Or alternatively, people who "naively" write these summaries are those who know exactly how the world works -- hordes of naive people on slashdot would take the bait hence extra page hits.
Honestly this stuff is getting old. No company in China is going to survive a second if they allow these "political sensitive" stuff to be published uncensored....
Calm down brother. I guess you live in a place where you're an ethnic minority, so I can't claim to totally understand how you feel. I'm Chinese too, and I didn't feel too much offended by the OP's post. It definitely wasn't pleasant, but not to the extent I'd be ranting on racism and stuff.
There is a time to tolerate cheap jokes and jabs, particularly when they don't really mean much beyond the verbal assault. Did you react to the "In Soviet Russia" jokes that used to be so common around here? Or the short lived "in Korea only old people..." meme?
Of course, as I've mentioned I don't live in a place where Chinese is an ethnic minority, so I'm less prone to being agitated by these kind of cheap jokes. But sometimes overreaction (in the eyes of onlookers) has negative effects. Choose your fights wisely.
If you buy hosting from someone else, KEEP A COPY of the contract, and stay abreast of any changes. If you do not understand completely every part of it, hire a lawyer to have it explained to you. (Or just ask for that part to be re-written to be clearer.)
With the number of contracts people make daily, one would go broke due to consultation fees before he gets anything done.
Besides, reading the comments of people who apparently have an opinion on how the law is, I think the danger is more in the terms where you *think* you understand what it says.
Sorry, but you're the one that is wrong. Your analogy sucks and is wrong. Here's an equivalent analogy, if you contract with someone, that they can have any $5 bill you leave on your dinner table inside your house, it is still illegal for them to break into your house to get it.
If you add a term that allows them to break in, why not? (Of course such a contract wouldn't normally exist in the real world).
If you lose the keys to your house and hire a locksmith or whoever to crack your doors open, then he's breaking into your house, legally.
You cannot write a contract that permits illegal activity. knowingly writing a contract to allow criminal activity is prima facie proof of criminal conspiracy to commit said crime.
For a lot of crimes which "harms" another, consent is a defense. It is not a crime for you to use my computer if I consented to that. And a contract is good evidence of consent.
If you hire security professionals to poke at your systems to find possible exploits, are you committing a conspiracy to hack your own systems? I think not.
I don't think selective enforcement of the law is grounds for litigation. It might be grounds for launching a lawsuit for discrimination (race, gender, etc) or perhaps a more general judicial review lawsuit according to constitutional/administrative law, but selective enforcement is not one of them.
And it's ridiculously hard to prove selective enforcement, they can always make up reasons, and you need lots of statistics to really catch them.
(In fact, a "personalized" one. These days you need to go through some registration procedures for student discounts... blahblahblah)
One issue with your argument though, is that theoretically they can process the available data and deduce who you are. Daily commutes would point to your home and work address, for example.
Same for Google searches. With the number of searches we make daily, there's bound to be something that almost uniquely identifies the searcher.
That being said, the fact that I have this personalized octopus card suggests that I'm personally not too worried about it.
Ever drove a bit faster than the limits? (traffic regulations) Ever realized the cashier gave extra change and neglected to give it back? (theft) Ever tried to log into some computer which you don't have access to? (attempted hacking) Or used a friend's account when he forgot to log off? (there's gotta be some computer crime here) Got into a fight with a friend? (assault)
How about the thousands if not millions of obscure laws and regulations which were enacted and forgotten, which nobody knows of yet exists?
Oh well, if it helps in making Mr(/s). Causality realize his/her fallacy, here's some additional information he might wish to see: http://slashdot.org/~causality
A person really paranoid about privacy is not going to use the same slashdot account over and over again accumulating personal opinions, and perhaps inadvertently disclosing personal information. I'm pretty sure those comments contain much more private data than what Google could gather from searches and whatnot (except perhaps gmail).
The problem is, Jones is sitting on top of a lot of data which nobody else can easily get. He has access to data of weather stations around the globe. And those stations don't release the full data.
You can, of course, blow billions of dollars trying to set up stations worldwide to do the same thing. But seriously, isn't it easier to just release the damned data and code?
I used to have doubts about AGW because I heard so many skeptics, but now
That is, in a sense, a strawman argument too. The strawman right-wing nut. Either the AGW proponents have proved their case, or they have not. It shouldn't matter that their opponents are even less credible than they are.
In this leaked email scandal, the case of the AGW has gotten weaker. Is it weak enough to discredit AGW? I personally think not. Is it bad though? Hell yes it is. Those who believe that AGW is infallible should take a second look at the available evidence, and try to figure out the implications if AGW is still supported by scientific evidence even if we disregard the results of the scientists involved in this scandal.
