"I would certainly agree that overstepping their mandate is a serious offense to the people. I know that when the RCMP have done so, that the people of Canada become very concerned."
If you want to see a real hullabaloo, check out what happened a few years ago when CSIS (basically the Canadian spy agency) had undercover agents planted in certain active hate groups. Not a pretty story, as I recall.
"In any case, I think you would have to naive to believe that it is only US nationals that are being spied on. It would also be naive to think that is the case in my country or any other technology-enabled country. Many governments watch their citizens whether they admit to it or not.
I am not so naive as to think that;). My concern was whether or not the FBI was overstepping its mandated powers in this regard. As I understand it, only certain agencies of the U.S. government have been granted the power to investigate foreign activities (this is not to say that said foreign powers allow this, only that the U.S. government has said, "This is what you do."), just as only certain other agencies have the right to investigate domestic activities. Even if you take a dim view of the ethics of the U.S. government as a whole, you'll have to admit that stepping outside one's established bailiwick is something even they don't like. (cf. attempts by those other than the Secret Service to investigate large scale counterfeiting, and the response of said agency).
The minute the government starts letting agencies define the appropriate kinds of actions in which to engage, is the minute that the government loses even its minimal ability to prevent abuses against its own people. I don't know about you, but the only thing I worry about more than a big bully in the sandbox (the U.S. government) is a gang of little bullies (unchecked agencies fighting amongst themselves when they aren't united at crushing some external threat). However badly they start treating U.S. citizens, you can bet diamonds to doughnuts that their treatment of non-U.S. citizens (*cough*me*cough*) will be that much worse.
Just wondering... assume I, as one of the flap-heads up north of the 49th, just happen to have my online e-mail/actions caught by this system. Does reading my private messages constitute espionage? Whether or not they have a mandate to investigate domestic stuff, they certainly don't have any rights granted to them covering external messages, do they? Perhaps if I was plotting terrorist activities, maybe...
Ah well, time to fire up the CSA spooler trigger package on Emacs again....;)
But, is DNA doing these commentaries in a serious vein (which would be interesting), or a humourous slant (which would also be interesting and more in keeping with his style)? Either way, I suddenly wish they let me listen to streaming media at work.;)
On the face of it, and based on a cursory read of the article, not the worst idea at all. And this guy definitely seems to have his heart in the right place on several issues.
Still, I'm not entirely clear as to why a bias towards Windows platforms seems to be such an important issue. Is there really that much difference in the requirements for a UNIX box? Given the number of Apache servers out there, I would think that ignoring UNIX platforms is a less than wise decision.
Still, he does describe the theory behind the approach. I don't doubt that there will soon be similar efforts for non-Windows platforms, if this method holds up to its promises. Invulnerability to DDoS alone is motivator enough.
Mind you, who finds the timing of this just a little suspect? A couple of months before the solstice-oriented holiday rush, people are told "oops, we're going to be short some units". (Implied: "better buy early".)
Just a thought, but I'll be watching to see if there's a miraculous appearance of components just in time to meet the end-of-year demand.
"That's all well and good, but searching ads doesn't require distributed computing. It requires 10 seconds on a 386."
There are other concerns where the distribution might help. For example, how many ad sites are out there with stale ads? By maintaining your own ad on your own "servlet" app, ads should be better maintained. If you don't want people looking for that used TV you were offering because you sold it, you nuke the ad on your machine. Presto! No more appearing in search results! Compare this with the week or so worth of phone calls in a paper after a sale, or the tendency for people to convieniently "forget" to delete an ad at, say, Excite after it has served its purpose.
Use of an appropriately flexible format (I work with XML, so I'm biased as some have noted, but whatever works...) can make this a reasonably effective "distributed classifieds", IMUO.
Hmmm... good questions. Wanna brainstorm on this thread?
Believe it or not, I'm wondering if you could run a dating service or people-locator using a distibuted approach and, say, XML format. Create a file describing oneself and what/who they are seeking, then let the servers pass your profile around. If your "seeking" tags match someone's "is" tags, that profile is shuffled to you and yours is shuffled to the match.
Man, I've mixed too much coffee and Yahoo Chat to have come up with that little frivolity...;) Mind you, it doesn't have to be dating... employer/employee matching, activity planning ( seeking=rock concert when=yadda where=New York, etc), and similar things. All you have to agree on is the XML file format. (And the software can always hide the grubby details...)
