Additional coolpoints voor DK hostmaster: click here (it should work without the dot at the end as well, but I don't get that to work often on my windows box).
AI is the only other TLD I've discovered so far which scores coolpoints for this as well.
I don't know what you're talking about. From my point of view the last 4 years of Nokia phones have been re-treads of the old 51xx design, just in smaller boxes. Only in the last few months have they come out with anything that doesn't look like a squished 5100. Maybe they've been selling progressively "cooler and cooler" phones in europe, but in the US, Nokia has been lagging *way* behind Motorola, Samsung, LG, and Ericsson in the cool department.
Nokia is launching 35 new models this year. Of the previous bunch, you must have missed the entire 6xxx series, the 72xx, the 8xxx and especially the 3650 (which has a rotary disc like design) and the 7650 smart phone (which slides open in two parts, check it out. Siemens is copying this already). Nokia also already sells an MP3 playing phone with full alphanumeric keyboard, about the same size and shape as the N-Gage, the 5510. The 3650, 7650 and 5510 (and indeed 92xx) have extremely different keypad configurations and designs. Also check out the freakish looking 3200.
http://www.nokia.com/phones/
The 51xxs had user-replaceable custom faceplates, something nobody else has done before or since. That was the high point of Nokia's coolness IMHO. For about 2 years, every college student and a lot of teenagers had them. Now those customers have largely moved on to sexier Asian designs (Samsung, LG, etc.)
The 3210, 3310, 3350 series (Nokia's kiddy range) have fully removable front- and backcovers. Even the keypad comes off. You can also get them printed up with custom picture from third parties.
Samsung has some sexy designs, but LG.. Not too sure about that.. (Though the CDMA models look better that their GSM range). Other manufacturers which have used removable covers include Ericsson, Alcatel, Kyocera and I suppose quite a few others. I think the Ericsson GA628 preceded any Nokia phones with removable covers. IIRC the first Nokia phone with a removable cover was the 3210
Of course most of Nokia's models are manufactured to work with GSM first, so I don't know whether they'd be available for niche standards such as iDen, and even CDMA is a wildly smaller market.
Now, I'm not Nokia's biggest fan (their handsets tend to fall apart after a year, and their warranty repairs take forever around here) but they sure do have a LOT of different models and they've launched more innovative designs than any other manufacturer (though not always the best designs, e.g. the 9210 and 7110).
I'm not so sure on that. For at least a year and a half, everyone I know (Suffolk County, NY) iwth a cell phone has owned a Motorola i90c. If they break it? They buy another i90c. I haven't seen another cell phone in weeks.
The i90c is an iDen phone. It's not exactly surprising that there are less new models available for a network technology that used as, ahem, "widely" as iDen.
I have never understood how this breed of cards exists to this day. Really... the difference between a "stock" GeForce and a workstation class Quadro GeForce... just doesnt justify the cost difference anymore.
Well, a specialist model requires retooling of the manufacturing process, which costs a fixed amount of money, and you sell fewer of them, so the added cost per unit produced is higher than you'd expect from the extra features to be gotten.
Of course, if nvidia would churn out Quadro models by default, the price per unit would only go up by a few bucks and everyone would have a gee-whiz superfast card. But that would be Communism. So what they do is a thing called price differentiation. Essentially both the consumer and pro market are buying the same product, but the pro's recon they can't live without some of the bells and whistles, and that they have no problem spending some extra cash, so they buy the pro version at a higher cost. This way everybody pays the most they can afford.
Price differentiation is also the driving force behind mail-in rebates; if you don't care too much about the cost you're not likely to mail in for the rebate cash, so everyone pays roughly what they were planning to spend (especially if the rebate undercuts a competitors price; since you don't expect to reimburse it 100% of the time you can offer your product at a price-after-rebate that is suspiciously low). Some companies take this a bit too far, and you can only succesfully claim the rebate if your time has no value at all and you are prepared to spend weeks jumping through hoops and reading fine print.
Older folk aren't going to go for it, which leaves the younger folk, who aren't necessarily going to have enough cash.
Even counting only US younger folk, the younger folk represent a spending power larger than a pretty decent chuck of the African continent. Well, I don't know about African economies actually, but teenager's influenced spending power is about $520 billion. Anually.
With handset subsidies being what they are in many places, the difference between a very uncool phone and a very cool phone may only be a few bucks up front (of course, you'll pay for it in monthly charges later..) Smart kids will negotiate a good deal with their parents, and get the cool phone.
