Dependencies. Nothing pisses me off more than trying to get application X to work, but in order to do that having to get libraries/apps Y and Z working too. My distro of choice is Red Hat, so normally it's not a problem as I can just install the RPM's, but I have to look on three CD's to find them. Keep in mind I'm a command line junkie. X doesn't do it for me. IMHO it's still pretty slow and clunky.
SysV configuration files also hold a special place on my pet peeve list. There is no easy way to add new daemons that I know of, so normally I just place daemons not part of the Red Hat install in rc.local.
However for all my complaints the one thing you can't beat about Linux, or Unix for that matter, is that once you have gone though the pain of configuration it runs forever. It will not magically die one day unless you have a catastrophic hardware problem or a breakin.
The problem also might be that I'm simply not aware of apps that exist that make the problems I complained about easier to deal with. So, suggestions are welcome.
There was a city in Texas, Dallas I think, who's city clerk's office had a wide open AP. A wardriver is nice enough to point it out, but gets smacked down with criminal hacking charges, probably because the idiots were embarrassed about being own3d by a Pringles can.
Moral of the story: Forget being nice. Knowing more than "they" do will only land you in trouble. Either give yourself an "A" or forget about the whole thing.
The article is too short on technical detail to be worth anything.
I don't think this is the Apocalypse for WiFi. The important thing to remember here that this is radio...Only one conversation can happen at a time, and the 11mbps is shared across all nodes. This is similar to a hub, but the difference is all the nodes can run at different speeds.
The folks close to the AP will still be going 11mbps, but although the laggard out in BFE will be going 1mbps, he will not drag the others down to his level. What WILL happen is that each packet takes longer to get to him, which could theoretically tie up the AP for longer times then if he were running at 11mbps. If he were getting enough packets, I could see how it could cause a slight slowdown, but not congestion.
Well I don't know about that. Microsoft was the last big advertising campaign in my memory that was designed to make people feel sorry for someone. "We're a poor corporation who only wants the best for our customers, and the evil government is trying to split us up".
This will be the same thing, only they'll take a bunch of pretty people, scruff them up a bit to make them look poor, have them face the cameras with sullen eyes and complain about how the evil file traders are forcing them to live in a cardboard box. Or they'll try to put big-name artists on in hopes that idiot celebrity worshippers might take the message to heart. Oh I hope they do that. "Because of file trading I can only afford three diamond encrusted urinals instead of four! Wah!"
There is no such thing as a "cheap" color laser printer. They are very messy and very expensive to maintain, as the printer engines tend to be insanely complicated.
Personally, I went the monochrome laser printer route. I was tired of being bent over on ink cartridges. Toner cartridges, although they can get expensive, last a longer time and give way more consistent results than inkjet. Laser printers are also way, way faster. If you are put off by the price of toner and if you are brave, you can buy toner refill kits online. Yeah it can get messy, but toner can be vacuumed up, whereas ink just stains forever:)
If you are looking for a cheap laser printer, there are a few on the market for under $500. A good one that comes to mind is an Okidata LED printer. I installed a few about three years ago for some customers and they worked pretty reliably. At the time the toner was cheap because it was in a separate package from the drum. It's possible that's been changed in the last few years, and now has the drum and toner are integrated into one package as so many other manufacturers love to do, so as always you are advised to do your homework on consumables.
If you are really a scrooge then you can look at the Samsung ML-1710...This is a laser that costs $200. However, I can't vouch for its reliability, as I have never worked with one.
When I require color, I just drop the job on the color laser at work. If you don't have that option, buying one of those el cheapo inkjets for the occasional color job is a possibility, albiet you'll have that much less desk space.
Kazaa is not doing this...The functions mentioned the article are done by Kazaa Lite and K++, which are hacked up versions of the legitimate Kazaa client courtesy of a couple of anonymous Russians. Originally the intent of Kazaa Lite was to offer people the ability to download from Kazaa without having to tolerate tons of spyware being loaded on their system. Apparently it's starting to evolve into something completely different.
