but you find me someone who has *actually* been a slave. I can go out and find 100's people in a matter of days who have been *directly* affected by your cute example of 'two collapsable circuits', but I'm willing to wager that you *can't* find someone *directly* affected by being a slave, subject to a master....I'm waiting...
http://www.freetheslaves.net/
Personally I think we should call the first drive on the chain the Israel device and the second drive on the chain the U.S. device. Or is that the other way around?
the word "slave" itself comes from the same word as "Slav" i.e. people who live in that part of the world. At one time, being a Slav and being a slave was synonymous.
Source: Henri Pirenne, A History of Europe Vol. 1, p.64. Here's a blockquote, emphasis added, and where he says Sorbs I think that's Serbs today:
...From 807 onwards the other marches or marks were established along the Elbe and the Saale, barring the further progress of teh Slav tribes of the Wends, Sorabi (Sorbs) and Obodrites.
This frontier was at the same time - as the Rhine had been in the 4th and 5th centuries - the frontier between Christian Europe and the pagan world. It is interesting, as illustrating the religious ideas of the time, to note that on the fronteir there was a temporary revival of slavery. The Slavs, as pagans, were beyond the pale of humanity, and those who were taken prisoner were sold like cattle; and the word for slave in all Western languages (esclave, sklave, slaaf), is merely the name of the Slav people. For the people of the 9th and 10th century the "slave" was what the "black" was for the people of the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries.
Only problem is, it's sort of "frowned upon" these days. Not sure why, really, with all the billions on the earth we could lose a few and I sure as hell wouldn't miss them.
It's ironic that as the human population has grown, the the protections afforded civilians have increased. In the good ole days, armies would kill every living thing in the cities they conquered, and the streets would literally run with blood. I guess we like to pretend we're more civilized now. Maybe we actually are, though the herd seems awfully fat.
So, yeah, genocide is the Final Solution, but the e-bomb or whatever is supposed to achieve the same results without violating that pesky Geneva Convention. That's the whole point.
In his interview on NPR, Wesley Clark had this to say: And I'm paraphrasing:
"I realized that when Republicans would talk about defense, they were referring to complex weapons systems. When Democrats would talk about defense, they were referring to the soldiers, the people. That's when I became a Democrat."
Read up on the "No Electronic Theft Act" of 1997 +/- 1 year. It moved copyright violations from the civil courts to the criminal courts.
Which means that instead of Sony or BMG having to spend their money for their lawyers and having to prove that your copyright violations led to economic harm, now Sony and BMG notify the FBI, who spends our money. Plus there's no need to demonstrate harm anymore -- simply infringing on copyright is punishable by huge fines, regardless of any actual economic harm to the copyright holder. Those are the two major changes of the NET act.
Why doesn't the RIAA sue Comcast or some other ISP for allowing these crimes to occur? Maybe they should sue John Ashcroft for not doing enough to stop these heinous cybercrimes.
What do they really hope to achieve by getting $3500 from this family? I guarantee that their legal bills for this action are already well in excess of $3500.
All they get for their $3500 is bad press.
In the past four years I've bought maybe twenty CDs new at Retail, and those were gifts. I buy used CDs not for some ideological reason but because $15 per CD seems too high. But after this... Well let's just say that Santa thinks that everyone will do just fine with books this Christmas.
Hey, if I give CDs this year, maybe those teenagers on my list will rip them and share them on Kazaa. I better steer clear of such a risky purchase; I wouldn't want to end up harming the very musicians I thought I was supporting!
Well it sure was fun writing this post. Now it's time to head down to the library and see what music the City of Seattle wants to share with me, legally, for free. Maybe I'll pick up a few DVDs while I'm there.
In other news, millions across America suffer serious burns after ingesting soup straight off the stove....
That's exactly my point. This wasn't at home, it was at a restaurant where you are served.
Have you ever been to Chi-Chis or one of the places where they cook the food by assembling the ingredients on a plate, then just superheat the plate?
Have you ever noticed how the waiter says "be careful, this plate is really hot" when they serve it to you?
They do that because people know that the food might be hot, but don't expect that the plate itself will burn them.