Nokia already is in the business of launching cooler and cooler phones (which under the skin are about 100% identical as far as hardware is concerned). And they're doing well at it. The prevailing "hip" model "everyone" has changes at least once a year, after which you'll only see older folk walking around with them, fumbling to get to grips with having to push the green button for it to actually dial the number you just entered..
I always thought Xerox PARC, that place that made money for everybody except Xerox, invented the mouse [wikipedia.org]. Is that just common misconception?
Actual people worked at PARC. Such as that Doug guy.
Caching webpages in a proxy is something all ISPs do. The downside is that whenever I've used an ISPs squid proxy, it slowed things down! Turning proxies off almost invariably helps speeds, in stead of hurting them. Plus, if the proxy goes down, you can still use the web. I have no idea why ISP's proxies are so craptastic (YMMV), but in my experience, they are. (BTW, it would help if windowsupdate was cacheable..)
Compression.. Now there's something! I have in the past used an ssh tunnel (with compression switched on) to my university's web proxy, and that sped up things quite a bit! Why isn't this switched on by default on my PPPoA connection? Doesn't apache handle gzip'ing these days? Doesn't seem to be used much, though.. This speed up might be less pronounced on dial-up links though, because POTS modems usually switch on compression anyway (again YMMV).
Some download accelerators simply download different chunks of the same file in multiple sessions from either one server (shouldn't matter - unless with roundrobin DNS) or even from mirrors (better!). That's quite effective as well, but we know this, and that's why we use bittorrent for big files, don't we?;-) Not such a good approach for webbrowsing btw.
But it has to be said.. Most download accelerators are just bloaty spyware and don't do *zilch* to help your download speed.. Feh!
Didn't AOL use to convert GIF graphics to their own, lossy,.ART format when you used their client? Do they still?
Class Members will also agree that they remain bound by the terms of Register.com's Services Agreement, as it is amended from time to time.
Yes! Let's agree to agree on things you never agreed on in the first place! Not that this is NOT worded in quite the same way as their current services agreement words it (which includes a 30 day period in which you can up and leave if they change the services agreement); it would seem that this class action settlement overrides such common sense provisions. Nasty!
Trust me on that one...my phone was tapped 24/7 in Russia, I still get taped when I call back there. It's the "click"...and at times you can hear them breathing...or music in the background. Sometimes they pick up before the phone connects, sometimes after. I suppose they enjoy the chats I have with my gf...
The alternative, simpler, explanation would be that the Russian telephone network simply experiences much more interference, such as cross-talk interference, and other anomalies..
Regardless what purveyors of little boxes with red lights on them will tell you, there is NO way to tell whether a phone line is being wiretapped or not. It's all digital these days, and doesn't require billions of funding (like, say, upgrading the Russian telco infrastructure to get rid of crosstalk interference would), but more in the region of a K or two..
And breathing?? Come on! Conversations are taped, transcribed (possibly mostly by using speech recognition software - it's no coincidence that there was "some" CIA involvement with Lernout&Hauspie, the Belgian language technology dotcom) and then analyzed. Nobody has the time to sit around waiting for some yank to call his girlfriend. If she is being tapped, I'm sure they only actually listen to the tapes of her talking to her friendly neighborhood drugdealer, or Chechzen aunt.
They're still hassling my grandparents there asking where I dissapeared to and why I'm not getting raped in the army.
Had they listened in on your phone conversations, they'd know;-)
Now, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you (in your case, well, probably they are). But wiretapping is a smooth and silent operation, and, obviously (spooks don't like to get found out) has been for ages.
Time, place and manner restrictions (yelling fire in a crowded theater) have been exempt for quite a while now, provided that there are other avenues for the speech in question.
Ah, yes, how could I forget the time, place and manner exemption in the First Amendment... oh wait... there isn't one.
That's right. Now define speech. Notice how there is no definition in the Constitution or Amendmends themselves. Is tattooing your political views on my forehead speech? No it's not. So, what is the difference between speech and non-speech? That's where the time, place and manner come into play; you're welcome to espouse your political views in other ways than tatooing them on my forehead; this leaves the speech intact, it's just the manner that's not OK.
It was the courts seeing something to be annoying, and so AMENDING the Constitution to allow it.
The constitution is still the same as ever. But people interpret it in different ways. If people with different views get into a dispute, there's a way to solve this; through the courts!