Kazaa the company never has and probably never will endorse these "forked" clients.
Well the new protections are no silver bullet, but they are a start. I don't buy into the IP-blocking idea. The RIAA can hire just about anyone to scan the networks for snippets of evil contraband.
The blocking of requests to see all the files a user has is a much better idea. Notice that the RIAA has only been going after the "big offenders", people with 1000's of MP3's up for download. This is exactly how they find them...Pick "mp3sh4r3r" out of the list and if they have more than 2000 MP3's send them a nastygram. That's much more difficult to do if said sharer's computer denies them the list.
The only way I can really see past that is if they did a Kazaa search for every single known filename and see what comes back...Record the IP's that return files and build a file list based on each IP based on the search results. Needless to say, that would not be an exact science. It appears the ball is in the RIAA's court again.
You are assuming these guys even have developers lined up for this thing in the first place. They can't even get their web page to work (clicked "broadband" from their main page and up comes a blank screen...just priceless)
I googled for the Phantom and so far my suspicions are confirmed that there aren't really any developers. It might play PC games, but come on - if you are right the thing costs $400, and it doesn't have anything but a TV out and a broadband connect. On top of that, these days you can get an OK PC for $400.
The other thing to consider is the insane competition in the console market. Even old timer Sega couldn't make ends meet and got weeded out in a market they have traditionally done well in. How is this little piss-ant with no developers, a web site that doesn't work, and a repackaged PC that costs twice as much as anything else on the market even going to have a prayer?
When my old clicky keyboard broke down I searched far and wide for a replacement. I didn't want el cheapo keyboard for $10 from the corner corner store...I wanted a brick, like the first IBM PS/2 keyboards. Eventually all paths lead to PCKeyboard.com. The blurb from their webpage reads as follows:
Unicomp is a keyboard manufacturer located in the heart of Bluegrass Country, Lexington, Kentucky. Yes, we are a new company; but if you know IBM or if you know Lexmark International, you already know a good bit about us. Unicomp was started in April, 1996 when we purchased keyboard technology from Lexmark International. You may recall that Lexmark manufactured the high quality keyboards for IBM computers and terminals prior to 1996.
In other words, these things are about as close to the original IBM keyboards as you can get. I've owned mine for three years now and I love it.
Last I checked, Spamarrest is software...It's in a different class than Hormel is. Unless Spamarrest is a food product, they can use that name all day if they want, and trademark it too. I seriously doubt Hormel will win...I wonder what lawyer was insane enough to bother to file?
Heh, I'm starting to think we should take this discussion to email. Poor Slashdot's HD's are going to fill up with all of our comments, and it seems we are two people who both want to get the last word in.:) Back atcha!
No. The constitution is the supreme law of the land.
The Bill of Rights was pointedly written to avoid the problems we had when we were under British rule. That is, forced quartering of soldiers in homes, censoring of the press, random searches & seizures, etc. It is the law of the land, yes, but I believe it was written to keep the government in check, not the people. There are other laws on the books that deal with civil rights abuses between private entities. Let's take discrimination based on color as an example. The Constitution gives the states and Congress the power to pass discrimination laws, but in and of itself it does not offer civil rights protection of one private entitiy from another. It only offeres protection against the creation of laws that discriminate, and allows the ones that specifically outlaw it. The Fair Housing Act is a perfect example.
There are a lot of people in jail right now for breaking unpopular laws who would disagree with that.
Yes, but unpopular with who? In the case of the DMCA, the Slashdot crowd? Joe Public does not care about the DMCA, because it does not affect them. When their computer gets destroyed or their sons and daughters start going to jail and/or sued by the RIAA for downloading the latest Britney song, we will see how much longer the DMCA lasts. In the case of the "war on drugs" are you referring to pot smokers? Pot smokers are not high on the public opinion scale. Hardly anyone cares if they go to jail. Why? Because THEY don't smoke pot. But here's something interesting: In California there are enough weedheads out here that having less than 1oz of pot on you is not a ticket to jail, all you get is a fine. Effectively what has happened is so many people are doing it that it's been partially decriminalized.
