In order to get such a Section 215 subpoena the officer has to in fact provide probably cause and support by oath the needs for it. The fact that it's done in a different court system doesn't short circuit anything.
How does a Section 215 warrant abridge your or the press's freedom of speech?
Trials come long after searches. Totally irrelevant to the matter at hand.
The people detained at Gitmo are in fact not US citizens nor were they detained on US soil and thus do not enjoy the protections of the Consitution of the United States. Moreso by the strictures of the Geneva Conventions these people are unlawful combatants and can be summarily executed.
If you read Section 215 it would in fact cover records of shoe companies if they could prove that they were relevant to a terror investigation.
It's ironic that there's all this gnashing of teeth over what the FBI might be doing when we already had the FBI file scandal back when we had a Democrat in the big chair.
So what "basic human right" aren't we respecting? How is having a defined legal process for requesting a FISA subpoena to view records for a terrorism investigation going to cause us to plunge into chaos and anarchy?
Damn, you can subpoena library records in a private law suit. No terrorist activity needs to be involved.
From ACLU's page:
Section 215 allows the FBI to order any person or entity to turn over "any tangible things," so long as the FBI "specif[ies]" that the order is "for an authorized investigation . . . to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities."
Note the emphasized parts. ANY person or entity. ANY tangible thing. If Section 215 is so damn dangerous then why are we only worried about libraries?
(Oh and today's challenge is to actually find the word library in the text of Section 215.)
That 50 MB isn't the problem. The problem is that you have an application that exposes system vulnerabilities and you're not even using the app. This means that you have to keep it patched which means more downloads and vulnerabilities that you don't need and/or want.
The biggest problem with any OS these days is complexity. Anything that stands in the way of reducing that complexity is a problem. If that barrier is there so that MS can stamp out another competitor then it's even worse.
which may explain why they had to tack it onto an existing military spending bill to get it through Congress.
I assume you're actually referencing the Real ID Act with that one. That is related to uniform standards for drivers licenses issued in the US. Ironically the same people who bitch about this are the same ones who tirelessly point out that the 9/11 terrorists had valid driver licenses.
The article in question this time is about changes to UK law.
Try to travel overseas without a credit card. Heck, try to stay overnight in a chain hotel in another state without a credit card. It ain't easy.
In this case we're getting worked into a lather about two countries trying to agree on a standard for their already issued government ID cards. The information contained in them is already accessible by the two governments. The only difference is that the border inspector can just swipe/scan instead of type to get that info.
So do please enlighten me as to how this is one giant step closer to the fascist big brother state?
No personal information? Name, address, Soc Sec # etc isn't personal?
Heck it's even worse than a passport as it can be used to access and correlate buying habbits. They could know even before you take your trip where you're going, where you're planning on staying and then see what restauraunts you ate at while you were away. Any "interesting" magazine subscriptions charged to that? Maybe even a SlashDot subscription paid on it to show just how subversive you really are.:-D
Check into a hotel, rent a car, do almost anything overseas without a Credit Card. It's awfully darn difficult without carrying a suitcase full of cash and getting screwed with each currency conversion.
Of course the data collected by all of this can be accessed by your, and other, governments and it's much more pervasive than the US and the UK trying to agree on a standard chip in their passports.
I'm must amazed that it suddenly becomes evil because they add this extra bit to an already government mandated identification card.
OMFG! An international standard for electronically readable ID cards? Big Brother is going to be the death of us all. Darn that Bush and his Consitution stomping cronies...
So, how many of you travellers appreciate using your Visa/MC/AmEx and ATM cards when you're in another country?
There was that "official" continuation written by Timothy Zahn that was decent, not great, but decent. Those would make some interesting movies. If someone else could take the reigns of directing them and just use ILM's sfx wizards you might actually get a neat series of films. Or maybe a mini-series is a better way to go.
Question 2: Was the funding/tax cut issue crucial?
Why would this money be acceptable one way and not the other? Would the proposed tax cut rescindment have actually paid for the funding in question?
The "inadequate armor" complaint is meaningless. The issue in that case was not funding but sheer logistics. The military cutbacks had meant that companies simply weren't making this stuff anymore and the amount of time it would take to spin these companies back up, procure the raw materials, manufacture the items, ship, and install was prohibitive. Maybe Red Warrior could provide some more insight on this issue.
You don't have to wait for the Iraqi's with open arms. If you just go back a little while in your memory (I realize this may be difficult) but the multiple-million Iraqi's with stained fingers would certainly seem to be a good cause. You could also look at the disarmed Libya and the lack of Syrian troops in Lebanon as well.
Umm, you do realize that the vote was for additional funding after the invasion don't you?
It had nothing to do with voting for the invasion in the first place. If we want to go into that then you can try to explain why Mr. "World Test" Kerry voted against Gulf War I which had full UN backing and a historic coalition (which he later mentioned as "the proper way to go to war") while voting for Gulf War II then voting against the funding needed to continue operations.
And for all those interested today marks the 100 day anniversary of Mr. Kerry's promise to fill out Form 180. We still wait breathlessly.
