"Italy" is not a monolithic entity. If some Italians don't want to view that kind of material, they should refrain from going to those sites. No one should tie up good Catholics and force them to view websites against their will.
Stopping the use of force against people who are doing nothing more than publishing words should be the "business" of everyone who values freedom.
A number of actual and proposed laws in various countries that should know better require ISPs and other organizations to aid in spying on their customers. These laws frequently require the company not to notify the subject of the investigation. This service could be used to post a "You are being investigated." message if the ISP is operating under duress.
While some countries might consider this to be notification, other legal systems distinguish between enjoining someone from performing an action and requiring someone to perform an action. At the very least, it could muddy the legal waters.
Buildings full of people don't pose a problem if you have the right visualization tools:
Home was BAMA, the Sprawl, the Boston-Atlanta Metropolitan Axis. Program a map to display frequency data exchange, every thousand megabytes a single pixel on a very large screen. Manhattan and Atlanta burn solid white. Then they start to pulse, the rate of traffic threatening to overload your simulation. Your map is about to go nova. Cool it down. Up your scale. Each pixel a million megabytes. At a hundred million megabytes per second, you begin to make out certain blocks in midtown Manhattan, outlines of hundred-year-old parks ringing the old core of Atlanta.
William Gibson, "Neuromancer"
End the War On (Some) Drugs
on
Data Quality Act
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
This could be a powerful tool for those of us interested in eliminating the costly, futile, foolish, and evil War On (Some) Drugs. The vast majority of respectable research demonstrates that the harm caused by drug use is far less than the government would have you believe and the harm caused by the drug warriors is much greater. Providing a means for us to challenge the bogus information currently used to support this travesty of justice could result in finally bringing some sanity to the discussion.
Then again, as the man said, "If voting could change anything, it would be illegal."
Your argument boils down to "I want to exchange data with these other people but I don't want to pay for the use of the format they insist on using." Well, then, you have a choice to make: Spend the money or don't exchange the data.
Note that "Use governmental force to take control of the format away from its owner." is not among the list of choices available to individuals who respect the rights of others.
Assuming that the customer who wants to stop doing business with the owner of the format was not forced into the original relationship, why should the owner of the format be compelled to do anything outside the bounds of the contract? Making a profit is not a crime, except in the minds of those who lack an understanding of economics.
The heart of the issue is simple: respect for the rights of others. Either you have that respect or you are an unethical, immoral, poor excuse for a human being who should be either shunned, resisted, or terminated as appropriate to eliminate the threat you pose to decent people.
Does twisted thinking like that result in you having to screw your hat on in the morning?
The core issue has nothing to do with patents -- and your attempted argument fails once that is understood. If I create a file format, I am under no obligation to patent it. If I keep it as a trade secret and refuse to license it, then it is mine. It was created by my effort, it is mine to do with as I please.
If you want the details of it, your only ethical option is to negotiate with me for it. Your willingness to use force demonstrates that you consider other people to be nothing more than slaves, the product of their labor yours to do with as you choose. I sincerely hope that you try to apply the force you support personally -- some of us refuse to live as slaves and are willing and able to defend ourselves.
If you are a member of the society you're subject to its rules.
Translation: A large enough group of people often has the power to coerce a smaller group or a single individual. Evidently AC thinks this is a good thing.
If the primary function of the society requires it, any private possession is subject to being handed over to the society.
Translation: Stealing is acceptable when done by a large enough number of people. Tell me, AC, how many people have to do an evil thing before it stops being an evil thing?
If you don't agree with this you're just a freeloader who takes advantage of the security provided by the State but is not willing to contribute back when required.
Translation: How dare anyone refuse to submit meekly to our initiation of force?
Your not-so-subtle equivocation between "society" and "the State" is noted. Your post shows you to be yet another statist drone with the ethics of a common sneak thief and far more cowardice than a typical street thug. At least they do their own dirty work.
No organized collection of people, whether they call themselves a state, a society, a community, a nation, or anything else may legitimately violate the rights of individuals. Those organizations that do so must be resisted. The threat posed by those individuals who support such heinous actions must be eliminated.
Force is not necessarily implied anywhwere here, unlike in the DMCA, which provides no alternatives for the users....
But then again, you seem to be shilling for the corporations instead of the users.
You seem to have problems with reading comprehension. Force is clearly what is being discussed, otherwise the topic would be "How can file format owners be persuaded to voluntarily make them public?"
The only entities I'm "shilling" for are those who benefit from respect for property rights -- everyone, in other words. If you argue today for violating the property rights of file format owners, you have no moral ground to stand on tomorrow when people with guns come to "liberate" your money, computer, car, or house for "the public good."
The question presupposes that "we" or "society" or "the government" have some kind of moral right to require the owner of a file format to give up that ownership and make it publicly available. Unlike the original poster, I am not willing to use force, or hire someone else to use force, against someone whose only relevant action has been the creation of a popular format.
The solution to this problem isn't to violate the property rights of the owner of the format but to simply refuse to use it.
