Certainly, because nesting the declaration and if statement in curly braces to use the existing scoping rules of C and not pollute the syntax space is completely impractical. Much better to solve a specific instance of a problem than to use the existing simple solution that solves the entire class of problems.
C++ aficionados, your vexing problem has been solved! That is to say, your complex language has added a new "if" structure with more side-effects to enhance the impenetrability and opportunity for obscurantism that we all value so much.
Glad to see that this fellow has figured out how to create new technology jobs in foreign countries. I didn't realize that was his job, but kudos nevertheless.
Yes, yes. Panic! There's a Java 0day! Dear Lord forfend! Of course, as you read this you are probably running Windows, with tons of extensions and software. You're probably using Flash. You probably have a web browser - heck, obviously you have a web browser. Well, not to worry: After disabling Java you will be completely safe.
Didn't I just read on this very site (or possibly Gizmodo; they all run together) that Jurassic Park was impossible because DNA degrades too fast? So how is this going to work? Because I'm pretty sure DNA (if that was how Martian life worked) would be subject to conditions that were even more harsh.
Okay. I read your blog post at the link. Your definition of rape omits the concept of consent, and randomly includes premarital sex (which would fit the definition in the first line) and homosexuality. Good luck with your mimeographed newsletter; I shall file you under "troll" and carry on. I sine Deus.
I'm pretty sure you don't need to believe in God to consider rape and murder unethical, immoral, and just wrong. In fact, plenty of people have pointed out (repeatedly) the fallacy of assuming that one needs God and/or religion to be good, so there is no reason to say more on that topic here. Go forth and Google.
The culture of consent and contraception, leads to this.
I'm not sure what the "culture of contraception" is, but I am pretty sure it does not lead to this kind of behavior, either. In fact, I strongly suspect this behavior - in general, minus the Internet - predates the widespread availability of contraception.
Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.
In short, I think there are problems beyond DRM with GPL software being distributed through the app store.
Q: But what if an attacker takes over all paths to the destination?
A: There are two answers to that. Please see our academic paper for a detailed security analysis.
1) Perspectives actually keeps a record of the keys used by a service over time. Thus, even if a powerful adversary is able to take over the whole Internet (scenario L_server in the paper), clients can still detect the key as suspicious because the key has recently changed. If the attacker is able to compromise all paths for a long time, then you are in trouble, but then again such a powerful adversary could also fool the so-called "verification procedures" of many certificate authorities, which often consist of a one-time email verification.
2) Even though a powerful adversary can defeat the system, it makes man-in-the-middle attacks much harder. Today an attacker must only be on the path between you and the destination, which isn't very hard. Think about an open wireless network, or the recent DNS attacks which compromise a targeted DNS resolver. Being on all links is much harder, and in the end security is nothing but making an attack harder.
is that how the dmca works? don't you have to break some kind of technology encryption or what not for it to apply? otherwise wouldn't copiers be illegal?
Sony manufactures devices and software for ripping CDs. If this is violating copyright, then isn't Sony potentially liable under the DMCA? Since this Sony representative has stated her opinion that such copying is illegal, then they would seem to be knowingly manufacturing devices and software whose purpose is to enable copyright infringement, and theft. Just a thought. IANAL and all that.
Sony BMG wants music to be easily transferable to any device that supports secure music. Currently, music from our protected CDs may be transferred to hundreds of such devices, as both Microsoft and Sony have assisted to make the user experience on our discs as seamless as possible with their secure formats.
Unfortunately, in order to directly and smoothly rip content into iTunes it requires the assistance of Apple. To date, Apple has not been willing to cooperate with our protection vendors to make ripping to iTunes and to the iPod a simple experience.
If you believe that you should be able to easily move tracks from your protected CD to your iPod then we encourage you to use the following link to contact Apple directly and tell them so. http://www.apple.com/feedback/ipod.html
duh i think that's it. libertarians live in their own world where capitalism si god and the state is devil. anyoe that self-absorbed it going ot be a nerd.
