If Microsoft were to embrace a technology, they would need to then extend it. Any proper Microsoft satire is meaningless if it lacks the absurdly logical extension.
Try this instead:
Gates also announced that
Microsoft(R) ActiveLZip(R)(TM) would feature enhancements making it far superior to the Open Source Industry's offerings.
"Microsoft(R) ActiveLZip(R)(TM) is capable of creating compressed files significantly larger than the original, thanks to our meticulously designed Gigantitron technology," said Gates, refering to the code name for Microsoft's latest innovation. "Larger file size means files are a negative percent smaller than the original, and everyone knows that a negative size is smaller than the numbers that those "other" guys put out. Their claim of superiority is just another "Linux Myth." As usual, Microsoft's superior products give consumers another huge incentive to upgrade."
Gates also claimed that the new Microsoft(R) ActiveLZip(R)(TM) technology would be imployed in the next version of Windows, which would explain the amazingly small mere 2 gigabytes of memory used by recent beta versions of Microsoft(R) WindowsXP(R)(TM). Gates did not, however, offer an explanation of the seemingly random pairings of letters being used by Microsoft(R)'s Marketing Department to distinguish between the company's many offerings.
[Moderators: this isn't a troll, it's bad humor. There is no "-1 Bad Humor" option. Please moderate accordingly]
You know, try as I might, I just can't seem to find some free, legal, quality pornography online.
It false under the "free, legal, quality -- choose two" rule:
free and legal - But then it's never quality. Who would actually dedicate their time and bandwidth to archiving quality pornography for others to view? It's like Gnutella -- too many people downloading, too few uploading.
free and quality - This is typically inspired by a strage fetish for something illegal, such as child pornography or papparazzi shots of celebrities. People are obsessive enough to waste their time collecting this stuff, but only because they're so desparate to find it themselves (after all, it's illegal).
legal and quality - Do I really need to say it? You get what you pay for. If somebody puts up a quality archive of legal pornography -- a precious commodity; one that people are willing to pay for -- how long can it be before money corrupts and they're off with their credit card billing, mass spam advertising, and hundreds of pop-up windows?
I look forward to seeing any dissenting views. It's a win-win situation for us all =)
If someone ran Jon Katz through lzip, would anyone notice?
I believe that would require lbloat, not lzip.
First, let me point out the remarkable progress the new lbloat engine has made since it was demoed exactly one year ago. Read down toward the end of those reviews and you'll see one of the many quirks that have been fixed.
lbloat is great for anyone who needs to create long documents utilizing big words without having any real content to base them on. Students and advertisers are sure to find this "if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit" strategy to be extremely useful.
lbloat is also capable of using its advanced Sensationalizing Technology(tm) to turn any small story into the perfect target for today's media. Witness the story a single geek, relentlessly persecuted by his peers, blossom into a 15,000,000-part "Hellmouth" series. Note how the title instils an instinctive sense of fear, dread, and anticipation in the reader, without needing any of that precious commodity known as content.
lbloat can be using in conjunction with lzip when it becomes necessary to misquote statements by a reliable source in order to further a contrasting viewpoint. Zip that Constitution down to nothing, and then bloat it up to the Communist Manifesto instantly! It's obviously the same document, since all we've done is compressed and decompressed it.
JonKatz is an advanced lbloat beta running on a limited distribution basis. In the meantime, check out WindowsME and Windows98, which take all of the three useful features of Windows95 and double the size and slow it down, all without providing any noticeable new features.
Via a Space Act Agreement, NASA Langley Research Center will receive a HAL (Hyper Algorithmic Logic)-15 Hypercomputer from Star Bridge Systems, Inc. of Midvale, Utah. The system is said to be faster and more versatile than any supercomputer on the market and will change the way we think about computational methods.
And from this article that Slashdot linked to in the same writeup:
Representatives of Star Bridge Systems, Inc. visited Langley Research Center on March 27 to demonstrate and deliver one of its Hyper Algorithmic Logic (HAL-15) supercomputers.
Star Bridge President Brent Ward and Chief Executive Officer Kent Gilson presented the supercomputer to Doug Dwoyer, Langley's Associate Director for Research and Technology Competencies, after press and technical briefings in the Pearl Young Theater.
I'm not trying to be a troll or start a flame war; I just think it's absurd that Slashdot's editors not only don't participate in posting comments (and claim they read them), but that they don't even their own articles!
