video games take a considerable amount of time that surgeons do not have.
> 'Can we know what we know?' Fascinating stuff.
Reminds me of Rumsfeld... "Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know."
> will this mean these jobs are headed to India too?
Yeah I can see all the porn stars moving to India. Imagine the next volley of Playboy TV: "Candy Suxxx: Bombay Butts", "Candy Suxxx: Lucky Lucknow"... et cetera.
I do not support the idea of ad-fetching based on a per-sentence reasoning, because it means more ads and interruptions (browser interstitials, really). It's totally inefficient for end users and it only gives the advertisers a hard-on because they get to really psychologically assault surfers (which is a huge turn on to advertisers because they feel like they are super-human if they can fuck with our heads... it's fucking sick if you ask me). I prefer Slashdot's method of bonus features that subscribers can get by chipping in. Why can't advertisers come up with better concepts for selling their product (perhaps by word of mouth because it's a good product, not because we're always tripping over an ad about it).
In my books, the more ads I see about a product, the less I want the product, because the product must be sold at an inflated cost to pay for advertising, or it must be a poor product if they are pushing it so hard. Word of mouth is best.
Moore's Law? Murphy's Law.