But if you want to protest America's policy, then you have to move to Darfur. If you want to vote against an incumbent president, you have to do it in countries where votes are not counted, and if you want to protest acts that get people killed, then you must die first.
Backups are only half the equation. The other half is that sensitive and private data for a large segment of the population has now landed in the hands of just some guy. The privacy issue, and legal violation are equally important.
The real question should be "Why are we still using ancient text messages instead of regular email?" All of my friends in Japan regularly do full-on email on their phones, and only have a vague-if-any notion of what a regular "text message" is elsewhere. 160-character limit? That is *so* 1990s.
Because email is free, and phone companies control the devices.
Yeah.....most people don't stand around talking about history at parties and at bars. Maybe something poignant to the conversation but doubtful. It's like archeology, only those in the field find talking about it in a social setting exciting.
Well, it __might__ help us understand why 911 happened, or how the economy works, or why prohibition didn't work (too bad that our lesson there was "prohibition doesn't work in this particular case"), or that countries occupied by a more powerful force do not fight honorably (I.E., Iraq, Vietnam, The American Revolution)...
I don't even know that much history, but I can think of a few places where it is relevant. And the sad fact is that in the US, our leaders don't make the decisions. They are merely salesmen, doing what the voters tell them to do. That passes the buck, when it comes to any political issue, to the majority of Americans.
ummm...it was one of those rapid cures. They gave him a vaccine, ran him through the transporter a couple of times (because that cures all genetic defects), rubbed some proactive cream on his head (which ironically seems to make Jessica Simpson look like a Klingon, in the commercials), and blammo, he was cured...
I'd have to agree with DNS-and-BIND. The Klingons are about as far from communist as you can get. I imagine the Klingon empire would have a shitty welfare system.
Where I went to school, they had an excellent means of blocking p2p traffic. After the RIAA started suing schools, they made it a priority to make sure no one could connect to a bit torrent network from their internet accounts.
They also had the PCs locked down to the point where it was nearly impossible to change a setting (with impossible being the goal), and had a ghost scheduler set up to reformat and re-image the drives at 3am.
That doesn't mean it can't be done. But, in some campuses, it would be more problem than it was worth, especially when the IT manager found the device.
Slightly off subject, but I saw a car a few days ago that had one of this "in memory of" sticker in the window, and a for sale sign on the other side. Now I wonder how weird it would be to be the next person who bought that car. You'd better believe I would scrape that thing off.
you could really creep out your enemys after you're gone, but you wouldn't be able to enjoy it.
still just knowing ahead of time.:-D
That gives me an idea. Delayed emails that do not get sent until after my death. Someone alerts the company, and they send out the emails. they can say creepy things like, "Hello, son. This is your father. God killed me to punish you for whacking off in the bathroom" or "Too dead to cook? Come in to Chilli's for some baby back ribs!"
1) Tap into old school hacker community mentality. 2) Rely on good people to do your large organizations work for free. 3) Degrade your own service. 4) Profit!
Of course peolpe helping each other and a solid community are great, but in the context of this happening in lieu of large for-profit organizations providing quality service? I think not.
Seeing how they point out how this can save them millions of dollars leaves me nonplussed.
So, is this open source tech support?
This brings up a significant question: The FOSS community relies on a similar approach both to software development and documentation. If it is ok for a company to rely on the community for software development, then is it that different for them to cultivate a similar phenomena for tech support?
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
The purpose of the so-called intellectual properties laws, is not to further the concept that a person can own a set of phrases or ideas, but to promote the arts and sciences. This was not a fairness issue, or a property issue. This was purely about encouraging writers to write and inventors to invent.
Intangible properties, such as IP are inherently different from physical properties. So much so, in fact, that the document that forms the basis of our legal system explicitly states that IPs cannot be held in perptuity.
Also, that time limit keeps getting extended...I think there might be a famous rat involved, but, the point is, that if a work was written in 1938, and you lived ten years, after that, you might have expected it to go into the public domain in 1976 (died in 1948+28 years). Instead, it was extended to 1998, under the copyright act, and has since been extended to 2018.
If you wrote something today, and lived another ten years, then how much would the time limit have been extended by 2089 (the date at which the item should enter the public domain, under current law)?
he doesn't need to be a geek so long as he has the right geeks working for him
Is that really true? I'm a lawyer. No way on God's green earth would I work under the supervision of a non-lawyer.
Isn't the law fundamentally different from technology? One doesn't have to know how to implement a p2p service to know what it does and why it is controversial. As for the law, well, is there a similar analogy? IANAL, but it seems to me that there is no way that you can have a 30,000 foot view and still be useful, when it comes to law.