Under Articles I and Articles III of the Constitution, the Courts don't have authority over laws, only cases under the law. (So "Case Law" and "Common Law" are not laws because they were not made by Congress and court rulings cannot be based on them)
Come on now, Article III doesn't even define the "judicial power" granted, let alone limit its contents (only its scope). The system of "Case"/"Common Law" evolved exactly because it is a Good Thing that the courts reach similar conclusions in similar cases; i.e. that the law is interpreted consistently time and again. If this leads to undesirable results; simply change the law, and the judiciary will uphold the new laws. Having courts operate independently from any historical judgement is pretty dangerous; in that case you could never know whether your case was strong or not, as courts could find as they please and interpret (and balance) laws differently each and everytime. This lack of Legal Certainty is exactly why codified law was invented in the first place, it would be a Bad Thing for courts to coopt it.
Note that this tradition of using jurisprudence is hardly unique to the US or British Common Law systems, European courts rely heavily on precedent as well, and even look at the state of mind of the legislature when laws were created to determine the best interpretation (in fact, legislatures have taken to publishing letters of intent along with laws put on the books, to guide judges (and the general public) in their interpretation of new laws).
Note by the way that the Constitution does not enumerate all rights. I certainly have a right to prevent people from tatooing my head, which in the case of anyone wishing to tatoo "speech" on my head would prevail. It's perfectly OK for a court to prioritize one basic human right (in the case of tatooing; the integrity/selfdetermination of the human body) over another one (speech) - such rights are absolute only when they do not infringe upon any one else's rights.
If you find courts re-interpreting the Constitution in new and exiting ways, ask yourself why. Because that's their job, that's why. If you don't like it, use your vote and hope the next President appoints judges that lean more towards your interpretations, or get laws on the books that can't be misinterpreted. That's how the Constitution works; through the Balance of Powers.
What part of 'Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech...' do you not understand? Spam should be solved technically, because it can't be done legally.
Time, place and manner restrictions (yelling fire in a crowded theater) have been exempt for quite a while now, provided that there are other avenues for the speech in question. There is not exactly a shortage of better ways to advertise than spam. Besides, corporations are not citizens; though they are treated as if they were individuals, they're really not; they don't get the vote (another constitutionally guaranteed right) either. Commercial speech has long been more restricted than scientific, literary, artistic or political speech to name just a few.
Furthermore, if you take a literal view of the Constitution (as opposed to a horizontal-effects view), this would mean that while Congress cannot abridge freedom of speech, the States can (that's the tenth Amendment).
There is a large body of law on the difference between acts (of speech) and speech itself. The situation is quite a bit less black&white as you seem to think it is.
'I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it' - Beatrice Hall
'But if you try to tattoo on my skull even things that I do agree with, I shall kick your ass mightily' - me.
Eduardo Sanchez will return to provide another thorough review of the base Mandrake Linux system. His review will consider, in depth, installation, administration, usage, and performance of Mandrake Linux 9.1.
OK. So there IS no beef? I thought that was supposed to be a spoon.
(Wasted another good, what, 3 minutes of my life RTFA - those kids should take classes and learn about paragraphs, beginnings, middles and endings.)
Actually, Settlers of Catan is way to dependent on chance for me. It offers little if no reward for strategy, people get hissy-fitty over underhanded tactics (come on, that's what strategy should be about!) like non-fair trading and forming alliances, the black raider thingy comes along way too often (what? 7 is the most probable combination of two dice? who wudda thunk!)
It's almost as bad as RISK (which is essentially totally lame if not predetermined)..
How much fun would the settlers of catan or Risk (or monopoly, or..) be if rolling the dice would result in the same number over and over again (i.e. without the element of chance)? Ever noticed how a game like Chess or Go does without dice altogether?
Please remember, this is not about the SCO case at all, but about false advertising. SCO was saying "linux users have to pay" even though this is an untested legal theory - it is for these misleading statements they now have to pay. If they later are proven to be right, they still made allegations out to be proven fact, which is a no-no in advertising, as far as Germany is concerned.
Bear in mind the order restraining them from making such claims is only a prelimenary injunction. That means all is still to play for, though the likelihood of a judgement against SCO Deutschland is very high indeed.
Re:Okay, here is the Linux compatible equivalent.
on
Aethera 1.0
·
· Score: 1
Make annoying changes to your files. Then send this Linux honor system virus to everyone you know.
Not quite unlike the Linux Honor System DDOS, known simply as "slashdot".
Google's simply complying with the request and blocking the URLs that were validly mentioned in the takedown notice. However, Google's not going to do anything more than the law requires, so any new URLs that pop up will certainly get GoogleBot's attention and the cat and mouse game goes on...