My point was that the whole investigative process was fully underway long before the press became involved at all.
My main point was that the press actually ignored the story when CentCom first announced it. They only became interested when the photos appeared and they figured they could club Bush over the head with it during the election cycle.
I owe nothing to the "scrutiny" of the journalists. Where was that vaunted scrutiny when the other major candidate was alleged to have been less than truthful about his Viet Nam service? Oh yeah, they were hunting down forged memos from "anonymous" sources that they were placing calls to the DNC for.
No sane congressperson would dare to vote against the troop funding omnibus because all of his peers would immediately label him an enemy of the troops.
Who said, "I actually voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it"?
I see someone posts about the evil government and gets a +4 Insightful. I bother to actual rebut the errors of the statement and get a -2 Offtopic?
Do we have a problem with actually holding conversations around here? (Truely amazing considering the hue and cry of government censorship that is always being moaned about around here.)
If you in fact bothered to go beyond the surface of the story you'd see that all investigations relating to the prisoner torture show that in fact it is not the government performing these actions. In fact, it was just a small sadistic bunch of people who broke the law and were being investigated and punished long before any pictures surfaced in the media. (CENTCOM had even issued a press release noting that these people were being investigated a month before the "scoop".)
The point is that Samba can act as either Server or Client. SourcePuller can only ever be a client.
Samba actually provides a migration path away from the MS Windows network by removing the dependency on MS software to provide server functionality. Think, you could replace all file and print servers on a network using Linux and Samba and not affect a single Windows client running on the network.
This may seem like a minor distinction to you but to me it is the crux of the matter and jibes with Linus' complaint about SourcePuller. It's a tool that will only function as long as BitKeeper is being used. The irony is that the use of the tool almost guaranteed that BitKeeper wouldn't be used.
One of the more useful functions of Samba where I work is to allow Windows boxes to access Unix file systems.
The point is that Samba acts as both a client and a server. It contains the complete functionality.
SourcePuller only works to get data out of BitKeeper. It doesn't do anything to put data into another SCM system. It can't replace the BK repository's functionality. It basically becomes useless without someone running a BK repository.
Slashdot Mirror
In order to get such a Section 215 subpoena the officer has to in fact provide probably cause and support by oath the needs for it. The fact that it's done in a different court system doesn't short circuit anything.
How does a Section 215 warrant abridge your or the press's freedom of speech?
Trials come long after searches. Totally irrelevant to the matter at hand.
The people detained at Gitmo are in fact not US citizens nor were they detained on US soil and thus do not enjoy the protections of the Consitution of the United States. Moreso by the strictures of the Geneva Conventions these people are unlawful combatants and can be summarily executed.
If you read Section 215 it would in fact cover records of shoe companies if they could prove that they were relevant to a terror investigation.
It's ironic that there's all this gnashing of teeth over what the FBI might be doing when we already had the FBI file scandal back when we had a Democrat in the big chair.
So what "basic human right" aren't we respecting? How is having a defined legal process for requesting a FISA subpoena to view records for a terrorism investigation going to cause us to plunge into chaos and anarchy?
Damn, you can subpoena library records in a private law suit. No terrorist activity needs to be involved.
From ACLU's page:
Note the emphasized parts. ANY person or entity. ANY tangible thing. If Section 215 is so damn dangerous then why are we only worried about libraries?
(Oh and today's challenge is to actually find the word library in the text of Section 215.)
It's not like any of the 9/11 hijackers used library computers to do anything after all...
oops
That 50 MB isn't the problem. The problem is that you have an application that exposes system vulnerabilities and you're not even using the app. This means that you have to keep it patched which means more downloads and vulnerabilities that you don't need and/or want.
The biggest problem with any OS these days is complexity. Anything that stands in the way of reducing that complexity is a problem. If that barrier is there so that MS can stamp out another competitor then it's even worse.
They're talking about British Passports here dude.
How many states actually require you to show any form of ID in order to vote? It's actually depressingly few.
which may explain why they had to tack it onto an existing military spending bill to get it through Congress.
I assume you're actually referencing the Real ID Act with that one. That is related to uniform standards for drivers licenses issued in the US. Ironically the same people who bitch about this are the same ones who tirelessly point out that the 9/11 terrorists had valid driver licenses.
The article in question this time is about changes to UK law.
Try to travel overseas without a credit card. Heck, try to stay overnight in a chain hotel in another state without a credit card. It ain't easy.
In this case we're getting worked into a lather about two countries trying to agree on a standard for their already issued government ID cards. The information contained in them is already accessible by the two governments. The only difference is that the border inspector can just swipe/scan instead of type to get that info.
So do please enlighten me as to how this is one giant step closer to the fascist big brother state?
No personal information? Name, address, Soc Sec # etc isn't personal?
:-D
Heck it's even worse than a passport as it can be used to access and correlate buying habbits. They could know even before you take your trip where you're going, where you're planning on staying and then see what restauraunts you ate at while you were away. Any "interesting" magazine subscriptions charged to that? Maybe even a SlashDot subscription paid on it to show just how subversive you really are.