If it is true that nerds tend to be libertarians or that libertarians tend to be nerds (which seems more likely) then I would guess the reason is that both groups just want to be free to pursue their interests without government interference. For most libertarians I know that's the point of departure. For nerds... well, they just don't suffer fools very well. Government is just people, and seldom of the nerd kind, it seems.
I would humbly submit that (1) people who read Slashdot probably have varied interests, and economics and politics are probably two of those. Since (2) economists tend to be libertarian in their views, and since (3) much of the carefully-argued political theory comes to us by way of Rawls and Nozick and the like, treating these fields as essentially technical fields may encourage a libertarian view.
Of course you must bear in mind that this is Slashdot, the nerd / libertarian Nexus of the Universe. On other sites YMMV.
> As armchair speculators of space exploration, do our posts & blogs create negative fallout for NASA or is public criticism like this healthy for keeping government agencies in line?
The gov't wants access to Google's search records. They are using porn as the excuse. Does anyone really believe that they will only use (and only want) access to the records for that reason?
Which carries more weight: the right of Apple to protect their trade secrets or the rights of journalists to protect their sources?
Just for fun, I'll respond to that.
Enforcing the right of Apple to protect trade secrets restricts the people from doing something (such as publishing Apple's trade secrets).
Enforcing the right of journalists to protect their sources restricts the government from doing something (coercing the names of the sources).
So, given my dramatic over-simplification, I conclude that the protection of sources is more important.
We know from sixty years of post-war work that these illustrations are accurate. If Pernkopf had been biased in any way, he might have depicted some "evil gland" in the Jews as an addendum, but it would have been simple to throw that out. As far as I know, he did not.
Ah, but why should we believe that a priori? Pernkopf's work is suspect because of the environment in which it was conducted. In short, we might know they are accurate now (sixty years of post-war work), but there is no reason to initially grant Pernkopf any veracity.
Finally, even if work is done by good people under good circumstances, the hallmark of science is repeatability. If people are advocating using Nazi experiment results because those experiments could not be conducted today, then they are really missing the point, IMO.
Slashdot Mirror
Zork. It is addictive, makes you afraid of the dark, and promotes witchcraft. Witchcraft!!!
This just in from Australia: Robots do not prevent sex.
Certainly, because nesting the declaration and if statement in curly braces to use the existing scoping rules of C and not pollute the syntax space is completely impractical. Much better to solve a specific instance of a problem than to use the existing simple solution that solves the entire class of problems.
C++ aficionados, your vexing problem has been solved! That is to say, your complex language has added a new "if" structure with more side-effects to enhance the impenetrability and opportunity for obscurantism that we all value so much.
Glad to see that this fellow has figured out how to create new technology jobs in foreign countries. I didn't realize that was his job, but kudos nevertheless.
Wait... Don't Chatham House rules apply at Chatham House?
> hoping that focusing investment on great content
Those evil capitalist bastards!!! I demand they give equal time to crappy content, like my new show: George Plimpton's CSI: Video Falconry.
Yes, yes. Panic! There's a Java 0day! Dear Lord forfend! Of course, as you read this you are probably running Windows, with tons of extensions and software. You're probably using Flash. You probably have a web browser - heck, obviously you have a web browser. Well, not to worry: After disabling Java you will be completely safe.
Yes. The article can be found here: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/669034
Didn't I just read on this very site (or possibly Gizmodo; they all run together) that Jurassic Park was impossible because DNA degrades too fast? So how is this going to work? Because I'm pretty sure DNA (if that was how Martian life worked) would be subject to conditions that were even more harsh.
Okay. I read your blog post at the link. Your definition of rape omits the concept of consent, and randomly includes premarital sex (which would fit the definition in the first line) and homosexuality. Good luck with your mimeographed newsletter; I shall file you under "troll" and carry on. I sine Deus.
Atheism leads to this.