Google is doing more than the law requires. If Google simply did nothing, that would be a valid alternative in the eyes of the law. However, they would assume liability for any claims of contributory infringement -- or rather, pulling the links in response to a DMCA notice ensures that any contributory liability will not arise. The DMCA is intented to protect cowardly companies, and is used as such by Google.
Would it be too much to ask what this free-for-personal-use.... product that "innoculates" is?
It only checks binaries that try to access the network, and only disallows accessing the network. Not much use against virusses (though it helps against spyware).
Do you or anyone else know of any other products? Commercial or otherwise?
no, not really, if anyone has suggestions? (tripwire for windows perhaps???)
The thing is, in newer versions they do not include "innoculation". Innoculation used to simply take a fingerprint (CRC32) of your executables/libraries, and could be set up to refuse to run unknown, or, more importantly, changed executables. This is great because even if you're behind in virus signature updates, your virusscanner will still detect new and unknown virusses as long as they don't compromise the virusscanner engine itself; such virusses (as well as engine updates) are far and wide between, unlike signature updates.
Recent version do NOT check binaries' integrity using any sort of fingerprinting, be it crc32, md5, sha1 or whatever, thus forcing you to rely on the yearly subscription of virus signature updates. That's not because innoculation was broken or even not user-friendly enough (it was off by default), that's was a pure 100% unadulterated marketing decision!
Interestingly, the free-for-personal use personal firewall product I'm using DOES use checksums to check whether binaries that may have specific permissions (to access the internet or open ports) have changed!
No. The BSD license is not viral. You can take BSD licensed code and incorporate the changes into your own code without having to put those changes under the BSDL.
The advertising clause is "viral". That's why old-school BSDL was not GPL compatible, and new school BSDL (the regents at one point waived the advertising provision) is.
Re:Why is nobody totally up in arms about this ?
on
Blackout Week Continues
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Well in the US we have more than 240 million people to provide power for. Who is more likely to have problems, a country that has to provide power for 60 million or a country that has to provide power for over 240 million?
Then again, the 60 million figure is only for France. The UK is another 60 million people, for instance. The EU houses a lot more people than the US, both in absolute numbers and in terms of population density. The latter makes providing electricity both a harder problem (less space for power plant and lines, more consumption of electricity) and a easier problem (no remote rural areas, less dependance on overhead powerlines and no resistance to streets being dug up to supply low(220V)voltage to houses and businesses via subterranean cables).
The point about regulation is generally a good one, but a blanket "let's deregulate more!" response seems to me to be an overreaction. Let's face it electricity has always been and will always remain a public utility. You can see how much good comes of competition in a black-out like this; turns out there is nowhere else to turn for electricity than.. well, your existing power company. Trading electricity is all good and well, but there can only be one infrastructure.
On a related note, due to the high temperatures, the electricity companies in The Netherlands had sounded the alarm a week before the US blackout. They asked their customers to use less electricity. That's because they're acting responsibly, and not just thinking; high demand, higher prices, sure, we'll sell everything we've got. There's actual concern about the grid's capacity, reserves, and possible failures.. Note that they've only asked their customers nicely (as have the water utilities) there's no government ban on specific uses of electricity (or a hose ban to save water, like the UK has had a few summer in a row - apparently the water infrastructure there has a lot of 'transport losses' - leaks).
Deregulation is almost never the answer to make privatization work. If you spin off government companies, you actually need more rules to make sure they don't turn around and act against the public interest - after all, when they were government-run this could be affected by means of policy in stead of laws and regulations..
With the power grid it's especially true since each state can regulate it's own power companies. You've got 50 different sets of rules in place and people are sitting around scratching their heads trying to figure out what the problem is. We need a more unified set of rules that allows the power companies to charge more (and perhaps make a little more profit) if they upgrade their infrastructe.
We, in whacky Europe, don't seem to have these problems; even though each EU memberstate has their own laws, and even 'harmonized' rules sometimes only bear a passing resemblance to a community directive (which is kinda like federal law, but it's up to member states how to implement it in local law so it works alongside existing national laws).
..Also means "Post Telegraph & Telephone". A lot of European countries used to have a single, government run, phone and postal service; PTT remains shorthand for ex-State telephone companies, like "ma Bell". (And as such it has negative connotations to the point that all telcos are moving away from that name..)
Slashdot Mirror
Additional coolpoints voor DK hostmaster:
click here (it should work without the dot at the end as well, but I don't get that to work often on my windows box).
