1) Kinkos does not DISTRIBUTE said publication. You do. That alone makes them sufficiently unlike Kinkos that your argument makes no sense.
2) Yes, they can either prevent it (e.g. ban the user by IP, require 24 hours before posting reviews,... require them to BUY A COPY OF THE BOOK BEFORE REVIEWING IT). Or if they can't, they shouldn't be free to host stuff like that.
3) acusing someone of being a spammer retard and that you should avoid the book at all cost is actually libel as defined in section 298 of the CCC. For your benefit:
298. (1) A defamatory libel is matter published, without lawful justification or excuse, that is likely to injure the reputation of any person by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule, or that is designed to insult the person of or concerning whom it is published.
So, as far as the CCC is concerned the reviews were libelous as there was no lawful justification for posting something which injured my reputation and exposed me to contempt.
Um we have several IC labs in Canada. We also have quite a few hardware engineers (hint: I work at a hardware crypto firm) who design things that get licensed into other designs and eventually taped out.
I wasn't trying to condemn the states, merely point out that "oh designed in Canada, means it sucks" is a fairly odd remark given the state of engineering in the states. It's not significantly better than what we do in Canada, or the rest of the world for that matter.
And btw, many weapons that the US military uses are developed here in Ontario. So we must be doing something right:-)
I've always favoured the DIACF approach. Apparently Justice Canada disagrees with me:-)
Sadly in my case the best solution is to ride it out. A few trolls in usenet decide they want to cause trouble and there isn't much I can do so long as NNTP servers accept anonymous posting (and usenet readers continue to be ignorant about how NNTP works...).
Yeah, except that "Anonymous Joe" on Amazon isn't exactly easy to track down unless Amazon tells me their IP and the ISP tells me their name.
Now, I should mention that in my case Amazon *was* good enough to remove the libelous reviews in only a day or two. So I don't want to give the impression that they're irresponsible. I just don't think they should be totally immune because who knows if in the future they will react with the same speed and objectiveness.
Amazon is not like kinkos, in that Amazon produces [or causes to be produced] said information on demand. As far as I know, kinkos does not perform mass mailings of stuff you photocopy.
There is a distinction. I go to Amazon.com and boom it says "Person $x is a spammer retard, don't buy their book." Sure the poster is the guy who wrote that, but it's Amazon that causes it to be distributed (e.g., published) and available for others. Since Amazon is the one distributing the libel they're the ones who are responsible [or should be] to remove it. And if they can't moderate their content they shouldn't be allowed to indiscriminantly host what would in any other context be considered libel.
This is like blaming the TV broadcaster and not the TV manufacturer or distributor for any libel/slanderous media.
Essentially this is saying that we can invent any technology, so long as you can maintain that safety is unreasonable you are not liable for the consequences of your actions. That my friend, is a slippery slope.
And frankly, until you have people libeling your work (e.g. in my case my two books) with obviously no good cause, you don't know what you are talking about. In my case I spent years writing the texts, and in an instant i had negative reviews and libelous comments posted from people who haven't even read either book.
So you don't know what you are talking about and should just shut up.
I don't see that though. Why shouldn't you be liable for what you publish? Just because you CAN publish it, doesn't mean you should, especially when they're obviously incapable of moderating it.
It's like saying you should have a right to leave loaded guns around, since you can't control EVERYONE it's clearly not your safety problem. Sites like Amazon, and usenet providers, are wonderful places to joe-job and spread disgusting shite without any recourse. I think it's about time they take some reponsibility for the services they claim they provide.
Them are fightin words, I say, I say sir, put up yer dukes!
I'm sure your comment makes a lot of sense right after we figure out that most processors are designed outside of the USA. And the ones that are done in town are by import engineers.
Yeah, except that the die that goes in a mobile and a desktop are not always different designs. Just the ones that can run low voltage make it there. Granted, the turions are 754-pin so they're not the same as the AM2 desktops but it was the case back in the day (e.g. you could throw a turion in a 754-pin desktop and use it there).
So a "laptop chip" is not always a distinct design. Even in the Intel world with the 479-pin Core 2 Duo mobiles and 775-pin desktops they're likely very similar internally (once you get past the front side bus). So adding a GPU to one and not the other is probably a pain in the ass.
If AMD decides to fracture their cpu lines and have totally distinct lines I think they'll suffer. They don't exactly have the mass staff to support multiple product lines (of completely different design). And I can't see them putting GPU extensions in the Opteron line...
Coming from the company who stole the gui from PARC, the IP stack from BSD, the new theme from Apple, the...
I see a lot of things in GNU/Linux that I don't see in Windows. Like a modern scheduler, a UNIX/POSIX compatible standard set of libraries, a competent collection of userland tools (coreutils), a free and commercially viable set of compilers, various desktop window managers based on X11, etc, etc, etc....