Why should the law? If the movie had had some more serious content would that have mattered? Seems to me our laws should reflect the understanding that Journalism holds a special place in our society and give journalists the freedom to report on our society as they see fit. If they endanger others or deprive others of reasonable profit then they should be dealt with accordingly. But in this example he did not deprive FOX of any revenue aside from those who found his review made them not want to see the movie (which is one point of a review).
Actually, we're not talking about legality. We're talking about someone who posted a story along the lines of "wow. I just found this thing called bit-torrent. It's awesome. You can get everything for free. And wolverine rocked."
So, while I would agree that the law has no place deciding what content is and is not suitable for print, or what tactics are justified in the attainment of said content, private businesses and individuals can make that distinction, and Fox News has every right to say that this is not the kind of journalism they sell.
I would compare it to an article in which someone bought marijuana and then wrote about what a great high it gave them. If the editor disapproves, then they have the right to terminate employment on that basis.
Let's look at that from a different angle: corruption at the highest levels of government often includes involvement by large corporations. How often do you think that reporters are going to expose that corruption when they know they can get fired for something as harmless as reviewing a pirated movie?
That sounds good, but you have it backward. Whistle blowers are not asked to break the law when it is harmless. They are asked to do so when it is important.
The difference is that one scenario is exposing corruption at the highest levels of government, and the other is helping us decide whether to go see a Hugh Jackman movie.
Slashdot Mirror
But if you want to protest America's policy, then you have to move to Darfur. If you want to vote against an incumbent president, you have to do it in countries where votes are not counted, and if you want to protest acts that get people killed, then you must die first.
It's all just common sense, really.
Backups are only half the equation. The other half is that sensitive and private data for a large segment of the population has now landed in the hands of just some guy. The privacy issue, and legal violation are equally important.
Seriously, are you that much of a conforming zero that you strive for others to control even MORE aspects of your life?
The irony of that statement astounds me. The say what GP said on this forum is probably one of the most non-conformist things you can do.
The real question should be "Why are we still using ancient text messages instead of regular email?" All of my friends in Japan regularly do full-on email on their phones, and only have a vague-if-any notion of what a regular "text message" is elsewhere. 160-character limit? That is *so* 1990s.
Because email is free, and phone companies control the devices.
Yeah.....most people don't stand around talking about history at parties and at bars. Maybe something poignant to the conversation but doubtful. It's like archeology, only those in the field find talking about it in a social setting exciting.
Well, it __might__ help us understand why 911 happened, or how the economy works, or why prohibition didn't work (too bad that our lesson there was "prohibition doesn't work in this particular case"), or that countries occupied by a more powerful force do not fight honorably (I.E., Iraq, Vietnam, The American Revolution)...
I don't even know that much history, but I can think of a few places where it is relevant. And the sad fact is that in the US, our leaders don't make the decisions. They are merely salesmen, doing what the voters tell them to do. That passes the buck, when it comes to any political issue, to the majority of Americans.
First he finds Jesus' tomb and now he invents a new "video drug"...I think we should start wondering about this guy.
"...I should really just relax"
I miss that show.
Don't worry. It comes on again in two hours
ummm...it was one of those rapid cures. They gave him a vaccine, ran him through the transporter a couple of times (because that cures all genetic defects), rubbed some proactive cream on his head (which ironically seems to make Jessica Simpson look like a Klingon, in the commercials), and blammo, he was cured...
I'd have to agree with DNS-and-BIND. The Klingons are about as far from communist as you can get. I imagine the Klingon empire would have a shitty welfare system.
I used to have a top-of-the-line 3dfx graphics card. It was all I ever thought I'd need.
I remember when this WHOLE website was nothin' but ORCHARDS; as far as the eye could see.
ORCHARDS? I remember when it was just a patch of dirt. We had to plant the trees first.
(cue up someone saying they remember the molten rock)
Molten rock? I remember xenu! I'm pretty sure that happened first.
That's an episode of Will it Blend that I have yet to see.
Where I went to school, they had an excellent means of blocking p2p traffic. After the RIAA started suing schools, they made it a priority to make sure no one could connect to a bit torrent network from their internet accounts.
They also had the PCs locked down to the point where it was nearly impossible to change a setting (with impossible being the goal), and had a ghost scheduler set up to reformat and re-image the drives at 3am.
That doesn't mean it can't be done. But, in some campuses, it would be more problem than it was worth, especially when the IT manager found the device.
Forget that! Just let me know how many Libraries of Congress this is? [OBLIGATORY
If they're holograms, wouldn't it be more appropriate to see how many you can fit in an olympic-sized swimming pool?
