...does this affect encryption in some way? My understanding is that a lot of encryption relies on the difficulty of finding prime numbers. I may be wrong. (It's certainly not my specialty.)
I watched a documentary about BBSes and there was a brief discussion about an "orchid lovers" BBS where "orchid" meant "child." Block all the vocabulary and you drive the terminology to co-opt less easily blocked terms, which has the double benefit of obfuscating what is being discussed. Think about how many terms exist for marijuana. It's not any different, and I doubt Google would block "Mary Jane" or "green" if this were about blocking drug search terms.
...assuming it only kills off Facebook and Zynga. Imagine...people WORKING instead of MASTURBATING TO GIFT TRACTORS (with a Google tab open to switch to in case the boss walks in!)
I have contributed some bug reports and fixes to LKML and I have yet to encounter anything other than a terse but helpful and friendly nature amongst those that picked up my reports and directly communicated with me to fix the code. The only people who get reamed on LKML or get a middle finger are the ones that do egregiously foolish things and should know better. Linux is a massive project that spans thousands of cultures and subcultures in the meatspace department, and there is no time at all to address every error with compliment sandwiches and a facade of "bless your heart" pseudo-kindness.
"Show me the code" is the mantra. If your code is shit and you're new, you'll be politely pointed at a resource such as the coding style guide or KernelNewbies to correct it. If your code is shit and you manage a whole kernel subsystem, you can expect to be told "your code is shit and you know better!" by Linus directly, because....get this: you tried to feed shit code into the kernel (which hurts everyone else because they ALL have to maintain your code down the line) and you're high enough on the food chain that you know better.
The National Juvenile Online Victimization Study in 2005 found that 100% of CP possessors whose cases were not dismissed or dropped were convicted, and 86% to 90% of the cases were guilty pleas (presumably with plea bargains.) Once you are accused of CP possession, you will almost always be convicted regardless of the facts and circumstances. If you fight it, you will be given many times the punishment of the plea bargain you turned down.
What's better: people who are normally breaching boundaries becoming productive and stable due to taking drugs, or locking them in a metal box and letting them go over and over as the problem gets worse?
A major part of the problem in the United States is that "once a felon, always a felon." Misdemeanor littering charges will drastically lower your ability to get a job and housing, and a felony conviction practically guarantees never being able to rent a decent apartment or obtain a decent job. The US has little concept of forgiveness, and the predominant attitude towards those who have wronged and wish to start walking the straight and very narrow path of lawful and ethically sound conduct are met with "if you didn't want to be homeless and jobless, you shouldn't have committed a crime. (Implicitly: We don't give a fuck if it was 20 years ago, you're a Bad Person(TM) and we hate you and wish you would die, but you won't so we'll do whatever we can to make you a permanent outcast.)" It is only through a combination of silence, deception, and a few understanding/forgiving people out there that a criminal can climb back up the ladder and live a more normal life.
I wonder how many repeat offenders are that only because they were at the end of their rope and had to steal just to survive, or how many probation violations are minor things like being unable to get a job. It's interesting that probationers are typically required to get and/or maintain employment as part of their probation even though a criminal conviction butchers their ability to do so. It's a pretty messed up system all around, but the largest fault falls on the shoulders of people who refuse to understand other people before passing rapid, harsh judgment upon them. Paranoid helicopter moms with rapist-scanning eyes set at ISO 6400 calling the cops on lone males minding their own business in a city park come to mind as one example. The threshold for "creepy" has lowered so far that if you simply exist with a penis attached in a public place, it's assumed you're going to go Candlejack on all the kids in short order. Throw in the people who can't grasp the concept that not everything they read online or see in a 24-hour news report is truthful and you've got a huge vocal chunk of the population that assume everyone is out to stab them and their families to death for the $2.47 and a paper clip in their pocket if they walk past the wrong bush.
Where are the societies in this world that consist of mostly trustworthy and friendly people? What happened in America that wrecked our compassion and desire to help people? When did that get replaced with token gestures and false fronts?
Since they risk being shut down, the DBs need to end up torrented by an "unknown security breach at YourCompanyNameHere.com" and they'll never go away. It doesn't fix the problem with the destruction of ad revenue, but it undermines the NMPA's actions.
A regulatory ban on sale and manufacture of stoves also implies a de facto ban on manufacture of the repair parts needed to keep those stoves going when something breaks. The ban on sales would include a private party selling that stove to someone else unless rendered inoperative. Granted, private party sales would simply ignore the rules since enforcement is a problem, but it would still be an illegal act under federal reguations. Reminder: IANAL
Looks like they cost around $3,000 and Fairbanks already tried it. The results were "mixed" and the scrubber by itself didn't resolve the issue completely.