Assuming you could get the numbers, how about a "CD double-burning rally": as a public act of disobedience, set up a number of CD burners. Make copies (in open format) for anyone who shows up with a blank CD and a copy of any CD they might own. They can then throw the original in a nice bonfire (or not). People who have already made their own burns can just show up to flash their heinously illegal copies (snigger) in the face of Big Business and/or have an original platter roast.
You've got to admit, it's the sort of protest that gets eyeballs in local media.
I wonder, on the assumption that a large number of people believe the alleged fallacy, what reasons they would give for accepting said concept? I mildly suspect there would be a lot of "geeks are solitary by nature, this lets them work the way they're used to" comments.
I hate to say it, but the above poster may have something there. For something like this, we need a "killer download" instead of a "killer app". Something that the vast majority of people would want to see enough that they'd overcome their natural disinclination to install software to be able to see it. Generally, that implies one of the following:
A release of a video by an extremely popular source, strictly in that codec. Sort of the video equivalent of Stephen King publishing an online-only book. This requires, of course, getting said popular type to do this. Not that easy.
Porn. Like it or (like me) lump it, it has a high eyeball count for the time and money required to produce it. Still, for this, you couldn't just ask Dani Ashe or Asia Carerra (both noted cyber-active porn icons) to "donate their services" for the cause... it's too easy to find similar stuff in a non-codec form. You'd need to offer something that would be popular AND not easily available from other sources. Judging from troll postings around here, something on the order of Natalie Portman's first nude video shoot ought to do it.;)
Something underground, a la "The Blair Witch Project" if it was released as a netmovie first.
Barring any of that, we'd need an agreement from some reasonably influential company (e.g. Paramount) to release online trailers and such in the new open format, which brings us back to square one again.
One other point about the porn route -- being the equal-opp people we are, we'd have to make sure that there's something for everyone. Ms. Portman in her skivvies is one thing, but does little for the female and gay male contingent who'd prefer, say, Ewan MacGregor.;)
Any other ideas? Are there other routes? And within the suggestions above, how would one go about implementing one or more on a practical level?
-TBHiX-
My own inclination, of course, is "Angelina Jolie's Hands-On Guide to Stripping and Overclocking Your Athlon System.";)
Linux multimedia is definitely hampered by the lack of a reasonable codec that everyone can use to view stuff. So there are people likely at work on this already. Add a $50K bounty, and suddenly a lot of dusty projects are going to get a good polish-up, IMUO.;)
OTOH, once the codec is created, how can acceptance be encouraged? If Quicktime players refuse to include it (for example), we're back to square one, aren't we?
...but theory gronks really need the atmosphere, I think. I was always an OK-fair programmer, but a better-than average algorithms guy. I doubt I could have easily developed that skill outside of an academic environment. So I think it depends on your style: if you are king of the architecture exploits, go to university if you like, but don't ignore valuable hacking time. If you're the next Knuth-in-training, though, hitting the books might be very adviseable.
-TBHiX-
How to solve the travelling salseman problem in n^2 time on the number of cities:
1. Salesman finds and travels shortest path between any two cities. (Time: O(n) )
2. Salesman is inevitably shot by annoyed customer with shotgun. (Time: O (1) )
3. All other paths are marked unreachable. (Time: O( n^2 ) )
Title says it all. Is this to be payed in a lump sum by such-and-such a date, or is it amortized over a period? And in what form does said payment take?
Additionally, if they appeal, is this payment frozen until the new decision?
-TBHiX-
Not particularly well-versed in the outrageous settlements granted under U.S. law.
On the face of it, a good idea. But wouldn't it be nice if the existence of a patent could be limited or negated outright by public opinion. As in:
Company patents something patently ridiculous, like energy use (see Nukees for an example).
Company attempts to put the hurt on all those lovely unsuspecting people who are "infringing" on their patent rights.
Large petition/referendum is conducted to challenge the sensibility of the patent.
Due to large numbers of people declaring how stupid said patent is, it is struck down. Happiness ensues.
Well, one can dream, I suppose...