Similarly, people expect their coffee to be hot, but they don't expect it to burn them; they don't expect it to be undrinkable as served. (Why serve someone food they can't consume? That makes no sense.) At home, where you make the coffee yourself, you're involved in every step of the process, and you'll know if it's going to be too hot, too cold, or juuust right. But when you're at a restaurant, and you're paying for the service, it's normal to assume that the food they serve is edible as served. If that's not the case, it's incumbent on the restaurant to warn you -- like Chi-Chis does with the superhot plates.
In general there should be a reasonable expectation that the coffee is close to boiling since that is how coffee is generally made.
I think the more reasonable expectation is that a cup of coffee served to you at a restaurant is served at a temperature where you can ingest it. You can't drink anything that's 180 degrees Fahrenheit, not without injuring yourself.
You claim people have no concept that they are responsible for their actions. What about the responsibility of McDonalds? Shouldn't they be expected to serve coffee that won't injure you if you try to drink it, or accidentally spill it on yourself trying to take the stupid lid off the styrofoam cup, which jostles the super-hot contents and makes them spill in your lap?
Shouldn't that read "New TPC-H Record Set Using Oracle?"
The article didn't give much details, but how much of this performance is directly attributable to Linux (specifically Red Hat AS3)? What was the OS of the system it beat? Could that also have been Linux? How much of the performance can be attributed to the (suspiciously un-Beowulf) Lenovo cluster?
From what I know of benchmarks, the numbers given reflect real-world preformance, to within one order of magnitude.
At first, I thought, It's just a press release, big deal... But wait, they used Linux, so it must be another straw on the back of the camel knows as the Closed Source Business Model. But wait, it's running Oracle, so it must therefore be evil. Aieeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!
I think hearing will be harder than sight. There's more processing that goes on there.
Have you ever listened to speakers of a foreign language and wondered where one word ends and another begins? I know enough Spanish to get my point across, but cannot understand fluent Spanish directed at me.
Here's a book that goes into some depth: Music, The Brain, and Ecstasy , ISBN 038078209X. The first few chapters go into the mechanics/chemistry/biology of how sound waves hit the ear, causing neurons to be fired, and all sorts of stuff. There are about eight layers of abstraction between "here's an interesting disturbance in the air that's found its way into my ear" and understanding language.
Your approach is a good one but here's where it breaks down: If MC/VISA stops processing credit card transactions for spammers, they lose money. It's the same reason that you see so much semi-illegal stuff on Ebay, and Ebay doesn't actively strive to close those auctions unless prodded to do so by the copyright holder. Why should they go this extra step to ailenate paying customers?
In short, MC/VISA, with their "we're just acting in the best interests of our shareholders" attitude, is why your approach will be met with significant resistance from MC/VISA.
Also, it seems to me that if you go so far as to purchase the product, you're going to be hard pressed to show how you were harmed by an unsolicited email. It looks to me like the spammers did you a service by making you aware of that useful addition to your life.
With all the -1 posts about Rob taking it up the ass from Kathleen, you'd think our gracious hosts here at Slashdot would be able to provide some unique insight on the subject of being cyber-bullied.
It's too late. These crimes were committed centuries ago. The aggressors are no longer alive, and the victims are no longer alive.
When, exactly, is it too late? When it happened centuries ago? What is the "statute of limitations" on property rights? Is Palestine "too late" or do they have a legitimate claim for that land that they lost in 1948? What exactly do you do with a situation like Jerusalem, where people lay claims on the land going back for millenia?
I'm bringing up this point to try to illustrate that your philosophy is too far removed from reality. It seems to me your views of liberty and property rights are well-suited to someone who's already got property and liberty, as a result of your forefather's actions. How convenient for you to now espouse your abhorrence for the use of violence. This is the same crap that came out of The Enlightenment -- all these marvelous philosophies and utopian visions being created, meanwhile over the next century the West proceeded to pillage America and Africa and Asia.
