> Kirk says the treaty will be published when it is finished - how long does > the public have for filing responses and objections before the treaty > becomes law? What possibilities are there for modifications?
The point of the secrecy is to prevent modifications. Once the governments all agree on a text it will be presented to the legislatures for ratification and implementation on an "all or nothing" basis, with the argument that "If you make any changes we'll have to go back and renegotiate the whole thing".
>...these charming folks would never dream of using the project to map out, > in a loose but enlightening way, the contacts of some of the more net-savvy > people around.
It's all part of the plan these evil geniuses hatched forty years ago when they invented the Internet.
> A perfect invisibility cloak is also a perfect blindness cloak.
You switch off a small area fifty times a second or so to let your camera look out. A 2cm diameter black spot that is only present a few percent of the time is going to be very hard to spet.
> The owners of the 'Victorian internet' used their control of the telegraph > to prop up monopolies, manipulate elections, facilitate insider trading, > and censor criticism.
And it would have been so much better had the government done that instead.
> Doing something like this (showing different content by user-agent) is > against Google's terms-of-service and can cause your site to be removed > from the index.
But that is exactly what paywall outfits like IEEE do: show the full article to the googlebot and then send me their subscribe page.
> MAKE PAYWALLED SITES AN OPTION in my preferences and set it OFF by default.
I agree. I don't want to see anything in my search results that I cannot see when I follow the link (abstracts with ads for paid access to the full article are fine).
Slashdot Mirror
> FOIA requests for the treaty text have been rebuffed over alleged 'national
> security' concerns.
Has a lawsuit been filed over this yet?
> Kirk says the treaty will be published when it is finished - how long does
> the public have for filing responses and objections before the treaty
> becomes law? What possibilities are there for modifications?
The point of the secrecy is to prevent modifications. Once the governments all agree on a text it will be presented to the legislatures for ratification and implementation on an "all or nothing" basis, with the argument that "If you make any changes we'll have to go back and renegotiate the whole thing".
> So what do we do ?
We use error correcting codes.
> ...the courts already declared that email stored on a third party server is
> not covered by the 4th amendment.
They have done no such thing.
> ...these charming folks would never dream of using the project to map out,
> in a loose but enlightening way, the contacts of some of the more net-savvy
> people around.
It's all part of the plan these evil geniuses hatched forty years ago when they invented the Internet.
...had it been won by a group that did not use the Internet at all.
> A perfect invisibility cloak is also a perfect blindness cloak.
You switch off a small area fifty times a second or so to let your camera look out. A 2cm diameter black spot that is only present a few percent of the time is going to be very hard to spet.
> In any case, a well placed pebble should also work as it would bounce off in
> a very obvious way.
Better yet, a well-placed bullet. Just spray bullets in all directions at all times.
> I do not want this thing appearing on my carefully locked down staff and lab
> desktops...
Then get rid of Microsoft Windows.
> IE would be first as it comes with all operating systems...
It most certainly does not.
Just asking.
> ...40- 45 mpg...
Diesel fuel is denser than gasoline. Redo your mileage computations on a km/kg basis and they won't look quite so good.
> More Torque than the titans of Detroit of old.
Try a two-cycle diesel (except that you won't be able to find one).
> They're right, text speech doesn't degrade literary skills... it's an
> indicator of deep-seated brain damage.
Others are using "fail" as a noun and abusing the word "huge".
> The owners of the 'Victorian internet' used their control of the telegraph
> to prop up monopolies, manipulate elections, facilitate insider trading,
> and censor criticism.
And it would have been so much better had the government done that instead.
> Does the LHC shut down gracefully...
Yes.
Not ghoulish: merely clinical. And yes, it is necessary. No non-invasive technology can resolve the neurons.
> -1 Flamebait
No. +5 Troll
Sure. For example, all the people have two legs (well, all but one).
Profit motive is no bar to fair use.
> 1. Google hasn't found out about it.
That is hard to believe, given how widespread it is and how long it has been going on.
> Doing something like this (showing different content by user-agent) is
> against Google's terms-of-service and can cause your site to be removed
> from the index.
But that is exactly what paywall outfits like IEEE do: show the full article to the googlebot and then send me their subscribe page.
Not everyone is attached to an institution and not every paywalled publication is scholarly.
> MAKE PAYWALLED SITES AN OPTION in my preferences and set it OFF by default.
I agree. I don't want to see anything in my search results that I cannot see when I follow the link (abstracts with ads for paid access to the full article are fine).
It's a joke, son. You know, "pipes"? "Tubes"? "The Intertubes"?
So this means that Craigslist has plugged up the portion of the Intertubes belonging to Yahoo? Sounds like lawsuit material!