Strange how Slashdot was bought out, and now that our beloved editors are paid hefty sums with full editorial control, they still can't find the time to read their own site. This site was definately better back when it was Rob & Jeff posting stuff that interested them (and that they therefore actually read). It's still an amazing site, just not as amazing =(
(This always is the point where the moderators finally get some pitty and moderate me up, only for someone in my school to see it and show everyone else =)
I sure wasn't trying to be a troll -- I hope it didn't come off that way =( Just wanted to take the opportunity to get in a cheap shot at Microsoft.
Technically, the "correct" way is to write out "he or she," but that sounds very cumbersome, especially when you start adding in "his or her" and "him or her" into the mix, all in the same sentence.
I'm a big fan of using "they," as you typically hear on the street these days, or "he," if you're in the company of people mature enough to understand you're not trying to make sexist assumptions. I really hate this politically correct crap that keeps going too far. ..
What about those of us who moved the mouse over the link [...] Can we mod you down?
Sure, if you're so haughty and self-absorbed that you have no qualms with sending others over to goatse.cx - I see that one moderator already did. Nice to see the thanks I get for trying to be helpful -- at least I've got a little karma to spare.
Ah, they finally got me =( Anyone who's dumb enough to click the http://uninstall.microsoft.com link in the parent post just for the hell of it is in for a very unpleasant surprise.
Maybe it's supposed to be part of the joke - I can't tell if the poster has a history of trolling from his past posts alone. Either way, there's a goatse.cx link - that's not cool.
If anybody's grateful for the warning, I wouldn't mind you expressing your generosity with a few mods up =)
CRIMINAL NO. 0 12:32 AM Some lamer just offered me $250 to write a one-day journal of my hacking. I brag that I can make $4,000 a day by stealing credit cards, but I'm still willing to spend several hours writing a journal for a meager $250. With that kind of incentive, you can be sure that none of this is made up. None of it. Trust me, I'll appeal to the media's maniacal demand for sensationalist hacker stories. 12:38 PM Found a cool new way to hack people. 31337. 12:39 AM Sent out a mass HTML email to hundreds of AOL Lusers with code to steal their passwords. The technical flaw only exploits Outlook Express users, but those Lamers are stupid enough that somehow it'll still work in their AOL mail programs. 12:40 AM Going to my girlfriend's house. 12:41 AM Back from girlfriend's. 1:14 AM Got 217,468.25 AOL logins already. Haha, those lamers are so stupid! I can steal all your passwords, America, and there's nothing you can do about it because I'm a scary hacker! ph34r me. 1:27 AM Ran a secret hacker script to extract credit card numbers. Bought $1,000,000,000 worth of cocaine from a secret hacker website at http://www.dea.gov/. The Feds will never be able to figure out my address, because I sent it to my mom, who's sleeping in her room down the hall. And my ISP will never give my name away - AOL doesn't do that kind of thing. 1:30 AM Realized its past my bedtime. Mommy's yelling at me to go to sleep. Remember, America, hackers can do anything! But send me your credit card number and I guarantee that you'll be safe from hackers.
Interesting excerpt, from the "Technical Details" portion of the support page:
An attacker could use this vulnerability in either of two scenarios.
She could host an affected HTML e-mail on a web site and try to persuade another user to visit it, at which point script on a web page could open the mail and initiate the executable. Alternatively, she could send the HTML mail directly to the user. In either case, the executable attachment, if it ran, would be limited only by user's permissions on the system.
(Emphasis mine)
Well I guess Microsoft has finally realized that we males are too stupid to be "attackers," since everyone knows that the vast majority of 5r1pt k1dd13s are women. I was going to try to be an 3133t hax0r, but apparently the women have beaten us to that, too. I suppose the only quick and dirty way to rake up some cash now is to audition for Survivor.
First of all, you're missing the two most important differences, IMHO. the Visor Edge is 33 MHz, the Palm Vx is only 20 MHz (I think - sombody correct me if that's wrong). The Visor Edge has a special optimized version of PalmOS that runs slightly faster and several superior apps are built in (eg, DateBk3), but at the cost of Flash ROM.
That being said, of course Visor Edge is playing catch-up -- in case anyone hasn't noticed, the Palm Vx has been Palm's best-selling model, largely because Handspring has no comparable model. Handspring is making a good business move by putting out an essentially equivalent model with a flashy design, which nearly guarantees that they'll capture at least a piece of the Palm Vx market.
