... (like the mentally ill who btw have no higher risk of violence than the general public)
That is plain wrong!
Depends on the specific illness of course, but both the paranoid, the schizophrenics and the bipolars have a significantly higher risk of violence than the population in general. As these also are the types that are most likely to go off their meds and thus become 'active', the result is that the police spend way too much time dealing with 'lunatics' going bananas somewhere, endangering others. Firearms, machetes, heavy objects... doesn't matter. They will use whatever to satisfy their inner demons.
Exactly. And who knows how many people feel the way you do?
Who knows how many devices stay fully on but silent in the passengers pockets? - Either intentionally or not?
I know I've forgotten a turned-on cellphone in a pocket more than once. As far as I know it caused no interference as there was no announcements over the PA to check for turned-on devices as there was interference or similar.
Oh, and I quite often snap pics with my electronic camera especially during landings, going back something like 15 years now. Again, no ill effects - and no reaction from the other passengers either.
It seems to be a combination of driving too fast for conditions (and/or bald tires) and assuming everyone else will jump the hell out of your way.
Not to mention a generous amount of vodka in their systems... Most of these accidents are the result of moves so stupid that it has to be the result of being severely drunk. I mean turning left from the rightmost lane, turning left into oncoming traffic going straight, driving fast weaving in and out in the middle of a snow storm, trying to overtake someone turning left, or driving straight into a stationary well-lit bus on an empty road on a clear night...
On the other hand, there is a clear law punishing blasphemy against Muhammad, because his life is supposed to be a perfect one, and a model for all believers to emulate, so someone who undermines it is aiming at the "moral fabric" of a Sharia-based society.
So you're saying that Islam in itself both tolerates and promotes pedophilia as it is a historical fact that Muhammad married a 6-year old and 'consummated the marriage' (had full intercourse) when she was only 9 years old?
So not only is Islam a death cult with megalomaniacal ambitions, rampant antisemitism and a strong hate of anyone not exactly like themselves, they're also a bunch of pedophiles? - Because if Muhammad was a pedophile then it must be good and right to be a pedophile, and to be a good Muslim you have to be as much like Muhammad as possible, i.e. a pedophile, right?
So many smart people agree on the usefulness of some form of IQ indicator (either the classic single number or a number for each of a collection of different IQ measured with standardized test in various areas besides math and logic, like musical, p.e. or verbal) that it's rather moot arguing against it.
But a high IQ - however measured - has no bearing on whether this brain power is used right... Adam Lanza had a very high IQ and yet all he used all the brain power for was to aim his guns and execute as many children as possible... not very smart in my book.
Back when I was at the University IQ testing was very popular and if you qualified, Mensa was on the prowl... but for some reason all the people that did join Mensa seemed to be either extremely arrogant, extremely self promoting or introvert weirdos. A bunch of us then formed Manse, the alternative Mensa, with the sole purpose of legitimizing homemade t-shirts with nerdish jokes on them and of course to interact socially, like group trips to the movies or parties. We always said (with a nod to "War Games") that the ultimate indicator of intelligence was to qualify for Mensa but not join and instead make fun of those that did. You know "the only winning move is not to play". .
It's just not due to asteroids, planetary alignment or similar... it'll be a couple of redneck gun-nuts trying out nuclear ICBMs for hunting... because fully automatic handguns, rifles and machine guns just isn't doing the job efficiently enough...
It appears you suffer from a severe mental dysfunction.
The funny name aside, the Pirates isn't out to steal or plunder. You would know this if you check out the various Pirate Party charters.
They argue that the business model where an organization - for a hefty fee - handles the rights of musicians and filmmakers, is not only obsolete but actually the very reason the creative people are locked into a structure where they cannot make a living.
Step back for a minute and think about this. You know when someone really like a new movie and goes to see it again and again? When someone love a record so much that he buys it again and again in different versions, different pressings, different formats etc.?
These are the people that don't mind paying for their entertainment - because it's that good.
So why are people downloading illegally? - Well, there are those people that can't or won't pay. You can't force them to pay. If they can't get it for free, they're not interested. So there's no loss there. Are they the majority? Nope. They are about 10% of the so-called pirates. The rest actually have one thing in common: They want something which isn't available where they live. Most would happily pay a decent price if they could. But due to the old and obsolete business model, entertainment is divided into regions and into sectors, strictly separated.