AI is the only other TLD I've discovered so far which scores coolpoints for this as well.
I don't know what you're talking about. From my point of view the last 4 years of Nokia phones have been re-treads of the old 51xx design, just in smaller boxes. Only in the last few months have they come out with anything that doesn't look like a squished 5100. Maybe they've been selling progressively "cooler and cooler" phones in europe, but in the US, Nokia has been lagging *way* behind Motorola, Samsung, LG, and Ericsson in the cool department.
Nokia is launching 35 new models this year.
Of the previous bunch, you must have missed the entire 6xxx series, the 72xx, the 8xxx and especially the 3650 (which has a rotary disc like design) and the 7650 smart phone (which slides open in two parts, check it out. Siemens is copying this already). Nokia also already sells an MP3 playing phone with full alphanumeric keyboard, about the same size and shape as the N-Gage, the 5510. The 3650, 7650 and 5510 (and indeed 92xx) have extremely different keypad configurations and designs. Also check out the freakish looking 3200.
http://www.nokia.com/phones/
The 51xxs had user-replaceable custom faceplates, something nobody else has done before or since. That was the high point of Nokia's coolness IMHO. For about 2 years, every college student and a lot of teenagers had them. Now those customers have largely moved on to sexier Asian designs (Samsung, LG, etc.)
The 3210, 3310, 3350 series (Nokia's kiddy range) have fully removable front- and backcovers. Even the keypad comes off. You can also get them printed up with custom picture from third parties.
Samsung has some sexy designs, but LG.. Not too sure about that.. (Though the CDMA models look better that their GSM range).
Other manufacturers which have used removable covers include Ericsson, Alcatel, Kyocera and I suppose quite a few others. I think the Ericsson GA628 preceded any Nokia phones with removable covers. IIRC the first Nokia phone with a removable cover was the 3210
Of course most of Nokia's models are manufactured to work with GSM first, so I don't know whether they'd be available for niche standards such as iDen, and even CDMA is a wildly smaller market.
Now, I'm not Nokia's biggest fan (their handsets tend to fall apart after a year, and their warranty repairs take forever around here) but they sure do have a LOT of different models and they've launched more innovative designs than any other manufacturer (though not always the best designs, e.g. the 9210 and 7110).
I'm not so sure on that. For at least a year and a half, everyone I know (Suffolk County, NY) iwth a cell phone has owned a Motorola i90c. If they break it? They buy another i90c. I haven't seen another cell phone in weeks.
The i90c is an iDen phone. It's not exactly surprising that there are less new models available for a network technology that used as, ahem, "widely" as iDen.
I have never understood how this breed of cards exists to this day. Really... the difference between a "stock" GeForce and a workstation class Quadro GeForce... just doesnt justify the cost difference anymore.
Well, a specialist model requires retooling of the manufacturing process, which costs a fixed amount of money, and you sell fewer of them, so the added cost per unit produced is higher than you'd expect from the extra features to be gotten.
Of course, if nvidia would churn out Quadro models by default, the price per unit would only go up by a few bucks and everyone would have a gee-whiz superfast card. But that would be Communism. So what they do is a thing called price differentiation. Essentially both the consumer and pro market are buying the same product, but the pro's recon they can't live without some of the bells and whistles, and that they have no problem spending some extra cash, so they buy the pro version at a higher cost. This way everybody pays the most they can afford.
Price differentiation is also the driving force behind mail-in rebates; if you don't care too much about the cost you're not likely to mail in for the rebate cash, so everyone pays roughly what they were planning to spend (especially if the rebate undercuts a competitors price; since you don't expect to reimburse it 100% of the time you can offer your product at a price-after-rebate that is suspiciously low). Some companies take this a bit too far, and you can only succesfully claim the rebate if your time has no value at all and you are prepared to spend weeks jumping through hoops and reading fine print.
I hate to reply to myself, but.. MOD PARENT DOWN! If only I had mod points.. ;-)
Older folk aren't going to go for it, which leaves the younger folk, who aren't necessarily going to have enough cash.
Even counting only US younger folk, the younger folk represent a spending power larger than a pretty decent chuck of the African continent. Well, I don't know about African economies actually, but teenager's influenced spending power is about $520 billion. Anually.
With handset subsidies being what they are in many places, the difference between a very uncool phone and a very cool phone may only be a few bucks up front (of course, you'll pay for it in monthly charges later..) Smart kids will negotiate a good deal with their parents, and get the cool phone.