I know you were only commenting on the model itself and not Handspring or Palm, but I just have to point out that Palm's new marketting strategy is absolutely absurd -- they put out the Palm m105, a model inferior to the Palm IIIxe, at a higher price, with a flashy appearance and an extensive advertising campaign. And it'll work, too.
That being said, I prefer Handspring to Palm in general, mostly because I've always been rooting for the underdog. But when Best Buy started selling Palm IIIxe's this week for a mere $150, I went out and bought it. I'm appalled by Palm's promotion of the m105, but everything boils down to money.
I'm listening to it in school right now - comp sci class, actually (and being constantly disconnected). Trust me, you're not missing much - it's very difficult to make out what's going on during the trial.
Not that I don't appreciate being able to say I listened - hope you had as much luck as I did.
It's quite interesting that Hoff repeatedly talks about Intellectual Property and patent issues from back in 1971. It seems that this isn't just a modern problem, but that the US patent office has always been somewhat broken.
Doesn't applying for a patent require that the applicant be able to show some evidence that they've made progress toward using the patented techniques? Shouldn't the patent office require a prototype in order to grant such a patent? That way, TI wouldn't have been able to patent Intel's processor, because it only has the specs but no silicon. If they were able to get Intel's design docs and create first silicon before Intel did, then they would be showing evidence that they have improved Intel's ideas and might possibly have something worthy of a patent.
So whatever became of these patents filed by TI and others? I'd imagine that they'd have expired by now, and Hoff says that the royalties were minimal because Intel had strong evidence that TI had stolen their patents - but even so, the patents did remain valid, correct?
Strange, the stupid lamer filter accused me of using all caps with a post that's all numbers (which is why I'm adding this line). I'd fire off a bug report to the slash guys, but god (er, linus) knows if they'd ever get around to fixing it. ..
I just downloaded the zip from the website, but saw no source code -- just the exe and a readme. Since the Quake source upon which this is based is GPL'd, shouldn't the source be included?
Is it me, or does every single movie that bends the laws of physics even slightly get trashed here on Slashdot? I can understand how ridiculous Mission to Mars was in that department, but a little "Suspension of Disbelief" can make a slightly imperfect movie quite enjoyable.
In fact, I think that if the old Star Wars movies were first released today, we'd trash them, too. Even worse, look at how far Star Trek has drifted from the real of reality. Babylon 5's attempts to maintain at least a little realism wouldn't make it through here, either.
Instead, we're so imbued with certain stereotypes that we even let The Phantom Menace's "midiclorians" - the "tiny organism that inhabit every cell in your body and channel the Force" - slip by with little complaint.
So here we are, trying to get people to try and accept a new operating system - even thought it isn't perfect - but meanwhile, we can't accept a few flaws in our movies. I'm not really trying to defend movies abusing the laws of physics, I'm just trying to point out some more of our trademark Slashdot hypocrisy that turns up every few weeks.
I can't seem to find any information about price or availability on the AIBO site - I can't afford one anyway, but since the first run sold out thousands in mere hours (at $2,000 a piece!) and the second run was done through a lottery-like drawing, I'm wondering how this one will be sold.
This is why anyone concerned with privacy shouldn't use hotmail, they should use hushmail.
According to the website, hushmail is "the world's first, secure end-to-end, free, Web-based email service." I haven't used it myself, but I've seen testimonials from happy users both here on slashdot and on other sites.
Email is read and sent via a Java applet that ensures it is encypted before even being sent to a company proxy, so your boss can't intercept the plain text going over the connect, as is the problem with hotmail, icq, et al.
Besides, doesn't 1024-bit encrypted email make you drool?
I've seen some pretty wacked out trolls here on slashdot, from the ancient times through the age of the Hot Grits and the petrification of Natalie Portman, but this one takes the cake. A First Post posted as a reply. . . now I've seen everything. That's so original that I'd moderate is up, were it not for the fact that I'd be killed in metamod.
I pity the troll who ate enough lead paint chips to actually press the submit button on that.
April Fools! Ha, bet you thought you had me, Taco, didn't you? Just because I believed that Microsoft really DID sue Slashdot in '99 doesn't mean I'll fall for your trickery twice, "CmdrTaco" - if that's even your real name!
