I'd ask anyone who routinely overrides your authority in the data-protection sphere to sign a form indicating something to the effect that they've been informed of these policies and the potential risks and if it all comes crashing down because they don't listen to you, it's not your fault.
If they have the authority to routinely ignore / override your security policies, they don't have to sign the fucking form either.
Explain the risks, if they choose to ignore it document that they have not returned the laptop to be backed up so that they can't try and blame you if it goes wrong and data loss does occur.
Have no fear, I have an asshole cousin who used to own a company. Anytime something went wrong he made sure to blame somebody else.
So it doesn't matter what you document, or how hard you try convince them that you're trying to protect their company; if something goes wrong, you're probably fucked. But keep those notes as due diligence, in case they really try to screw you for their fuckups. And keep your resume up to date.
While I agree that the penalties allowed under DCMA are out of line and ridiculous, the law is not a tit-for-tat system of retribution. It is the law and it is meant to be applied on the specific issues by themselves.
And as alluded to in the essay above, setting a precedent for excessive legal fees has negative consequences of its own, even to the "good" guys.
When Universal and the RIAA claim, in court, that these fees are outrageous, it will establish a precedent to use in a defense against them.
What better to use in a defense than a prosecution's own words?
This is a common misconception. In truth, Jesus was the son of a carpenter (or the foster son of a carpenter). It is not clear what his actual profession was, if he ever had one. Most likely is that he was a rabbi.
The only reference to Jesus being a carpenter in the New Testament is this:
Mark 6:2-3
And when the sabbath day was come, he began to teach in the synagogue: and many hearing him were astonished, saying, From whence hath this man these things? and what wisdom is this which is given unto him, that even such mighty works are wrought by his hands?
Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon?
The first verse mentions teaching in the synagogue, which carpenters don't generally do. The second verse calls him a carpenter, but other translations use the phrase "Is not this the son of the carpenter, the son of Mary". Also, the Greek version uses the word "tekton", which can be translated in a number of ways, including "poet" and "author".
If he were a rabbi, a poet, or an auther, where his writings?
For the record, you will find that God hates homosexuality but loves the people
According to whom? Certainly not according to the Bible. According to Proverbs 6:16-19, there are six things God hates, and homosexuality is not one of them:
There are six things the LORD hates, seven that are detestable to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, a false witness who pours out lies and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers.
That's a really good list.
I tend to think that Leviticus shouldn't be included in Christian canon as it's largely concerned with the Jewish concept of ritual purity which is discarded in Christianity. I went to a good church as a child (although I didn't really believe back then) where the focus was on love and forgiveness and I don't think anyone ever read from Leviticus. In general, I think the idea of pinning down religion to a matter of ritual and binary compliance with a set of procedures is a bad idea and I see Jesus's teachings as railing against that view within the community of his time.
It's nice to see people around here talking about this civilly.
The Christians pick and choose which parts they think are canon depending on their mood. For instance they throw out the whole, kill anybody eating shellfish, but they want to keep the Ten Commandments.
Reading the article (yeah yeah), he says nothing about the netbook being "dead" or even declining. Just your standard Slashdot editorial slant -- fabricating a headline out of thin air.
That's not thin air, that's a methane releasing orifice.
Just think how much the libraries are costing publishers, OMG!
And with the ability to actually borrow a book for free, nobody will ever need to actually buy a book. That's nothing but the liberals, err socialists trying to take nationalize both the publishing and retail book industries!
Where were the T-parties? Where is Fox news? Why are they not protecting our constitutional rights and going after the people who committed these felonies against the our citizens?
Oh, that's right. The only protest people they think are liberals, who want things like health care, and believe in the rule of law. When a conservative administration breaks the law its for our own good. My bad.
Actually, MythBusters busted that one. They build one building out of marshmallows and toothpicks, then they built ten. It took them ten times as long!
They weren't building computer chips either.
Also did they factor the R&D time into the first one?
The 4th amendment does not apply. As with every other country, the US considers domestic law to only apply when you are inside the country. If you have not yet cleared customs, you are technically not in the country. Therefore, you do not benefit from the protections of domestic law. This may seem like quibbling, but it is how every country controls its borders.
Whether or not such searches make any sense is another question altogether.
Of course our laws don't extend beyond our borders, that's why John Walker Lindh, and Manuel Noriega are in prison. The crimes they committed inside the US border.