A movie usually get a monopoly in the local cinemas first. Then comes pay-per-view and subscription movie channels. Then rental. Finally it hits the shelves for general purchase. Along the way, other regions join in, usually in the same order, i.e. cinemas first etc. Now, if you happen to live in the wrong place, you'll have to wait. Maybe it will show up later, maybe not. But the movie is available illegally from day one. So instead of allowing people to pay for it, they push people into piracy. That's stupidity squared and that's why piracy works so well.
A model that would work is make everything available all at once globally in all formats. Then offer merchandise and enhanced experience in the cinemas. That way over 90% the piracy goes away and done right the merchandising extended to almost all titles could be a gold mine. Sure, there would still be some piracy here and there, mostly done by the people who can't or won't pay, so that's not worth fussing over as there's no sales to be gained.
Sure things come and go. but I googled a website I created 15 years ago. The severs and pages long ago stopped working, but I found it in 4 different caches.
It's a variation of the Streisand Effect. The real version was very much intentional as Streisand tried to have something obviously public removed (a wide shot of her house) and people started copying the picture and placing it everywhere, ensuring that it could never be removed completely. But automated caches and archives also make sure that a copy is kept... somewhere. And sometimes such dead stuff comes to life again if someone stumbles across it and reposts it on a blog or similar, making it live again.
So basically - on the Internet you can live forever, whatever you like it or not.
... Does YouTube have a DDoS problem from this group, too?
DDoS probably but problem? No.
YouTube is a massively distributed service, like Google, Twitter, Facebook etc. and it is close to impossible to take out the entire distributed service. They may take out some parts if they're really good, but most of the service will remain. DDoS is only really efficient on sites hosted on single servers or small clusters with single points of failures.
The best DDoS looks exactly like regular traffic, but most tools do quantity, not quality. Duplicated packages, invalid checksums etc. makes detection and blocking fairly easy for a good network administrator. The painfully simple LOIC from Anonymous is better but requires a lot of people that all will be revealing their IP unless they use tor or similar. Traffic from LOIC can only be distinguished from normal traffic due to repetition (it performs a real query (full tcp dialog) again and again, several times a second). and it pretty hard to block automatically. Scripts can be written that extracts repeating IPs and blocks them in the firewall but it's a slow process that takes hours given a non-changing group of attackers, and days to be complete if new people join the attacks along the way.
The brute force DDoS is harder to beat - It simply saturates the full bandwidth with traffic, often bogus replies from various amplification attacks. If the attacker can generate enough traffic, it works. If not, it's hardly noticeable. To beat such an attack you need upstream help.
I mean, you have to be stupid to 'confess' (even indirectly) by texting about your crimes. It's common knowledge that texts are saved for a long time, at least several years and in some places for decades, and they're among the first things to be looked at when you become a suspect.
Oh and new legislation isn't necessary - they are readily available with a proper warrant.
I would not dream of accessing my mail using plaintext protocols for instance; imaps and smtps is the way to go.
And many websites are also available using https instead of http, and there are browser extensions that help you to avoid forgetting, and trying https in vain where not available.
These measures may not be perfect but they do make eavesdropping much more difficult.
... by distinguishing between commercial and non-commercial infringement.
They have to. Non-commercial infringement has zero loss attached to it, despite feeble attempts to do so. You cannot prove that each download represents a lost sale, but you can prove that a significant number of downloads are stuff unavailable for purchase and that a not insignificant number of downloads are made by people completely unwilling (or unable) to pay for their entertainment. All these downloads thus has no lost sale attached and thus no profit loss.
Commercial infringement are where people buy the pirated version instead of the legal version, perhaps to save a bit of money. There's a clear financial loss here and thus it is a completely different thing.
There's well over $5000 worth of DVD's in my collection.
Congratulations on your purchase! They have a shelf life of about 10-15 years before the acids intentionally added to the die cause enough surface damage to render it unusable. Planned obsolesence, my friend. But I digress...
I call bullshit, urban myth or whatever...
I have bought CD's since the mid 1980's and the oldest still look and play as new. I just ripped one a few days ago. I own 6.000+ CDs and I have yet to experience the first 'self-destructing' CD.
