What Anonymous/LulzSec do (a good percentage of the time) is illegal anyways, yes? Why the crap do we need new laws when what they do is already criminal?
Because there isn't enough profit made from the current laws.
A growing tactic among the ruling elite is to accuse the political opposition of insulting the king, allowing for censorship and political imprisonment of those who dare speak out.
This entire disaster has been framed as a failure of nuclear power almost every time it comes up. People don't seem to say this was a failure of management or engineering in these discussions.
Is there a difference ? Aren't management and engineering part of the process ?
Use TorButton then (the Windows bundle includes it IIRC). AFAIK it solves most of the problems you mentioned. If you are using Firefox 4 then you need the alpha version from here.
Add to that BetterPrivacy, and you should be much harder to track.
Well, a corporation's primary allegiance is to its shareholders,not to any random consumer, and their first task is to turn a profit, not to be the Goodie Good Guys.
Luckily there are laws protecting us from the corporations and their allegiances. At least partially. And at least for now.
Nice Guys Finish First (BBC Horizon television series) is a 1986 documentary by Richard Dawkins which discusses selfishness and cooperation, arguing that evolution often favors co-operative behaviour, and focusing especially on the tit for tat strategy of the prisoner's dilemma game. The film is approximately 45 minutes long and was produced by Jeremy Taylor.
As to your first point, I think that's the most logical option. Or would you rather contract that out to the lowest bidder?
I don't find governments to be trust worthy in these matters. Besides, freedom of speech is IMO something that you either have or not. You can't just have half of it.
As to the second, I can think of plenty. Say that whatever Japan's equivalent of CNN or Fox News runs the story "Fukushima to explode with force of 20 gigatons in 20 minutes, will obliterate most of Honshu". Mass panic erupts, and everyone tries to flee. Instant recipe for stampeding deaths, car wrecks, etc. With 100 million people trying to evacuate, you're going to get significant casualties.
Or perhaps the alternate. Major news networks start saying "Fukushima completely safe, radiation is well below detectable levels. People start moving back in. Then there's another accident at the reactor, and BAM. Massive radiation leak in an area that is no longer evacuated.
This is not about freedom of speech, but more about lying for some form of profit, or being completely retarded. I'm not a lawyer but I'm pretty sure this would be considered criminal.
No, I am saying that if "speech > weapons" and "limited regulation of weapons is acceptable", then "limited regulation of speech is acceptable". The key there being "limited" - the only time I want freedom of expression curtailed is when it would otherwise cause significant harm and/or death.
1. And who decides when freedom of speech is to be limited ? The government ?
2. Could you please give a realistic example of how freedom of speech could cause significant harm and/or death for the case of Fukushima ?
In "Debt of Honor", Clark and Chavez blind the pilots of a Japanese AWACS. They also use it several times to incapacitate guards. Their device was a 1kW light flash though, so I suppose this new invention is a bit more efficient.
Has anyone checked Clancy's recent novels to see how their retinas look like after all this time ?
No, but sometimes the use of force is the only way to stop someone like Gaddafi from continuing to use force as he slaughters his own people.
I am sure a similar argument was used before "helping" Iraq too, and look what it turned into. I just hope this time it'll end when the dictator is gone (or at least weak enough) and the people of Libya will be allowed to make their own future. Let's not turn the rebels fighting against the oppressive government into the insurgents fighting against the invading force.
I don't follow you. Could you please elaborate ? Why is Firefox dying ? And if so, why is it similar to BSD ? What's this "BSD is dying" thing anyway ?
I wish people would write more than just a simple sentence and expect everyone to extract the great depths of meaning from it.
For the record, I just upgraded a system from 8.1 to 8.2. It has 6 jails running software like mail server, web server, name server, db server and others. Everything works fine, without the need for recompilation of ports.
Also, for as long as you read the file/usr/ports/UPDATING, you should be just fine even with rare port upgrades. Add to that a tool like portupgrade, and you are set for a nice ride.
Looks like it's another 2-3 hours of compiling packages and the odd several hours of library/package build error resolution for you!
You can use freebsd-update to do a binary update. Also, recompilation of ports is not usually necessary in between minor upgrades (ie. 8.1 to 8.2). Of course, you may have chosen to build a custom kernel and then you need to build it manually. On my dual core CPU with 4GB RAM it takes about 10-12 minutes to build the kernel and 30-40 minutes for world. To deal with etc scripts you can use etcupdate.
Also, if you don't like this way of doing things and you are a more desktop oriented user, you can look at PC-BSD which comes with its own package system for binary packages, while still offering access to the ports system. And PC-BSD 8.2 (which is obviously based on FreeBSD 8.2) was just released, too.
Why are technology companies boycotting themselves so badly lately? I just don't get it.