If GNU/Linux *did* copy things from Windows (like the shitty scheduler, memory manager, lack of user land tools, etc) I wouldn't use it. I might as well run Windows.
I think we can all sit back and laugh at MSFT for squirming into oblivion. Vista will be a hoot of a failure. I for one am going to sit back and laugh.
Um actually, being popular does have something to do with it. A monopoly is simply a business which dominates significiantly the market. Monopolies are NOT illegal. Abusing them is because it violates the trust we put in them to act in our best interest.
Microsoft has a monopoly on the OS market. That's not a secret. When they start playing tricks that lock out 3rd party vendors for no reason other than they can, they're violating our trust in them. Why is it in my best interest that the.doc format not be documented? Why is it in theirs?
Well you can still get in trouble for distributing closed source proprietary crypto without a license. The new exception is for free open source, which makes things like GPG and my LibTomCrypt possible (cuz even though I'm a cannuck, I deal a lot with americans...).
Phil wasn't the only one going through the hell. Daniel Bernstein had a similar experience. They both had quite a few supporters along the way too, so lets not forget about them.
Some people do things because they can. Some people enjoy the rewards of exploring new ideas and theories. Some people like to create. In short, some people are not all about wealth and power, they can see beyond their personal well being and help others out.
Why did Linus create Linux? Probably because it was new to him, to explore new ideas in OS creation, because he could. People in the OSS movement (the real lifers) don't sit there and ask "what's in it for me?"
The motivation to write new software? To solve problems that don't have adequate solutions.
Yeah, my point is that PGP wasn't illegal, making it available on the intarweb was. (and technically, without an export license, closed source software must be reviewed first..., even today)/me enjoys kitkat, still thanks Phil for going through hell for me. Still uses GPG for my projects...
Yeah, well when you're all grown up and in the workforce you'll see how stupid your comment is.
Except for really small companies it's hard to avoid using MSFT tools because at some level people [re: customers] really really need that.doc file not.pdf, etc, etc....
Personally I'd just be happy with having companies like Dell, HP, Acer, Asus, etc, not forcefully bundling Windows with their computers. That'll also require they stop using random "upgraded" chipsets so that OSS drivers can have a chance to work...
At my first Toorcon talk he was rude and disruptive when I mentioned that PGP had bugs in various incarnations (it was a talk on cryptanalysis, I was trying to make the point that even the big boys fall). He claims there was never a problem with the ADK, he proceeded to lecture me, DURING MY TALK, about how ADK was/is perfectly fine.
During my talk I didn't have net access, so I let him rant in order to save some grace, but afterwards I found the CERT advisory for the bug and I emailed him. He never replied. I asked for an apology and never got one.
I saw Jon at Defcon, he didn't remember me. He had attached himself to the Tor panel and was spouting the virtues of "everyone absolutely needs Tor or they're insecure..." He may be a nice person outside the conference scene, but as a cryptographer/conference goer he's a fucking retard and a jerk. He's trying to be the next Bruce Schneier (he even dresses like him) and it's really pathetic.
Um, it was illegal to EXPORT not use. Get your fud straight.
That not withstanding he [and people like him] went through hell to free up crypto projects for the rest of us. I, myself, give out a crypto library that slips through relaxed regulations on free software.
Kudos to Phil, his supporters, and PGP as a whole. [except Jon Callas, he's a jerk and I still hate him]
Well it couldn't hurt and I think enough professionals who happen to use Linux would go for it.
Remember, not all of us are anti-proprietary nutcases. While I like GNU/Linux and the host of tools I have, I wouldn't mind running VS on my box. I imagine many others would be in the same camp.
What it does potentially hurt are Windows sales. But why should the VS group care about that? They want to sell more copies of VS not Windows.... oh yeah... THEREIN LIES THE WHOLE PROBLEM!
Slashdot Mirror
1) Kinkos does not DISTRIBUTE said publication. You do. That alone makes them sufficiently unlike Kinkos that your argument makes no sense.
... require them to BUY A COPY OF THE BOOK BEFORE REVIEWING IT). Or if they can't, they shouldn't be free to host stuff like that.
2) Yes, they can either prevent it (e.g. ban the user by IP, require 24 hours before posting reviews,
3) acusing someone of being a spammer retard and that you should avoid the book at all cost is actually libel as defined in section 298 of the CCC. For your benefit:
298. (1) A defamatory libel is matter published, without lawful justification or excuse, that is likely to injure the reputation of any person by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule, or that is designed to insult the person of or concerning whom it is published.
So, as far as the CCC is concerned the reviews were libelous as there was no lawful justification for posting something which injured my reputation and exposed me to contempt.