As far as I know the myth originates with the old 12" LaserDisc's that had two playable sides glued together. They did experience what was called "laser rot" that originated in the glue and progressively destroyed the silver layer. There are no glue in CD's so that phenomena isn't possible. Some CD-plants have had issues with microscopic air bubbles in the silver layer and the walls of those bubbles did degrade in sunlight (not the pickup laser) so the error rate went significantly up until the media was unplayable. Storing the CD's in their cases (or just face-down) prevents this, and quality has since improved significantly due to technological advances - the CD format is "crude" compared to DVD and especially blu-rays.
Funny that all the responsibility lies on Hamas when Israel could, you know, just stop trying to annex the Palestinians land without the Palestinians. You know why article 49 of the 4th Geneva Convention prohibits transferring your own population into occupied territory? Because it amounts to ethnic cleansing...
There's a large loophole in that article... It operates with purposefully moving population into occupied territory, and that is not what Israel is doing. They simply don't prevent their people from moving there. No military involvement. Just people building houses and moving into them. Israel has moved into settlements, destroyed the houses and thrown out the settlers, but the settlers often returns and rebuilds.
And BAM!, you inadvertedly discovered the background motivation for Israels actions the last 60 years. Slo-mo cleansing of non-jews.
How anti-Semitic of you...
No, Israel is mostly interested in removing militant anti-Semitics hell-bent on destroying Israel (and if possible every jew on the planet) from its neighborhood.
After all, Israel is only defending themselves following a massive rocket bombardment.
Hamas is quickly destroying any chance of ever seeing a Palestinian state, especially one that includes East Jerusalem. A few more years of this rocket terror and UN will support that Israel gets Jerusalem as its undivided capital. Oh, and then the Al-Aqsa mosque will be torn down and Solomon's Temple re-erected in its place, marking the end of Islamic claim to the site.
Well, then you pretty much have to say "any police action which doesn't have the corresponding video will result in disciplinary action".
Should be even stronger: Require that video evidence by camera-wearing cops be used in court in lieu of the officer's testimony. If they were supposed to be wearing the camera and weren't, their testimony will not be allowed as a substitute.
Perfect! - Yes, that's exactly what must be done. Require the camera and require that its recording be used, possibly in addition to a normal testimony. But no recording means no testimony, and if no recordings are available, only physical evidence recovered can be used, and only where it isn't in dispute.
Another obvious thing would be that any insults by the arrestee recorded automatically results in a fine for each if brought to court. People need to respect the police if they expect the police to respect them, and step one is to talk politely and avoid profanity. A fine of $50 for each insult recorded would be reasonable and the fine must be paid in full within 14 days. No extension and no payment plan. This ensures that it will be felt and thus hopefully make people think before they insult.
Copyright is the right of the creator to his own works of art (words or otherwise). By definition, you own the copyright for your own words. Thus, your Free Speech is protected by, not limited by copyright.
Putting someone elses words through the printing press to distribute them is not Free Speech. Doing it with your own words is legal.
It's you that's the idiot here, if anyone.
Any form of expression is free speech. Just look up modern rulings on pornography for instance. There's no originality clause so repeating what others have said is equal to saying it yourself. So making a pornographic movie is clearly free speech, which means that copying it is also free speech. Copyright is censorship and a restriction on free speech, and thus actually a human rights violation.
How to protect the livelihood of people creating original content? - Well, not by inventing artificial rules and boundaries, add laws and then hunting down those that actually like these creations, that's for sure. A much better idea would be to sell enhanced copies (like a CD or a DVD) so people have the choice of free downloads or pay for something to collect. There are lots of options if they chose to reward those that pay instead of criminalizing those that don't.
When people start dropping like flies, chances are that something like a pandemic is at work...
This seems like a waste of money - If people are really sick, chances are they won't be posting about it. And if they aren't really sick, it isn't worth writing home about and any pandemic of it is likely to be utter uninteresting and trivial.
Slashdot Mirror
... (like the mentally ill who btw have no higher risk of violence than the general public)
That is plain wrong!