A number of fish and birds are known to use either the earth's magnetic field or their own generated electric field for orientation/navigation, the ability to do so is scientifically understood and not "paranormal" by any means. I personally suspect that this guy is either a liar or just crazy, but if he's not, there are scientific explanations for it: perhaps he has a mutation that caused him to develop an organ sensitive to EM (highly unlikely). Or maybe a medical implant of a certain length (around 2.5", I believe), say, a metal plate screwed to a leg bone that is picking up the radiation and producing heat (likely), or a current strong enough to make the surrounding muscle twitch (less likely).
This could be considered paranormal and make him eligible for the prize.
WiFi sensitivity should easily count for paranormal
I suspect that Randi would call it "abnormal" rather than "paranormal", after all, WiFi scientifically exists, and there are various mechanisms for detecting electromagnetic fields throughout nature.
He alleged ability to detect is is paranormal in nature, since its complete BS.
Gun ownership is a Natural Right, and an absolute necessity without which government tyranny is impossible to avoid. Natural Rights don't come from a historical piece of paper no living person has signed, as brilliant as that piece of paper might have been at the time when it was written, Natural Rights is an economic concept, no different than the laws of physics or mathematics. Unless human nature suddenly changes, power will continue to corrupt, and checks and balances on absolute government power will remain a necessity and a duty of every freedom-loving individual on this planet (and beyond)!
Abortion is also a natural right for women.
Freedom of Speech is also a natural right. That includes freedom from intimidation by gun toting nutters.
Freedom of Religion is also a natural right. This includes freedom from to reject any and all religion.
And gun rights do not support freedom of speech. Just look at Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan, they have lots of guns, but no freedom of religion, and no freedom of speech either. But they certainly have plenty of guns.
The real point of the legal definition of CP should be: Something that hurts children, and therefore must be prevented.
But of course, right now, the real point is: Something that a politician thinks, the most extreme conservative groups might objet to, and therefore cost him votes, or will be picked up by the media, and so in the end costs him power.
They don’t fuckin’ care about children getting hurt. All they care about are their own asses. The whole idea of just forbidding to talk/see/hear anything about CP, instead of preventing the actual action that hurts children, is just sick. Because it protects CP. If accidentally stumbling upon a CP site and then call the cops to put them in jail, means that you will be put in jail, then CP is safer than it ever was!
And that is what ever people who got themselves raped as children say.
The problem is many people are under the delusion that what somebody else thinks, and does with their own body; harms them.
I thought the idea of freedom was that your freedom to throw a punch stops at the point where it reaches my face (but not sooner).
And the concept of limiting freedom of thought is just ridiculous.
So as long as the pervert's hands are on his own crotch, and not on someone else, he can think about whomever he wants.
But yeah, your final statement is clearly worded in a way to politically incite the masses.
Exactly, doesn't matter what someone else thinks. Its what they actually do.
Interstate trade is regulated by Congress, according to the constitution. Courts have held that all taxes on trade between states are an unconstitutional restraint on trade. The only exception is alcohol, which is granted an exception by the 21st amendment.
You do realize that some states have a usage tax on items purchased in other states. So if you purchase something from Amazon, depending on your state, you need to pay the usage tax on those goods.
"What isn't known, the precise characteristics of the particles that fall... "
What is unknown is boundless. What we all know is next to insignificant in comparison. Hubris is an overbearing presumption. You don't know what is or isn't known - you certainly are convinced you do, though.
Not knowing the precise characteristics is not the same as not knowing at all. We know these particles cannot destroy the Earth, because particles with much higher energies have been impacting from deep space and we are still here. Hence it is not a presumption, but based on physical evidence.
- on your part too. I don't know what goes into the estimations made by the folks who do such things at the LHC, but your comment indicates that you believe you have a *complete* understanding of the problem and can further assign risk from that assessment. Now, you may be right, or very close. People can be right as well as over their head and arrogant. Either way, I don't care. What struck me about the comment - it reminds me a bit of all those quants who thought they had a near complete understanding of a complicated problem and could accurately assign risk to derivatives.
I see this sort of thing all the time. I'm a research scientists. Part of what makes research interesting are the unexpected, confusing results. Emergent phenomena from really complicated interactions. Yet many or most of my colleagues have this kind of surety and arrogance. I don't get it.
It is not hubris, its math. The energy the LHC operates at is known, and we know how much energy some of the particles hitting the earth contain. The LHC operates at power levels many orders of magnitude beneath that. Its not that complicated; and conservation of energy still applies.
What isn't known, the precise characteristics of the particles that fall out of the collisions the LHC generates. Physicists would love to just put up a detector, and use the 1E20 eV Particles that are coming in from outer space. Unfortunately that's not really possible at this point in time, so they have to build the LHC.
we would have ridiculed the death of every explorer we ever had instead of mourn it.
The death of every explorer who died stupidly because he forgot to check if (s)he knows how to operate his material or if his it is working.