Tom
Um we have several IC labs in Canada. We also have quite a few hardware engineers (hint: I work at a hardware crypto firm) who design things that get licensed into other designs and eventually taped out.
:-)
I wasn't trying to condemn the states, merely point out that "oh designed in Canada, means it sucks" is a fairly odd remark given the state of engineering in the states. It's not significantly better than what we do in Canada, or the rest of the world for that matter.
And btw, many weapons that the US military uses are developed here in Ontario. So we must be doing something right
Tom
I've always favoured the DIACF approach. Apparently Justice Canada disagrees with me :-)
Sadly in my case the best solution is to ride it out. A few trolls in usenet decide they want to cause trouble and there isn't much I can do so long as NNTP servers accept anonymous posting (and usenet readers continue to be ignorant about how NNTP works...).
Tom
Yeah, except that "Anonymous Joe" on Amazon isn't exactly easy to track down unless Amazon tells me their IP and the ISP tells me their name.
Now, I should mention that in my case Amazon *was* good enough to remove the libelous reviews in only a day or two. So I don't want to give the impression that they're irresponsible. I just don't think they should be totally immune because who knows if in the future they will react with the same speed and objectiveness.
Tom
Amazon is not like kinkos, in that Amazon produces [or causes to be produced] said information on demand. As far as I know, kinkos does not perform mass mailings of stuff you photocopy.
There is a distinction. I go to Amazon.com and boom it says "Person $x is a spammer retard, don't buy their book." Sure the poster is the guy who wrote that, but it's Amazon that causes it to be distributed (e.g., published) and available for others. Since Amazon is the one distributing the libel they're the ones who are responsible [or should be] to remove it. And if they can't moderate their content they shouldn't be allowed to indiscriminantly host what would in any other context be considered libel.
This is like blaming the TV broadcaster and not the TV manufacturer or distributor for any libel/slanderous media.
Essentially this is saying that we can invent any technology, so long as you can maintain that safety is unreasonable you are not liable for the consequences of your actions. That my friend, is a slippery slope.
And frankly, until you have people libeling your work (e.g. in my case my two books) with obviously no good cause, you don't know what you are talking about. In my case I spent years writing the texts, and in an instant i had negative reviews and libelous comments posted from people who haven't even read either book.
So you don't know what you are talking about and should just shut up.
Tom
I don't see that though. Why shouldn't you be liable for what you publish? Just because you CAN publish it, doesn't mean you should, especially when they're obviously incapable of moderating it.
It's like saying you should have a right to leave loaded guns around, since you can't control EVERYONE it's clearly not your safety problem. Sites like Amazon, and usenet providers, are wonderful places to joe-job and spread disgusting shite without any recourse. I think it's about time they take some reponsibility for the services they claim they provide.
Tom
Them are fightin words, I say, I say sir, put up yer dukes!
I'm sure your comment makes a lot of sense right after we figure out that most processors are designed outside of the USA. And the ones that are done in town are by import engineers.
Tom
Yeah, except that the die that goes in a mobile and a desktop are not always different designs. Just the ones that can run low voltage make it there. Granted, the turions are 754-pin so they're not the same as the AM2 desktops but it was the case back in the day (e.g. you could throw a turion in a 754-pin desktop and use it there).
So a "laptop chip" is not always a distinct design. Even in the Intel world with the 479-pin Core 2 Duo mobiles and 775-pin desktops they're likely very similar internally (once you get past the front side bus). So adding a GPU to one and not the other is probably a pain in the ass.
If AMD decides to fracture their cpu lines and have totally distinct lines I think they'll suffer. They don't exactly have the mass staff to support multiple product lines (of completely different design). And I can't see them putting GPU extensions in the Opteron line...
Tom
Canada much?
Tom
fed for a day, teach to fish ...
The goal is not to give kids toys. It's to give them the means to explore education.
Obviously "feeding a village" isn't solving the problem, it's just keeping uneducated poor masses alive.
I'd rather educate them so they can help themselves.
Tom
My point was very few of the treasured Windows assets are actually from Microsoft.
As for cygwin, well if I have to PAY for Windows to then download cygwin to get a useful box, why not just install GNU/Linux?
I use ext2/reiserfs, NFS, and I don't use WINE at all.
oops.
Tom
I like Gnome because it's simpler. Though yeah, KDE does mimic aero/XP a bit too much.
Tom
Coming from the company who stole the gui from PARC, the IP stack from BSD, the new theme from Apple, the ...
I see a lot of things in GNU/Linux that I don't see in Windows. Like a modern scheduler, a UNIX/POSIX compatible standard set of libraries, a competent collection of userland tools (coreutils), a free and commercially viable set of compilers, various desktop window managers based on X11, etc, etc, etc....
If GNU/Linux *did* copy things from Windows (like the shitty scheduler, memory manager, lack of user land tools, etc) I wouldn't use it. I might as well run Windows.