I can give you two reasons, although there are probably more possibilities:
the people making decisions are complete idiots
the people making decisions have more to win by making decisions against the greater good of the company than by helping the company, meaning there is a conflict of interests
In real life it's probably a mix of the two, with more of the second because idiots tend to be removed before they can do real harm.
They also fired on people, killing 84. Somehow they don't seem to understand that killing people will only make their situation worse. Libya will probably follow the same path as Egypt did, at least I certainly hope so. It's time for the people to take the power back.
I just don't get how the information gained this way could be worth the cost of our freedom.
Let me explain it to you then: the value of your freedom, to them, is zero in the best case, but realistically it's probably negative. If the value of the information gained this way is anything bigger than the value of your freedom, which is not hard to imagine, it's worth more to them. See, simple math!
This is just the outcome of public provided services [...]
I can't see any link between public provided services and the rest of your argument. There are other countries which offer public services (schools, hospitals etc) and people are just fine.
Freeing the people......if the people just happen to be dumb-shits or irrational? Well that's the bed you've made for yourself, why are you disappointed or put out?
Yes, history shown that totalitarian regimes are much better for keeping people "straight", isn't it ? Slaves (the opposite of free people) were much better people, much easier to manage, isn't it ?
Excuse my sarcasm, but I can hardly listen to such arguments. I propose that instead of throwing the blame on freedom and people's stupidity, we should think about how those people got to be so stupid in the first place. I would argue that poor education has a major role in this. By education I mean both the schools of all levels and the information people receive through media of all kinds. If you want to change something, you need to look there. The current generations are probably too far gone anyway, so the best thing you can do is to focus on the generations that will come.
What? "Debate being on" and results pointing both ways is a meaningless metric, there's always results pointing both ways!
The question is, how much, how strong, how reliable. I've seen this "it's still undecided"-argument used far too often by some who want to ignore studies they don't like.
I'm open and I would say I don't have a bias, though I might be wrong. I would certainly like to know for sure these "things" are not dangerous. But please bring some references (preferably strong and reliable, as you said it). I am sorry but I can't just take your word for it. But seeing your strong position, I suspect you have done your research and I hope you will share with us.
Please note I made no affirmation of any kind myself, I just pointed out there are studies that claim there might be a negative effects on health. Also, you don't need to be so final about it: if cell phones don't cause cancer, it doesn't mean there are no other side effects. In any case, I still think we should know what the risks are. Just like with tobacco. Many people still smoke, but knowing the risks some people (I count myself in this category) choose not to smoke. Maybe you will like to see this article on the subject.
Certainly, you have removed all of the electrical wires running through every wall in your home then, right?
I can't see the relevance of your comment. I merely shown that it's stupid to make such definitive statements as the OP did, while the debate is still on, with results pointing both ways. And yes, I try to avoid exposure to stronger fields as much as I can (for instance I do use a headset (not even bluetooth) to keep the phone farther from my head, I try to avoid living near basestations - I own a spectrum analyzer, I mostly use wired network instead of wireless). Until this debate is over, I'd rather be on the safe side.
I swear, people are so dedicated to perpetuating this stupid myth that consumer electronic devices interfere with our brains. Its been so thoroughly debunked that it's almost in the same realm as anti-vaccination/autism beliefs (except it doesn't get people killed.)
Care to give some references ?
There seem to be some studies suggesting otherwise. See Mobile phone radiation and health. There are references to many studies in the Wikipedia article. I think you are too dedicated to perpetuating this stupid myth that consumer electronic devices do not interfere with our brains.
Stupid people! Why would you think it's a button ?! It's Egypt after all (Pyramids, Sphinx etc), surely it has to be a hand lever or something similar.
Now that this finally happened, I think it's time we give them a helping hand: the least that we, the/. crowd, can do is donate some bandwidth to the Tor network by adding relay/bridge nodes and for those who can afford it exit nodes, too. This way we offer them a safer way to communicate among themselves and with the rest of the world.
For those yet unfamiliar with Tor, you can find out more here: Tor Project
That's why Stargate Universe ends: they figured out they can't reach the edge of the Universe in just a few seasons, to figure out what that mystery is all about.
The difference is, in the US or the UK, if you feel that you have a better idea than the government you can run for office and try to change things.
Do you really believe that ? I mean really, give it a try. Without money, without support from "big business", nobody will ever hear about you. And even if people hear about you, you won't be one of their favorites, mostly because they don't know you. Running for office involves much more than just the will to do it.
And the kind of people that have the will, the money and the support are in the game for power, for their own benefit, not for ours.
Slashdot Mirror
What Anonymous/LulzSec do (a good percentage of the time) is illegal anyways, yes? Why the crap do we need new laws when what they do is already criminal?