Check into a hotel, rent a car, do almost anything overseas without a Credit Card. It's awfully darn difficult without carrying a suitcase full of cash and getting screwed with each currency conversion.
Of course the data collected by all of this can be accessed by your, and other, governments and it's much more pervasive than the US and the UK trying to agree on a standard chip in their passports.
I'm must amazed that it suddenly becomes evil because they add this extra bit to an already government mandated identification card.
OMFG! An international standard for electronically readable ID cards? Big Brother is going to be the death of us all. Darn that Bush and his Consitution stomping cronies...
So, how many of you travellers appreciate using your Visa/MC/AmEx and ATM cards when you're in another country?
There was that "official" continuation written by Timothy Zahn that was decent, not great, but decent. Those would make some interesting movies. If someone else could take the reigns of directing them and just use ILM's sfx wizards you might actually get a neat series of films. Or maybe a mini-series is a better way to go.
Maybe we could get a phisher to write about how he loves Windows for it's ease of use in ripping off people's personal information.
An ode to Outlook Express...
How I turned 100 hotmail accounts into a spam powerhouse?
Or, why I really like Windows. I get to billg@microsoft.com in the email line for all those annoying registration forms.
The porn industry gets larger and larger and then suddenly contracts, gets bored, and probably nips off for a quick nap.
It took many more years to have a democratically elected government in Germany and Japan.
The Bosnia Serbia region is a complete mess thanks to the UN.
...awaiting the truth in Germany and Japan?
Go over and look at Bosnia and Serbia lately?
I guess South Korea is an unmitigated disaster too.
You need to open your eyes.
Question 1: Was the $87 billion needed or not?
Question 2: Was the funding/tax cut issue crucial?
Why would this money be acceptable one way and not the other? Would the proposed tax cut rescindment have actually paid for the funding in question?
The "inadequate armor" complaint is meaningless. The issue in that case was not funding but sheer logistics. The military cutbacks had meant that companies simply weren't making this stuff anymore and the amount of time it would take to spin these companies back up, procure the raw materials, manufacture the items, ship, and install was prohibitive. Maybe Red Warrior could provide some more insight on this issue.
You don't have to wait for the Iraqi's with open arms. If you just go back a little while in your memory (I realize this may be difficult) but the multiple-million Iraqi's with stained fingers would certainly seem to be a good cause. You could also look at the disarmed Libya and the lack of Syrian troops in Lebanon as well.
Umm, you do realize that the vote was for additional funding after the invasion don't you?
It had nothing to do with voting for the invasion in the first place. If we want to go into that then you can try to explain why Mr. "World Test" Kerry voted against Gulf War I which had full UN backing and a historic coalition (which he later mentioned as "the proper way to go to war") while voting for Gulf War II then voting against the funding needed to continue operations.
And for all those interested today marks the 100 day anniversary of Mr. Kerry's promise to fill out Form 180. We still wait breathlessly.
..means.
"Hammered" now equals Democratic Nominee for President?
My point was that the whole investigative process was fully underway long before the press became involved at all.
My main point was that the press actually ignored the story when CentCom first announced it. They only became interested when the photos appeared and they figured they could club Bush over the head with it during the election cycle.
I owe nothing to the "scrutiny" of the journalists. Where was that vaunted scrutiny when the other major candidate was alleged to have been less than truthful about his Viet Nam service? Oh yeah, they were hunting down forged memos from "anonymous" sources that they were placing calls to the DNC for.
No sane congressperson would dare to vote against the troop funding omnibus because all of his peers would immediately label him an enemy of the troops.
Who said, "I actually voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it"?
I see someone posts about the evil government and gets a +4 Insightful. I bother to actual rebut the errors of the statement and get a -2 Offtopic?
Do we have a problem with actually holding conversations around here? (Truely amazing considering the hue and cry of government censorship that is always being moaned about around here.)
If you in fact bothered to go beyond the surface of the story you'd see that all investigations relating to the prisoner torture show that in fact it is not the government performing these actions. In fact, it was just a small sadistic bunch of people who broke the law and were being investigated and punished long before any pictures surfaced in the media. (CENTCOM had even issued a press release noting that these people were being investigated a month before the "scoop".)
The point is that Samba can act as either Server or Client. SourcePuller can only ever be a client.
Samba actually provides a migration path away from the MS Windows network by removing the dependency on MS software to provide server functionality. Think, you could replace all file and print servers on a network using Linux and Samba and not affect a single Windows client running on the network.
This may seem like a minor distinction to you but to me it is the crux of the matter and jibes with Linus' complaint about SourcePuller. It's a tool that will only function as long as BitKeeper is being used. The irony is that the use of the tool almost guaranteed that BitKeeper wouldn't be used.
One of the more useful functions of Samba where I work is to allow Windows boxes to access Unix file systems.
The point is that Samba acts as both a client and a server. It contains the complete functionality.
SourcePuller only works to get data out of BitKeeper. It doesn't do anything to put data into another SCM system. It can't replace the BK repository's functionality. It basically becomes useless without someone running a BK repository.