The Pirate Bay doesn't even have a primary purpose of infringing on copyrights... Its primary purpose is file sharing. They just don't care about copyrights, nor acknowledge them in any way other than making fools of those stupid enough to think that US laws apply outside the US.
Let's look at the major terror attacks that has been carried out and see if the new screenings would have prevented them.
Let's start with the biggest one of all: 9/11. The answer is 'NO'. Neither backscatter screening, nor metal detectors, x-ray machines or enhanced pat-downs would have stopped the carbon fiber box cutters which were used to kill the pilots on the four 9/11 hijacked airplanes. Sure, the air marshals and the locked cockpit doors would make it harder to take over the planes but it is still possible, especially if you are 4 hijackers.
How about Lockerbye? - A bomb in the cargo hold? - Well, sure they screen checked luggage but do they screen the airport employees well enough? - Here's an example: Heathrow in London did an extra screening and found no less than THREE employees who were illegal aliens, i.e. working without proper papers and permits. None used false documentation; they just didn't check anything when they were hired. All three had access to both checked luggage and the secured areas around the planes. It would be childsplay for one of them to place a bomb on a plane. Oh, and all three were from 'high risk countries' in the muslim world... Oh, and recently Al-Queda tried the simple thing of sending the bombs as air freight and it worked like a charm...
So much for the security theater at the airports...
As many have already pointed out - it's security theater and it has nothing to do with security except in the name. It's a pathetic joke designed to make it appear to the less intelligent (which obviously includes most of the power establishment) that something is done.
* None of the checks at the airports, including the porn scanner, would not have stopped the 9/11 terrorists. * It takes less than 200ml of liquid explosive to down a plane and you're allowed five times that (in separate containers but still).
A simple profiling banning everybody that had connections with extremist organisations would have stopped both all the 9/11 terrorists and all subsequent attempts using shoe-bombs, underwear bombs, liquid bombs and so on. All the people involved were on watch-lists, as were many others by the way.
Sure, you'll ban a lot of legitimate travelers as well, but people chose their friends and if they chose to associate with extremists it might (or will) have consequences, like the inability to travel by air.
Yes, I know it's a stupid question in itself. Every day we see smart people do incredible stupid things, especially in the area of politics, and this is no exception.
Going to great length in an attempt to prevent someone from expressing an opinion you disagree with is both stupid, useless and very pointless. It's also dumb and counter-productive. You gain the most from engaging in a discussion with you opponent and winning the arguments, and you lose everything by removing the opponent from the discussion.
Remember Voltaires famous quote: "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
That's important. It's the very foundation of the democracy.
Sure, some people babble and bring only empty words and inflated egos to discussions, but let them reveal themselves as hollow windbags instead of oppressing them and making them a martyr for their cause. If they have nothing, it will be revealed. The classic Lincoln quote also apples: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.".
And even if there was proof of downloads, RIAA also need to prove that each and every one of those downloads equals a lost sale in order to get restitution for it. No proof, so lost sale, no money.
This is of course completely impossible because studies have shown pretty much conclusively that most downloads are made either for evaluation purposes (good stuff equals a later sale, bad stuff no sale) or for access purposes (unable to buy legitimately, have to download illegally).
That's a huge flame-bait although I suspect it wasn't meant as such.
Please go read the Human Rights Charter. Tell me where your age discrimination fits in, please.
In case you miss the point: EVERYBODY has a right to both freedom of expression and a right to privacy, not matter what age. Here in Denmark we've had a huge discussion about fitting GPS trackers to elderly people with dementia in order to find them before they die of exposure if they wander off from nursing homes. The issue is that they also have a right to privacy, even if they cannot administer it. Similar for children. Gotta watch your kids but there's limit.
It is justifiable to use a baby monitor on a baby because it serves an important purpose (checking that the baby is alright) while it doesn't violate the baby's privacy as the child is too young to be doing anything it would like to keep private (actually in isn't until around age 5-6 that a child understand the concept of privacy).
