Not equated to but connected with. Lots of terrorist organizations use coutnerfitting as a way to raise funds. Of course thats not the ONLY reason to counterfit but it is a widely acknowledged one. Therefore fighting counterfitting is in an indirect way fighting terrorism.
Is this because of a general lack of respect for those in the military and the refusal to acknowledge that anyone allowed to fly a fighter jet is a highly trained and very disciplined individual or was it just mindless sarcasm?
1. That I am uneducated. 2. That I would resort to violence over an argument. 3. That I would continue the fight. 4. That you could defeat me in a fight. 5. That I am a future mass murderer. 6. That I am not a liberal.
I don't start physical fights with people. If they can't argue civilly then they have no business arguing.
As to the comment, you said the punishment was excessive. Since he's going to get jail time then you must by deductive logic have a problem with the guy being sentenced to any length of jail time at all. This I cannot understand since he clearly tresspassed onto a system he did not own and has already confessed and pleaded guilty to the act. What would you suggest a $40 fine? How is that in any way going to be a deterrant to others?
I didn't make up anything. You just admitted you said the punishment was excessive. Thats equivalent to having a problem with the guy gbetting jail time.
The likes of me? What because I'm not a panzy pacificist as your sig indicates you are?
Some countries provide a greater range of freedoms than the US and a great deal more provide a lesser range of freedoms than the US so whats your point? It should be noted that there is no nation the same size or larger than the US population wise that offers greater freedoms than the US. Perhaps the more people you have, the more laws you need to manage them.
Yes weed does cause brain damage but I can see how it would be difficult to find that out if your main source of information on marijuana use is from fringe sites like erowid.org.
Basically to sum it up you have a problem with this guy getting jail time because you don't feel hacking into computer systems is a crime that ought to be punished. To justify this stance you go off on rants about how this nation either "isn't free" or "isn't free as some other countries". Which of course is irrelevant because no matter what your rankings are on the "freedom" scale the laws a country has ought to be enforced especially if they are reasonable. And keeping intruders out of private computer systems is a very reasonable law.
Then again I *AM* on Slashdot where situational ethics dominate and where people aren't responsible for their actions when they originate from the other side of an internet connection.
In the US, US Citizens are protected by the writ of habeas corpus and fair trials. No country is immune from having illogical laws on the books here or there but you make it sound like that is all that exists in the US. Again prison labor is fine. There's nothing wrong with it and if there is you haven't stated any reasons why it should not be allowed. Equality? By and large the US is a nation that strives to treat every person as an equal. It doesn't always succeed but it tries.
I never said cigaratte addiction was harmless but we as a society have decided it is tolerable. Obviously it is less damaging than weed smoking since weed smoking carries most of the same dangers as smoking yet adds brain damage.
My point is that you have tried to paint the US as being full of unfair and unjust laws and a non-free country. You have failed to do so with the examples you have provided.
Guns are legal and their ownership is a Constitutionally protected right. Cigarettes are legal. Therefore equipment to enhance their usefulness are also legal within reason (machine guns aren't legal for civilians for example.) Weed is not legal however. We've decided as a society that allowing someone to become a loser dopefiend is not in our best interests so its not legal. That means bongs aren't legal either. Its not that hard to understand.
Comparing number of laws is immensely stupid. The number of laws could vary for a number of reasons the main one being the age of the nations in question. Furthermore I would not want to live in a country with a minimum of laws as it wouldn't be a very safe place. Using your logic the most free country would be the one without laws. Such a country would be an anarchy run nation and its hard to see how "free" the average person could be with murderers and rapists running unpunished thru the streets.
Looking at the percentage of citizens in prison could also be an indicator as to how serious a nation's government is about enforcing its laws and keeping its law-abiding citizens safe.
Pocket knifes in the form of switch-blades are in fact illegal to carry.
Executions are wonderful. They rid our nation of people who are extremely dangerous. I acknowledge they are not a deterrant. Prison labor is not cruel or unusual punishment. Therefore why not use it?