IMHO, alcohol is way worse than pot. But alcohol is not illegal. There was a constitutional amendment banning alcohol, which was repealed. Why? Because everyone drinks it. I bet if enough people smoked out and public opinion of it improved then pot would become just as legal as alcohol.
Public opinion will sometimes trump the law, but not always.
Yeah, I suppose not ALWAYS. That was a rather generalized statement I made.
Hell, sometimes money trumps public opinion and the law. That goes back to why I say that I don't condemn you for breaking the law. Sometimes we pretty much have to break the law. Other times we can and can still get away with it. This particular law just happens to be one which I agree with, and in certain situations (like viewing porn in a library) am willing to fight for (to some extent, anyway).
True, true...our difference lies in the fact that I don't think it's worth the fight.:)
That's fine. If you're willing to break the law in order to keep your job, I'm not going to tell you you're a bad person for it. But I will actively fight against you if you ever try to do it to me.
Well actually it wasn't a job, I was volunteering. And as far as "breaking the law" goes, I don't see how you come to that conclusion - The constitution deals with what types of laws congress is allowed to be passed (although lately they've been ignoring the Consitution, IMHO). At the library I was simply enforcing community standards. These are two different things. Don't think I'm some kind of rabid Gestapo freak out to stop the world from destroying themselves with boobies. I probably have more pr0n cached on my HD than I should. But when I volunteered to help this library out, surely you must understand that I had to abide by their rules regarding how they want things done.
Well, like it or not, the majority of the public does not have the right to ignore the constitution. If enough of the public doesn't like the consitution, then they can pass a constitutional amendment.
Public opinion will trump the law, every time. Even the constitution. The constitution allows you to get on a soap box in the middle of Harlem and yell though a bullhorn about how we should bring slavery back. Somehow I don't think the 100 people that will instantly surround you will give a rip about your 1st amendment rights.
Unless of course you're in a wheelchair... Your comment reminds me of this handicapped person who used to view porn all the time from the Rutgers computer lab. Not once did I ever see anyone ask him to stop. Anyway, I can't comment on whether or not I'd win my case in your particular library. But I think I'd win the case in mine.
Eheheheh, well then perhaps Rutgers is more liberal than my community is. More power to the wheel chair guy:)
I understand the points you are trying to make and in a perfect world I would agree with them. But what you are talking about simply wouldn't fly at the place I was working at.
An important point that I forgot to mention was that these computers are out in the open in the middle of the library..Anyone passing by can see what you are doing. We most certainly would get complaints from parents. One way or another there would be problems for you, either from the library staff, parent, or ultra-puritan.
Yes, libraries are publicly funded and are supposed to serve the public interest. But like it or not the majority of the public does not believe that people should be surfing porn on library computers. You might have better luck in Amsterdam, but around here as long as people think the human body is a grotesque and horrible thing, you won't have any luck publicly surfing porn.
I never said anything about yelling and screaming. And no dragging or lockup will be necessary. I'll gladly call the police myself. When they get there I'll explain the situation, and if they order me to leave, I will do so peacefully and then initiate a lawsuit. There's no need for violence. If they drag me out the door I'll sue them for excessive use of force. If they lock me up I'll sue them for false arrest.
Here is the crux of our misunderstanding. When I said "If they raised a stink all we had to do was point to the police station right out the window. ", by stink I mean yelling, screaming, etc. It happens. Personally, I have never had to shut anyone's monitor off to stop them from surfing pr0n...Such problems are actually few. But you do get the oddballs in there who don't like to be told they can't look at boobies.
I can see where you're coming from on the 14th amendment, but what the libary I volunteered at does regarding porn does not fall under it. You can't deny that the libary has a right to keep people from surfing "objectionable" sites if that is what they want. As I said before, if someone doesn't like it, they can surf on their own computer.
Personally, I've got no problem with pr0n. I doubt anyone here does. But there is also a time and a place for it.