But both ethically and morally it is wrong to purposely snoop on your children. Besides, if you respect your children and their right to privacy, chances are much greater that they'll respect you and your rules, especially if they are reasonable and serves a valid purpose.
If you install it on your own phone, there's nothing illegal about it. If your partner or your child then uses it and you thus are able to snoop on their conversation is irrelevant. It's your phone.
Seriously, it's all about 1's and 0's. Does it really matter what language and syntax abstraction you use to enter them?
If it ain't broken, why fix it? - And is ASCII broken? - No, it works just fine for expressing the programming languages we've used so far, and as far as I know they works just fine in solving all our algorithmic needs.
Just make sure the kid and/or their parents are FORCED to pay for any damages and you're all set. Makes for some nice off-schedule replacements too.
No I'm not kidding about the payment. Take their house, television, car, whatever if you have to. Just make sure they pay - in full and right away (no payment plans). A price tag of several hundred dollars makes for a nice deterrent as well.
This could easily be extended to all other acts of vandalism as well, especially graffiti. A hefty bill and severe sanctions until it is settled is an efficient deterrent.
Doesn't it occur to any of you that a much more important issue is the damage the kids suffer from using badly fitting furniture?
In my native Denmark we basically used three sizes of chairs and ditto tables, from grade 0 (age 5-6) through grade 9 (age 15-16). The closest match was usually fairly far off and most kids ended up with back trouble. I still have back issues to this day - can't carry anything even slightly heavy or crouch without my back screaming.
The correct furniture would be adjustable tables and ditto chairs but with a full tilt function as well, making it possible to 'bend over' the table without bending the back too much. As for keeping it nice, just make sure the laws are in place to force the kids or their parents to pay for any intentional damage, and the furniture will stay nice for many years if the quality is right.
Sure you can sue if they use trademarked names like "Sony" or "PS3", but a dongle with a name like "Freedom" and containing no code or hardware copyrighted by Sony cannot be stopped.
Yes, it is a device to circumvent copy protection but far from all European countries have laws banning such devices, and once they're in a European country the device can be moved freely to other countries.
I would buy such a device, mostly just to spite Sony and their megalomania.
The data retention system is never ever going to prevent any terrorism. Real dangerous terrorists would never communicate over the open Internet, and amateurs that might are not really dangerous; they are more likely to either blow themselves up by accident or be unable to manufacture even the simplest explosive that works.
If people were willing to use this scheme to get cheaper electricity, I guess the electricity is too expensive.
Here in Denmark over 90% of the amount we pay for electricity is various taxes. No wonder people turn to alternative solutions because once you've done yours and switched bulbs, appliances and everything to the most environmentally friendly versions available, you still get a hefty bill and there's nothing (more) you can do about it - except perhaps to steal the electricity that is...;)
I was thinking of using it to identify masked vandals, hooligans etc. in a crowd - they can but on masks, hoods etc. and hide their faces while they do their destruction and/or violence, but with a system like this they can be identified from their voices even across a football/soccer stadium, plus there's the possibility of learning valuable intel from the conversations. Would be nice to be able to get them to pay for their negative behavior, both juridically and financially.
Sure, stupid spammers think replacing an article with a badly spelled advert for ViAGRa is the way to go, and morons think that they gain something from inserting "I'M GAY!!!!!" into an article about someone they dislike, but why just do damage for no other purpose than destroying other people's hard work?
I just don't get it.
These trolls/vandals need to get their asses kicked - hard. Or maybe just have something of theirs broken, just for the fun of it, and see if they find that funny.
Who knows how many people are jailed because hackers (meaning "evil computer intruders") planted CP or used the victim's machine as a relay or distribution point... Kinda scary but then all the more reason to keep the machine patched and avoid pissing off collegues who might snoop your password or install a keylogger...