Because there isn't enough profit made from the current laws.
A growing tactic among the ruling elite is to accuse the political opposition of insulting the king, allowing for censorship and political imprisonment of those who dare speak out.
Since child prostitution exists and is unofficially accepted there, they can't go for "protect the children" slogan, so they are going for "protect the king".
This entire disaster has been framed as a failure of nuclear power almost every time it comes up. People don't seem to say this was a failure of management or engineering in these discussions.
Is there a difference ? Aren't management and engineering part of the process ?
Use TorButton then (the Windows bundle includes it IIRC). AFAIK it solves most of the problems you mentioned. If you are using Firefox 4 then you need the alpha version from here.
Add to that BetterPrivacy, and you should be much harder to track.
Well, a corporation's primary allegiance is to its shareholders,not to any random consumer, and their first task is to turn a profit, not to be the Goodie Good Guys.
Luckily there are laws protecting us from the corporations and their allegiances. At least partially. And at least for now.
If you are interested in this subject, you might find this documentary interesting.
From wikipedia:
Nice Guys Finish First (BBC Horizon television series) is a 1986 documentary by Richard Dawkins which discusses selfishness and cooperation, arguing that evolution often favors co-operative behaviour, and focusing especially on the tit for tat strategy of the prisoner's dilemma game. The film is approximately 45 minutes long and was produced by Jeremy Taylor.
As to your first point, I think that's the most logical option. Or would you rather contract that out to the lowest bidder?
I don't find governments to be trust worthy in these matters. Besides, freedom of speech is IMO something that you either have or not. You can't just have half of it.
As to the second, I can think of plenty. Say that whatever Japan's equivalent of CNN or Fox News runs the story "Fukushima to explode with force of 20 gigatons in 20 minutes, will obliterate most of Honshu". Mass panic erupts, and everyone tries to flee. Instant recipe for stampeding deaths, car wrecks, etc. With 100 million people trying to evacuate, you're going to get significant casualties. Or perhaps the alternate. Major news networks start saying "Fukushima completely safe, radiation is well below detectable levels. People start moving back in. Then there's another accident at the reactor, and BAM. Massive radiation leak in an area that is no longer evacuated.
This is not about freedom of speech, but more about lying for some form of profit, or being completely retarded. I'm not a lawyer but I'm pretty sure this would be considered criminal.
No, I am saying that if "speech > weapons" and "limited regulation of weapons is acceptable", then "limited regulation of speech is acceptable". The key there being "limited" - the only time I want freedom of expression curtailed is when it would otherwise cause significant harm and/or death.
1. And who decides when freedom of speech is to be limited ? The government ?
2. Could you please give a realistic example of how freedom of speech could cause significant harm and/or death for the case of Fukushima ?
In "Debt of Honor", Clark and Chavez blind the pilots of a Japanese AWACS. They also use it several times to incapacitate guards. Their device was a 1kW light flash though, so I suppose this new invention is a bit more efficient.
Has anyone checked Clancy's recent novels to see how their retinas look like after all this time ?
No, but sometimes the use of force is the only way to stop someone like Gaddafi from continuing to use force as he slaughters his own people.
I am sure a similar argument was used before "helping" Iraq too, and look what it turned into. I just hope this time it'll end when the dictator is gone (or at least weak enough) and the people of Libya will be allowed to make their own future. Let's not turn the rebels fighting against the oppressive government into the insurgents fighting against the invading force.
OK, I have to face it: I completely missed the point made by the OP it seems. My bad.
Sounds like Firefox is dying (like BSD).
I don't follow you. Could you please elaborate ? Why is Firefox dying ? And if so, why is it similar to BSD ? What's this "BSD is dying" thing anyway ?
I wish people would write more than just a simple sentence and expect everyone to extract the great depths of meaning from it.
For the record, I just upgraded a system from 8.1 to 8.2. It has 6 jails running software like mail server, web server, name server, db server and others. Everything works fine, without the need for recompilation of ports.
Also, for as long as you read the file /usr/ports/UPDATING, you should be just fine even with rare port upgrades. Add to that a tool like portupgrade, and you are set for a nice ride.
Looks like it's another 2-3 hours of compiling packages and the odd several hours of library/package build error resolution for you!
You can use freebsd-update to do a binary update. Also, recompilation of ports is not usually necessary in between minor upgrades (ie. 8.1 to 8.2). Of course, you may have chosen to build a custom kernel and then you need to build it manually. On my dual core CPU with 4GB RAM it takes about 10-12 minutes to build the kernel and 30-40 minutes for world. To deal with etc scripts you can use etcupdate.