Once again a clueless company tries to use the ham fist of the law when the problem is technical. If the newspaper doesn't want other sites linking directly to their stories, they should serve them from a database with dynamic URLs and keep their front pages updated.
Technical incompetence on their part is not equivalent to copyright infringement on mine.
There is nothing new under the sun. If you want to make a lasting mark in a virtual environment, there are a number of text-based MUDs who would value your contributions. My personal favorite is Ancient Anguish. After demonstrating some familiarity with the world, players may choose to become developers and add to the enviroment. There are literally dozens of active coders and thousands of players.
Text-based MUDs are also an excellent way to learn the basics of coding. The interactive environment is much more interesting to work in than the typical IDE.
The solution to the spamming problem isn't yet more clueless government intervention but the use of mechanisms to allow free market forces to work. Legal solutions always have unintended, negative consequences. Technological solutions are needed for what is at heart a technical problem.
The best approaches currently being developed involve the use of micropayment systems for the equivalent of email postage. If it costs spammers a cent, or even a tenth of a cent, per email, their return on investment drops dramatically. The major hurdle that must be cleared by these systems is that mail user agents and/or mail transfer agents must be configured to support them.
There are a large number of online, multiplayer roleplaying games, similar in theme if not in style to EverQuest, that are free (as in beer) to their players. My personal favorite, Ancient Anguish, is one of the largest and has been running continuously for ten years.
The most compelling aspect of these games is not the gameplay, for most players, but the social interactions. I know of several married couples who met on the MUD. Quite possibly the social aspects are enhanced by the lack of fees. It would be interesting to see a similar study done on some of the free MUDs.
This is exactly what I was thinking when I read the original poster's list of criteria. I've worked extensively with C++ and Java and less exetensively with Perl and Python. The only language system in my experience that meets all of the specified criteria is Common Lisp with CLOS (the Common Lisp Object System).
I suspect that if the original poster were to present his boss with the suggestion to use LispWorks, for example, new requirements would be forthcoming.
Unique identifiers have been available for years in the form of PGP signatures on email messages. It is a simple matter to sort unsigned messages and messages signed by unknown entities into a separate folder and deal with them safely.
Because of the existence of Microsoft Outlook and other insecure email clients, simply identifying the sender is insufficient security. It is also necessary, as the article points out, to limit the access of attachments. This is possible with executable attachments written in Java. It is also possible with textual attachments in formats such as LaTeX and with picture attachments in common formats. In fact, only Microsoft format attachments pose a real threat because of the ubiquity of VB script in Microsoft products.
The features mentioned in the article are available now, in a number of open source applications. There's no need for new software to meet these goals. Too few people are aware of these options.
Open source doesn't need leaders, it needs marketers.
Whining about how the incredibly modest proposed tax cuts are going to affect your favorite government programs misses the point entirely. The bottom line is that other peoples' money is not yours to do with as you see fit. People who support taxes are basically saying "I'm willing to take money from you by force to use as I wish." There is a word for that: stealing.
If you think the space program is a good idea, work on getting it funded through voluntary means.
Evidently my correspondance with my elected representatives has had the affect of scaring Microsoft. I suggested that, as the people entrusted with our tax dollars, my U.S. senator and representative had the obligation to spend those dollars wisely. Purchasing licenses for proprietary software when perfectly usable free alternatives exist is not a good use of public funds. Perhaps others voiced the same concern, prompting Microsofts intemperate response.
If you haven't yet made this suggestion to your public servants, it's not too late!
Slashdot Mirror
"Italy" is not a monolithic entity. If some Italians don't want to view that kind of material, they should refrain from going to those sites. No one should tie up good Catholics and force them to view websites against their will.
Stopping the use of force against people who are doing nothing more than publishing words should be the "business" of everyone who values freedom.
Patrick
While some countries might consider this to be notification, other legal systems distinguish between enjoining someone from performing an action and requiring someone to perform an action. At the very least, it could muddy the legal waters.
Patrick May
Then again, as the man said, "If voting could change anything, it would be illegal."
Note that "Use governmental force to take control of the format away from its owner." is not among the list of choices available to individuals who respect the rights of others.
The heart of the issue is simple: respect for the rights of others. Either you have that respect or you are an unethical, immoral, poor excuse for a human being who should be either shunned, resisted, or terminated as appropriate to eliminate the threat you pose to decent people.
The core issue has nothing to do with patents -- and your attempted argument fails once that is understood. If I create a file format, I am under no obligation to patent it. If I keep it as a trade secret and refuse to license it, then it is mine. It was created by my effort, it is mine to do with as I please.
If you want the details of it, your only ethical option is to negotiate with me for it. Your willingness to use force demonstrates that you consider other people to be nothing more than slaves, the product of their labor yours to do with as you choose. I sincerely hope that you try to apply the force you support personally -- some of us refuse to live as slaves and are willing and able to defend ourselves.
Translation: A large enough group of people often has the power to coerce a smaller group or a single individual. Evidently AC thinks this is a good thing.