Slightly off subject, but I saw a car a few days ago that had one of this "in memory of" sticker in the window, and a for sale sign on the other side. Now I wonder how weird it would be to be the next person who bought that car. You'd better believe I would scrape that thing off.
you could really creep out your enemys after you're gone, but you wouldn't be able to enjoy it.
still just knowing ahead of time. :-D
That gives me an idea. Delayed emails that do not get sent until after my death. Someone alerts the company, and they send out the emails. they can say creepy things like, "Hello, son. This is your father. God killed me to punish you for whacking off in the bathroom" or "Too dead to cook? Come in to Chilli's for some baby back ribs!"
1) Tap into old school hacker community mentality.
2) Rely on good people to do your large organizations work for free.
3) Degrade your own service.
4) Profit!
Of course peolpe helping each other and a solid community are great, but in the context of this happening in lieu of large for-profit organizations providing quality service? I think not.
Seeing how they point out how this can save them millions of dollars leaves me nonplussed.
So, is this open source tech support?
This brings up a significant question: The FOSS community relies on a similar approach both to software development and documentation. If it is ok for a company to rely on the community for software development, then is it that different for them to cultivate a similar phenomena for tech support?
From Article 1, Section 8 of the constitution:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
The purpose of the so-called intellectual properties laws, is not to further the concept that a person can own a set of phrases or ideas, but to promote the arts and sciences. This was not a fairness issue, or a property issue. This was purely about encouraging writers to write and inventors to invent.
Intangible properties, such as IP are inherently different from physical properties. So much so, in fact, that the document that forms the basis of our legal system explicitly states that IPs cannot be held in perptuity.
Also, that time limit keeps getting extended...I think there might be a famous rat involved, but, the point is, that if a work was written in 1938, and you lived ten years, after that, you might have expected it to go into the public domain in 1976 (died in 1948+28 years). Instead, it was extended to 1998, under the copyright act, and has since been extended to 2018.
If you wrote something today, and lived another ten years, then how much would the time limit have been extended by 2089 (the date at which the item should enter the public domain, under current law)?
But.. but.. he isn't one of us!
I mean, did Obama even consider the CowboyNeal option?
I'm sorry. We already had a cowboy president and that didn't work out. I think we're going to stay away from cowboys for the next few years.
he doesn't need to be a geek so long as he has the right geeks working for him
Is that really true? I'm a lawyer. No way on God's green earth would I work under the supervision of a non-lawyer.
Isn't the law fundamentally different from technology? One doesn't have to know how to implement a p2p service to know what it does and why it is controversial. As for the law, well, is there a similar analogy? IANAL, but it seems to me that there is no way that you can have a 30,000 foot view and still be useful, when it comes to law.
Why should the law? If the movie had had some more serious content would that have mattered? Seems to me our laws should reflect the understanding that Journalism holds a special place in our society and give journalists the freedom to report on our society as they see fit. If they endanger others or deprive others of reasonable profit then they should be dealt with accordingly. But in this example he did not deprive FOX of any revenue aside from those who found his review made them not want to see the movie (which is one point of a review).
Actually, we're not talking about legality. We're talking about someone who posted a story along the lines of "wow. I just found this thing called bit-torrent. It's awesome. You can get everything for free. And wolverine rocked."
Here is a screenshot of the article, by the way. http://chud.com/articles/content_images/24/fox411_wolverine.jpg. I know this is not in the summary, but please look over how much this guy gushes over how great illegal downloads are.
So, while I would agree that the law has no place deciding what content is and is not suitable for print, or what tactics are justified in the attainment of said content, private businesses and individuals can make that distinction, and Fox News has every right to say that this is not the kind of journalism they sell.
I would compare it to an article in which someone bought marijuana and then wrote about what a great high it gave them. If the editor disapproves, then they have the right to terminate employment on that basis.
Let's look at that from a different angle: corruption at the highest levels of government often includes involvement by large corporations. How often do you think that reporters are going to expose that corruption when they know they can get fired for something as harmless as reviewing a pirated movie?
That sounds good, but you have it backward. Whistle blowers are not asked to break the law when it is harmless. They are asked to do so when it is important.
By a nuclear war for example.
Why go to such extremes?
root@internet# shutdown -h +30 "Teh Intarwebs are going down!"
Why shut it down when you can blow it up?
root@inernet# yum install Windows-Vista.x86_64
The difference is that one scenario is exposing corruption at the highest levels of government, and the other is helping us decide whether to go see a Hugh Jackman movie.
I consider that a significant difference.
Well, that's the discussion wrapped up nice and neat in just two comments. Well done Slashdot!
ok...umm...should we argue about global warming now?