How is the data stored in the electron ever read or modified? Last I checked, there's a prevalent little theory known as the Heisenburg Uncertainty Priciple states that observing an electron inherently implies changing its position/state. Since this theory is generally accepted by just about every scientist I've ever met, how is it that we're supposed to read data without modifying it in a possibly unpredictable way here? It's the same situation with transporters in Star Trek - they simply can't exist as long as this principle holds true.
This is probably being posted too late to reach a high enough rank to be posed as an official interview question, but I think it's worth putting forth to the slashdot crowd anyways.
I, like most slashdotters, used to firmly believe that DeCSS was in no way involved in DVD piracy at all and the MPAA was just spewing total bullshit when they accused it of such (in fact, I had a post hit a score of 5 based on just that argument). But since then, I redownloaded the DivX codec, and the following little ditty on how DVDs are ripped struck me:
1- Use a CSS descambler to copy your DVD to your HD, keep the DVD structure
2- Convert Video to DivX;-) AVI using FlaskMPEG with the AVI plug in [SNIP]
3- Use VirtualDub to compress and multiplex Audio with Video
In case you didn't catch that - and it's pretty hard not to - the process of ripping a DVD to DivX not only uses DeCSS, but requires it to descramble the content.
It seems to be that this completely obliterates any argument saying that the MPAA is lying, that DVD piracy is not feasible (you've seen the amazing DivX compression ratios), etc, etc.
Don't get me wrong - I still see DeCSS as both a matter of free speech and a valid tool with legal uses, and I do not want to see it lose these court battles, but I do think there is a need to be completely honest here - DeCSS can be a tool for piracy - as well as slashdot needing some devil's advocates to express the dissenting opinion now and then.
So I suppose my question for Mr. Garbus, Mr. Gross, and anyone here on slashdot who sees fit to stick in their two cents, is this: how do you fight such a potentially incriminating angle in this case? Do you focus on the fact that DeCSS was developed for and is often used for just and legal purposes? Do you ignore that altogether and focus on the fact that making linking illegal will destroy the utter foundation of the internet? Do you continue to focus on the free speech aspect, possibly claiming that the legality of the program's operation is irrelevant in light of past "software is speech" rulings? Is it a combination of several of the above, or something altogether different?
And, on a closing note, good luck to Mr. Garbus and the rest of 2600's legal team - I've been interested in pursuing a career in law and following this case closely since the MPAA's complaints against DeCSS were first disclosed, and I've been very intrigued by how it has been handled so far (by the defendants, the MPAA, and the judge as well). Keep fighting the good fight =)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I just read through that whole embellished rant (it wasn't easy, believe me) to find that it just expressed one simple idea:
New encryption in the not-too-distant future will allow us to break rules and look at pr0n on Harvard computers without getting caught. Oh yeah, and we can do legal stuff in private, too, but that's not important.
Geez, Katz, if you wanted to appeal to us geeks, you could have saved a lot of time. I suggest that your next article be composed of just a few, simple words:
Proactivily utilizing encryption means pr0n at work!
Slashdot Mirror
If Microsoft were to embrace a technology, they would need to then extend it. Any proper Microsoft satire is meaningless if it lacks the absurdly logical extension.
Try this instead:
You know, try as I might, I just can't seem to find some free, legal, quality pornography online.
It false under the "free, legal, quality -- choose two" rule:
free and legal - But then it's never quality. Who would actually dedicate their time and bandwidth to archiving quality pornography for others to view? It's like Gnutella -- too many people downloading, too few uploading.
free and quality - This is typically inspired by a strage fetish for something illegal, such as child pornography or papparazzi shots of celebrities. People are obsessive enough to waste their time collecting this stuff, but only because they're so desparate to find it themselves (after all, it's illegal).
legal and quality - Do I really need to say it? You get what you pay for. If somebody puts up a quality archive of legal pornography -- a precious commodity; one that people are willing to pay for -- how long can it be before money corrupts and they're off with their credit card billing, mass spam advertising, and hundreds of pop-up windows?
