hmm
i meant that if they can't examine it, they dont know what it is
the impression i get from the article in the nyt is that the filtering system only blocks that which is 'bad', instead of only allowing that which is 'good'.. which makes sense, because youd need a huge database of 'good'.. shrug
well, the only arhcitecture i can think of fo this system is easily circumvented
it would, of course, require someone in a free country to help..
the way saudi arabia must have their internet set up is that _everything_ goes through a massive gateway, which filters content on port 80 (and probably a few others).. just like your average high school gateway
of course, they can't block any content thats encrypted
so, someone sets up a website that will display any other website, but encypted.. and write a browser addon to read the encrypted info
kinda similar architecture to those sites you used to see that allowed for anonymous browsing - excpt with the encryption layer in the middle
just a thought..
yeah, plus the gross inaccuracy saying alan was going to maintain the 2.4 kernel.. didnt they *just* announce that it would be marcelo? oh the joys of clueless linux reporting..
this seems to be a common free-marketeer fallacy: lets deregulate the industry! the freemarket will solve everything!
taking no account whatsoever of previous examples where deregulation has screwed us over..
want a good example? just ask california, im sure they're enjoying the effects of deregulation (albeit of a different industry) with their rolling blackouts..
slackware.
its the distro i started out with, and since then ive tried every single distro under the sun (with the exception of debian, thats next).
every time, i came back to slackware, and for the following reasons i recommend it for beginners:
1) first and foremost, its not going to mollycoddle you. redhat, mandrake, suse all make extensive efforts to be userfriendly and easy (dare i say it, like windows..), but in the long run they simply give the wrong impression: that linux is simple; its not.
2) secondly, its not going to kill you either, it lets you learn the OS at your own pace.. i started out barely being able to use xwin, and as and when i was ready i learnt about the console and its various uses and features (and correspondingly obscure things in x, too)
3) thirdly, after a year or two in slack, you'll have no problem adapting to a *bsd; i went from slack to freebsd and noticed little difference. this ofcourse is because one of slack's philosophies is to be as BSD-like as possible.
the only problem with slack is that some programs will need a little tweaking or hacking to run under it (the first thing that comes to mind is win4lin) because they are made for redhat and similarly setup systems (inconsiderate bastards that coded them.. hehe)
anyway such are my thoughts, take them as you wish..
this is why there are no good open source games, if anyone was wondering -- because PEOPLE ARE SELFISH BASTARDS. a game reaches commercial quality and suddenly they decide to clam up and go closed source.. its very surprising that so many opensource projects have survived without going closed source, and is probably evidence of a benevolent god. im overreacting, obviously, but this really pisses me off, i hope the guy who started tuxracer suffers an aneurysm. ooooh i know im gonna get moded down for that..
here's an interesting idea - why dont they try to get papers published in major newspapers, like say the nyt and washington post, etc. they could add a whole science section to their papers, which would probably increase readership among scientists, it would encourage scientists to write in a language more accessible to the public, and it would put the scientific journal monopoly out of business. obviously, yes, the papers would want to do the same thing the journals do, but if atleast one major paper accepts the terms proposed by the scientists, others will soon follow..
not to mention misuse of *our* word, "hackers".. hell lets sue the entire media industry for that one.. any lawyers reading this feel like handling a controversial class-action lawsuit?;)
you know, its funny. twice ive installed windows, and thrice ive installed slackware. slackware install died and fucked up my system: 0 times. windows died and fucked up my system: 2 times. windows may be userfriendly once its installed, but damn the install program needs work.
hahaha..
this may be offtopic but i love your.sig
but to hell with light earth gravity, drop it somewhere where it'll really make a crunch, say saturn or something.. hehe
good grief. further capitalization of an already overcapitalist america. exactly what we need. so that, instead of having thousands of independent radio stations across america, we can have one or two huge media conglomerates controlling EVERYTHING we listen to on the airwaves. and the radio stations will sell out, because they wont be able to pay the 7-figure lease on their little slice of the spectrum. and forget about wireless ethernet -- im sure the media conglomerates will push through another draconian law with dire consequences for anyone trespassing on their part of the spectrum. we already live in a country - nay, a world controlled by corporate america. do we REALLY want to give big business an even longer lever to subdue us with?