Well, yes, but unless you have the means to take it back, it's the Fed's money:)
Regarding your second comment - the Fed gives money to the states who in turn fund the libraries. Who is it then that is supposed to enforce CIPA? I mean, it sounds like the Feds are throwing the money into a black hole and saying "This money only goes to libraries with filters". So now it's the states' job to figure out who's running filters and who isn't? Don't you think that it would become such an administrative nightmare that the states would refuse SLC funding all together?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Trust me, your constitutional rights are not being violated. Case in point: You can surf pr0n all day at home if you want. The same can't be said if you were living in China or (insert name of Middle Eastern country here). I do not see "library" anywhere in the first amendment. If the directors of the library don't want you surfing pr0n when you're on their turf, then that's the way it's going to be. If you are going to start yelling and screaming about how your rights are being violated I'm sure the police will be happy to hear about it as they drag you out the door and into the lockup to cool off.
I can't surf porn at my job....are my rights being violated? No, because I choose to work here and understand why that policy is in place. If you go to the libary and use their computers, you must abide by their rules. CIPA is an issue because it forces libraries under a blanket that might not work for them.
Isn't the FBI stretched really thin as it is? Unless a lot of money is involved, they won't look at you twice. Are they going to run down every college student in the country who is sharing a few MP3's? No.
These people are all living in fantasyland. The senators keep it quiet because they know there will be a backlash. Berman is already saying "It's not my bill. It's his." The RIAA shows their idoicy by touting this bill that they haven't even read! Looking at his top contributors, I don't see the entertainment industry on there. Maybe he wants to get on their payroll?
I think the stealth with which this bill was put out indicates that the senators know that this type of legislation could damage their careers, but they want to keep the soft money coming in and keep writing up this crap.
Yeah, reading the docs more carefully they say that moderation and posting can't be done in the same article, so oh well, chalk that one up to experience. I only used one mod point anyway and the author has a +5 soooo...it doesn't matter now. Thanks for not being a lamer about it like that AC up there.
Slashdot Mirror
Dependencies. Nothing pisses me off more than trying to get application X to work, but in order to do that having to get libraries/apps Y and Z working too. My distro of choice is Red Hat, so normally it's not a problem as I can just install the RPM's, but I have to look on three CD's to find them.
Keep in mind I'm a command line junkie. X doesn't do it for me. IMHO it's still pretty slow and clunky.
SysV configuration files also hold a special place on my pet peeve list. There is no easy way to add new daemons that I know of, so normally I just place daemons not part of the Red Hat install in rc.local.
However for all my complaints the one thing you can't beat about Linux, or Unix for that matter, is that once you have gone though the pain of configuration it runs forever. It will not magically die one day unless you have a catastrophic hardware problem or a breakin.
The problem also might be that I'm simply not aware of apps that exist that make the problems I complained about easier to deal with. So, suggestions are welcome.
There was a city in Texas, Dallas I think, who's city clerk's office had a wide open AP. A wardriver is nice enough to point it out, but gets smacked down with criminal hacking charges, probably because the idiots were embarrassed about being own3d by a Pringles can.
Moral of the story: Forget being nice. Knowing more than "they" do will only land you in trouble. Either give yourself an "A" or forget about the whole thing.
The article is too short on technical detail to be worth anything.
I don't think this is the Apocalypse for WiFi. The important thing to remember here that this is radio...Only one conversation can happen at a time, and the 11mbps is shared across all nodes. This is similar to a hub, but the difference is all the nodes can run at different speeds.
The folks close to the AP will still be going 11mbps, but although the laggard out in BFE will be going 1mbps, he will not drag the others down to his level. What WILL happen is that each packet takes longer to get to him, which could theoretically tie up the AP for longer times then if he were running at 11mbps. If he were getting enough packets, I could see how it could cause a slight slowdown, but not congestion.
Well I don't know about that. Microsoft was the last big advertising campaign in my memory that was designed to make people feel sorry for someone. "We're a poor corporation who only wants the best for our customers, and the evil government is trying to split us up".