Depends on the specific illness of course, but both the paranoid, the schizophrenics and the bipolars have a significantly higher risk of violence than the population in general. As these also are the types that are most likely to go off their meds and thus become 'active', the result is that the police spend way too much time dealing with 'lunatics' going bananas somewhere, endangering others. Firearms, machetes, heavy objects... doesn't matter. They will use whatever to satisfy their inner demons.
404
Exactly. And who knows how many people feel the way you do?
Who knows how many devices stay fully on but silent in the passengers pockets? - Either intentionally or not?
I know I've forgotten a turned-on cellphone in a pocket more than once. As far as I know it caused no interference as there was no announcements over the PA to check for turned-on devices as there was interference or similar.
Oh, and I quite often snap pics with my electronic camera especially during landings, going back something like 15 years now. Again, no ill effects - and no reaction from the other passengers either.
I seriously doubt there's any real issue as all.
It seems to be a combination of driving too fast for conditions (and/or bald tires) and assuming everyone else will jump the hell out of your way.
Not to mention a generous amount of vodka in their systems... Most of these accidents are the result of moves so stupid that it has to be the result of being severely drunk. I mean turning left from the rightmost lane, turning left into oncoming traffic going straight, driving fast weaving in and out in the middle of a snow storm, trying to overtake someone turning left, or driving straight into a stationary well-lit bus on an empty road on a clear night...
On the other hand, there is a clear law punishing blasphemy against Muhammad, because his life is supposed to be a perfect one, and a model for all believers to emulate, so someone who undermines it is aiming at the "moral fabric" of a Sharia-based society.
So you're saying that Islam in itself both tolerates and promotes pedophilia as it is a historical fact that Muhammad married a 6-year old and 'consummated the marriage' (had full intercourse) when she was only 9 years old?
So not only is Islam a death cult with megalomaniacal ambitions, rampant antisemitism and a strong hate of anyone not exactly like themselves, they're also a bunch of pedophiles? - Because if Muhammad was a pedophile then it must be good and right to be a pedophile, and to be a good Muslim you have to be as much like Muhammad as possible, i.e. a pedophile, right?
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill
So many smart people agree on the usefulness of some form of IQ indicator (either the classic single number or a number for each of a collection of different IQ measured with standardized test in various areas besides math and logic, like musical, p.e. or verbal) that it's rather moot arguing against it.
But a high IQ - however measured - has no bearing on whether this brain power is used right... Adam Lanza had a very high IQ and yet all he used all the brain power for was to aim his guns and execute as many children as possible... not very smart in my book.
Back when I was at the University IQ testing was very popular and if you qualified, Mensa was on the prowl... but for some reason all the people that did join Mensa seemed to be either extremely arrogant, extremely self promoting or introvert weirdos. A bunch of us then formed Manse, the alternative Mensa, with the sole purpose of legitimizing homemade t-shirts with nerdish jokes on them and of course to interact socially, like group trips to the movies or parties. We always said (with a nod to "War Games") that the ultimate indicator of intelligence was to qualify for Mensa but not join and instead make fun of those that did. You know "the only winning move is not to play".
.
It's just not due to asteroids, planetary alignment or similar... it'll be a couple of redneck gun-nuts trying out nuclear ICBMs for hunting... because fully automatic handguns, rifles and machine guns just isn't doing the job efficiently enough...
How about the international S3 LTE? - Mine is model GT-I9305
It appears you suffer from a severe mental dysfunction.
The funny name aside, the Pirates isn't out to steal or plunder. You would know this if you check out the various Pirate Party charters.
They argue that the business model where an organization - for a hefty fee - handles the rights of musicians and filmmakers, is not only obsolete but actually the very reason the creative people are locked into a structure where they cannot make a living.
Step back for a minute and think about this. You know when someone really like a new movie and goes to see it again and again? When someone love a record so much that he buys it again and again in different versions, different pressings, different formats etc.?
These are the people that don't mind paying for their entertainment - because it's that good.
So why are people downloading illegally? - Well, there are those people that can't or won't pay. You can't force them to pay. If they can't get it for free, they're not interested. So there's no loss there. Are they the majority? Nope. They are about 10% of the so-called pirates. The rest actually have one thing in common: They want something which isn't available where they live. Most would happily pay a decent price if they could. But due to the old and obsolete business model, entertainment is divided into regions and into sectors, strictly separated.