My point is this: Throwing up this "defense of liberty" bullshit, and saying how you're opposed to violence, is the easiest cop-out to make. It's not a philosophy, it's a bedtime story you tell young idealists after they've learned about the horrors of modern life. "Oh, yes, it's morally wrong to take things from people. We must strive never to do that." Yet our country was built on slave labor. Your philosophy is the equivalent of tossing coins in a wishing well. *NOBODY* in the world, except perhaps the poor, victimized Indians who now have shit to show for it, actually lives by these rules. I suppose I should say nobody applies those rules equally to people within their community and to outsiders. You can see this division, even in America today, when you look at the criminal justice system. Rich people tend to get away with it, poor people get the shaft.
Now that I've said all that, let me make clear that I don't know what the answer is. One thing is obviuos, though, is that you can't so easliy get away with doing what we did to the Indians anymore. If Israel had been formed in 1848 instead of 1948, they probably could have gone ahead and just eradicated all the Palestinians, and the world would have shrugged. Genocides have happened throughout history, but they are very out of favor these days. And I don't quite understand why that is. Perhaps (hopefully) your philosophy is starting to gain a hold in people's minds. But I think it's more a consequence of a full planet. In the old days, if invaders came, the normal thing to do was to pack up your hut and hit the road. Now, with people everywhere and modern States, it's not so simple. Look at the thousands of people in refugee camps throughout the world, with no hope of assimilating into the population the way refugees would have a millenia ago.
I think the refugee situation in the world says a lot too. Essentially the message is "yeah, it's too bad you were about to get ethnically cleansed/politically oppressed, and we grudgingly made this camp for you, but you're not welcome here. As soon as we tell you it's safe, you're going back to Kerplakistan, because we sure as hell don't want your kind here." Where's the defense of liberty and property rights? Or is that each individual's duty? (Survival of the fittest?) If it is up to the person, then I submit that your philosophy sounds well and good, but you better have a bigger stick than the guy who wants to covet your livestock. Which brings us back to where I started: Your philosophy is a good one, especially for people who already have all the liberty and property they want. People such as us, who are in that position today because our forefathers did not adhere to your philosophy for a second. Our blood relations may not have specifically played a role, they were probably peasants. (Mine certainly were.) But they were peasants of the side that, by use of force, established our Empire. No, we are not culpable for the i
I have several friends who are CS majors and use Windows 98 with no virus protection or firewall.
Typically the only people who know anything about security are the same people who have built a complete system from parts. It's sad but a lot of CS people aren't hackers (in the hackers-with-a-dumb-glider-logo sense of the word).
Come to think of it the only programmer I know who actually went to school and got a CS degree is my mom, and it was her second degree -- she went back to school to pursue a well-paying career. I still remember the shoeboxes full of punch cards. She is clueless about Internet security, but pretty 1337 with COBOL and JCL, if such a thing is possible.
So your saying that a weak password protection scheme isn't an "effective technological measure" under the DMCA?
If that were truly the case, there would be no DeCSS lawsuit, since Xing's weak password protection was what allowed DeCSS to be written in the first place.
If you're such a big believer in property rights, does that mean you think we should give America back to the Indians?
(That was rhetorical, and you're supposed to answer "no.")
So let's analyze what exactly do you believe in, then, when you say "Property rights and freedom go hand in hand." From what I can see, you're saying that if I have big enough guns to kick everyone off of some land, then I can own it, and I can now enjoy freedom on my land, while everybody else is screwed.
I don't think that you're wrong. In fact the very words I put into your mouth above pretty much describe The Way It Works In The Real World. But don't wave the banner of "freedom" when our private ownership of American soil was won by force (which you kindly point out is the basic premise for all sorts of bad stuff.)
I thought it was because Heinlein was attempting to retell the Story of Jesus.* Like, you know, how Jesus went to Jerusalem for the purpose of being crucified || Martian guy coming to Earth for the same reason... Ooh and look how spiritually enlightened this Martian hippy is, we can all learn from him. Now everybody crucify him. Personally I felt that SISAL was a crappy book, mainly because the retelling of the fable was sooo hamfisted and the characters were one dimension short of the requirement to live in this universe.