I think we can all sit back and laugh at MSFT for squirming into oblivion. Vista will be a hoot of a failure. I for one am going to sit back and laugh.
Tom
I knew to avoid jumping in front of buses unlike this guy...
It's not uncommon when I drive home from work to have stupid 14 yr olds jump in the middle of the road, or walk like 9 across down a road...
Kids are stupider today than yesterday because we fear forcing them to learn shit all. Can't discipline them, can't fail them, etc, etc, etc...
Not that kids my age weren't stupid when we were teens, just that teens today are STUPIDERERER.
Tom
ok, your business has to use .doc files. GO! [.xls, etc...]
.doc files properly. Whoops.
Oh wait, nothing in Linux manipulates
And you were saying?
Tom
Um actually, being popular does have something to do with it. A monopoly is simply a business which dominates significiantly the market. Monopolies are NOT illegal. Abusing them is because it violates the trust we put in them to act in our best interest.
.doc format not be documented? Why is it in theirs?
Microsoft has a monopoly on the OS market. That's not a secret. When they start playing tricks that lock out 3rd party vendors for no reason other than they can, they're violating our trust in them. Why is it in my best interest that the
Tom
That just proves that he didn't get it then, just like he doesn't get it now. Maybe in his retirement he'll figure it out ...
Tom
Well you can still get in trouble for distributing closed source proprietary crypto without a license. The new exception is for free open source, which makes things like GPG and my LibTomCrypt possible (cuz even though I'm a cannuck, I deal a lot with americans...).
Phil wasn't the only one going through the hell. Daniel Bernstein had a similar experience. They both had quite a few supporters along the way too, so lets not forget about them.
Tom
Some people do things because they can. Some people enjoy the rewards of exploring new ideas and theories. Some people like to create.
In short, some people are not all about wealth and power, they can see beyond their personal well being and help others out.
Why did Linus create Linux? Probably because it was new to him, to explore new ideas in OS creation, because he could. People in the OSS movement (the real lifers) don't sit there and ask "what's in it for me?"
The motivation to write new software? To solve problems that don't have adequate solutions.
I guess you'll never get it.
Tom
Yeah, my point is that PGP wasn't illegal, making it available on the intarweb was. (and technically, without an export license, closed source software must be reviewed first..., even today) /me enjoys kitkat, still thanks Phil for going through hell for me. Still uses GPG for my projects...
Yeah, well when you're all grown up and in the workforce you'll see how stupid your comment is.
.doc file not .pdf, etc, etc....
Except for really small companies it's hard to avoid using MSFT tools because at some level people [re: customers] really really need that
Personally I'd just be happy with having companies like Dell, HP, Acer, Asus, etc, not forcefully bundling Windows with their computers. That'll also require they stop using random "upgraded" chipsets so that OSS drivers can have a chance to work...
Tom
At my first Toorcon talk he was rude and disruptive when I mentioned that PGP had bugs in various incarnations (it was a talk on cryptanalysis, I was trying to make the point that even the big boys fall). He claims there was never a problem with the ADK, he proceeded to lecture me, DURING MY TALK, about how ADK was/is perfectly fine.
During my talk I didn't have net access, so I let him rant in order to save some grace, but afterwards I found the CERT advisory for the bug and I emailed him. He never replied. I asked for an apology and never got one.
I saw Jon at Defcon, he didn't remember me. He had attached himself to the Tor panel and was spouting the virtues of "everyone absolutely needs Tor or they're insecure..." He may be a nice person outside the conference scene, but as a cryptographer/conference goer he's a fucking retard and a jerk. He's trying to be the next Bruce Schneier (he even dresses like him) and it's really pathetic.
Tom
The munitions clause was for EXPORTED software. It wasn't, and isn't, illegal to use or publish domestic cryptographic software.
For crying out loud it's NBS (defunct, now NIST) who solicited for and published DES and 3DES in the first place!
Tom
Um, it was illegal to EXPORT not use. Get your fud straight.
That not withstanding he [and people like him] went through hell to free up crypto projects for the rest of us. I, myself, give out a crypto library that slips through relaxed regulations on free software.
Kudos to Phil, his supporters, and PGP as a whole. [except Jon Callas, he's a jerk and I still hate him]
Tom
Well it couldn't hurt and I think enough professionals who happen to use Linux would go for it.
... oh yeah ... THEREIN LIES THE WHOLE PROBLEM!
Remember, not all of us are anti-proprietary nutcases. While I like GNU/Linux and the host of tools I have, I wouldn't mind running VS on my box. I imagine many others would be in the same camp.
What it does potentially hurt are Windows sales. But why should the VS group care about that? They want to sell more copies of VS not Windows.
Tom