I look forward to seeing any dissenting views. It's a win-win situation for us all =)
First, let me point out the remarkable progress the new lbloat engine has made since it was demoed exactly one year ago. Read down toward the end of those reviews and you'll see one of the many quirks that have been fixed.
lbloat is great for anyone who needs to create long documents utilizing big words without having any real content to base them on. Students and advertisers are sure to find this "if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit" strategy to be extremely useful.
lbloat is also capable of using its advanced Sensationalizing Technology(tm) to turn any small story into the perfect target for today's media. Witness the story a single geek, relentlessly persecuted by his peers, blossom into a 15,000,000-part "Hellmouth" series. Note how the title instils an instinctive sense of fear, dread, and anticipation in the reader, without needing any of that precious commodity known as content.
lbloat can be using in conjunction with lzip when it becomes necessary to misquote statements by a reliable source in order to further a contrasting viewpoint. Zip that Constitution down to nothing, and then bloat it up to the Communist Manifesto instantly! It's obviously the same document, since all we've done is compressed and decompressed it.
JonKatz is an advanced lbloat beta running on a limited distribution basis. In the meantime, check out WindowsME and Windows98, which take all of the three useful features of Windows95 and double the size and slow it down, all without providing any noticeable new features.
Excerpting from this NASA press release that Slashdot linked to Friday:
And from this article that Slashdot linked to in the same writeup: I'm not trying to be a troll or start a flame war; I just think it's absurd that Slashdot's editors not only don't participate in posting comments (and claim they read them), but that they don't even their own articles!Strange how Slashdot was bought out, and now that our beloved editors are paid hefty sums with full editorial control, they still can't find the time to read their own site. This site was definately better back when it was Rob & Jeff posting stuff that interested them (and that they therefore actually read). It's still an amazing site, just not as amazing =(
(This always is the point where the moderators finally get some pitty and moderate me up, only for someone in my school to see it and show everyone else =)
Technically, the "correct" way is to write out "he or she," but that sounds very cumbersome, especially when you start adding in "his or her" and "him or her" into the mix, all in the same sentence.
I'm a big fan of using "they," as you typically hear on the street these days, or "he," if you're in the company of people mature enough to understand you're not trying to make sexist assumptions. I really hate this politically correct crap that keeps going too far. . .
Maybe it's supposed to be part of the joke - I can't tell if the poster has a history of trolling from his past posts alone. Either way, there's a goatse.cx link - that's not cool.
If anybody's grateful for the warning, I wouldn't mind you expressing your generosity with a few mods up =)
Well I guess Microsoft has finally realized that we males are too stupid to be "attackers," since everyone knows that the vast majority of 5r1pt k1dd13s are women. I was going to try to be an 3133t hax0r, but apparently the women have beaten us to that, too. I suppose the only quick and dirty way to rake up some cash now is to audition for Survivor.
Come on, admit it: who else here celebrated the "millennium" for both 2000 and 2001? Any excuse to get drunk is a good excuse to get drunk.
That being said, of course Visor Edge is playing catch-up -- in case anyone hasn't noticed, the Palm Vx has been Palm's best-selling model, largely because Handspring has no comparable model. Handspring is making a good business move by putting out an essentially equivalent model with a flashy design, which nearly guarantees that they'll capture at least a piece of the Palm Vx market.
I know you were only commenting on the model itself and not Handspring or Palm, but I just have to point out that Palm's new marketting strategy is absolutely absurd -- they put out the Palm m105, a model inferior to the Palm IIIxe, at a higher price, with a flashy appearance and an extensive advertising campaign. And it'll work, too.
That being said, I prefer Handspring to Palm in general, mostly because I've always been rooting for the underdog. But when Best Buy started selling Palm IIIxe's this week for a mere $150, I went out and bought it. I'm appalled by Palm's promotion of the m105, but everything boils down to money.
Not that I don't appreciate being able to say I listened - hope you had as much luck as I did.
Doesn't applying for a patent require that the applicant be able to show some evidence that they've made progress toward using the patented techniques? Shouldn't the patent office require a prototype in order to grant such a patent? That way, TI wouldn't have been able to patent Intel's processor, because it only has the specs but no silicon. If they were able to get Intel's design docs and create first silicon before Intel did, then they would be showing evidence that they have improved Intel's ideas and might possibly have something worthy of a patent.
So whatever became of these patents filed by TI and others? I'd imagine that they'd have expired by now, and Hoff says that the royalties were minimal because Intel had strong evidence that TI had stolen their patents - but even so, the patents did remain valid, correct?
Strange, the stupid lamer filter accused me of using all caps with a post that's all numbers (which is why I'm adding this line). I'd fire off a bug report to the slash guys, but god (er, linus) knows if they'd ever get around to fixing it. . .
I just downloaded the zip from the website, but saw no source code -- just the exe and a readme. Since the Quake source upon which this is based is GPL'd, shouldn't the source be included?