A movie usually get a monopoly in the local cinemas first. Then comes pay-per-view and subscription movie channels. Then rental. Finally it hits the shelves for general purchase. Along the way, other regions join in, usually in the same order, i.e. cinemas first etc. Now, if you happen to live in the wrong place, you'll have to wait. Maybe it will show up later, maybe not. But the movie is available illegally from day one. So instead of allowing people to pay for it, they push people into piracy. That's stupidity squared and that's why piracy works so well.
A model that would work is make everything available all at once globally in all formats. Then offer merchandise and enhanced experience in the cinemas. That way over 90% the piracy goes away and done right the merchandising extended to almost all titles could be a gold mine. Sure, there would still be some piracy here and there, mostly done by the people who can't or won't pay, so that's not worth fussing over as there's no sales to be gained.
Sure things come and go. but I googled a website I created 15 years ago. The severs and pages long ago stopped working, but I found it in 4 different caches.
It's a variation of the Streisand Effect. The real version was very much intentional as Streisand tried to have something obviously public removed (a wide shot of her house) and people started copying the picture and placing it everywhere, ensuring that it could never be removed completely. But automated caches and archives also make sure that a copy is kept... somewhere. And sometimes such dead stuff comes to life again if someone stumbles across it and reposts it on a blog or similar, making it live again.
So basically - on the Internet you can live forever, whatever you like it or not.
... Does YouTube have a DDoS problem from this group, too?
DDoS probably but problem? No.
YouTube is a massively distributed service, like Google, Twitter, Facebook etc. and it is close to impossible to take out the entire distributed service. They may take out some parts if they're really good, but most of the service will remain. DDoS is only really efficient on sites hosted on single servers or small clusters with single points of failures.
The best DDoS looks exactly like regular traffic, but most tools do quantity, not quality. Duplicated packages, invalid checksums etc. makes detection and blocking fairly easy for a good network administrator. The painfully simple LOIC from Anonymous is better but requires a lot of people that all will be revealing their IP unless they use tor or similar. Traffic from LOIC can only be distinguished from normal traffic due to repetition (it performs a real query (full tcp dialog) again and again, several times a second). and it pretty hard to block automatically. Scripts can be written that extracts repeating IPs and blocks them in the firewall but it's a slow process that takes hours given a non-changing group of attackers, and days to be complete if new people join the attacks along the way.
The brute force DDoS is harder to beat - It simply saturates the full bandwidth with traffic, often bogus replies from various amplification attacks. If the attacker can generate enough traffic, it works. If not, it's hardly noticeable. To beat such an attack you need upstream help.
Well, some tv broadcasters considers walking out of the room when ads plays to be equal to stealing... this is not far from this.
Here's a novel idea: Make the ads interesting so people WANT to watch them! - Problem solved!
I mean, you have to be stupid to 'confess' (even indirectly) by texting about your crimes. It's common knowledge that texts are saved for a long time, at least several years and in some places for decades, and they're among the first things to be looked at when you become a suspect.
Oh and new legislation isn't necessary - they are readily available with a proper warrant.
Are you using http or https?
Use https and some of the alternative URLs and I'm sure it'll work just fine, DPI or not.
...is available for most protocols - use it!
I would not dream of accessing my mail using plaintext protocols for instance; imaps and smtps is the way to go.
And many websites are also available using https instead of http, and there are browser extensions that help you to avoid forgetting, and trying https in vain where not available.
These measures may not be perfect but they do make eavesdropping much more difficult.
... by distinguishing between commercial and non-commercial infringement.
They have to. Non-commercial infringement has zero loss attached to it, despite feeble attempts to do so. You cannot prove that each download represents a lost sale, but you can prove that a significant number of downloads are stuff unavailable for purchase and that a not insignificant number of downloads are made by people completely unwilling (or unable) to pay for their entertainment. All these downloads thus has no lost sale attached and thus no profit loss.
Commercial infringement are where people buy the pirated version instead of the legal version, perhaps to save a bit of money. There's a clear financial loss here and thus it is a completely different thing.
There's well over $5000 worth of DVD's in my collection.
Congratulations on your purchase! They have a shelf life of about 10-15 years before the acids intentionally added to the die cause enough surface damage to render it unusable. Planned obsolesence, my friend. But I digress...