I would rate the US on a scale of 1-10 (1 being extremely free, 10 being overly oppressive) compared to Western Europe, Austraila, New Zealand or Canada as a 3. If you question why I give the US such a high score I would ask you to keep in mind that freedom is not just a lack of laws and regulations but the ability of the common people to go about their business on a daily basis without being accosted and or negatively affected by various social ills. The permitting of weed consumption in the Netherlands for example has leds to scores of individuals who are unproductive and need public assistance to prevent homelessness.
...is a good one as long as you do not try to justify hacking by claiming its a special kind of crime.
The areas of the NYTimes website that this guy accessed were off limits to the public. That is akin to entering a private residence. There is no difference. A password is the same as a key and lock on a door or window. The point is he was where he shouldn't have been. Tresspassing in physical property equates to hacking in digital property.
Now if your point is that as long as you were granted permission it doesn't matter how you get in, it does. If I allow you into my home that does not give you permission to jimmy open the window. You come in thru the door or not at all. Whatever system the NYTimes website has is the way he should have accessed the website, not thru a means of his own creation/discovery.
If he has such an incredible sense of moral ethics then why was he using lame ass excuses to break into websites he did not own and was not invited to hack into?
If you allow "good samaritans" to go where they want at will then you'll have an internet where every hacker is a "good samaritan". You'll have 50000 people "testing" your security for your own benefit.
He didn't "explore". He illegally hacked into a private computer system. He didn't own this system and he wasn't asked to evaluate its security beforehand.
Is it OK to break into a store to tell them where their security weaknesses lie? I didn't think so. But somehow its alright if its done from a keyboard right?
How about you quit enabling him and others who may be contemplating getting themselves into the same kind of ass-pounding situation and the world will be a much better place, capice?
I'm sorry I was under the impression that companies give back to the nations they do business in by PAYING TAXES. This "giving-back" that you speak of smacks awfully of charity to me.....
Why do people post as AC's so that they can't be informed of responses? That is so irritating.
Listen, I'm never going to starve. I simply make too much money and I'm not a moron financially for that to happen. It used to be that college/university were finishing schools for the sons/daughters of the elite. Now everyone and their mother thinks they need to go to a 4 year institution. Well they're wrong. You DONT. You can make a GOOD living without ever stepping foot in a university. Its just most folks don't have the ambition to pave their own way without that piece of paper in their hands.
There's also a supply and demand issue. Way more people in the US have IT degrees (CS, EE, MIS...etc) than are needed. So it really doesn't fucking matter whether the jobs are outsourced or not. There aren't enough of them anyways.
As for revolutions, this isn't the middle ages anymore or even colonial times. With the combination of technology and mob management techniques gated communities of the future will be more secure than ever before and nothing short of nukes can take down the military might of Washington DC.
So sorry but like it or not folks are just going to have to deal with being educated and unemployed. And yes over time less and less people will seek higher ed and it will return to the domain of the rich and elite where it belongs.
Since Americans are by nature born businessmen and capitalists no American should have a problem buying HP products when she says things like that. The very first thing us Americans learn is how to achieve the highest returns for The Shareholder.
It seems that someone needs to be reminded that earning a degree or certification of any kind is neither a garuntee or entitlement of a better standard of living.
She's bad because she's whipping the company into shape? Do you HP-Way loving fucks understand that the ONLY profitable division of Hewlet Packard is the frigging PRINTER division? Ever heard of a company called Dell? They're eating HP's lunch. HP won't survive unless it goes in the direction Carly is taking it.
Slashdot Mirror
Not equated to but connected with. Lots of terrorist organizations use coutnerfitting as a way to raise funds. Of course thats not the ONLY reason to counterfit but it is a widely acknowledged one. Therefore fighting counterfitting is in an indirect way fighting terrorism.
Is this because of a general lack of respect for those in the military and the refusal to acknowledge that anyone allowed to fly a fighter jet is a highly trained and very disciplined individual or was it just mindless sarcasm?