Did anybody else read that as Paula Jones and instantly assume that it's some smutty porn webcast? I really need to get out more. . .
In fact, I think that if the old Star Wars movies were first released today, we'd trash them, too. Even worse, look at how far Star Trek has drifted from the real of reality. Babylon 5's attempts to maintain at least a little realism wouldn't make it through here, either.
Instead, we're so imbued with certain stereotypes that we even let The Phantom Menace's "midiclorians" - the "tiny organism that inhabit every cell in your body and channel the Force" - slip by with little complaint.
So here we are, trying to get people to try and accept a new operating system - even thought it isn't perfect - but meanwhile, we can't accept a few flaws in our movies. I'm not really trying to defend movies abusing the laws of physics, I'm just trying to point out some more of our trademark Slashdot hypocrisy that turns up every few weeks.
I can't seem to find any information about price or availability on the AIBO site - I can't afford one anyway, but since the first run sold out thousands in mere hours (at $2,000 a piece!) and the second run was done through a lottery-like drawing, I'm wondering how this one will be sold.
According to the website, hushmail is "the world's first, secure end-to-end, free, Web-based email service." I haven't used it myself, but I've seen testimonials from happy users both here on slashdot and on other sites.
Email is read and sent via a Java applet that ensures it is encypted before even being sent to a company proxy, so your boss can't intercept the plain text going over the connect, as is the problem with hotmail, icq, et al.
Besides, doesn't 1024-bit encrypted email make you drool?
I pity the troll who ate enough lead paint chips to actually press the submit button on that.
April Fools! Ha, bet you thought you had me, Taco, didn't you? Just because I believed that Microsoft really DID sue Slashdot in '99 doesn't mean I'll fall for your trickery twice, "CmdrTaco" - if that's even your real name!
How is the data stored in the electron ever read or modified? Last I checked, there's a prevalent little theory known as the Heisenburg Uncertainty Priciple states that observing an electron inherently implies changing its position/state. Since this theory is generally accepted by just about every scientist I've ever met, how is it that we're supposed to read data without modifying it in a possibly unpredictable way here? It's the same situation with transporters in Star Trek - they simply can't exist as long as this principle holds true.
I, like most slashdotters, used to firmly believe that DeCSS was in no way involved in DVD piracy at all and the MPAA was just spewing total bullshit when they accused it of such (in fact, I had a post hit a score of 5 based on just that argument). But since then, I redownloaded the DivX codec, and the following little ditty on how DVDs are ripped struck me:
In case you didn't catch that - and it's pretty hard not to - the process of ripping a DVD to DivX not only uses DeCSS, but requires it to descramble the content.It seems to be that this completely obliterates any argument saying that the MPAA is lying, that DVD piracy is not feasible (you've seen the amazing DivX compression ratios), etc, etc.
Don't get me wrong - I still see DeCSS as both a matter of free speech and a valid tool with legal uses, and I do not want to see it lose these court battles, but I do think there is a need to be completely honest here - DeCSS can be a tool for piracy - as well as slashdot needing some devil's advocates to express the dissenting opinion now and then.
So I suppose my question for Mr. Garbus, Mr. Gross, and anyone here on slashdot who sees fit to stick in their two cents, is this: how do you fight such a potentially incriminating angle in this case? Do you focus on the fact that DeCSS was developed for and is often used for just and legal purposes? Do you ignore that altogether and focus on the fact that making linking illegal will destroy the utter foundation of the internet? Do you continue to focus on the free speech aspect, possibly claiming that the legality of the program's operation is irrelevant in light of past "software is speech" rulings? Is it a combination of several of the above, or something altogether different?
And, on a closing note, good luck to Mr. Garbus and the rest of 2600's legal team - I've been interested in pursuing a career in law and following this case closely since the MPAA's complaints against DeCSS were first disclosed, and I've been very intrigued by how it has been handled so far (by the defendants, the MPAA, and the judge as well). Keep fighting the good fight =)
New encryption in the not-too-distant future will allow us to break rules and look at pr0n on Harvard computers without getting caught. Oh yeah, and we can do legal stuff in private, too, but that's not important.
Geez, Katz, if you wanted to appeal to us geeks, you could have saved a lot of time. I suggest that your next article be composed of just a few, simple words:
Proactivily utilizing encryption means pr0n at work!