Nokia already is in the business of launching cooler and cooler phones (which under the skin are about 100% identical as far as hardware is concerned). And they're doing well at it. The prevailing "hip" model "everyone" has changes at least once a year, after which you'll only see older folk walking around with them, fumbling to get to grips with having to push the green button for it to actually dial the number you just entered..
Oops. Right you are.
here's a list of which GUI invention was made where.
I always thought Xerox PARC, that place that made money for everybody except Xerox, invented the mouse [wikipedia.org]. Is that just common misconception?
Actual people worked at PARC. Such as that Doug guy.
Caching webpages in a proxy is something all ISPs do. The downside is that whenever I've used an ISPs squid proxy, it slowed things down! Turning proxies off almost invariably helps speeds, in stead of hurting them. Plus, if the proxy goes down, you can still use the web. I have no idea why ISP's proxies are so craptastic (YMMV), but in my experience, they are. (BTW, it would help if windowsupdate was cacheable..)
;-) Not such a good approach for webbrowsing btw.
.ART format when you used their client? Do they still?
Compression.. Now there's something! I have in the past used an ssh tunnel (with compression switched on) to my university's web proxy, and that sped up things quite a bit! Why isn't this switched on by default on my PPPoA connection? Doesn't apache handle gzip'ing these days? Doesn't seem to be used much, though.. This speed up might be less pronounced on dial-up links though, because POTS modems usually switch on compression anyway (again YMMV).
Some download accelerators simply download different chunks of the same file in multiple sessions from either one server (shouldn't matter - unless with roundrobin DNS) or even from mirrors (better!). That's quite effective as well, but we know this, and that's why we use bittorrent for big files, don't we?
But it has to be said.. Most download accelerators are just bloaty spyware and don't do *zilch* to help your download speed.. Feh!
Didn't AOL use to convert GIF graphics to their own, lossy,
Class Members will also agree that they remain bound by the terms of Register.com's Services Agreement, as it is amended from time to time.
Yes! Let's agree to agree on things you never agreed on in the first place! Not that this is NOT worded in quite the same way as their current services agreement words it (which includes a 30 day period in which you can up and leave if they change the services agreement); it would seem that this class action settlement overrides such common sense provisions. Nasty!
The remedy seems worse than the disease.
Trust me on that one...my phone was tapped 24/7 in Russia, I still get taped when I call back there. It's the "click"...and at times you can hear them breathing...or music in the background. Sometimes they pick up before the phone connects, sometimes after. I suppose they enjoy the chats I have with my gf...
;-)
The alternative, simpler, explanation would be that the Russian telephone network simply experiences much more interference, such as cross-talk interference, and other anomalies..
Regardless what purveyors of little boxes with red lights on them will tell you, there is NO way to tell whether a phone line is being wiretapped or not. It's all digital these days, and doesn't require billions of funding (like, say, upgrading the Russian telco infrastructure to get rid of crosstalk interference would), but more in the region of a K or two..
And breathing?? Come on! Conversations are taped, transcribed (possibly mostly by using speech recognition software - it's no coincidence that there was "some" CIA involvement with Lernout&Hauspie, the Belgian language technology dotcom) and then analyzed. Nobody has the time to sit around waiting for some yank to call his girlfriend. If she is being tapped, I'm sure they only actually listen to the tapes of her talking to her friendly neighborhood drugdealer, or Chechzen aunt.
They're still hassling my grandparents there asking where I dissapeared to and why I'm not getting raped in the army.
Had they listened in on your phone conversations, they'd know
Now, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you (in your case, well, probably they are). But wiretapping is a smooth and silent operation, and, obviously (spooks don't like to get found out) has been for ages.
Time, place and manner restrictions (yelling fire in a crowded theater) have been exempt for quite a while now, provided that there are other avenues for the speech in question.
Ah, yes, how could I forget the time, place and manner exemption in the First Amendment... oh wait... there isn't one.
That's right. Now define speech. Notice how there is no definition in the Constitution or Amendmends themselves. Is tattooing your political views on my forehead speech? No it's not. So, what is the difference between speech and non-speech? That's where the time, place and manner come into play; you're welcome to espouse your political views in other ways than tatooing them on my forehead; this leaves the speech intact, it's just the manner that's not OK.
It was the courts seeing something to be annoying, and so AMENDING the Constitution to allow it.
The constitution is still the same as ever. But people interpret it in different ways. If people with different views get into a dispute, there's a way to solve this; through the courts!