I think your analogy isn't quite correct. Lighting technology isn't the same as burning wood. Part of the problem with wood is that you can't exactly change what wood is made of. It's made of wood. When you burn wood, it makes smoke. How do you reduce the amount of smoke that wood burns? (Seriously, does anyone know how to get less smoke from the same volume of wood?)
I believe that "wood-burning stoves" means any heating device in a home that uses wood as its fuel source. I haven't read the regulations, so I don't know the precise legal definition.
That's one major reason I wanted to bring this story here. Poor choices regarding the regulation of wood stoves can (as those regulations squeeze the availability of these stoves) result in deaths, especially since manufacturing repair parts for "illegal" stoves is a consequence of "you can't manufacture these stoves."
It's not like people use wood stoves to drive the kids to school; they're mostly used to avoid the hazards of freezing temperatures in the winter. Frostbite and hypothermia aren't commonly seen as positive outcomes of government regulations.
Were you going for a "funny" tag with this? Are you a software developer? You know that OpenSSH isn't a program for website user authentication, right?
Large companies love to abuse their trademark and copyright protections to silence critics. It's unfortunate that there aren't SLAPP laws in every state. Angie's List was particularly scummy in that they threatened to come after me for reposting a review on a noncommercial blog so I could refute it outside of Angie's List. "Our reviews are copyrighted by us and we will sue the fuck out of you." That's how it works, and what's a small fry to do about it? In America, the person with the most money always wins, even if they ARE total assholes who are wrong in the eyes of the law.
Slashdot Mirror
...does this affect encryption in some way? My understanding is that a lot of encryption relies on the difficulty of finding prime numbers. I may be wrong. (It's certainly not my specialty.)
I watched a documentary about BBSes and there was a brief discussion about an "orchid lovers" BBS where "orchid" meant "child." Block all the vocabulary and you drive the terminology to co-opt less easily blocked terms, which has the double benefit of obfuscating what is being discussed. Think about how many terms exist for marijuana. It's not any different, and I doubt Google would block "Mary Jane" or "green" if this were about blocking drug search terms.
...assuming it only kills off Facebook and Zynga. Imagine...people WORKING instead of MASTURBATING TO GIFT TRACTORS (with a Google tab open to switch to in case the boss walks in!)
...in protest of this behavior. I don't think any active OSS project should stay there if they think this is ethical behavior.
Troll.
I have contributed some bug reports and fixes to LKML and I have yet to encounter anything other than a terse but helpful and friendly nature amongst those that picked up my reports and directly communicated with me to fix the code. The only people who get reamed on LKML or get a middle finger are the ones that do egregiously foolish things and should know better. Linux is a massive project that spans thousands of cultures and subcultures in the meatspace department, and there is no time at all to address every error with compliment sandwiches and a facade of "bless your heart" pseudo-kindness.
"Show me the code" is the mantra. If your code is shit and you're new, you'll be politely pointed at a resource such as the coding style guide or KernelNewbies to correct it. If your code is shit and you manage a whole kernel subsystem, you can expect to be told "your code is shit and you know better!" by Linus directly, because....get this: you tried to feed shit code into the kernel (which hurts everyone else because they ALL have to maintain your code down the line) and you're high enough on the food chain that you know better.
The National Juvenile Online Victimization Study in 2005 found that 100% of CP possessors whose cases were not dismissed or dropped were convicted, and 86% to 90% of the cases were guilty pleas (presumably with plea bargains.) Once you are accused of CP possession, you will almost always be convicted regardless of the facts and circumstances. If you fight it, you will be given many times the punishment of the plea bargain you turned down.
What's better: people who are normally breaching boundaries becoming productive and stable due to taking drugs, or locking them in a metal box and letting them go over and over as the problem gets worse?
A major part of the problem in the United States is that "once a felon, always a felon." Misdemeanor littering charges will drastically lower your ability to get a job and housing, and a felony conviction practically guarantees never being able to rent a decent apartment or obtain a decent job. The US has little concept of forgiveness, and the predominant attitude towards those who have wronged and wish to start walking the straight and very narrow path of lawful and ethically sound conduct are met with "if you didn't want to be homeless and jobless, you shouldn't have committed a crime. (Implicitly: We don't give a fuck if it was 20 years ago, you're a Bad Person(TM) and we hate you and wish you would die, but you won't so we'll do whatever we can to make you a permanent outcast.)" It is only through a combination of silence, deception, and a few understanding/forgiving people out there that a criminal can climb back up the ladder and live a more normal life.