Slashdot Mirror
but you find me someone who has *actually* been a slave. I can go out and find 100's people in a matter of days who have been *directly* affected by your cute example of 'two collapsable circuits', but I'm willing to wager that you *can't* find someone *directly* affected by being a slave, subject to a master. ...I'm waiting...
http://www.freetheslaves.net/
Personally I think we should call the first drive on the chain the Israel device and the second drive on the chain the U.S. device. Or is that the other way around?
I guess I have to serve Fromagey Freedom Fries at the Super Bowl party now. That should keep everybody happy.
Source: Henri Pirenne, A History of Europe Vol. 1, p.64. Here's a blockquote, emphasis added, and where he says Sorbs I think that's Serbs today:
You're right, genocide is the answer.
Only problem is, it's sort of "frowned upon" these days. Not sure why, really, with all the billions on the earth we could lose a few and I sure as hell wouldn't miss them.
It's ironic that as the human population has grown, the the protections afforded civilians have increased. In the good ole days, armies would kill every living thing in the cities they conquered, and the streets would literally run with blood. I guess we like to pretend we're more civilized now. Maybe we actually are, though the herd seems awfully fat.
So, yeah, genocide is the Final Solution, but the e-bomb or whatever is supposed to achieve the same results without violating that pesky Geneva Convention. That's the whole point.
In his interview on NPR, Wesley Clark had this to say: And I'm paraphrasing:
"I realized that when Republicans would talk about defense, they were referring to complex weapons systems. When Democrats would talk about defense, they were referring to the soldiers, the people. That's when I became a Democrat."
Read up on the "No Electronic Theft Act" of 1997 +/- 1 year. It moved copyright violations from the civil courts to the criminal courts.
Which means that instead of Sony or BMG having to spend their money for their lawyers and having to prove that your copyright violations led to economic harm, now Sony and BMG notify the FBI, who spends our money. Plus there's no need to demonstrate harm anymore -- simply infringing on copyright is punishable by huge fines, regardless of any actual economic harm to the copyright holder. Those are the two major changes of the NET act.
Why doesn't the RIAA sue Comcast or some other ISP for allowing these crimes to occur? Maybe they should sue John Ashcroft for not doing enough to stop these heinous cybercrimes.
What do they really hope to achieve by getting $3500 from this family? I guarantee that their legal bills for this action are already well in excess of $3500.
All they get for their $3500 is bad press.
In the past four years I've bought maybe twenty CDs new at Retail, and those were gifts. I buy used CDs not for some ideological reason but because $15 per CD seems too high. But after this... Well let's just say that Santa thinks that everyone will do just fine with books this Christmas.
Hey, if I give CDs this year, maybe those teenagers on my list will rip them and share them on Kazaa. I better steer clear of such a risky purchase; I wouldn't want to end up harming the very musicians I thought I was supporting!
Well it sure was fun writing this post. Now it's time to head down to the library and see what music the City of Seattle wants to share with me, legally, for free. Maybe I'll pick up a few DVDs while I'm there.
In other news, millions across America suffer serious burns after ingesting soup straight off the stove....
That's exactly my point. This wasn't at home, it was at a restaurant where you are served.
Have you ever been to Chi-Chis or one of the places where they cook the food by assembling the ingredients on a plate, then just superheat the plate?
Have you ever noticed how the waiter says "be careful, this plate is really hot" when they serve it to you?
They do that because people know that the food might be hot, but don't expect that the plate itself will burn them.
Similarly, people expect their coffee to be hot, but they don't expect it to burn them; they don't expect it to be undrinkable as served. (Why serve someone food they can't consume? That makes no sense.) At home, where you make the coffee yourself, you're involved in every step of the process, and you'll know if it's going to be too hot, too cold, or juuust right. But when you're at a restaurant, and you're paying for the service, it's normal to assume that the food they serve is edible as served. If that's not the case, it's incumbent on the restaurant to warn you -- like Chi-Chis does with the superhot plates.
In general there should be a reasonable expectation that the coffee is close to boiling since that is how coffee is generally made.
I think the more reasonable expectation is that a cup of coffee served to you at a restaurant is served at a temperature where you can ingest it. You can't drink anything that's 180 degrees Fahrenheit, not without injuring yourself.