Brave words from an Anonymous Coward.
You make several assumptions.
1. That I am uneducated.
2. That I would resort to violence over an argument.
3. That I would continue the fight.
4. That you could defeat me in a fight.
5. That I am a future mass murderer.
6. That I am not a liberal.
I don't start physical fights with people. If they can't argue civilly then they have no business arguing.
As to the comment, you said the punishment was excessive. Since he's going to get jail time then you must by deductive logic have a problem with the guy being sentenced to any length of jail time at all. This I cannot understand since he clearly tresspassed onto a system he did not own and has already confessed and pleaded guilty to the act. What would you suggest a $40 fine? How is that in any way going to be a deterrant to others?
I didn't make up anything. You just admitted you said the punishment was excessive. Thats equivalent to having a problem with the guy gbetting jail time.
The likes of me? What because I'm not a panzy pacificist as your sig indicates you are?
Some countries provide a greater range of freedoms than the US and a great deal more provide a lesser range of freedoms than the US so whats your point? It should be noted that there is no nation the same size or larger than the US population wise that offers greater freedoms than the US. Perhaps the more people you have, the more laws you need to manage them.
Yes weed does cause brain damage but I can see how it would be difficult to find that out if your main source of information on marijuana use is from fringe sites like erowid.org.
Basically to sum it up you have a problem with this guy getting jail time because you don't feel hacking into computer systems is a crime that ought to be punished. To justify this stance you go off on rants about how this nation either "isn't free" or "isn't free as some other countries". Which of course is irrelevant because no matter what your rankings are on the "freedom" scale the laws a country has ought to be enforced especially if they are reasonable. And keeping intruders out of private computer systems is a very reasonable law.
Then again I *AM* on Slashdot where situational ethics dominate and where people aren't responsible for their actions when they originate from the other side of an internet connection.
The last time I checked, it was legal for a property owner to leave their property unlocked.
In the US, US Citizens are protected by the writ of habeas corpus and fair trials. No country is immune from having illogical laws on the books here or there but you make it sound like that is all that exists in the US. Again prison labor is fine. There's nothing wrong with it and if there is you haven't stated any reasons why it should not be allowed. Equality? By and large the US is a nation that strives to treat every person as an equal. It doesn't always succeed but it tries.
I never said cigaratte addiction was harmless but we as a society have decided it is tolerable. Obviously it is less damaging than weed smoking since weed smoking carries most of the same dangers as smoking yet adds brain damage.
My point is that you have tried to paint the US as being full of unfair and unjust laws and a non-free country. You have failed to do so with the examples you have provided.
Guns are legal and their ownership is a Constitutionally protected right. Cigarettes are legal. Therefore equipment to enhance their usefulness are also legal within reason (machine guns aren't legal for civilians for example.) Weed is not legal however. We've decided as a society that allowing someone to become a loser dopefiend is not in our best interests so its not legal. That means bongs aren't legal either. Its not that hard to understand.
Comparing number of laws is immensely stupid. The number of laws could vary for a number of reasons the main one being the age of the nations in question. Furthermore I would not want to live in a country with a minimum of laws as it wouldn't be a very safe place. Using your logic the most free country would be the one without laws. Such a country would be an anarchy run nation and its hard to see how "free" the average person could be with murderers and rapists running unpunished thru the streets.
Looking at the percentage of citizens in prison could also be an indicator as to how serious a nation's government is about enforcing its laws and keeping its law-abiding citizens safe.
Pocket knifes in the form of switch-blades are in fact illegal to carry.
Executions are wonderful. They rid our nation of people who are extremely dangerous. I acknowledge they are not a deterrant. Prison labor is not cruel or unusual punishment. Therefore why not use it?
I would rate the US on a scale of 1-10 (1 being extremely free, 10 being overly oppressive) compared to Western Europe, Austraila, New Zealand or Canada as a 3. If you question why I give the US such a high score I would ask you to keep in mind that freedom is not just a lack of laws and regulations but the ability of the common people to go about their business on a daily basis without being accosted and or negatively affected by various social ills. The permitting of weed consumption in the Netherlands for example has leds to scores of individuals who are unproductive and need public assistance to prevent homelessness.