The Darwin-award worthy part of the story isn't that he tried something unusual and pioneering.
It's that, to be sure that nothing wrong would happen he did embark a lot of equipment, including a GPS receiver and a sat-phone - to be able to call for help whatever happens...... but he didn't even check if he knew how to use the GPS.
WTF? He goes as far as to imagine worst-case scenario and doesn't even check if the solution he has planned for that scenario is working ? What the hell did he expect ? That the GPS device will "magically" enable him to get found ? If he plans to use a GPS to tell potential rescuers where to search for him, he should at least check that he can manage to get a position from the GPS.
To get an explorer-analogy, it is as if Columbus, when embarking to discover the East Indies (or even Cpt FritzRoy and Darwin when embarking on the HMS Beagle), did consider that they might get attacked, decided to pack a few weapon for self defence. And then got the whole expedition completely exterminated by the first natives on pirogues armed with primitive spears, just because he forget to check if he knew to operate the weapons. *that* would be something Darwin Award-worthy.
More like Columbus or Darwin decided that the ship would be faster if it was lighter, and then dumped all their drinking water overboard because they were surrounded by water.
A more analogous slam would have been The Blind Side. I can't for the life of me figure out why people consistently pay to see Sandra Bullock movies. Sure, she's hot. But her movies are also consistently crap. Look at her list of movies here. There's not even one worth watching. But yet they always make money.
Well Demolition Man is on that list, and I love that movie. It's just about the only Stallone movie I enjoy, heck the only one I can even sit through. The cheese, fights, one-liners; it's a decent flick. And her role in it was decent.
Beyond that, some of her chick flicks are alright. They're the kind of chick flicks I can sit through and enjoy, instead of struggling to appear interested.
Out of the wiki list, I can find a handful of films that I enjoy (or enjoy well enough).
The only reason her acting looked good in Speed was that she was paired up with Ted.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd ask anyone who routinely overrides your authority in the data-protection sphere to sign a form indicating something to the effect that they've been informed of these policies and the potential risks and if it all comes crashing down because they don't listen to you, it's not your fault.
If they have the authority to routinely ignore / override your security policies, they don't have to sign the fucking form either.
Explain the risks, if they choose to ignore it document that they have not returned the laptop to be backed up so that they can't try and blame you if it goes wrong and data loss does occur.
Have no fear, I have an asshole cousin who used to own a company. Anytime something went wrong he made sure to blame somebody else.
So it doesn't matter what you document, or how hard you try convince them that you're trying to protect their company; if something goes wrong, you're probably fucked. But keep those notes as due diligence, in case they really try to screw you for their fuckups. And keep your resume up to date.
While I agree that the penalties allowed under DCMA are out of line and ridiculous, the law is not a tit-for-tat system of retribution. It is the law and it is meant to be applied on the specific issues by themselves. And as alluded to in the essay above, setting a precedent for excessive legal fees has negative consequences of its own, even to the "good" guys.
When Universal and the RIAA claim, in court, that these fees are outrageous, it will establish a precedent to use in a defense against them.
What better to use in a defense than a prosecution's own words?
Jesus was a carpenter.
This is a common misconception. In truth, Jesus was the son of a carpenter (or the foster son of a carpenter). It is not clear what his actual profession was, if he ever had one. Most likely is that he was a rabbi.
The only reference to Jesus being a carpenter in the New Testament is this:
Mark 6:2-3
And when the sabbath day was come, he began to teach in the synagogue: and many hearing him were astonished, saying, From whence hath this man these things? and what wisdom is this which is given unto him, that even such mighty works are wrought by his hands?
Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon?
The first verse mentions teaching in the synagogue, which carpenters don't generally do. The second verse calls him a carpenter, but other translations use the phrase "Is not this the son of the carpenter, the son of Mary". Also, the Greek version uses the word "tekton", which can be translated in a number of ways, including "poet" and "author".
If he were a rabbi, a poet, or an auther, where his writings?
For the record, you will find that God hates homosexuality but loves the people
According to whom? Certainly not according to the Bible. According to Proverbs 6:16-19, there are six things God hates, and homosexuality is not one of them:
There are six things the LORD hates, seven that are detestable to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, a false witness who pours out lies and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers.
That's a really good list.
I tend to think that Leviticus shouldn't be included in Christian canon as it's largely concerned with the Jewish concept of ritual purity which is discarded in Christianity. I went to a good church as a child (although I didn't really believe back then) where the focus was on love and forgiveness and I don't think anyone ever read from Leviticus. In general, I think the idea of pinning down religion to a matter of ritual and binary compliance with a set of procedures is a bad idea and I see Jesus's teachings as railing against that view within the community of his time.