I'm pretty sure you don't need to believe in God to consider rape and murder unethical, immoral, and just wrong. In fact, plenty of people have pointed out (repeatedly) the fallacy of assuming that one needs God and/or religion to be good, so there is no reason to say more on that topic here. Go forth and Google.
The culture of consent and contraception, leads to this.
I'm not sure what the "culture of contraception" is, but I am pretty sure it does not lead to this kind of behavior, either. In fact, I strongly suspect this behavior - in general, minus the Internet - predates the widespread availability of contraception.
So he's a slashdotter who might end up in Congress. Fine. What I want to know is does he run Linux???
FTFA:
http://www.fsf.org/news/blogs/licensing/more-about-the-app-store-gpl-enforcement
Basically:
In short, I think there are problems beyond DRM with GPL software being distributed through the app store.
This is in the FAQ. From TFA:
Q: But what if an attacker takes over all paths to the destination?
A: There are two answers to that. Please see our academic paper for a detailed security analysis.
1) Perspectives actually keeps a record of the keys used by a service over time. Thus, even if a powerful adversary is able to take over the whole Internet (scenario L_server in the paper), clients can still detect the key as suspicious because the key has recently changed. If the attacker is able to compromise all paths for a long time, then you are in trouble, but then again such a powerful adversary could also fool the so-called "verification procedures" of many certificate authorities, which often consist of a one-time email verification.
2) Even though a powerful adversary can defeat the system, it makes man-in-the-middle attacks much harder. Today an attacker must only be on the path between you and the destination, which isn't very hard. Think about an open wireless network, or the recent DNS attacks which compromise a targeted DNS resolver. Being on all links is much harder, and in the end security is nothing but making an attack harder.
is that how the dmca works? don't you have to break some kind of technology encryption or what not for it to apply? otherwise wouldn't copiers be illegal?
Sony manufactures devices and software for ripping CDs. If this is violating copyright, then isn't Sony potentially liable under the DMCA? Since this Sony representative has stated her opinion that such copying is illegal, then they would seem to be knowingly manufacturing devices and software whose purpose is to enable copyright infringement, and theft. Just a thought. IANAL and all that.
See DMCA [1201(b)].
From a Sony FAQ:Glad to see this story has been tagged flamebait.
If it is true that nerds tend to be libertarians or that libertarians tend to be nerds (which seems more likely) then I would guess the reason is that both groups just want to be free to pursue their interests without government interference. For most libertarians I know that's the point of departure. For nerds... well, they just don't suffer fools very well. Government is just people, and seldom of the nerd kind, it seems.
I would humbly submit that (1) people who read Slashdot probably have varied interests, and economics and politics are probably two of those. Since (2) economists tend to be libertarian in their views, and since (3) much of the carefully-argued political theory comes to us by way of Rawls and Nozick and the like, treating these fields as essentially technical fields may encourage a libertarian view.
Of course you must bear in mind that this is Slashdot, the nerd / libertarian Nexus of the Universe. On other sites YMMV.
More importantly, without Tron we wouldn't know what Moses looks like.
"I desire... I desire... macaroni pictures."
Mod me offtopic if you must, but... I read the summary, then read the tags: wrong, no, design, idiot. Ah... I'm suddenly in love with tagging.
> As armchair speculators of space exploration, do our posts & blogs create negative fallout for NASA or is public criticism like this healthy for keeping government agencies in line?
Yes. And yes.
The gov't wants access to Google's search records. They are using porn as the excuse. Does anyone really believe that they will only use (and only want) access to the records for that reason?
Ah, but why should we believe that a priori? Pernkopf's work is suspect because of the environment in which it was conducted. In short, we might know they are accurate now (sixty years of post-war work), but there is no reason to initially grant Pernkopf any veracity.
Finally, even if work is done by good people under good circumstances, the hallmark of science is repeatability. If people are advocating using Nazi experiment results because those experiments could not be conducted today, then they are really missing the point, IMO.