"must stand up to rigorous scientific questioning" - true, indeed. The problem is that Global Warming has done so convincingly several times over and still some people refuse to bulge.
Huh? A few major "scientists", cited multiple times in the IPCC reports (which advises the UN bodies and policy makers worldwide), have been shown to be doing things that are dubious at best. This is so convincing.
Looks like you are being the denialist.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not in the "global warming is false" camp. I just think that the science needs to be more rigorous, given the importance of the implications. It is exactly because the issue is very important, that we need to have discussions to make sure we don't make the wrong decisions.
I've read a lot of those "sites". Some are absolutely hogwash, written by clueless people with no understanding at all about the relevant issues.
However, the few sites which were written with people with a clue, actually provide the context. And with the context the emails are even more incriminating than without.
For example - deleting emails: Deleting emails is not unethical or criminal, but if you delete them pursuant to FOIA requests, or anticipation of such, then it is.
If it's god-damned good science, then really there shouldn't be any debate. Should we be debating whether gravity exists at all? Or whether the laws of conservation of energy is real? Or for that matter, whether 1+1=2 and Pi = 3.1415926... ?
If you open these topics for debate, only crackpots will respond.
Of course, I don't think Climate Science is "god-damned good science", at least not to the level of the ones I mentioned above.
The accusation in this scandal is not that there is a worldwide conspiracy blah blah blah -- the accusation is that the people involved are not doing credible science, and yet we base our policies on climate change on them.
And that's a real problem, which needs to be rectified somehow.
e.g. if your result depends on some observation of an astronomical event which only you recorded, but that doesn't seem to apply here.
I think it does apply. Not many people have the resources to set up weather stations around the globe to record temperature.
The temperature records of the Earth is actually sort of an astronomical event, although it's right here. There's only one Earth. That's in contrast to other experiments -- you can try mixing chemicals in your own lab, for example.
What if the people doing experiments in the Large Hadron Collider refuse to publish their data? "We're not going to give you our data, if you want them, do it yourself"? That makes no sense, nobody else has the resources to build such a thing.
Unless your coupon has a bunch of legalese covering your ass (and the buyer knows about it when he paid the price of the widget), it's probably not "legal".
In most cases it doesn't matter much and it wouldn't be worth it to fuss over waiting a bit for you to restock or finding another supplier for widgets, but if the widgets are expensive and prices fluctuate, then getting the widgets now and getting them later could be of great difference.
You will be liable for any loss that the buyer incurs due to this.
Not for 4, which sounds similar to "death". 8.8.4.4. is not exactly a good number. If you must try to interpret that in the "chinese way", it probably means get rich and then die...
8.8.8.8 is a really nice number though, in the Chinese culture (and superstition).
I don't think it has anything to do with appealing to the Chinese though, the numbers are nice and easy to remember in their own right. Even in binary.
Man pages are not designed for beginners. It's usually a technical reference for people with a good working knowledge of the system.
You sound like you've been a victim of elitist "command line experts", or perceived yourself to have been so. It doesn't have to be that way.
Of course, if you prefer to spend your nights having sex then you'll have less time to learn about another thing. It's a trade off, and I don't think you're entitled to complain about man pages being "difficult" just because you didn't want to spend time learning it.
The command line isn't "just to be nerdy", things are not made to look hard because it's "cool". It's hard because once you learn properly how to use the things they become pretty powerful tools, and you need to invest time and effort in it.
And just curious, what "angle" did you come from? Trying to impress that nerdy chick?
After all, after his own personal sense of accomplishment over this feat has faded, he's going to be left looking back at all the time he spent on it, and the fact that he ultimately has nothing of any value to show for it. That can be very depressing.
It depends on how much you personally subscribe to the social norms.
They have different servers distributed around the globe.
I'm in Hong Kong, and pings to 8.8.8.8 have ~ 40ms latency, which implies it's geographically close. Any connection to USA will require latency of 100+ms, due to speed of light limits.
Slashdot Mirror
Or alternatively, people who "naively" write these summaries are those who know exactly how the world works -- hordes of naive people on slashdot would take the bait hence extra page hits.
Honestly this stuff is getting old. No company in China is going to survive a second if they allow these "political sensitive" stuff to be published uncensored....
Calm down brother. I guess you live in a place where you're an ethnic minority, so I can't claim to totally understand how you feel. I'm Chinese too, and I didn't feel too much offended by the OP's post. It definitely wasn't pleasant, but not to the extent I'd be ranting on racism and stuff.