-TBHiX-
Current holder of patent #5863434455555555534-A, "A biochemical aid to life support via repeated contraction-release mechanical action to propel an oxygen and nutrient enriched fluid to living organic tissue." Those using such a system without prior permission can contact me to work out a payment schedule.;)
Isn't Mars the closest planet to the asteroid belt? If so, and assuming that that occasionally an asteroid gets knocked into an eccentric orbit, might this not explain some aspects? Of course, that's dependent on whether there are young rocks in the belt. If there aren't, pardonez mon air chaud.;)
-TBHiX-
Forgive Babelfish, for it knows not what it translates.
Entertaining and gratifying, but what does this mean in real terms? In U.S. law, a decision is often only as good as the next higher court. How much effect does this have on the "main" case, the DoJ antitrust decision, and Microsoft's plan to appeal?
On a slightly more serious level, a lot of work would need to be done in terms of biochemical regulating mechanisms before this is feasible, in order to ensure that you don't live in a permanent state of caf OD (or worse), and also to ensure that you don't build up a tolerance to your "natural" levels. Why splice it in, after all, if you're only going to become resistant to its presence?
-TBHiX-
Coffee bean, coffee bean, so small and yet so mighty
Its gentle buzz, as warm as fuzz, by day or in the nighty!
--one of the few nights even I might admit to one too many cups of Turkish.
...only if it means R2D2 can do battle with JarJar in his native environment and give him the de-rez he so richly deserves.;)
Seriously, George Lucas has had some great moments -- more than anyone's fair share, really -- but hasn't he gone just a little too keen on CGI, to the point where he puts it in too frequently (even when the reason is poor, like having a CGI main character), or when another technique (like tried-and-true miniatures) would have better effect?
Admittedly, they are going to be feeding it what they consider to be atomic facts. I highly suspect they will be filtering for opinion on the side of caution, i.e. an attempt to introduce the mindpixel of "Natalie Portman is hot" by one or more of our, shall we say, more fervent congregation would be altered to "Some people who write comments on Slashdot say that Natalie Portman is hot". The latter version, of course, is indisputable fact in the truest sense and therefore qualifies as a mindpixel.
Slashdot Mirror
crystal dragon wrote:
If you want to see a real hullabaloo, check out what happened a few years ago when CSIS (basically the Canadian spy agency) had undercover agents planted in certain active hate groups. Not a pretty story, as I recall.
-TBHiX
crystal dragon wrote:
I am not so naive as to think that ;). My concern was whether or not the FBI was overstepping its mandated powers in this regard. As I understand it, only certain agencies of the U.S. government have been granted the power to investigate foreign activities (this is not to say that said foreign powers allow this, only that the U.S. government has said, "This is what you do."), just as only certain other agencies have the right to investigate domestic activities. Even if you take a dim view of the ethics of the U.S. government as a whole, you'll have to admit that stepping outside one's established bailiwick is something even they don't like. (cf. attempts by those other than the Secret Service to investigate large scale counterfeiting, and the response of said agency).
The minute the government starts letting agencies define the appropriate kinds of actions in which to engage, is the minute that the government loses even its minimal ability to prevent abuses against its own people. I don't know about you, but the only thing I worry about more than a big bully in the sandbox (the U.S. government) is a gang of little bullies (unchecked agencies fighting amongst themselves when they aren't united at crushing some external threat). However badly they start treating U.S. citizens, you can bet diamonds to doughnuts that their treatment of non-U.S. citizens (*cough*me*cough*) will be that much worse.
-TBHiX-
Just wondering... assume I, as one of the flap-heads up north of the 49th, just happen to have my online e-mail/actions caught by this system. Does reading my private messages constitute espionage? Whether or not they have a mandate to investigate domestic stuff, they certainly don't have any rights granted to them covering external messages, do they? Perhaps if I was plotting terrorist activities, maybe...
Ah well, time to fire up the CSA spooler trigger package on Emacs again.... ;)
-TBHiX-
But, is DNA doing these commentaries in a serious vein (which would be interesting), or a humourous slant (which would also be interesting and more in keeping with his style)? Either way, I suddenly wish they let me listen to streaming media at work. ;)
-TBHiX-
Sorry about that. That'll teach me to use the redirected links straight from the browser.