Put quite simply: They only measure the performance of the student on that particular day. That performance will be the best possible with a lot of subtractions for stuff completely unrelated to the subject at hand, like personal mental state (a lot of people are extremely nervous), the questions in the test (choice of words, order, subjects etc.), the exam conditions (light, heat, cold, people present) and the date and time (female periods, lack of sleep, too many exams on top of each other). In other words: If you do good, the grade probably reflects your potential, but if you do bad you might have just have the same or greater potential than the student who did good, but were caught on a bad day.
None of these issues in any way reflects the true potential of the student as most of these can be worked around in real life situations where planning and scheduling is possible (indeed essential), thus allowing for the best performance possible.
The best evaluation is a continuous all-year evaluation based on many, many tests of various types, combined with classroom performance. That way the 'local' issues (bad days etc.) gets evened out over time.
Unfortunately the reality is that stuff is put into production that is created by sloppy development practices all the time. When it breaks (production is down) the system administrators have no chance to fix the application problems as they know nothing about it. No choice but to involve the developers as the alternative of restoring backups takes a lot longer and might not fix the problem (think a date-related bug for instance) - and the hosting game is all about uptime. That happens daily around here.
With Unix-family systems it's easy to stream syslog to another server, and that other server should be used for nothing else. Firewall it so it seems down from everywhere (except perhaps a monitoring server) and so that you only access it in two ways: Inbound udp on port 514 (syslog streaming) and inbound ssh on a different port than 22 only from a single access point (another server, a workstation or similar) using a key not stored on that access point and not used anywhere else.
I'd say that it is extremely difficult for someone to compromise another server (webserver typically) and then gain access to the logging server (name or IP evident in/etc/syslog.conf) to erase his tracks there as well.
Slashdot Mirror
The Pirate Bay doesn't even have a primary purpose of infringing on copyrights... Its primary purpose is file sharing. They just don't care about copyrights, nor acknowledge them in any way other than making fools of those stupid enough to think that US laws apply outside the US.
Serves them right.
A closed system controlling important hardware should NEVER have open USB ports. It's that simple. It's security 101.
If you cannot disable them completely in a password-protected BIOS/UEFI, just use some superglue in the USB plugs.
How many times do we need to repeat it before the morons at MPAA (and RIAA probably) understands this?!?!
We will never know the answer to that.
Let's look at the major terror attacks that has been carried out and see if the new screenings would have prevented them.
Let's start with the biggest one of all: 9/11. The answer is 'NO'. Neither backscatter screening, nor metal detectors, x-ray machines or enhanced pat-downs would have stopped the carbon fiber box cutters which were used to kill the pilots on the four 9/11 hijacked airplanes. Sure, the air marshals and the locked cockpit doors would make it harder to take over the planes but it is still possible, especially if you are 4 hijackers.
How about Lockerbye? - A bomb in the cargo hold? - Well, sure they screen checked luggage but do they screen the airport employees well enough? - Here's an example: Heathrow in London did an extra screening and found no less than THREE employees who were illegal aliens, i.e. working without proper papers and permits. None used false documentation; they just didn't check anything when they were hired. All three had access to both checked luggage and the secured areas around the planes. It would be childsplay for one of them to place a bomb on a plane. Oh, and all three were from 'high risk countries' in the muslim world... Oh, and recently Al-Queda tried the simple thing of sending the bombs as air freight and it worked like a charm...
So much for the security theater at the airports...
As many have already pointed out - it's security theater and it has nothing to do with security except in the name. It's a pathetic joke designed to make it appear to the less intelligent (which obviously includes most of the power establishment) that something is done.
* None of the checks at the airports, including the porn scanner, would not have stopped the 9/11 terrorists.
* It takes less than 200ml of liquid explosive to down a plane and you're allowed five times that (in separate containers but still).
A simple profiling banning everybody that had connections with extremist organisations would have stopped both all the 9/11 terrorists and all subsequent attempts using shoe-bombs, underwear bombs, liquid bombs and so on. All the people involved were on watch-lists, as were many others by the way.
Sure, you'll ban a lot of legitimate travelers as well, but people chose their friends and if they chose to associate with extremists it might (or will) have consequences, like the inability to travel by air.