There is a time to tolerate cheap jokes and jabs, particularly when they don't really mean much beyond the verbal assault. Did you react to the "In Soviet Russia" jokes that used to be so common around here? Or the short lived "in Korea only old people..." meme?
Of course, as I've mentioned I don't live in a place where Chinese is an ethnic minority, so I'm less prone to being agitated by these kind of cheap jokes. But sometimes overreaction (in the eyes of onlookers) has negative effects. Choose your fights wisely.
If you buy hosting from someone else, KEEP A COPY of the contract, and stay abreast of any changes. If you do not understand completely every part of it, hire a lawyer to have it explained to you. (Or just ask for that part to be re-written to be clearer.)
With the number of contracts people make daily, one would go broke due to consultation fees before he gets anything done.
Besides, reading the comments of people who apparently have an opinion on how the law is, I think the danger is more in the terms where you *think* you understand what it says.
Sorry, but you're the one that is wrong. Your analogy sucks and is wrong. Here's an equivalent analogy, if you contract with someone, that they can have any $5 bill you leave on your dinner table inside your house, it is still illegal for them to break into your house to get it.
If you add a term that allows them to break in, why not? (Of course such a contract wouldn't normally exist in the real world).
If you lose the keys to your house and hire a locksmith or whoever to crack your doors open, then he's breaking into your house, legally.
You cannot write a contract that permits illegal activity. knowingly writing a contract to allow criminal activity is prima facie proof of criminal conspiracy to commit said crime.
For a lot of crimes which "harms" another, consent is a defense. It is not a crime for you to use my computer if I consented to that. And a contract is good evidence of consent.
If you hire security professionals to poke at your systems to find possible exploits, are you committing a conspiracy to hack your own systems? I think not.
I don't think selective enforcement of the law is grounds for litigation. It might be grounds for launching a lawsuit for discrimination (race, gender, etc) or perhaps a more general judicial review lawsuit according to constitutional/administrative law, but selective enforcement is not one of them.
And it's ridiculously hard to prove selective enforcement, they can always make up reasons, and you need lots of statistics to really catch them.
http://xkcd.com/598/
Hi. I have an octopus card too :)
(In fact, a "personalized" one. These days you need to go through some registration procedures for student discounts... blahblahblah)
One issue with your argument though, is that theoretically they can process the available data and deduce who you are. Daily commutes would point to your home and work address, for example.
Same for Google searches. With the number of searches we make daily, there's bound to be something that almost uniquely identifies the searcher.
That being said, the fact that I have this personalized octopus card suggests that I'm personally not too worried about it.
They (governments) wisened up since then.
Ever drove a bit faster than the limits? (traffic regulations)
Ever realized the cashier gave extra change and neglected to give it back? (theft)
Ever tried to log into some computer which you don't have access to? (attempted hacking)
Or used a friend's account when he forgot to log off? (there's gotta be some computer crime here)
Got into a fight with a friend? (assault)
How about the thousands if not millions of obscure laws and regulations which were enacted and forgotten, which nobody knows of yet exists?
I wish I had mod points.
Oh well, if it helps in making Mr(/s). Causality realize his/her fallacy, here's some additional information he might wish to see: http://slashdot.org/~causality
A person really paranoid about privacy is not going to use the same slashdot account over and over again accumulating personal opinions, and perhaps inadvertently disclosing personal information. I'm pretty sure those comments contain much more private data than what Google could gather from searches and whatnot (except perhaps gmail).
If they started doing that, what's to stop you from changing your DNS provider to whatever you were using before?
What if slashdot becomes goatse? OMG block it quick!
The problem is, Jones is sitting on top of a lot of data which nobody else can easily get. He has access to data of weather stations around the globe. And those stations don't release the full data.
You can, of course, blow billions of dollars trying to set up stations worldwide to do the same thing. But seriously, isn't it easier to just release the damned data and code?
I used to have doubts about AGW because I heard so many skeptics, but now
That is, in a sense, a strawman argument too. The strawman right-wing nut. Either the AGW proponents have proved their case, or they have not. It shouldn't matter that their opponents are even less credible than they are.
In this leaked email scandal, the case of the AGW has gotten weaker. Is it weak enough to discredit AGW? I personally think not. Is it bad though? Hell yes it is. Those who believe that AGW is infallible should take a second look at the available evidence, and try to figure out the implications if AGW is still supported by scientific evidence even if we disregard the results of the scientists involved in this scandal.
"must stand up to rigorous scientific questioning" - true, indeed. The problem is that Global Warming has done so convincingly several times over and still some people refuse to bulge.
Huh? A few major "scientists", cited multiple times in the IPCC reports (which advises the UN bodies and policy makers worldwide), have been shown to be doing things that are dubious at best. This is so convincing.