-TBHiX-
On the face of it, and based on a cursory read of the article, not the worst idea at all. And this guy definitely seems to have his heart in the right place on several issues.
Still, I'm not entirely clear as to why a bias towards Windows platforms seems to be such an important issue. Is there really that much difference in the requirements for a UNIX box? Given the number of Apache servers out there, I would think that ignoring UNIX platforms is a less than wise decision.
Still, he does describe the theory behind the approach. I don't doubt that there will soon be similar efforts for non-Windows platforms, if this method holds up to its promises. Invulnerability to DDoS alone is motivator enough.
-TBHiX-
It's true! Picture it, many years ago...
Ogg (looking at stick propped under huge boulder): "Hmf. Writing on stick say, 'Push here to view Cave Defense Strategy.'"
Mogg: "Ug. I push." (press)
*** RRRRRUUUUUMMMMBLEE ****
-TBHiX-
Mind you, who finds the timing of this just a little suspect? A couple of months before the solstice-oriented holiday rush, people are told "oops, we're going to be short some units". (Implied: "better buy early".)
Just a thought, but I'll be watching to see if there's a miraculous appearance of components just in time to meet the end-of-year demand.
-TBHiX-
Thanks. Sometimes I and my fingers don't agree as to what to type. ;) Note also that I didn't properly close those tags (shout be </...>).
-TBHiX-
Not to nickpick, but shouldn't that be:
<poster type="Karma Whore">TBHiX<poster>
<post type="lame">Mention XML<post>
;)
-TBHiX- ;)
Who regularly gives up his seat on the bus to just about anyone, so I guess you're right.
"That's all well and good, but searching ads doesn't require distributed computing. It requires 10 seconds on a 386."
There are other concerns where the distribution might help. For example, how many ad sites are out there with stale ads? By maintaining your own ad on your own "servlet" app, ads should be better maintained. If you don't want people looking for that used TV you were offering because you sold it, you nuke the ad on your machine. Presto! No more appearing in search results! Compare this with the week or so worth of phone calls in a paper after a sale, or the tendency for people to convieniently "forget" to delete an ad at, say, Excite after it has served its purpose.
Use of an appropriately flexible format (I work with XML, so I'm biased as some have noted, but whatever works...) can make this a reasonably effective "distributed classifieds", IMUO.
-TBHiX-
Hmmm... good questions. Wanna brainstorm on this thread?
Believe it or not, I'm wondering if you could run a dating service or people-locator using a distibuted approach and, say, XML format. Create a file describing oneself and what/who they are seeking, then let the servers pass your profile around. If your "seeking" tags match someone's "is" tags, that profile is shuffled to you and yours is shuffled to the match.
Man, I've mixed too much coffee and Yahoo Chat to have come up with that little frivolity... ;) Mind you, it doesn't have to be dating... employer/employee matching, activity planning ( seeking=rock concert when=yadda where=New York, etc), and similar things. All you have to agree on is the XML file format. (And the software can always hide the grubby details...)
-TBHiX-
Man, this guy had way too much time on his hands. And maybe a few too many Lego Mindstorms. I mean, who in their right minds would build such a thing?
Needless to say, I am in envious awe. Bravo!
-TBHiX-
Assuming you could get the numbers, how about a "CD double-burning rally": as a public act of disobedience, set up a number of CD burners. Make copies (in open format) for anyone who shows up with a blank CD and a copy of any CD they might own. They can then throw the original in a nice bonfire (or not). People who have already made their own burns can just show up to flash their heinously illegal copies (snigger) in the face of Big Business and/or have an original platter roast.
You've got to admit, it's the sort of protest that gets eyeballs in local media.
-TBHiX-
I wonder, on the assumption that a large number of people believe the alleged fallacy, what reasons they would give for accepting said concept? I mildly suspect there would be a lot of "geeks are solitary by nature, this lets them work the way they're used to" comments.
-TBHiX-
I hate to say it, but the above poster may have something there. For something like this, we need a "killer download" instead of a "killer app". Something that the vast majority of people would want to see enough that they'd overcome their natural disinclination to install software to be able to see it. Generally, that implies one of the following:
Barring any of that, we'd need an agreement from some reasonably influential company (e.g. Paramount) to release online trailers and such in the new open format, which brings us back to square one again.