i think the entire point of the reply was that it _was_ satire/parody and therefore protected by copyright law. however, consider: doesnt the DMCA do away with all that? after all wasnt CNNfn.com able to kill a parody of it? i forget the exact story but if anyone knows if that can be precedent for this, do tell.
let me address your initial question first: redhat should not be run out of the box because it comes with a bunch of deamons running; many of these daemons are very insecure and can be exploited (check securityfocus to see what i mean). now, it may be that the rh7+ installer changes this; however, rh7+ is worse, it has a broken gcc that linus torvalds himself condemned. secondly; yes i think the iMac and windows are great.. for people who want easy, no-brainer solutions. personally, i prefer to have a little control over my box, instead of having everything automated to the automater's specifications. but others may just want to get their box online in 30 minutes.. and thats fine too, let them use mac, and ill keep my *nix. i dont want linux to be dumbed down to the level of the average user thereby removing my ability to control my box as i want it.
heh. yes, the computer is a tool to get things done. but, the incompetent dont need to get done the same things as the competent. the incompetent type essays or make spreadsheets on their windows computer; the competent code and hack on their *nix. trying to make *nix easy for the incompetent is like trying to dull the blade of an axe to use it like a hammer. am i elitist? hell yes.
yeah, really, i dont see why theres such a need to dumb *nix down for the "common man". indeed, its too easy as it is, with distributions like redhat making installing linux easier than installing windows, thereby having a bunch of people considering themselves linux users but who barely have the faintest idea what a shell is. if you dont believe me, nmap a random 24.x.x.* subnet.. youll find atleast 10% of them to be redhat "users" who havent even configured what daemons they want running! note: this is not a slur on rh, though i personally use slack; its a slur on the idiots who run rh out of the box.
you know, every single day, i understand better why General William T. Sherman said, "If I owned both Texas and Hell, I'd sell Texas and live in Hell."
yeah, but you have to realize that the UK is one of the top 10 nations in the world, and with the UK and possibly the EU on the right track, the US will be forced to atleast reconsider
for once, im proud to be british!
okay, im pleased by the fact that these major sports organizations are on our side (heck, their being on our side may mobilize a large portion of the population) but it DOES beg the question... why?! what's their stake in it? i dont exactly see basketball players having to use DeCSS for any reason at all.. the question is hard to answer. any ideas?
you make a good point; under *current* law, the vast majority of napster users (including myself, to hell with lars ulrich..) ARE probably doing something illegal. the less significant reply to this is that unlike other judicial systems, the american judicial system is based on one's being innocent until proven guilty; being at the scene of a crime does not make one a criminal.
however, there is a far more important point here; the entire idea of 'intellectual property' is basically flawed. often, the concept undermines the very thing it was meant to preserve: innovation! the type of property people are most familiar with are tangible: cars, houses, computers. how do you say you own a stream of bits and bytes? or an analog series of magnetisms (ie music/data on a cassette tape) ? what if i were to change one bit, or chop off the end of the file? blurring the line a little more obviously, if i play your song on my guitar am i infringing your copyright? how about if i use a lick from one of your songs? it is no longer the same thing you claim ownership to, certainly. one can claim ownership to the *media* that it is recorded on, but when the cost of reproduction of a commodity is zero, then the entire idea of owning and charging for it is void. the line between what is and what isnt claimable as 'intellectual property' is very, very blurry, and its being pushed further back every day. athletes have started to patent specific moves! does that seem sensible? its about as sensible as 'owning' a string of bits and bytes.
no see here's the legal precedent, because the government is stupid and does not understand technology: the ISP is responsible for all content a user acesses -- not just the content it PROVIDES. ie if a user accesses a child porn WEBSITE, the ISP is responsible and must block it. tech people know that this is a cnsiderably different scenario, but government types dont, and soon ISPs will be forced to use blocking software, much like schools.