How can someone that smart be that stupid?!
Yes, I know it's a stupid question in itself. Every day we see smart people do incredible stupid things, especially in the area of politics, and this is no exception.
Going to great length in an attempt to prevent someone from expressing an opinion you disagree with is both stupid, useless and very pointless. It's also dumb and counter-productive. You gain the most from engaging in a discussion with you opponent and winning the arguments, and you lose everything by removing the opponent from the discussion.
Remember Voltaires famous quote: "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
That's important. It's the very foundation of the democracy.
Sure, some people babble and bring only empty words and inflated egos to discussions, but let them reveal themselves as hollow windbags instead of oppressing them and making them a martyr for their cause. If they have nothing, it will be revealed. The classic Lincoln quote also apples: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.".
And even if there was proof of downloads, RIAA also need to prove that each and every one of those downloads equals a lost sale in order to get restitution for it. No proof, so lost sale, no money.
This is of course completely impossible because studies have shown pretty much conclusively that most downloads are made either for evaluation purposes (good stuff equals a later sale, bad stuff no sale) or for access purposes (unable to buy legitimately, have to download illegally).
That's a huge flame-bait although I suspect it wasn't meant as such.
Please go read the Human Rights Charter. Tell me where your age discrimination fits in, please.
In case you miss the point: EVERYBODY has a right to both freedom of expression and a right to privacy, not matter what age. Here in Denmark we've had a huge discussion about fitting GPS trackers to elderly people with dementia in order to find them before they die of exposure if they wander off from nursing homes. The issue is that they also have a right to privacy, even if they cannot administer it. Similar for children. Gotta watch your kids but there's limit.
It is justifiable to use a baby monitor on a baby because it serves an important purpose (checking that the baby is alright) while it doesn't violate the baby's privacy as the child is too young to be doing anything it would like to keep private (actually in isn't until around age 5-6 that a child understand the concept of privacy).
But both ethically and morally it is wrong to purposely snoop on your children. Besides, if you respect your children and their right to privacy, chances are much greater that they'll respect you and your rules, especially if they are reasonable and serves a valid purpose.
Snooping on teenage children? - Now there's a way to gain their trust... NOT!
That's possibly the worst possible way to handle your kids.
If you install it on your own phone, there's nothing illegal about it. If your partner or your child then uses it and you thus are able to snoop on their conversation is irrelevant. It's your phone.
Seriously, it's all about 1's and 0's. Does it really matter what language and syntax abstraction you use to enter them?
If it ain't broken, why fix it? - And is ASCII broken? - No, it works just fine for expressing the programming languages we've used so far, and as far as I know they works just fine in solving all our algorithmic needs.
Just make sure the kid and/or their parents are FORCED to pay for any damages and you're all set. Makes for some nice off-schedule replacements too.
No I'm not kidding about the payment. Take their house, television, car, whatever if you have to. Just make sure they pay - in full and right away (no payment plans). A price tag of several hundred dollars makes for a nice deterrent as well.
This could easily be extended to all other acts of vandalism as well, especially graffiti. A hefty bill and severe sanctions until it is settled is an efficient deterrent.
Doesn't it occur to any of you that a much more important issue is the damage the kids suffer from using badly fitting furniture?
In my native Denmark we basically used three sizes of chairs and ditto tables, from grade 0 (age 5-6) through grade 9 (age 15-16). The closest match was usually fairly far off and most kids ended up with back trouble. I still have back issues to this day - can't carry anything even slightly heavy or crouch without my back screaming.
The correct furniture would be adjustable tables and ditto chairs but with a full tilt function as well, making it possible to 'bend over' the table without bending the back too much. As for keeping it nice, just make sure the laws are in place to force the kids or their parents to pay for any intentional damage, and the furniture will stay nice for many years if the quality is right.
What's wrong with Foxit?
Works just fine without the Adobe bloat...
If you put it on the Internet, it's free - or will be soon enough... Stop thinking you can make money from things that should be free.
How do they expect this to work?