You claim people have no concept that they are responsible for their actions. What about the responsibility of McDonalds? Shouldn't they be expected to serve coffee that won't injure you if you try to drink it, or accidentally spill it on yourself trying to take the stupid lid off the styrofoam cup, which jostles the super-hot contents and makes them spill in your lap?
Your "common sense" makes no sense to me.
Shouldn't that read "New TPC-H Record Set Using Oracle?"
The article didn't give much details, but how much of this performance is directly attributable to Linux (specifically Red Hat AS3)? What was the OS of the system it beat? Could that also have been Linux? How much of the performance can be attributed to the (suspiciously un-Beowulf) Lenovo cluster?
From what I know of benchmarks, the numbers given reflect real-world preformance, to within one order of magnitude.
At first, I thought, It's just a press release, big deal... But wait, they used Linux, so it must be another straw on the back of the camel knows as the Closed Source Business Model. But wait, it's running Oracle, so it must therefore be evil. Aieeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!
That's pretty smurfy, because I've always wondered what the smurf Pikachu is smurfing on about.
I think hearing will be harder than sight. There's more processing that goes on there.
Have you ever listened to speakers of a foreign language and wondered where one word ends and another begins? I know enough Spanish to get my point across, but cannot understand fluent Spanish directed at me.
Here's a book that goes into some depth: Music, The Brain, and Ecstasy , ISBN 038078209X. The first few chapters go into the mechanics/chemistry/biology of how sound waves hit the ear, causing neurons to be fired, and all sorts of stuff. There are about eight layers of abstraction between "here's an interesting disturbance in the air that's found its way into my ear" and understanding language.
Your approach is a good one but here's where it breaks down: If MC/VISA stops processing credit card transactions for spammers, they lose money. It's the same reason that you see so much semi-illegal stuff on Ebay, and Ebay doesn't actively strive to close those auctions unless prodded to do so by the copyright holder. Why should they go this extra step to ailenate paying customers?
In short, MC/VISA, with their "we're just acting in the best interests of our shareholders" attitude, is why your approach will be met with significant resistance from MC/VISA.
Also, it seems to me that if you go so far as to purchase the product, you're going to be hard pressed to show how you were harmed by an unsolicited email. It looks to me like the spammers did you a service by making you aware of that useful addition to your life.
With all the -1 posts about Rob taking it up the ass from Kathleen, you'd think our gracious hosts here at Slashdot would be able to provide some unique insight on the subject of being cyber-bullied.
I guess Hell is thawing a little bit.
It's too late. These crimes were committed centuries ago. The aggressors are no longer alive, and the victims are no longer alive.
When, exactly, is it too late? When it happened centuries ago? What is the "statute of limitations" on property rights? Is Palestine "too late" or do they have a legitimate claim for that land that they lost in 1948? What exactly do you do with a situation like Jerusalem, where people lay claims on the land going back for millenia?
I'm bringing up this point to try to illustrate that your philosophy is too far removed from reality. It seems to me your views of liberty and property rights are well-suited to someone who's already got property and liberty, as a result of your forefather's actions. How convenient for you to now espouse your abhorrence for the use of violence. This is the same crap that came out of The Enlightenment -- all these marvelous philosophies and utopian visions being created, meanwhile over the next century the West proceeded to pillage America and Africa and Asia.
My point is this: Throwing up this "defense of liberty" bullshit, and saying how you're opposed to violence, is the easiest cop-out to make. It's not a philosophy, it's a bedtime story you tell young idealists after they've learned about the horrors of modern life. "Oh, yes, it's morally wrong to take things from people. We must strive never to do that." Yet our country was built on slave labor. Your philosophy is the equivalent of tossing coins in a wishing well. *NOBODY* in the world, except perhaps the poor, victimized Indians who now have shit to show for it, actually lives by these rules. I suppose I should say nobody applies those rules equally to people within their community and to outsiders. You can see this division, even in America today, when you look at the criminal justice system. Rich people tend to get away with it, poor people get the shaft.