It's nice to see people around here talking about this civilly.
The Christians pick and choose which parts they think are canon depending on their mood. For instance they throw out the whole, kill anybody eating shellfish, but they want to keep the Ten Commandments.
Reading the article (yeah yeah), he says nothing about the netbook being "dead" or even declining. Just your standard Slashdot editorial slant -- fabricating a headline out of thin air.
That's not thin air, that's a methane releasing orifice.
Just think how much the libraries are costing publishers, OMG!
And with the ability to actually borrow a book for free, nobody will ever need to actually buy a book. That's nothing but the liberals, err socialists trying to take nationalize both the publishing and retail book industries!
Where were the T-parties? Where is Fox news? Why are they not protecting our constitutional rights and going after the people who committed these felonies against the our citizens?
Oh, that's right. The only protest people they think are liberals, who want things like health care, and believe in the rule of law. When a conservative administration breaks the law its for our own good. My bad.
Actually, MythBusters busted that one. They build one building out of marshmallows and toothpicks, then they built ten. It took them ten times as long!
They weren't building computer chips either.
Also did they factor the R&D time into the first one?
Did they take marriage into account?
After marriage men don't change but women do.
Of course most people here on /. wouldn't be familiar with that concept outside of 2L.
The 4th amendment does not apply. As with every other country, the US considers domestic law to only apply when you are inside the country. If you have not yet cleared customs, you are technically not in the country. Therefore, you do not benefit from the protections of domestic law. This may seem like quibbling, but it is how every country controls its borders.
It is not only laptops: many people have also been required to show the photos on their cameras, as well as the contents of other electronic devices.
Whether or not such searches make any sense is another question altogether.
Of course our laws don't extend beyond our borders, that's why John Walker Lindh, and Manuel Noriega are in prison. The crimes they committed inside the US border.
Anyone who needs a Caps Lock Key for legitimate technical reasons can buy a specialized keyboard for that purpose.
And install it into the laptop's chassis how?
How about using the USB port?
Liars aren't paranormal, just liars.
Hence Randi's offer of $1 Million.
A number of fish and birds are known to use either the earth's magnetic field or their own generated electric field for orientation/navigation, the ability to do so is scientifically understood and not "paranormal" by any means. I personally suspect that this guy is either a liar or just crazy, but if he's not, there are scientific explanations for it: perhaps he has a mutation that caused him to develop an organ sensitive to EM (highly unlikely). Or maybe a medical implant of a certain length (around 2.5", I believe), say, a metal plate screwed to a leg bone that is picking up the radiation and producing heat (likely), or a current strong enough to make the surrounding muscle twitch (less likely).
This could be considered paranormal and make him eligible for the prize.
WiFi sensitivity should easily count for paranormal
I suspect that Randi would call it "abnormal" rather than "paranormal", after all, WiFi scientifically exists, and there are various mechanisms for detecting electromagnetic fields throughout nature.
He alleged ability to detect is is paranormal in nature, since its complete BS.
bwk_at_princeton.edu
Gun ownership is a Natural Right, and an absolute necessity without which government tyranny is impossible to avoid. Natural Rights don't come from a historical piece of paper no living person has signed, as brilliant as that piece of paper might have been at the time when it was written, Natural Rights is an economic concept, no different than the laws of physics or mathematics. Unless human nature suddenly changes, power will continue to corrupt, and checks and balances on absolute government power will remain a necessity and a duty of every freedom-loving individual on this planet (and beyond)!
Abortion is also a natural right for women.
Freedom of Speech is also a natural right. That includes freedom from intimidation by gun toting nutters.
Freedom of Religion is also a natural right. This includes freedom from to reject any and all religion.
And gun rights do not support freedom of speech. Just look at Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan, they have lots of guns, but no freedom of religion, and no freedom of speech either. But they certainly have plenty of guns.
Why should I participate in DRM P2P, especially if I have to buy a license? Microsoft should be paying me.
Which is absolutely not the point.
The real point of the legal definition of CP should be: Something that hurts children, and therefore must be prevented. But of course, right now, the real point is: Something that a politician thinks, the most extreme conservative groups might objet to, and therefore cost him votes, or will be picked up by the media, and so in the end costs him power. They don’t fuckin’ care about children getting hurt. All they care about are their own asses. The whole idea of just forbidding to talk/see/hear anything about CP, instead of preventing the actual action that hurts children, is just sick. Because it protects CP. If accidentally stumbling upon a CP site and then call the cops to put them in jail, means that you will be put in jail, then CP is safer than it ever was! And that is what ever people who got themselves raped as children say.