I wonder how many repeat offenders are that only because they were at the end of their rope and had to steal just to survive, or how many probation violations are minor things like being unable to get a job. It's interesting that probationers are typically required to get and/or maintain employment as part of their probation even though a criminal conviction butchers their ability to do so. It's a pretty messed up system all around, but the largest fault falls on the shoulders of people who refuse to understand other people before passing rapid, harsh judgment upon them. Paranoid helicopter moms with rapist-scanning eyes set at ISO 6400 calling the cops on lone males minding their own business in a city park come to mind as one example. The threshold for "creepy" has lowered so far that if you simply exist with a penis attached in a public place, it's assumed you're going to go Candlejack on all the kids in short order. Throw in the people who can't grasp the concept that not everything they read online or see in a 24-hour news report is truthful and you've got a huge vocal chunk of the population that assume everyone is out to stab them and their families to death for the $2.47 and a paper clip in their pocket if they walk past the wrong bush.
Where are the societies in this world that consist of mostly trustworthy and friendly people? What happened in America that wrecked our compassion and desire to help people? When did that get replaced with token gestures and false fronts?
Since they risk being shut down, the DBs need to end up torrented by an "unknown security breach at YourCompanyNameHere.com" and they'll never go away. It doesn't fix the problem with the destruction of ad revenue, but it undermines the NMPA's actions.
What does this say to people who claim that ADHD is not a "real illness" or that it is merely "an excuse for bad behavior?"
An apology that blocks further discussion. I'm disappointed, but not surprised.
If I could +1 Informative this, I would.
A regulatory ban on sale and manufacture of stoves also implies a de facto ban on manufacture of the repair parts needed to keep those stoves going when something breaks. The ban on sales would include a private party selling that stove to someone else unless rendered inoperative. Granted, private party sales would simply ignore the rules since enforcement is a problem, but it would still be an illegal act under federal reguations. Reminder: IANAL
http://www.adn.com/2011/09/29/2095361/wood-stove-smoke-scrubber-gets.html
That solution doesn't quite solve the problem, plus it costs more than a lot of poor people will be able to afford.
http://www.adn.com/2011/09/29/2095361/wood-stove-smoke-scrubber-gets.html
Looks like they cost around $3,000 and Fairbanks already tried it. The results were "mixed" and the scrubber by itself didn't resolve the issue completely.
Stop stalking my house!
What I want to know is how a person can change the amount of smoke coming out of the same volume of wood being combusted.
I think your analogy isn't quite correct. Lighting technology isn't the same as burning wood. Part of the problem with wood is that you can't exactly change what wood is made of. It's made of wood. When you burn wood, it makes smoke. How do you reduce the amount of smoke that wood burns? (Seriously, does anyone know how to get less smoke from the same volume of wood?)
I believe that "wood-burning stoves" means any heating device in a home that uses wood as its fuel source. I haven't read the regulations, so I don't know the precise legal definition.
That's one major reason I wanted to bring this story here. Poor choices regarding the regulation of wood stoves can (as those regulations squeeze the availability of these stoves) result in deaths, especially since manufacturing repair parts for "illegal" stoves is a consequence of "you can't manufacture these stoves."
It's not like people use wood stoves to drive the kids to school; they're mostly used to avoid the hazards of freezing temperatures in the winter. Frostbite and hypothermia aren't commonly seen as positive outcomes of government regulations.
The comment I was responding to was trolling, thus modded off the board. I'm not responding to the original post.
Were you going for a "funny" tag with this? Are you a software developer? You know that OpenSSH isn't a program for website user authentication, right?
Maybe you didn't see the letter from the EFF's lawyer to Canonical yet because you didn't RTFA:
https://micahflee.com/2013/11/canonical-shouldnt-abuse-trademark-law-to-silence-critics-of-its-privacy-decisions/
You have NO IDEA what you are talking about, specifically in the legal aspect. This is a prime example of fair use.
Large companies love to abuse their trademark and copyright protections to silence critics. It's unfortunate that there aren't SLAPP laws in every state. Angie's List was particularly scummy in that they threatened to come after me for reposting a review on a noncommercial blog so I could refute it outside of Angie's List. "Our reviews are copyrighted by us and we will sue the fuck out of you." That's how it works, and what's a small fry to do about it? In America, the person with the most money always wins, even if they ARE total assholes who are wrong in the eyes of the law.