This will be the same thing, only they'll take a bunch of pretty people, scruff them up a bit to make them look poor, have them face the cameras with sullen eyes and complain about how the evil file traders are forcing them to live in a cardboard box. Or they'll try to put big-name artists on in hopes that idiot celebrity worshippers might take the message to heart. Oh I hope they do that. "Because of file trading I can only afford three diamond encrusted urinals instead of four! Wah!"
I love "Oh poor me" commercials. This should be even better than the Microsoft ones when they were catching heat from the DoJ.
How many times was "innovation" said again?
There is no such thing as a "cheap" color laser printer. They are very messy and very expensive to maintain, as the printer engines tend to be insanely complicated.
:)
Personally, I went the monochrome laser printer route. I was tired of being bent over on ink cartridges. Toner cartridges, although they can get expensive, last a longer time and give way more consistent results than inkjet. Laser printers are also way, way faster. If you are put off by the price of toner and if you are brave, you can buy toner refill kits online. Yeah it can get messy, but toner can be vacuumed up, whereas ink just stains forever
If you are looking for a cheap laser printer, there are a few on the market for under $500. A good one that comes to mind is an Okidata LED printer. I installed a few about three years ago for some customers and they worked pretty reliably. At the time the toner was cheap because it was in a separate package from the drum. It's possible that's been changed in the last few years, and now has the drum and toner are integrated into one package as so many other manufacturers love to do, so as always you are advised to do your homework on consumables.
If you are really a scrooge then you can look at the Samsung ML-1710...This is a laser that costs $200. However, I can't vouch for its reliability, as I have never worked with one.
When I require color, I just drop the job on the color laser at work. If you don't have that option, buying one of those el cheapo inkjets for the occasional color job is a possibility, albiet you'll have that much less desk space.
With all this Big Brother crap coming out of England, it's no wonder George Orwell was British.
The products responsible for Homeland Security are programmed in India and China.
Kazaa is not doing this...The functions mentioned the article are done by Kazaa Lite and K++, which are hacked up versions of the legitimate Kazaa client courtesy of a couple of anonymous Russians. Originally the intent of Kazaa Lite was to offer people the ability to download from Kazaa without having to tolerate tons of spyware being loaded on their system. Apparently it's starting to evolve into something completely different.
Kazaa the company never has and probably never will endorse these "forked" clients.
Well the new protections are no silver bullet, but they are a start. I don't buy into the IP-blocking idea. The RIAA can hire just about anyone to scan the networks for snippets of evil contraband.
The blocking of requests to see all the files a user has is a much better idea. Notice that the RIAA has only been going after the "big offenders", people with 1000's of MP3's up for download. This is exactly how they find them...Pick "mp3sh4r3r" out of the list and if they have more than 2000 MP3's send them a nastygram. That's much more difficult to do if said sharer's computer denies them the list.
The only way I can really see past that is if they did a Kazaa search for every single known filename and see what comes back...Record the IP's that return files and build a file list based on each IP based on the search results. Needless to say, that would not be an exact science. It appears the ball is in the RIAA's court again.
You are assuming these guys even have developers lined up for this thing in the first place. They can't even get their web page to work (clicked "broadband" from their main page and up comes a blank screen...just priceless)
I googled for the Phantom and so far my suspicions are confirmed that there aren't really any developers. It might play PC games, but come on - if you are right the thing costs $400, and it doesn't have anything but a TV out and a broadband connect. On top of that, these days you can get an OK PC for $400.
The other thing to consider is the insane competition in the console market. Even old timer Sega couldn't make ends meet and got weeded out in a market they have traditionally done well in. How is this little piss-ant with no developers, a web site that doesn't work, and a repackaged PC that costs twice as much as anything else on the market even going to have a prayer?
It sounds to me like the Phantom is just that.
You could be right...After playing GTA3 for a week I had the urge to run other people off the road and steal their cars :)
In other words, these things are about as close to the original IBM keyboards as you can get. I've owned mine for three years now and I love it.
Last I checked, Spamarrest is software...It's in a different class than Hormel is. Unless Spamarrest is a food product, they can use that name all day if they want, and trademark it too. I seriously doubt Hormel will win...I wonder what lawyer was insane enough to bother to file?