One other point about the porn route -- being the equal-opp people we are, we'd have to make sure that there's something for everyone. Ms. Portman in her skivvies is one thing, but does little for the female and gay male contingent who'd prefer, say, Ewan MacGregor. ;)
Any other ideas? Are there other routes? And within the suggestions above, how would one go about implementing one or more on a practical level?
-TBHiX- ;)
My own inclination, of course, is "Angelina Jolie's Hands-On Guide to Stripping and Overclocking Your Athlon System."
Linux multimedia is definitely hampered by the lack of a reasonable codec that everyone can use to view stuff. So there are people likely at work on this already. Add a $50K bounty, and suddenly a lot of dusty projects are going to get a good polish-up, IMUO. ;)
OTOH, once the codec is created, how can acceptance be encouraged? If Quicktime players refuse to include it (for example), we're back to square one, aren't we?
-TBHiX-
...but theory gronks really need the atmosphere, I think. I was always an OK-fair programmer, but a better-than average algorithms guy. I doubt I could have easily developed that skill outside of an academic environment. So I think it depends on your style: if you are king of the architecture exploits, go to university if you like, but don't ignore valuable hacking time. If you're the next Knuth-in-training, though, hitting the books might be very adviseable.
-TBHiX-
How to solve the travelling salseman problem in n^2 time on the number of cities:
1. Salesman finds and travels shortest path between any two cities. (Time: O(n) )
2. Salesman is inevitably shot by annoyed customer with shotgun. (Time: O (1) )
3. All other paths are marked unreachable. (Time: O( n^2 ) )
Title says it all. Is this to be payed in a lump sum by such-and-such a date, or is it amortized over a period? And in what form does said payment take?
Additionally, if they appeal, is this payment frozen until the new decision?
-TBHiX-
Not particularly well-versed in the outrageous settlements granted under U.S. law.
On the face of it, a good idea. But wouldn't it be nice if the existence of a patent could be limited or negated outright by public opinion. As in:
Well, one can dream, I suppose...
-TBHiX- ;)
Current holder of patent #5863434455555555534-A, "A biochemical aid to life support via repeated contraction-release mechanical action to propel an oxygen and nutrient enriched fluid to living organic tissue." Those using such a system without prior permission can contact me to work out a payment schedule.
Isn't Mars the closest planet to the asteroid belt? If so, and assuming that that occasionally an asteroid gets knocked into an eccentric orbit, might this not explain some aspects? Of course, that's dependent on whether there are young rocks in the belt. If there aren't, pardonez mon air chaud. ;)
-TBHiX-
Forgive Babelfish, for it knows not what it translates.
Entertaining and gratifying, but what does this mean in real terms? In U.S. law, a decision is often only as good as the next higher court. How much effect does this have on the "main" case, the DoJ antitrust decision, and Microsoft's plan to appeal?
-TBHiX-
I... am *so* there. ;)
On a slightly more serious level, a lot of work would need to be done in terms of biochemical regulating mechanisms before this is feasible, in order to ensure that you don't live in a permanent state of caf OD (or worse), and also to ensure that you don't build up a tolerance to your "natural" levels. Why splice it in, after all, if you're only going to become resistant to its presence?
-TBHiX-
Coffee bean, coffee bean, so small and yet so mighty
Its gentle buzz, as warm as fuzz, by day or in the nighty!
--one of the few nights even I might admit to one too many cups of Turkish.
...only if it means R2D2 can do battle with JarJar in his native environment and give him the de-rez he so richly deserves. ;)
Seriously, George Lucas has had some great moments -- more than anyone's fair share, really -- but hasn't he gone just a little too keen on CGI, to the point where he puts it in too frequently (even when the reason is poor, like having a CGI main character), or when another technique (like tried-and-true miniatures) would have better effect?
-TBHiX-
Admittedly, they are going to be feeding it what they consider to be atomic facts. I highly suspect they will be filtering for opinion on the side of caution, i.e. an attempt to introduce the mindpixel of "Natalie Portman is hot" by one or more of our, shall we say, more fervent congregation would be altered to "Some people who write comments on Slashdot say that Natalie Portman is hot". The latter version, of course, is indisputable fact in the truest sense and therefore qualifies as a mindpixel.
-TBHiX-