Then i have no idea why that was relevant as a reply to my post. I don't have any opinion on your subject.
And i'll reply to your other reply to my comment here, just for simplicity. Neither "Stealing" and "Unauthorized Publication" mean anything. There isn't languange to describe the exact nature of this crime. Both are basterdizations. Don't claim my argument is wrong because i'm not using the terms most favorable to your argument.
if the law is broken then the law should rectify the situation in a balanced fashion
You just made my argument for me. You can't say "I can commit this crime against party X because party X commited this crime against me, but the court didn't punish them enough."
These are two seperate issues. The ruling in one is not an excuse for stealing music.
This is the same rediculous logic that's causing so much of the problem. Simply because the record companies are big, bad, and evil, doesn't mean that anyone stealing music is right to be doing so.
This is essentialy an ad-hominem attack on a company. Slashdot is famous for this.
These files can be queried to see if they contain a given email address, but they can't be reverse-engineered to reveal the list of addresses used to construct them.
Or so they thought, untill they heard about the sha vulnerability.
Is it really that hard to move a mouse to the top of the screen?
The layout of controls on screen should be dictated by logic and ease of finding controls, not 'how far your mouse has to travel to get to the controls'. If it's really that hard to move your mouse to the top of the screen, you have carpel tunnel. Go see a doctor.
I'll keep my menus where i expect them, at the top of the screen.
From what you tell me, I wander if you're not being screwed, after all - the best way to screw a person over is to tell them they have some special type of right that they don't have and watch them beat their head on the wall trying to make it work.
Yes because the movie, music, printing, and computer software don't work? How exactly do I go about telling if I really have a special right or not? I think I missed your point.
Something tells me you're not Michael Jackson. That you'd likely be far better off going way out of your way to give away everything you create and encourage copying wherever possible, then develop a "following" who will buy shirts, signed items, and tickes to events you perform at.
Good point. I like it. But I think that your argument that copyrights should be abolished (I'm assuming that's what you were saying, correct me if not) is not furthered by one case in which copyright is a hinderence. Whether or not you copyright your own works is your choice. Denying it to everyone else simply because it doesn't suit you makes no sense.
Do not confuse the music industry with the institution of copyright.
You seem to be talking about picture-hanging-on-the-wall art. I don't know about that, I can't comment.
Whether you use the word "protect" or "promote" in that sentence depends only on perspective. Per the constitution, the gole of copyright is to "promote" the arts and useful sciences. If you think they've gone too far and started to 'protect' publishers from, oh who knows what evil, then sure, that's your opinion. That's a problem of our copyright law, not a fundamental problem of the idea people should be compensated for their ("intellectual") works.
I really can't reply to the last two sentences there. I can't understand what you're trying to convey there. Betamax probably.
So I have to resort to the charity of others? Sorry, that's not an incentive for me to go create.
Now it's interesting you say "the right to mircoregulate how everyone on the planet uses a given piece of information". So it's just the "microregulation" we need to get rid of or prevent?
Guess who thinks similarly. Yep. Good ole Lawernce Lessig.
The security of a one time pad comes from the fact that the attacker cannot determine when they've sucessfuly decrypted the message. To use a binary example:
Message:0101 Key:1010 XOR: 1111
Now if an attacker might randomly guess that key, but they have no way to determine if 0101 is the message or if the key is 1001 is the key and 0110 is the message. With port knocking, when they've found the right combination, there'll be a distinguishable response: a new port will be opened. This allows the attacker to simply try every possible combination, and then see which causes the port to open.
It's dificult to argue with made up numbers. But i'll try
I attacked you like that because i'm a musician, and you're attacking my right to recieve compensation for my work. You're devaluing my work, deeming it unworthy of compensation. This is selfish and offensive to me.
I don't know about these people you think the 'copyright system' has screwed, explain and i'll respond.
Oh really? So are you saying you deserve no compensation for any of your work? The point of copyrights is to encourage people to create, money being the easiest incentive to do so. Maybe you don't need any encouragement, go ahead and put your work in the public domain. That's your right, you can opt-out of copyright for your works. But I'm willing to pay to support the creator(s) of the song/painting/program. I hope you won't be too offended.
In a way Lessig is a sellout to the big media industries.
Bzzzzt. Wrong. Why don't you read one of his books before you start accusing him of being the exact opposite of what he is.
Every time we've had it up to here with the likes of the RIAA and SCO, Lessing would come out and scream from the rooftoops that abolition of copyright is too radical, and those who see copyrights for the evil that they are get labeled as extremists.