The problem is many people are under the delusion that what somebody else thinks, and does with their own body; harms them.
I thought the idea of freedom was that your freedom to throw a punch stops at the point where it reaches my face (but not sooner). And the concept of limiting freedom of thought is just ridiculous.
So as long as the pervert's hands are on his own crotch, and not on someone else, he can think about whomever he wants.
But yeah, your final statement is clearly worded in a way to politically incite the masses.
Exactly, doesn't matter what someone else thinks. Its what they actually do.
Interstate trade is regulated by Congress, according to the constitution. Courts have held that all taxes on trade between states are an unconstitutional restraint on trade. The only exception is alcohol, which is granted an exception by the 21st amendment.
You do realize that some states have a usage tax on items purchased in other states. So if you purchase something from Amazon, depending on your state, you need to pay the usage tax on those goods.
"What isn't known, the precise characteristics of the particles that fall ... "
What is unknown is boundless. What we all know is next to insignificant in comparison. Hubris is an overbearing presumption. You don't know what is or isn't known - you certainly are convinced you do, though.
Not knowing the precise characteristics is not the same as not knowing at all. We know these particles cannot destroy the Earth, because particles with much higher energies have been impacting from deep space and we are still here. Hence it is not a presumption, but based on physical evidence.
- on your part too. I don't know what goes into the estimations made by the folks who do such things at the LHC, but your comment indicates that you believe you have a *complete* understanding of the problem and can further assign risk from that assessment. Now, you may be right, or very close. People can be right as well as over their head and arrogant. Either way, I don't care. What struck me about the comment - it reminds me a bit of all those quants who thought they had a near complete understanding of a complicated problem and could accurately assign risk to derivatives.
I see this sort of thing all the time. I'm a research scientists. Part of what makes research interesting are the unexpected, confusing results. Emergent phenomena from really complicated interactions. Yet many or most of my colleagues have this kind of surety and arrogance. I don't get it.
It is not hubris, its math. The energy the LHC operates at is known, and we know how much energy some of the particles hitting the earth contain. The LHC operates at power levels many orders of magnitude beneath that. Its not that complicated; and conservation of energy still applies.
What isn't known, the precise characteristics of the particles that fall out of the collisions the LHC generates. Physicists would love to just put up a detector, and use the 1E20 eV Particles that are coming in from outer space. Unfortunately that's not really possible at this point in time, so they have to build the LHC.
we would have ridiculed the death of every explorer we ever had instead of mourn it.
The death of every explorer who died stupidly because he forgot to check if (s)he knows how to operate his material or if his it is working .
The Darwin-award worthy part of the story isn't that he tried something unusual and pioneering. It's that, to be sure that nothing wrong would happen he did embark a lot of equipment, including a GPS receiver and a sat-phone - to be able to call for help whatever happens... ... but he didn't even check if he knew how to use the GPS.
WTF? He goes as far as to imagine worst-case scenario and doesn't even check if the solution he has planned for that scenario is working ? What the hell did he expect ? That the GPS device will "magically" enable him to get found ? If he plans to use a GPS to tell potential rescuers where to search for him, he should at least check that he can manage to get a position from the GPS.
To get an explorer-analogy, it is as if Columbus, when embarking to discover the East Indies (or even Cpt FritzRoy and Darwin when embarking on the HMS Beagle), did consider that they might get attacked, decided to pack a few weapon for self defence. And then got the whole expedition completely exterminated by the first natives on pirogues armed with primitive spears, just because he forget to check if he knew to operate the weapons. *that* would be something Darwin Award-worthy.
More like Columbus or Darwin decided that the ship would be faster if it was lighter, and then dumped all their drinking water overboard because they were surrounded by water.
A more analogous slam would have been The Blind Side. I can't for the life of me figure out why people consistently pay to see Sandra Bullock movies. Sure, she's hot. But her movies are also consistently crap. Look at her list of movies here. There's not even one worth watching. But yet they always make money.
Well Demolition Man is on that list, and I love that movie. It's just about the only Stallone movie I enjoy, heck the only one I can even sit through. The cheese, fights, one-liners; it's a decent flick. And her role in it was decent.
Beyond that, some of her chick flicks are alright. They're the kind of chick flicks I can sit through and enjoy, instead of struggling to appear interested.
Out of the wiki list, I can find a handful of films that I enjoy (or enjoy well enough).
The only reason her acting looked good in Speed was that she was paired up with Ted.
a wsj analyst has to be looking at this, and concluding that the gpu business is doomed.
Intel is going to have to come out with a GPU that's better than a 4 year old nvidia gpu first.