Under Articles I and Articles III of the Constitution, the Courts don't have authority over laws, only cases under the law. (So "Case Law" and "Common Law" are not laws because they were not made by Congress and court rulings cannot be based on them)
Come on now, Article III doesn't even define the "judicial power" granted, let alone limit its contents (only its scope). The system of "Case"/"Common Law" evolved exactly because it is a Good Thing that the courts reach similar conclusions in similar cases; i.e. that the law is interpreted consistently time and again. If this leads to undesirable results; simply change the law, and the judiciary will uphold the new laws. Having courts operate independently from any historical judgement is pretty dangerous; in that case you could never know whether your case was strong or not, as courts could find as they please and interpret (and balance) laws differently each and everytime. This lack of Legal Certainty is exactly why codified law was invented in the first place, it would be a Bad Thing for courts to coopt it.
Note that this tradition of using jurisprudence is hardly unique to the US or British Common Law systems, European courts rely heavily on precedent as well, and even look at the state of mind of the legislature when laws were created to determine the best interpretation (in fact, legislatures have taken to publishing letters of intent along with laws put on the books, to guide judges (and the general public) in their interpretation of new laws).
Note by the way that the Constitution does not enumerate all rights. I certainly have a right to prevent people from tatooing my head, which in the case of anyone wishing to tatoo "speech" on my head would prevail. It's perfectly OK for a court to prioritize one basic human right (in the case of tatooing; the integrity/selfdetermination of the human body) over another one (speech) - such rights are absolute only when they do not infringe upon any one else's rights.
If you find courts re-interpreting the Constitution in new and exiting ways, ask yourself why. Because that's their job, that's why. If you don't like it, use your vote and hope the next President appoints judges that lean more towards your interpretations, or get laws on the books that can't be misinterpreted. That's how the Constitution works; through the Balance of Powers.
What part of 'Congress shall make no law ...abridging the freedom of speech...' do you not understand? Spam should be solved technically, because it can't be done legally.
Time, place and manner restrictions (yelling fire in a crowded theater) have been exempt for quite a while now, provided that there are other avenues for the speech in question. There is not exactly a shortage of better ways to advertise than spam. Besides, corporations are not citizens; though they are treated as if they were individuals, they're really not; they don't get the vote (another constitutionally guaranteed right) either. Commercial speech has long been more restricted than scientific, literary, artistic or political speech to name just a few.
Furthermore, if you take a literal view of the Constitution (as opposed to a horizontal-effects view), this would mean that while Congress cannot abridge freedom of speech, the States can (that's the tenth Amendment).
There is a large body of law on the difference between acts (of speech) and speech itself. The situation is quite a bit less black&white as you seem to think it is.
'I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it' - Beatrice Hall
'But if you try to tattoo on my skull even things that I do agree with, I shall kick your ass mightily' - me.
The Matrix is not scifi? Hmm..
Eduardo Sanchez will return to provide another thorough review of the base Mandrake Linux system. His review will consider, in depth, installation, administration, usage, and performance of Mandrake Linux 9.1.
OK. So there IS no beef? I thought that was supposed to be a spoon.
(Wasted another good, what, 3 minutes of my life RTFA - those kids should take classes and learn about paragraphs, beginnings, middles and endings.)
Actually, Settlers of Catan is way to dependent on chance for me. It offers little if no reward for strategy, people get hissy-fitty over underhanded tactics (come on, that's what strategy should be about!) like non-fair trading and forming alliances, the black raider thingy comes along way too often (what? 7 is the most probable combination of two dice? who wudda thunk!)
It's almost as bad as RISK (which is essentially totally lame if not predetermined)..
How much fun would the settlers of catan or Risk (or monopoly, or..) be if rolling the dice would result in the same number over and over again (i.e. without the element of chance)? Ever noticed how a game like Chess or Go does without dice altogether?
Please remember, this is not about the SCO case at all, but about false advertising. SCO was saying "linux users have to pay" even though this is an untested legal theory - it is for these misleading statements they now have to pay. If they later are proven to be right, they still made allegations out to be proven fact, which is a no-no in advertising, as far as Germany is concerned.
Bear in mind the order restraining them from making such claims is only a prelimenary injunction. That means all is still to play for, though the likelihood of a judgement against SCO Deutschland is very high indeed.
Make annoying changes to your files. Then send this Linux honor system virus to everyone you know.
Not quite unlike the Linux Honor System DDOS, known simply as "slashdot".
Google's simply complying with the request and blocking the URLs that were validly mentioned in the takedown notice. However, Google's not going to do anything more than the law requires, so any new URLs that pop up will certainly get GoogleBot's attention and the cat and mouse game goes on...