An extremist is someone who believes themselves to be absolutely unquestionably right, without considering the opinion of the opposition. Sounds like yourself. Just because Lessig is willing to look at both sides of the issue, which you obviously aren't capable of, doesn't mean he's a sellout to either side. He's simply willing to actualy expend some thought about the problem, instead of demanding one way or the other all the time.
Sadly, Lessig is the extremist, and even nurotic. If a mugger wanted to beat an ole lady with a baseball bat 10 times, and I wanted to force it so that she would be beat 0 times - Lessing would come in and say we were both extremists and suggest we beat her 5 times.
I'm sorry you don't agree with lessig. I'm also sorry can't understand the concept of comprimise. I'm also sorry you can't be bothered to contemplate the other side of your argument. You're obviously not a musician, writer, or artist. Just because you want to take their works for free doesn't mean it's right.
I've spent so many weekends playing with connecting FreeS/WAN to my OpenBSD router. Every time I'd end up with some insanely cryptic error message (on both ends, openbsd isn't much better). This weekend I downloaded KAME for the 2.6 kernel, and had it working within half an hour, including the time to recompile my kernel.
FreeS/WAN is an unfortunate example of a project too focused on a far out goal (OE) to make the simple foundations work.
The point is that he's refering to something that's changed since that date which I won't mention since it offends you. It doesn't matter how much time has passed since then, it changed alot of security procedures. Since he's refering to those specific changes, post-9/11 is the best term.
The Cheyenne Mountain Complex, I believe a Department of Defense operation. Coincidentaly the DoD also spawned (D)ARPA, which spawned the ARPANET, which mutated into this here internet.
GNU was not developed at MIT. Stallman resigned from the AI lab before doing anything on the gnu project. Oh and the BSD code stealing line is bullshit too. There's no BSD code in the GNU system, and I'm not sure why anyone would relicense BSD code under the GPL.
Re:It's a ridiculously contrived plot device,
on
Quicksilver
·
· Score: 1
Diceware definitly provides the most secure but easily remembered passwords, and even lets you make pretty exact estimates of the entropy content of your passwords, which makes all sorts of calculations simple and fun.
Slashdot Mirror
When America was a third world country nobody gave us jack.
Many other european countries backed the country financialy. France backed us militarily.
When we had the Great Depression I don't recall receiving a crumb from anyone.
The rest of Europe was experiencing its own depression about the same time as us (a bit lagged though).
And, even if it had been offered, we wouldn't have taken it.
Uhh, you forget how greedy americans can be.
Then i have no idea why that was relevant as a reply to my post. I don't have any opinion on your subject.
And i'll reply to your other reply to my comment here, just for simplicity. Neither "Stealing" and "Unauthorized Publication" mean anything. There isn't languange to describe the exact nature of this crime. Both are basterdizations. Don't claim my argument is wrong because i'm not using the terms most favorable to your argument.
if the law is broken then the law should rectify the situation in a balanced fashion
You just made my argument for me. You can't say "I can commit this crime against party X because party X commited this crime against me, but the court didn't punish them enough."
These are two seperate issues. The ruling in one is not an excuse for stealing music.
This is the same rediculous logic that's causing so much of the problem. Simply because the record companies are big, bad, and evil, doesn't mean that anyone stealing music is right to be doing so.
This is essentialy an ad-hominem attack on a company. Slashdot is famous for this.
These files can be queried to see if they contain a given email address, but they can't be reverse-engineered to reveal the list of addresses used to construct them.
Or so they thought, untill they heard about the sha vulnerability.
A very Gödelian problem.
Is it really that hard to move a mouse to the top of the screen?
The layout of controls on screen should be dictated by logic and ease of finding controls, not 'how far your mouse has to travel to get to the controls'. If it's really that hard to move your mouse to the top of the screen, you have carpel tunnel. Go see a doctor.
I'll keep my menus where i expect them, at the top of the screen.
Have you ever been to any town in Europe? They've all had the same narrow streets for centuries, literaly.
I'm not rebuilding my city just to accomedate a segway.
From what you tell me, I wander if you're not being screwed, after all - the best way to screw a person over is to tell them they have some special type of right that they don't have and watch them beat their head on the wall trying to make it work.
Yes because the movie, music, printing, and computer software don't work? How exactly do I go about telling if I really have a special right or not? I think I missed your point.
Something tells me you're not Michael Jackson. That you'd likely be far better off going way out of your way to give away everything you create and encourage copying wherever possible, then develop a "following" who will buy shirts, signed items, and tickes to events you perform at.