Looks like you are being the denialist.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not in the "global warming is false" camp. I just think that the science needs to be more rigorous, given the importance of the implications. It is exactly because the issue is very important, that we need to have discussions to make sure we don't make the wrong decisions.
Or do you believe you can't be wrong, ever?
The problem with slashdot is that while many posters are rational and logical, they tend to speak about things they know nothing about.
And then you get bullet proof reasoning and faulty assumptions, which lead to wrong conclusions nonetheless :)
It's better than most other sites for sure, but still.
That being said, sometimes you'll occasionally get somebody who knows what they're talking about post here, and those posts are quite worth reading.
I think it's the other way round.
I've read a lot of those "sites". Some are absolutely hogwash, written by clueless people with no understanding at all about the relevant issues.
However, the few sites which were written with people with a clue, actually provide the context. And with the context the emails are even more incriminating than without.
For example - deleting emails: Deleting emails is not unethical or criminal, but if you delete them pursuant to FOIA requests, or anticipation of such, then it is.
"Johnny runs Linux. Johnny also stole Windows 7, therefore all linux useres steal Windows 7."
How about: Linus Torvalds runs Linux. Linus stole Windows 7.
Sure, there are other Linux developers, but then it would still be a huge scandal and a huge problem.
And Phil Jones and CRU is where much of the surface temperature research is coming from. He *is* the Linus in that field.
If it's god-damned good science, then really there shouldn't be any debate. Should we be debating whether gravity exists at all? Or whether the laws of conservation of energy is real? Or for that matter, whether 1+1=2 and Pi = 3.1415926... ?
If you open these topics for debate, only crackpots will respond.
Of course, I don't think Climate Science is "god-damned good science", at least not to the level of the ones I mentioned above.
Strawman.
The accusation in this scandal is not that there is a worldwide conspiracy blah blah blah -- the accusation is that the people involved are not doing credible science, and yet we base our policies on climate change on them.
And that's a real problem, which needs to be rectified somehow.
e.g. if your result depends on some observation of an astronomical event which only you recorded, but that doesn't seem to apply here.
I think it does apply. Not many people have the resources to set up weather stations around the globe to record temperature.
The temperature records of the Earth is actually sort of an astronomical event, although it's right here. There's only one Earth. That's in contrast to other experiments -- you can try mixing chemicals in your own lab, for example.
What if the people doing experiments in the Large Hadron Collider refuse to publish their data? "We're not going to give you our data, if you want them, do it yourself"? That makes no sense, nobody else has the resources to build such a thing.
Unless your coupon has a bunch of legalese covering your ass (and the buyer knows about it when he paid the price of the widget), it's probably not "legal".
In most cases it doesn't matter much and it wouldn't be worth it to fuss over waiting a bit for you to restock or finding another supplier for widgets, but if the widgets are expensive and prices fluctuate, then getting the widgets now and getting them later could be of great difference.
You will be liable for any loss that the buyer incurs due to this.
Not for 4, which sounds similar to "death". 8.8.4.4. is not exactly a good number. If you must try to interpret that in the "chinese way", it probably means get rich and then die...
8.8.8.8 is a really nice number though, in the Chinese culture (and superstition).
I don't think it has anything to do with appealing to the Chinese though, the numbers are nice and easy to remember in their own right. Even in binary.
Man pages are not designed for beginners. It's usually a technical reference for people with a good working knowledge of the system.
You sound like you've been a victim of elitist "command line experts", or perceived yourself to have been so. It doesn't have to be that way.
Of course, if you prefer to spend your nights having sex then you'll have less time to learn about another thing. It's a trade off, and I don't think you're entitled to complain about man pages being "difficult" just because you didn't want to spend time learning it.
The command line isn't "just to be nerdy", things are not made to look hard because it's "cool". It's hard because once you learn properly how to use the things they become pretty powerful tools, and you need to invest time and effort in it.
And just curious, what "angle" did you come from? Trying to impress that nerdy chick?
After all, after his own personal sense of accomplishment over this feat has faded, he's going to be left looking back at all the time he spent on it, and the fact that he ultimately has nothing of any value to show for it. That can be very depressing.
It depends on how much you personally subscribe to the social norms.
Are you aware that the fact that there are two ips does not imply two physical servers?
For example most DNS root servers, even though they only have a single IP each, are distrubted. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Root_nameserver#Root_server_addresses
See also the other post I just wrote on more proof.
They have different servers distributed around the globe.
I'm in Hong Kong, and pings to 8.8.8.8 have ~ 40ms latency, which implies it's geographically close. Any connection to USA will require latency of 100+ms, due to speed of light limits.