If any of you are interested in following suit, the tools one needs to write any AGI/SCI game can be found here:
http://www.classicgaming.com/agisci/
The tools will also open up the resource files and code for existing Sierra games and let you tweak them. Have fun!
Yech...It sounds a hell of a lot like they took EQ and turned it into Star Wars.
Even if taking the money means they have to pay more to figure out who it goes to? Hmmm, you're right, they would do it. They ARE the goverment.
Heh, I'm starting to think we should take this discussion to email. Poor Slashdot's HD's are going to fill up with all of our comments, and it seems we are two people who both want to get the last word in. :) Back atcha!
:)
No. The constitution is the supreme law of the land.
The Bill of Rights was pointedly written to avoid the problems we had when we were under British rule. That is, forced quartering of soldiers in homes, censoring of the press, random searches & seizures, etc. It is the law of the land, yes, but I believe it was written to keep the government in check, not the people. There are other laws on the books that deal with civil rights abuses between private entities. Let's take discrimination based on color as an example. The Constitution gives the states and Congress the power to pass discrimination laws, but in and of itself it does not offer civil rights protection of one private entitiy from another. It only offeres protection against the creation of laws that discriminate, and allows the ones that specifically outlaw it. The Fair Housing Act is a perfect example.
There are a lot of people in jail right now for breaking unpopular laws who would disagree with that.
Yes, but unpopular with who? In the case of the DMCA, the Slashdot crowd? Joe Public does not care about the DMCA, because it does not affect them. When their computer gets destroyed or their sons and daughters start going to jail and/or sued by the RIAA for downloading the latest Britney song, we will see how much longer the DMCA lasts.
In the case of the "war on drugs" are you referring to pot smokers? Pot smokers are not high on the public opinion scale. Hardly anyone cares if they go to jail. Why? Because THEY don't smoke pot. But here's something interesting: In California there are enough weedheads out here that having less than 1oz of pot on you is not a ticket to jail, all you get is a fine. Effectively what has happened is so many people are doing it that it's been partially decriminalized.
IMHO, alcohol is way worse than pot. But alcohol is not illegal. There was a constitutional amendment banning alcohol, which was repealed. Why? Because everyone drinks it. I bet if enough people smoked out and public opinion of it improved then pot would become just as legal as alcohol.
Public opinion will sometimes trump the law, but not always.
Yeah, I suppose not ALWAYS. That was a rather generalized statement I made.
Hell, sometimes money trumps public opinion and the law. That goes back to why I say that I don't condemn you for breaking the law. Sometimes we pretty much have to break the law. Other times we can and can still get away with it. This particular law just happens to be one which I agree with, and in certain situations (like viewing porn in a library) am willing to fight for (to some extent, anyway).
True, true...our difference lies in the fact that I don't think it's worth the fight.
That's fine. If you're willing to break the law in order to keep your job, I'm not going to tell you you're a bad person for it. But I will actively fight against you if you ever try to do it to me.
:)
Well actually it wasn't a job, I was volunteering. And as far as "breaking the law" goes, I don't see how you come to that conclusion - The constitution deals with what types of laws congress is allowed to be passed (although lately they've been ignoring the Consitution, IMHO). At the library I was simply enforcing community standards. These are two different things. Don't think I'm some kind of rabid Gestapo freak out to stop the world from destroying themselves with boobies. I probably have more pr0n cached on my HD than I should. But when I volunteered to help this library out, surely you must understand that I had to abide by their rules regarding how they want things done.
Well, like it or not, the majority of the public does not have the right to ignore the constitution. If enough of the public doesn't like the consitution, then they can pass a constitutional amendment.
Public opinion will trump the law, every time. Even the constitution. The constitution allows you to get on a soap box in the middle of Harlem and yell though a bullhorn about how we should bring slavery back. Somehow I don't think the 100 people that will instantly surround you will give a rip about your 1st amendment rights.