If the primary function of the society requires it, any private possession is subject to being handed over to the society. Translation: Stealing is acceptable when done by a large enough number of people. Tell me, AC, how many people have to do an evil thing before it stops being an evil thing?
If you don't agree with this you're just a freeloader who takes advantage of the security provided by the State but is not willing to contribute back when required.
Translation: How dare anyone refuse to submit meekly to our initiation of force?
Your not-so-subtle equivocation between "society" and "the State" is noted. Your post shows you to be yet another statist drone with the ethics of a common sneak thief and far more cowardice than a typical street thug. At least they do their own dirty work.
No organized collection of people, whether they call themselves a state, a society, a community, a nation, or anything else may legitimately violate the rights of individuals. Those organizations that do so must be resisted. The threat posed by those individuals who support such heinous actions must be eliminated.
But then again, you seem to be shilling for the corporations instead of the users.
You seem to have problems with reading comprehension. Force is clearly what is being discussed, otherwise the topic would be "How can file format owners be persuaded to voluntarily make them public?"
The only entities I'm "shilling" for are those who benefit from respect for property rights -- everyone, in other words. If you argue today for violating the property rights of file format owners, you have no moral ground to stand on tomorrow when people with guns come to "liberate" your money, computer, car, or house for "the public good."
The solution to this problem isn't to violate the property rights of the owner of the format but to simply refuse to use it.
The folks at StopSpam.org have a good overview on Reading Email Headers.
. . . you're likely to get sued.
People who leave the room containing the television to use the toilet while commercials are running are stealing ad revenue!
Once again a clueless company tries to use the ham fist of the law when the problem is technical. If the newspaper doesn't want other sites linking directly to their stories, they should serve them from a database with dynamic URLs and keep their front pages updated.
Technical incompetence on their part is not equivalent to copyright infringement on mine.
In the long run, we're all dead. -- John Maynard Keynes
Well, not that you remember, anyway.
There is nothing new under the sun. If you want to make a lasting mark in a virtual environment, there are a number of text-based MUDs who would value your contributions. My personal favorite is Ancient Anguish. After demonstrating some familiarity with the world, players may choose to become developers and add to the enviroment. There are literally dozens of active coders and thousands of players.
Text-based MUDs are also an excellent way to learn the basics of coding. The interactive environment is much more interesting to work in than the typical IDE.
You can try out Ancient Anguish by telnet to anguish.org, port 2222.
The solution to the spamming problem isn't yet more clueless government intervention but the use of mechanisms to allow free market forces to work. Legal solutions always have unintended, negative consequences. Technological solutions are needed for what is at heart a technical problem.
The best approaches currently being developed involve the use of micropayment systems for the equivalent of email postage. If it costs spammers a cent, or even a tenth of a cent, per email, their return on investment drops dramatically. The major hurdle that must be cleared by these systems is that mail user agents and/or mail transfer agents must be configured to support them.
See Other Online Payment Initiatives for pointers to additional information.
There are a large number of online, multiplayer roleplaying games, similar in theme if not in style to EverQuest, that are free (as in beer) to their players. My personal favorite, Ancient Anguish, is one of the largest and has been running continuously for ten years.
The most compelling aspect of these games is not the gameplay, for most players, but the social interactions. I know of several married couples who met on the MUD. Quite possibly the social aspects are enhanced by the lack of fees. It would be interesting to see a similar study done on some of the free MUDs.
I suspect that if the original poster were to present his boss with the suggestion to use LispWorks, for example, new requirements would be forthcoming.
Unique identifiers have been available for years in the form of PGP signatures on email messages. It is a simple matter to sort unsigned messages and messages signed by unknown entities into a separate folder and deal with them safely.
Because of the existence of Microsoft Outlook and other insecure email clients, simply identifying the sender is insufficient security. It is also necessary, as the article points out, to limit the access of attachments. This is possible with executable attachments written in Java. It is also possible with textual attachments in formats such as LaTeX and with picture attachments in common formats. In fact, only Microsoft format attachments pose a real threat because of the ubiquity of VB script in Microsoft products.
The features mentioned in the article are available now, in a number of open source applications. There's no need for new software to meet these goals. Too few people are aware of these options.
Open source doesn't need leaders, it needs marketers.
Patrick MayYou mean this story is thin, neat, and dresses well?
Whining about how the incredibly modest proposed tax cuts are going to affect your favorite government programs misses the point entirely. The bottom line is that other peoples' money is not yours to do with as you see fit. People who support taxes are basically saying "I'm willing to take money from you by force to use as I wish." There is a word for that: stealing. If you think the space program is a good idea, work on getting it funded through voluntary means.
Evidently my correspondance with my elected representatives has had the affect of scaring Microsoft. I suggested that, as the people entrusted with our tax dollars, my U.S. senator and representative had the obligation to spend those dollars wisely. Purchasing licenses for proprietary software when perfectly usable free alternatives exist is not a good use of public funds. Perhaps others voiced the same concern, prompting Microsofts intemperate response. If you haven't yet made this suggestion to your public servants, it's not too late!