Sure you can sue if they use trademarked names like "Sony" or "PS3", but a dongle with a name like "Freedom" and containing no code or hardware copyrighted by Sony cannot be stopped.
Yes, it is a device to circumvent copy protection but far from all European countries have laws banning such devices, and once they're in a European country the device can be moved freely to other countries.
I would buy such a device, mostly just to spite Sony and their megalomania.
How about 15.0.0.0/8 and 16.0.0.0/8 - Both assigned to HP (Hewlett Packard)...
That's 33.5 million IPs for a single company... Kind of a huge waste, right?
The data retention system is never ever going to prevent any terrorism. Real dangerous terrorists would never communicate over the open Internet, and amateurs that might are not really dangerous; they are more likely to either blow themselves up by accident or be unable to manufacture even the simplest explosive that works.
If people were willing to use this scheme to get cheaper electricity, I guess the electricity is too expensive.
Here in Denmark over 90% of the amount we pay for electricity is various taxes. No wonder people turn to alternative solutions because once you've done yours and switched bulbs, appliances and everything to the most environmentally friendly versions available, you still get a hefty bill and there's nothing (more) you can do about it - except perhaps to steal the electricity that is... ;)
I was thinking of using it to identify masked vandals, hooligans etc. in a crowd - they can but on masks, hoods etc. and hide their faces while they do their destruction and/or violence, but with a system like this they can be identified from their voices even across a football/soccer stadium, plus there's the possibility of learning valuable intel from the conversations. Would be nice to be able to get them to pay for their negative behavior, both juridically and financially.
Why vandalize articles in the first place?
Sure, stupid spammers think replacing an article with a badly spelled advert for ViAGRa is the way to go, and morons think that they gain something from inserting "I'M GAY!!!!!" into an article about someone they dislike, but why just do damage for no other purpose than destroying other people's hard work?
I just don't get it.
These trolls/vandals need to get their asses kicked - hard. Or maybe just have something of theirs broken, just for the fun of it, and see if they find that funny.
But maybe the first discovered and prosecuted...
Who knows how many people are jailed because hackers (meaning "evil computer intruders") planted CP or used the victim's machine as a relay or distribution point... Kinda scary but then all the more reason to keep the machine patched and avoid pissing off collegues who might snoop your password or install a keylogger...
Put quite simply: They only measure the performance of the student on that particular day. That performance will be the best possible with a lot of subtractions for stuff completely unrelated to the subject at hand, like personal mental state (a lot of people are extremely nervous), the questions in the test (choice of words, order, subjects etc.), the exam conditions (light, heat, cold, people present) and the date and time (female periods, lack of sleep, too many exams on top of each other). In other words: If you do good, the grade probably reflects your potential, but if you do bad you might have just have the same or greater potential than the student who did good, but were caught on a bad day.
None of these issues in any way reflects the true potential of the student as most of these can be worked around in real life situations where planning and scheduling is possible (indeed essential), thus allowing for the best performance possible.
The best evaluation is a continuous all-year evaluation based on many, many tests of various types, combined with classroom performance. That way the 'local' issues (bad days etc.) gets evened out over time.
Unfortunately the reality is that stuff is put into production that is created by sloppy development practices all the time. When it breaks (production is down) the system administrators have no chance to fix the application problems as they know nothing about it. No choice but to involve the developers as the alternative of restoring backups takes a lot longer and might not fix the problem (think a date-related bug for instance) - and the hosting game is all about uptime. That happens daily around here.
With Unix-family systems it's easy to stream syslog to another server, and that other server should be used for nothing else. Firewall it so it seems down from everywhere (except perhaps a monitoring server) and so that you only access it in two ways: Inbound udp on port 514 (syslog streaming) and inbound ssh on a different port than 22 only from a single access point (another server, a workstation or similar) using a key not stored on that access point and not used anywhere else.
I'd say that it is extremely difficult for someone to compromise another server (webserver typically) and then gain access to the logging server (name or IP evident in /etc/syslog.conf) to erase his tracks there as well.