Yeah cause putting people who illegally break into websites they do not own in prison is FACISM!
...is a good one as long as you do not try to justify hacking by claiming its a special kind of crime.
The areas of the NYTimes website that this guy accessed were off limits to the public. That is akin to entering a private residence. There is no difference. A password is the same as a key and lock on a door or window. The point is he was where he shouldn't have been. Tresspassing in physical property equates to hacking in digital property.
Now if your point is that as long as you were granted permission it doesn't matter how you get in, it does. If I allow you into my home that does not give you permission to jimmy open the window. You come in thru the door or not at all. Whatever system the NYTimes website has is the way he should have accessed the website, not thru a means of his own creation/discovery.
Weed equipment is illegal. What is so hard to fucking understand about that? Because there are laws on the books that makes this an unfree country?
Or is it an unfree country because you can't do whatever the hell you damn well please?
We're a society too, keep that in mind when you bitch about some law or rule.
If he has such an incredible sense of moral ethics then why was he using lame ass excuses to break into websites he did not own and was not invited to hack into?
If you allow "good samaritans" to go where they want at will then you'll have an internet where every hacker is a "good samaritan". You'll have 50000 people "testing" your security for your own benefit.
Understand now why we can't allow it?
He didn't "explore". He illegally hacked into a private computer system. He didn't own this system and he wasn't asked to evaluate its security beforehand.
Is it OK to break into a store to tell them where their security weaknesses lie? I didn't think so. But somehow its alright if its done from a keyboard right?
How about you quit enabling him and others who may be contemplating getting themselves into the same kind of ass-pounding situation and the world will be a much better place, capice?
You mean aside from the millions of viewers who prefer him over his next closest competition, David Letterman?
Is it any surprise that Java is so slow?
I'm sorry I was under the impression that companies give back to the nations they do business in by PAYING TAXES. This "giving-back" that you speak of smacks awfully of charity to me.....
Why do people post as AC's so that they can't be informed of responses? That is so irritating.
Listen, I'm never going to starve. I simply make too much money and I'm not a moron financially for that to happen. It used to be that college/university were finishing schools for the sons/daughters of the elite. Now everyone and their mother thinks they need to go to a 4 year institution. Well they're wrong. You DONT. You can make a GOOD living without ever stepping foot in a university. Its just most folks don't have the ambition to pave their own way without that piece of paper in their hands.
There's also a supply and demand issue. Way more people in the US have IT degrees (CS, EE, MIS...etc) than are needed. So it really doesn't fucking matter whether the jobs are outsourced or not. There aren't enough of them anyways.
As for revolutions, this isn't the middle ages anymore or even colonial times. With the combination of technology and mob management techniques gated communities of the future will be more secure than ever before and nothing short of nukes can take down the military might of Washington DC.
So sorry but like it or not folks are just going to have to deal with being educated and unemployed. And yes over time less and less people will seek higher ed and it will return to the domain of the rich and elite where it belongs.
Since Americans are by nature born businessmen and capitalists no American should have a problem buying HP products when she says things like that. The very first thing us Americans learn is how to achieve the highest returns for The Shareholder.
Did someone put a gun to your head and force you to go to college?
No job is more important than another. Why protect your job at the expense of ANY other kind of job?
It seems that someone needs to be reminded that earning a degree or certification of any kind is neither a garuntee or entitlement of a better standard of living.
She's bad because she's whipping the company into shape? Do you HP-Way loving fucks understand that the ONLY profitable division of Hewlet Packard is the frigging PRINTER division? Ever heard of a company called Dell? They're eating HP's lunch. HP won't survive unless it goes in the direction Carly is taking it.
Business was never meant to be warm and fuzzy.
San Jose will never become like Detroit BECAUSE of its weather. It will become another resort/luxury town like Palm Beach.