I call bullshit, urban myth or whatever...
I have bought CD's since the mid 1980's and the oldest still look and play as new. I just ripped one a few days ago. I own 6.000+ CDs and I have yet to experience the first 'self-destructing' CD.
As far as I know the myth originates with the old 12" LaserDisc's that had two playable sides glued together. They did experience what was called "laser rot" that originated in the glue and progressively destroyed the silver layer. There are no glue in CD's so that phenomena isn't possible. Some CD-plants have had issues with microscopic air bubbles in the silver layer and the walls of those bubbles did degrade in sunlight (not the pickup laser) so the error rate went significantly up until the media was unplayable. Storing the CD's in their cases (or just face-down) prevents this, and quality has since improved significantly due to technological advances - the CD format is "crude" compared to DVD and especially blu-rays.
Funny that all the responsibility lies on Hamas when Israel could, you know, just stop trying to annex the Palestinians land without the Palestinians. You know why article 49 of the 4th Geneva Convention prohibits transferring your own population into occupied territory? Because it amounts to ethnic cleansing...
There's a large loophole in that article... It operates with purposefully moving population into occupied territory, and that is not what Israel is doing. They simply don't prevent their people from moving there. No military involvement. Just people building houses and moving into them. Israel has moved into settlements, destroyed the houses and thrown out the settlers, but the settlers often returns and rebuilds.
> the Gaza strip will be unlivable by 2020
And BAM!, you inadvertedly discovered the background motivation for Israels actions the last 60 years. Slo-mo cleansing of non-jews.
How anti-Semitic of you...
No, Israel is mostly interested in removing militant anti-Semitics hell-bent on destroying Israel (and if possible every jew on the planet) from its neighborhood.
They have more sense than that.
After all, Israel is only defending themselves following a massive rocket bombardment.
Hamas is quickly destroying any chance of ever seeing a Palestinian state, especially one that includes East Jerusalem. A few more years of this rocket terror and UN will support that Israel gets Jerusalem as its undivided capital. Oh, and then the Al-Aqsa mosque will be torn down and Solomon's Temple re-erected in its place, marking the end of Islamic claim to the site.
Should be even stronger: Require that video evidence by camera-wearing cops be used in court in lieu of the officer's testimony. If they were supposed to be wearing the camera and weren't, their testimony will not be allowed as a substitute.
Perfect! - Yes, that's exactly what must be done. Require the camera and require that its recording be used, possibly in addition to a normal testimony. But no recording means no testimony, and if no recordings are available, only physical evidence recovered can be used, and only where it isn't in dispute.
Another obvious thing would be that any insults by the arrestee recorded automatically results in a fine for each if brought to court. People need to respect the police if they expect the police to respect them, and step one is to talk politely and avoid profanity. A fine of $50 for each insult recorded would be reasonable and the fine must be paid in full within 14 days. No extension and no payment plan. This ensures that it will be felt and thus hopefully make people think before they insult.
Actual piracy? - Where's the peg leg, the parrot and the ship?
Copyright is a limitation on free speech.
Idiot.
Copyright is the right of the creator to his own works of art (words or otherwise). By definition, you own the copyright for your own words. Thus, your Free Speech is protected by, not limited by copyright.
Putting someone elses words through the printing press to distribute them is not Free Speech. Doing it with your own words is legal.
It's you that's the idiot here, if anyone.
Any form of expression is free speech. Just look up modern rulings on pornography for instance. There's no originality clause so repeating what others have said is equal to saying it yourself. So making a pornographic movie is clearly free speech, which means that copying it is also free speech. Copyright is censorship and a restriction on free speech, and thus actually a human rights violation.
How to protect the livelihood of people creating original content? - Well, not by inventing artificial rules and boundaries, add laws and then hunting down those that actually like these creations, that's for sure. A much better idea would be to sell enhanced copies (like a CD or a DVD) so people have the choice of free downloads or pay for something to collect. There are lots of options if they chose to reward those that pay instead of criminalizing those that don't.
When people start dropping like flies, chances are that something like a pandemic is at work...
This seems like a waste of money - If people are really sick, chances are they won't be posting about it. And if they aren't really sick, it isn't worth writing home about and any pandemic of it is likely to be utter uninteresting and trivial.