Now that I've said all that, let me make clear that I don't know what the answer is. One thing is obviuos, though, is that you can't so easliy get away with doing what we did to the Indians anymore. If Israel had been formed in 1848 instead of 1948, they probably could have gone ahead and just eradicated all the Palestinians, and the world would have shrugged. Genocides have happened throughout history, but they are very out of favor these days. And I don't quite understand why that is. Perhaps (hopefully) your philosophy is starting to gain a hold in people's minds. But I think it's more a consequence of a full planet. In the old days, if invaders came, the normal thing to do was to pack up your hut and hit the road. Now, with people everywhere and modern States, it's not so simple. Look at the thousands of people in refugee camps throughout the world, with no hope of assimilating into the population the way refugees would have a millenia ago.
I think the refugee situation in the world says a lot too. Essentially the message is "yeah, it's too bad you were about to get ethnically cleansed/politically oppressed, and we grudgingly made this camp for you, but you're not welcome here. As soon as we tell you it's safe, you're going back to Kerplakistan, because we sure as hell don't want your kind here." Where's the defense of liberty and property rights? Or is that each individual's duty? (Survival of the fittest?) If it is up to the person, then I submit that your philosophy sounds well and good, but you better have a bigger stick than the guy who wants to covet your livestock. Which brings us back to where I started: Your philosophy is a good one, especially for people who already have all the liberty and property they want. People such as us, who are in that position today because our forefathers did not adhere to your philosophy for a second. Our blood relations may not have specifically played a role, they were probably peasants. (Mine certainly were.) But they were peasants of the side that, by use of force, established our Empire. No, we are not culpable for the i
I have several friends who are CS majors and use Windows 98 with no virus protection or firewall.
Typically the only people who know anything about security are the same people who have built a complete system from parts. It's sad but a lot of CS people aren't hackers (in the hackers-with-a-dumb-glider-logo sense of the word).
Come to think of it the only programmer I know who actually went to school and got a CS degree is my mom, and it was her second degree -- she went back to school to pursue a well-paying career. I still remember the shoeboxes full of punch cards. She is clueless about Internet security, but pretty 1337 with COBOL and JCL, if such a thing is possible.
So your saying that a weak password protection scheme isn't an "effective technological measure" under the DMCA?
If that were truly the case, there would be no DeCSS lawsuit, since Xing's weak password protection was what allowed DeCSS to be written in the first place.
When tweetle beetles battle in a bottle on a poodle and the poodle's eating noodles...
Are you channeling Brian Eno???
But if there are property rights in space, it'll end up like Alien, and little monsters will come popping out of our stomachs at the breakfast table.
Your call.
I thought it was because nobody ever bought the Palestinians and the Israelis a Coke, and taught them to sing in perfect harmony...
Just curious, is it the doing nothing with their lives, or the worship of crows, that makes them unsympathetic?
If you're such a big believer in property rights, does that mean you think we should give America back to the Indians?
(That was rhetorical, and you're supposed to answer "no.")
So let's analyze what exactly do you believe in, then, when you say "Property rights and freedom go hand in hand." From what I can see, you're saying that if I have big enough guns to kick everyone off of some land, then I can own it, and I can now enjoy freedom on my land, while everybody else is screwed.
I don't think that you're wrong. In fact the very words I put into your mouth above pretty much describe The Way It Works In The Real World. But don't wave the banner of "freedom" when our private ownership of American soil was won by force (which you kindly point out is the basic premise for all sorts of bad stuff.)
I thought it was because Heinlein was attempting to retell the Story of Jesus.* Like, you know, how Jesus went to Jerusalem for the purpose of being crucified || Martian guy coming to Earth for the same reason... Ooh and look how spiritually enlightened this Martian hippy is, we can all learn from him. Now everybody crucify him. Personally I felt that SISAL was a crappy book, mainly because the retelling of the fable was sooo hamfisted and the characters were one dimension short of the requirement to live in this universe.
I did love TMIAHM though.
*Jesus is a registered trademark of The 700 Club.
BUMP
the shorthand for parent comment goes like this: "possesion is nine tenths of the law."