Also, if you don't like this way of doing things and you are a more desktop oriented user, you can look at PC-BSD which comes with its own package system for binary packages, while still offering access to the ports system. And PC-BSD 8.2 (which is obviously based on FreeBSD 8.2) was just released, too.
Why are technology companies boycotting themselves so badly lately? I just don't get it.
I can give you two reasons, although there are probably more possibilities:
In real life it's probably a mix of the two, with more of the second because idiots tend to be removed before they can do real harm.
They also fired on people, killing 84. Somehow they don't seem to understand that killing people will only make their situation worse. Libya will probably follow the same path as Egypt did, at least I certainly hope so. It's time for the people to take the power back.
I just don't get how the information gained this way could be worth the cost of our freedom.
Let me explain it to you then: the value of your freedom, to them, is zero in the best case, but realistically it's probably negative. If the value of the information gained this way is anything bigger than the value of your freedom, which is not hard to imagine, it's worth more to them. See, simple math!
This is just the outcome of public provided services [...]
I can't see any link between public provided services and the rest of your argument. There are other countries which offer public services (schools, hospitals etc) and people are just fine.
Freeing the people... ...if the people just happen to be dumb-shits or irrational? Well that's the bed you've made for yourself, why are you disappointed or put out?
Yes, history shown that totalitarian regimes are much better for keeping people "straight", isn't it ? Slaves (the opposite of free people) were much better people, much easier to manage, isn't it ?
Excuse my sarcasm, but I can hardly listen to such arguments. I propose that instead of throwing the blame on freedom and people's stupidity, we should think about how those people got to be so stupid in the first place. I would argue that poor education has a major role in this. By education I mean both the schools of all levels and the information people receive through media of all kinds. If you want to change something, you need to look there. The current generations are probably too far gone anyway, so the best thing you can do is to focus on the generations that will come.
What? "Debate being on" and results pointing both ways is a meaningless metric, there's always results pointing both ways!
The question is, how much, how strong, how reliable. I've seen this "it's still undecided"-argument used far too often by some who want to ignore studies they don't like.
I'm open and I would say I don't have a bias, though I might be wrong. I would certainly like to know for sure these "things" are not dangerous. But please bring some references (preferably strong and reliable, as you said it). I am sorry but I can't just take your word for it. But seeing your strong position, I suspect you have done your research and I hope you will share with us.
Please note I made no affirmation of any kind myself, I just pointed out there are studies that claim there might be a negative effects on health. Also, you don't need to be so final about it: if cell phones don't cause cancer, it doesn't mean there are no other side effects. In any case, I still think we should know what the risks are. Just like with tobacco. Many people still smoke, but knowing the risks some people (I count myself in this category) choose not to smoke. Maybe you will like to see this article on the subject.
Certainly, you have removed all of the electrical wires running through every wall in your home then, right?
I can't see the relevance of your comment. I merely shown that it's stupid to make such definitive statements as the OP did, while the debate is still on, with results pointing both ways. And yes, I try to avoid exposure to stronger fields as much as I can (for instance I do use a headset (not even bluetooth) to keep the phone farther from my head, I try to avoid living near basestations - I own a spectrum analyzer, I mostly use wired network instead of wireless). Until this debate is over, I'd rather be on the safe side.
It's not like something similar didn't happen before, with tobacco industry (not as safe as doctors thought.
I swear, people are so dedicated to perpetuating this stupid myth that consumer electronic devices interfere with our brains. Its been so thoroughly debunked that it's almost in the same realm as anti-vaccination/autism beliefs (except it doesn't get people killed.)
Care to give some references ?
There seem to be some studies suggesting otherwise. See Mobile phone radiation and health. There are references to many studies in the Wikipedia article. I think you are too dedicated to perpetuating this stupid myth that consumer electronic devices do not interfere with our brains.
Stupid people! Why would you think it's a button ?!
It's Egypt after all (Pyramids, Sphinx etc), surely it has to be a hand lever or something similar.
Now that this finally happened, I think it's time we give them a helping hand: the least that we, the /. crowd, can do is donate some bandwidth to the Tor network by adding relay/bridge nodes and for those who can afford it exit nodes, too. This way we offer them a safer way to communicate among themselves and with the rest of the world.
For those yet unfamiliar with Tor, you can find out more here: Tor Project
That's why Stargate Universe ends: they figured out they can't reach the edge of the Universe in just a few seasons, to figure out what that mystery is all about.
The difference is, in the US or the UK, if you feel that you have a better idea than the government you can run for office and try to change things.
Do you really believe that ? I mean really, give it a try. Without money, without support from "big business", nobody will ever hear about you. And even if people hear about you, you won't be one of their favorites, mostly because they don't know you. Running for office involves much more than just the will to do it.
And the kind of people that have the will, the money and the support are in the game for power, for their own benefit, not for ours.