Unless of course you're in a wheelchair... Your comment reminds me of this handicapped person who used to view porn all the time from the Rutgers computer lab. Not once did I ever see anyone ask him to stop. Anyway, I can't comment on whether or not I'd win my case in your particular library. But I think I'd win the case in mine.
Eheheheh, well then perhaps Rutgers is more liberal than my community is. More power to the wheel chair guy
I understand the points you are trying to make and in a perfect world I would agree with them. But what you are talking about simply wouldn't fly at the place I was working at.
An important point that I forgot to mention was that these computers are out in the open in the middle of the library..Anyone passing by can see what you are doing. We most certainly would get complaints from parents. One way or another there would be problems for you, either from the library staff, parent, or ultra-puritan.
Yes, libraries are publicly funded and are supposed to serve the public interest. But like it or not the majority of the public does not believe that people should be surfing porn on library computers. You might have better luck in Amsterdam, but around here as long as people think the human body is a grotesque and horrible thing, you won't have any luck publicly surfing porn.
I never said anything about yelling and screaming. And no dragging or lockup will be necessary. I'll gladly call the police myself. When they get there I'll explain the situation, and if they order me to leave, I will do so peacefully and then initiate a lawsuit. There's no need for violence. If they drag me out the door I'll sue them for excessive use of force. If they lock me up I'll sue them for false arrest.
Here is the crux of our misunderstanding. When I said "If they raised a stink all we had to do was point to the police station right out the window.
", by stink I mean yelling, screaming, etc. It happens. Personally, I have never had to shut anyone's monitor off to stop them from surfing pr0n...Such problems are actually few. But you do get the oddballs in there who don't like to be told they can't look at boobies.
I can see where you're coming from on the 14th amendment, but what the libary I volunteered at does regarding porn does not fall under it. You can't deny that the libary has a right to keep people from surfing "objectionable" sites if that is what they want. As I said before, if someone doesn't like it, they can surf on their own computer.
Personally, I've got no problem with pr0n. I doubt anyone here does. But there is also a time and a place for it.
No, it is our money taken at gunpoint
:)
Well, yes, but unless you have the means to take it back, it's the Fed's money
Regarding your second comment - the Fed gives money to the states who in turn fund the libraries. Who is it then that is supposed to enforce CIPA? I mean, it sounds like the Feds are throwing the money into a black hole and saying "This money only goes to libraries with filters". So now it's the states' job to figure out who's running filters and who isn't? Don't you think that it would become such an administrative nightmare that the states would refuse SLC funding all together?
The first amendment reads:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Trust me, your constitutional rights are not being violated. Case in point: You can surf pr0n all day at home if you want. The same can't be said if you were living in China or (insert name of Middle Eastern country here). I do not see "library" anywhere in the first amendment. If the directors of the library don't want you surfing pr0n when you're on their turf, then that's the way it's going to be. If you are going to start yelling and screaming about how your rights are being violated I'm sure the police will be happy to hear about it as they drag you out the door and into the lockup to cool off.
I can't surf porn at my job....are my rights being violated? No, because I choose to work here and understand why that policy is in place. If you go to the libary and use their computers, you must abide by their rules.
CIPA is an issue because it forces libraries under a blanket that might not work for them.
Isn't the FBI stretched really thin as it is? Unless a lot of money is involved, they won't look at you twice. Are they going to run down every college student in the country who is sharing a few MP3's? No.
These people are all living in fantasyland. The senators keep it quiet because they know there will be a backlash. Berman is already saying "It's not my bill. It's his." The RIAA shows their idoicy by touting this bill that they haven't even read! Looking at his top contributors, I don't see the entertainment industry on there. Maybe he wants to get on their payroll?
I think the stealth with which this bill was put out indicates that the senators know that this type of legislation could damage their careers, but they want to keep the soft money coming in and keep writing up this crap.
Yeah, reading the docs more carefully they say that moderation and posting can't be done in the same article, so oh well, chalk that one up to experience. I only used one mod point anyway and the author has a +5 soooo...it doesn't matter now. Thanks for not being a lamer about it like that AC up there.