Good point. I like it. But I think that your argument that copyrights should be abolished (I'm assuming that's what you were saying, correct me if not) is not furthered by one case in which copyright is a hinderence. Whether or not you copyright your own works is your choice. Denying it to everyone else simply because it doesn't suit you makes no sense.
Do not confuse the music industry with the institution of copyright.
You seem to be talking about picture-hanging-on-the-wall art. I don't know about that, I can't comment.
Whether you use the word "protect" or "promote" in that sentence depends only on perspective. Per the constitution, the gole of copyright is to "promote" the arts and useful sciences. If you think they've gone too far and started to 'protect' publishers from, oh who knows what evil, then sure, that's your opinion. That's a problem of our copyright law, not a fundamental problem of the idea people should be compensated for their ("intellectual") works.
I really can't reply to the last two sentences there. I can't understand what you're trying to convey there. Betamax probably.
So I have to resort to the charity of others? Sorry, that's not an incentive for me to go create.
Now it's interesting you say "the right to mircoregulate how everyone on the planet uses a given piece of information". So it's just the "microregulation" we need to get rid of or prevent?
Guess who thinks similarly. Yep. Good ole Lawernce Lessig.
The security of a one time pad comes from the fact that the attacker cannot determine when they've sucessfuly decrypted the message. To use a binary example:
:1010
Message:0101
Key
XOR: 1111
Now if an attacker might randomly guess that key, but they have no way to determine if 0101 is the message or if the key is 1001 is the key and 0110 is the message. With port knocking, when they've found the right combination, there'll be a distinguishable response: a new port will be opened. This allows the attacker to simply try every possible combination, and then see which causes the port to open.
It's dificult to argue with made up numbers. But i'll try
I attacked you like that because i'm a musician, and you're attacking my right to recieve compensation for my work. You're devaluing my work, deeming it unworthy of compensation. This is selfish and offensive to me.
I don't know about these people you think the 'copyright system' has screwed, explain and i'll respond.
Oh really? So are you saying you deserve no compensation for any of your work? The point of copyrights is to encourage people to create, money being the easiest incentive to do so. Maybe you don't need any encouragement, go ahead and put your work in the public domain. That's your right, you can opt-out of copyright for your works. But I'm willing to pay to support the creator(s) of the song/painting/program. I hope you won't be too offended.
Bzzzzt. Wrong. Why don't you read one of his books before you start accusing him of being the exact opposite of what he is.
An extremist is someone who believes themselves to be absolutely unquestionably right, without considering the opinion of the opposition. Sounds like yourself. Just because Lessig is willing to look at both sides of the issue, which you obviously aren't capable of, doesn't mean he's a sellout to either side. He's simply willing to actualy expend some thought about the problem, instead of demanding one way or the other all the time.
I'm sorry you don't agree with lessig. I'm also sorry can't understand the concept of comprimise. I'm also sorry you can't be bothered to contemplate the other side of your argument. You're obviously not a musician, writer, or artist. Just because you want to take their works for free doesn't mean it's right.
I've spent so many weekends playing with connecting FreeS/WAN to my OpenBSD router. Every time I'd end up with some insanely cryptic error message (on both ends, openbsd isn't much better). This weekend I downloaded KAME for the 2.6 kernel, and had it working within half an hour, including the time to recompile my kernel.
FreeS/WAN is an unfortunate example of a project too focused on a far out goal (OE) to make the simple foundations work.
I'm looking to get a memory hole installed in my house actualy.
And since this is more of a poll than anything else, I'll say "Me too!" for gandi.
Never had a problem, everything clearly understandable.
The point is that he's refering to something that's changed since that date which I won't mention since it offends you. It doesn't matter how much time has passed since then, it changed alot of security procedures. Since he's refering to those specific changes, post-9/11 is the best term.
SAC is no longer in existance. Sorry.
The Cheyenne Mountain Complex, I believe a Department of Defense operation. Coincidentaly the DoD also spawned (D)ARPA, which spawned the ARPANET, which mutated into this here internet.
Yes it's true,
1+1
GNU was not developed at MIT. Stallman resigned from the AI lab before doing anything on the gnu project. Oh and the BSD code stealing line is bullshit too. There's no BSD code in the GNU system, and I'm not sure why anyone would relicense BSD code under the GPL.
Read up on the Birthday Paradox.
Ok, that's it. We need to get verisign out, now. Anyone know how to accomplish this?
Diceware definitly provides the most secure but easily remembered passwords, and even lets you make pretty exact estimates of the entropy content of your passwords, which makes all sorts of calculations simple and fun.