Google is doing more than the law requires. If Google simply did nothing, that would be a valid alternative in the eyes of the law. However, they would assume liability for any claims of contributory infringement -- or rather, pulling the links in response to a DMCA notice ensures that any contributory liability will not arise. The DMCA is intented to protect cowardly companies, and is used as such by Google.
Would it be too much to ask what this free-for-personal-use.... product that "innoculates" is?
It only checks binaries that try to access the network, and only disallows accessing the network. Not much use against virusses (though it helps against spyware).
Do you or anyone else know of any other products? Commercial or otherwise?
no, not really, if anyone has suggestions?
(tripwire for windows perhaps???)
The thing is, in newer versions they do not include "innoculation". Innoculation used to simply take a fingerprint (CRC32) of your executables/libraries, and could be set up to refuse to run unknown, or, more importantly, changed executables. This is great because even if you're behind in virus signature updates, your virusscanner will still detect new and unknown virusses as long as they don't compromise the virusscanner engine itself; such virusses (as well as engine updates) are far and wide between, unlike signature updates.
Recent version do NOT check binaries' integrity using any sort of fingerprinting, be it crc32, md5, sha1 or whatever, thus forcing you to rely on the yearly subscription of virus signature updates. That's not because innoculation was broken or even not user-friendly enough (it was off by default), that's was a pure 100% unadulterated marketing decision!
Interestingly, the free-for-personal use personal firewall product I'm using DOES use checksums to check whether binaries that may have specific permissions (to access the internet or open ports) have changed!
No. The BSD license is not viral. You can take BSD licensed code and incorporate the changes into your own code without having to put those changes under the BSDL.
The advertising clause is "viral". That's why old-school BSDL was not GPL compatible, and new school BSDL (the regents at one point waived the advertising provision) is.
Well in the US we have more than 240 million people to provide power for. Who is more likely to have problems, a country that has to provide power for 60 million or a country that has to provide power for over 240 million?
Then again, the 60 million figure is only for France. The UK is another 60 million people, for instance. The EU houses a lot more people than the US, both in absolute numbers and in terms of population density. The latter makes providing electricity both a harder problem (less space for power plant and lines, more consumption of electricity) and a easier problem (no remote rural areas, less dependance on overhead powerlines and no resistance to streets being dug up to supply low(220V)voltage to houses and businesses via subterranean cables).
The point about regulation is generally a good one, but a blanket "let's deregulate more!" response seems to me to be an overreaction. Let's face it electricity has always been and will always remain a public utility. You can see how much good comes of competition in a black-out like this; turns out there is nowhere else to turn for electricity than.. well, your existing power company. Trading electricity is all good and well, but there can only be one infrastructure.
On a related note, due to the high temperatures, the electricity companies in The Netherlands had sounded the alarm a week before the US blackout. They asked their customers to use less electricity. That's because they're acting responsibly, and not just thinking; high demand, higher prices, sure, we'll sell everything we've got. There's actual concern about the grid's capacity, reserves, and possible failures.. Note that they've only asked their customers nicely (as have the water utilities) there's no government ban on specific uses of electricity (or a hose ban to save water, like the UK has had a few summer in a row - apparently the water infrastructure there has a lot of 'transport losses' - leaks).
Deregulation is almost never the answer to make privatization work. If you spin off government companies, you actually need more rules to make sure they don't turn around and act against the public interest - after all, when they were government-run this could be affected by means of policy in stead of laws and regulations..
With the power grid it's especially true since each state can regulate it's own power companies. You've got 50 different sets of rules in place and people are sitting around scratching their heads trying to figure out what the problem is. We need a more unified set of rules that allows the power companies to charge more (and perhaps make a little more profit) if they upgrade their infrastructe.
We, in whacky Europe, don't seem to have these problems; even though each EU memberstate has their own laws, and even 'harmonized' rules sometimes only bear a passing resemblance to a community directive (which is kinda like federal law, but it's up to member states how to implement it in local law so it works alongside existing national laws).
One question, how are you supposed to "put on" some music without ELECTRICITY? Unless you have some mighty batteries that is :).
Happily, automobiles tend to have batteries, a generator AND sound equipment! Some even hava a jacuzzi!
..Also means "Post Telegraph & Telephone". A lot of European countries used to have a single, government run, phone and postal service; PTT remains shorthand for ex-State telephone companies, like "ma Bell". (And as such it has negative connotations to the point that all telcos are moving away from that name..)