Slashdot Mirror
hmm .. which makes sense, because youd need a huge database of 'good' .. shrug
i meant that if they can't examine it, they dont know what it is
the impression i get from the article in the nyt is that the filtering system only blocks that which is 'bad', instead of only allowing that which is 'good'
well, the only arhcitecture i can think of fo this system is easily circumvented .. just like your average high school gateway
it would, of course, require someone in a free country to help..
the way saudi arabia must have their internet set up is that _everything_ goes through a massive gateway, which filters content on port 80 (and probably a few others)
of course, they can't block any content thats encrypted
so, someone sets up a website that will display any other website, but encypted.. and write a browser addon to read the encrypted info
kinda similar architecture to those sites you used to see that allowed for anonymous browsing - excpt with the encryption layer in the middle
just a thought..
yeah, plus the gross inaccuracy saying alan was going to maintain the 2.4 kernel.. didnt they *just* announce that it would be marcelo? oh the joys of clueless linux reporting..
well, i mean, when you get right down to it, im sure youre not going to find konqueror in your average dictionary.. hehe..
this seems to be a common free-marketeer fallacy: lets deregulate the industry! the freemarket will solve everything!
taking no account whatsoever of previous examples where deregulation has screwed us over..
want a good example? just ask california, im sure they're enjoying the effects of deregulation (albeit of a different industry) with their rolling blackouts..
its the distro i started out with, and since then ive tried every single distro under the sun (with the exception of debian, thats next).
every time, i came back to slackware, and for the following reasons i recommend it for beginners:
1) first and foremost, its not going to mollycoddle you. redhat, mandrake, suse all make extensive efforts to be userfriendly and easy (dare i say it, like windows..), but in the long run they simply give the wrong impression: that linux is simple; its not.
2) secondly, its not going to kill you either, it lets you learn the OS at your own pace.. i started out barely being able to use xwin, and as and when i was ready i learnt about the console and its various uses and features (and correspondingly obscure things in x, too)
3) thirdly, after a year or two in slack, you'll have no problem adapting to a *bsd; i went from slack to freebsd and noticed little difference. this ofcourse is because one of slack's philosophies is to be as BSD-like as possible.
the only problem with slack is that some programs will need a little tweaking or hacking to run under it (the first thing that comes to mind is win4lin) because they are made for redhat and similarly setup systems (inconsiderate bastards that coded them.. hehe)
anyway such are my thoughts, take them as you wish..
this is why there are no good open source games, if anyone was wondering -- because PEOPLE ARE SELFISH BASTARDS. a game reaches commercial quality and suddenly they decide to clam up and go closed source.. its very surprising that so many opensource projects have survived without going closed source, and is probably evidence of a benevolent god. im overreacting, obviously, but this really pisses me off, i hope the guy who started tuxracer suffers an aneurysm. ooooh i know im gonna get moded down for that..
here's an interesting idea - why dont they try to get papers published in major newspapers, like say the nyt and washington post, etc. they could add a whole science section to their papers, which would probably increase readership among scientists, it would encourage scientists to write in a language more accessible to the public, and it would put the scientific journal monopoly out of business. obviously, yes, the papers would want to do the same thing the journals do, but if atleast one major paper accepts the terms proposed by the scientists, others will soon follow..
not to mention misuse of *our* word, "hackers" .. hell lets sue the entire media industry for that one.. any lawyers reading this feel like handling a controversial class-action lawsuit? ;)
you know, its funny. twice ive installed windows, and thrice ive installed slackware. slackware install died and fucked up my system: 0 times. windows died and fucked up my system: 2 times. windows may be userfriendly once its installed, but damn the install program needs work.
well, actually, since i got my cdrw, i dont really need my regular cd drive.. *opens up case*
hahaha.. this may be offtopic but i love your .sig
but to hell with light earth gravity, drop it somewhere where it'll really make a crunch, say saturn or something.. hehe
good grief. further capitalization of an already overcapitalist america. exactly what we need. so that, instead of having thousands of independent radio stations across america, we can have one or two huge media conglomerates controlling EVERYTHING we listen to on the airwaves. and the radio stations will sell out, because they wont be able to pay the 7-figure lease on their little slice of the spectrum. and forget about wireless ethernet -- im sure the media conglomerates will push through another draconian law with dire consequences for anyone trespassing on their part of the spectrum. we already live in a country - nay, a world controlled by corporate america. do we REALLY want to give big business an even longer lever to subdue us with?
i think the entire point of the reply was that it _was_ satire/parody and therefore protected by copyright law. however, consider: doesnt the DMCA do away with all that? after all wasnt CNNfn.com able to kill a parody of it? i forget the exact story but if anyone knows if that can be precedent for this, do tell.
not true; more recent studies have shown that that's well, frankly, bullshit. i dont have a link, search google (or your favorite search engine)
let me address your initial question first: redhat should not be run out of the box because it comes with a bunch of deamons running; many of these daemons are very insecure and can be exploited (check securityfocus to see what i mean). now, it may be that the rh7+ installer changes this; however, rh7+ is worse, it has a broken gcc that linus torvalds himself condemned. secondly; yes i think the iMac and windows are great.. for people who want easy, no-brainer solutions. personally, i prefer to have a little control over my box, instead of having everything automated to the automater's specifications. but others may just want to get their box online in 30 minutes.. and thats fine too, let them use mac, and ill keep my *nix. i dont want linux to be dumbed down to the level of the average user thereby removing my ability to control my box as i want it.
heh. yes, the computer is a tool to get things done. but, the incompetent dont need to get done the same things as the competent. the incompetent type essays or make spreadsheets on their windows computer; the competent code and hack on their *nix. trying to make *nix easy for the incompetent is like trying to dull the blade of an axe to use it like a hammer. am i elitist? hell yes.
yeah, really, i dont see why theres such a need to dumb *nix down for the "common man". indeed, its too easy as it is, with distributions like redhat making installing linux easier than installing windows, thereby having a bunch of people considering themselves linux users but who barely have the faintest idea what a shell is. if you dont believe me, nmap a random 24.x.x.* subnet.. youll find atleast 10% of them to be redhat "users" who havent even configured what daemons they want running! note: this is not a slur on rh, though i personally use slack; its a slur on the idiots who run rh out of the box.
you know, every single day, i understand better why General William T. Sherman said, "If I owned both Texas and Hell, I'd sell Texas and live in Hell."
...no. you SLAUGHTERED 700 british. at night. AFTER the war was OVER. congrats.
yeah, but you have to realize that the UK is one of the top 10 nations in the world, and with the UK and possibly the EU on the right track, the US will be forced to atleast reconsider for once, im proud to be british!
okay, im pleased by the fact that these major sports organizations are on our side (heck, their being on our side may mobilize a large portion of the population) but it DOES beg the question... why?! what's their stake in it? i dont exactly see basketball players having to use DeCSS for any reason at all.. the question is hard to answer. any ideas?
you make a good point; under *current* law, the vast majority of napster users (including myself, to hell with lars ulrich..) ARE probably doing something illegal. the less significant reply to this is that unlike other judicial systems, the american judicial system is based on one's being innocent until proven guilty; being at the scene of a crime does not make one a criminal. however, there is a far more important point here; the entire idea of 'intellectual property' is basically flawed. often, the concept undermines the very thing it was meant to preserve: innovation! the type of property people are most familiar with are tangible: cars, houses, computers. how do you say you own a stream of bits and bytes? or an analog series of magnetisms (ie music/data on a cassette tape) ? what if i were to change one bit, or chop off the end of the file? blurring the line a little more obviously, if i play your song on my guitar am i infringing your copyright? how about if i use a lick from one of your songs? it is no longer the same thing you claim ownership to, certainly. one can claim ownership to the *media* that it is recorded on, but when the cost of reproduction of a commodity is zero, then the entire idea of owning and charging for it is void. the line between what is and what isnt claimable as 'intellectual property' is very, very blurry, and its being pushed further back every day. athletes have started to patent specific moves! does that seem sensible? its about as sensible as 'owning' a string of bits and bytes.
thats besides the point; you know this, i know this, but the average jurymember/judge/lawyer doesnt, and will see no distinction between the two.
no see here's the legal precedent, because the government is stupid and does not understand technology: the ISP is responsible for all content a user acesses -- not just the content it PROVIDES. ie if a user accesses a child porn WEBSITE, the ISP is responsible and must block it. tech people know that this is a cnsiderably different scenario, but government types dont, and soon ISPs will be forced to use blocking software, much like schools.