Re:And let me be the first to say
on
DOJ Dot-Narc
·
· Score: 2, Troll
But I do know he would be somewhat more angry at the people who actually killed him.
Then your uncle was short sighted. Who would you be more angry at: a) The confused dimwit who hit you over the head in a fit of rage, or b) the evil, plotting megalomaniac who rapes your dead body and grinds it up to feed to your children and then marries your widow so he can abuse her?
Ashcroft is NOT honoring the memories of the dead, he is using them as a pawn in his sick twisted Orwellian game to bring about dystopia.
Yes, the actual murders are BAD PEOPLE. But they are also lame and stupid people who don't really have any clue about what they are doing. Ashcroft knows full well that he is dirting the values your Uncle held true, and he doesn't give a damn.
Re:And let me be the first to say
on
DOJ Dot-Narc
·
· Score: 2
that it's obvious no one in your family was killed in the Sept. 11 attacks.
And it's obvious that it was a very terrible misfortune that YOU were not killed in the attack.
Using the deaths of innocent Americans to set up a Nazi-like, anti-American police state is an INSULT to those that died.
Those who died in the attack were, for the most part, proud of this country, and it's long tradition of freedom and liberty. To use thier deaths as an excuse to take those very freedoms that they died believing is worse than insulting, it's vile, it's abhorant. I would rathar forget forever and spit on the graves of the dead than let thier memory be used to corrupt the world for thier children. And if you really used your head for a minute, you would say the same.
A S S H O L E !
on
DOJ Dot-Narc
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I cannot stress enough how much of a complete and total jerkwad this guy is. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand how destroying or damaging the ONE AND ONLY THING that this country was founded is, by definition, bad for this country.
If we cannot discuss the flaws of our current system of laws, then how can we ever hope to create new and better ones?
Here's a very simple way to understadn what is so incredibly wring with everything that is going on in that guy's head: Take every single argument he makes and place the replace the word "legalization" with "slavery".
Imagine if a hundred years ago people were hunted down by the government because they were against slavery laws?
The current stance our country takes on drugs was NOT handed down by God. It was written by men who had motives. Maybe the laws are good, maybe they are NOT. ANY attempt to squash the discussion and merits of changing the laws is tantamount to advocating totalitarianism.
A republic or a democracy where the "people" can not advocate new and better laws is not a free place. It is a banana republic.
Is it just me, or does the background in the "illustration" on the article look suspisciously like a post-apocolyptic wasteland?
Is it a good thing that the people desiging these suits are working from the premise that the world will be a shattered smoking dystopia? I'm not convinced they have the right frame of mind...
I may just be naive here, but why are files sotred in this way? It seems to be the smart way to implement a filesystem would be to have one monolithif "file" that spanned every block in the whole disk, and have a "virtual" filesystem driver that reads/writes/defragemtns/etc that large file as though it were a physical disk. You would never see loss to block size again, and it would have other benifits too, like making make automagic encryption a breeze.
Of course, any liability law would have to have a clause for beta testers, becuase you can't hold somone liable for failing while in the TESTING phase (If you could, test tracks all over the country would be bankrupt). The solution will naturally be that everything gets released as a beta. Everything. Office Xb, Mac OSb, Linux Kernal 2.5.4.7.1.1-prebeta-RC4-b... um, ok, Linux kernals will remain unchanged.
One of the features I'm working on now is some basic intelligence to detect out-of-character behavior by a mail server client -- such as attempting to download all messages, which would indicate they've been subpoenaed. If that happens, then we would attempt to contact the customer and get positive confirmation that they are *not* being investigated before allowing the transaction to continue. It's a trade-off between allowing normal function and protecting against legal attacks.
Why not give them two passwords. One for "normal" use, and one that automatically flags your alarm system. They can ostensibly be "complying" with the court order while at the same time having your system automagically alter or destroy all the "good stuff".
Re:Paradox: Publishing a googlewhack destroys it
on
Google Juice
·
· Score: 2
It seems that the absolutle pinnicale of a googlewhack you be to have the original page dissapear and ONLY have the page that published the googlewhack remain. It would be like a zen googlewhack.
Re:Anti-Semitic Advertisements on Google
on
Google Juice
·
· Score: 2
Now, I'm not one of those people who thinks Google should try and filter hate speech from search results. Likewise, I don't think that the Free Occident should somehow be prevented from using SourceForge's software - open source means open, Voltaire was right, etc. However, I think google should draw the line at serving advertisements for articles about how "If you hear about a 100-million-dollar swindle, then you know that it has to be a Jew." [freeoccident.org]
Bah, you're looking at it the wrong way. No one in modern society with the ability to tie thier own shoes and form complete sentences can be swayed to prejudice and racism by reading a web page. No matter HOW spiffy, trust me here. People get predudiced either by training from thier parents of some tramatic childhood expierence that they don't want to deal with correctly when they grow up.
I can assure you, there is no danger of an impressionable 7 year old being swayed into facisim by an extreemly poorly written rant on Enron. After a bowl or two of Lucky Charms, there is serious difficulting getting the swayed into sitting still for more than five minutes, let alone having them read an incredibly dry, illogical and uninformative blog.
The *only* people who will be reading this are the people who either A) already agree with it and wouldn't change thier minds in the ghost of Hitler himself were to come back and admit he made a mistake, or B) people who think reading the rantings of supremicists (Be they white, black, jeweish, or Japanese revisionist, it's all good) is terribly entertaining and an eerie yet exciting (horror movie esque) look into the mush that a nonfunctional human brain can devolve in to.
The end result of Google taking thier money is not so bad. A few people get to rant thier heart's content about secret race-based conspircaies, the fans of those kooks get to laugh thier asses off and/or write nasty letters to thier congressmen. And schoolkids all across the country can easily find things to stick in thier bibliographies the day before thier inevitable 10th grade essay of Elie Wiesel's Night is due. It's all good.
Hey, you discovered a zip gun. I can simplify it for you too:
1 metal pipe (diamter of a bullet) 1 metal ball bearing 1 strong rubber band 1 bullet
bullet goes in the pipe, bearing rests aainst the firing pin, rubber band gets glued/ducte taped, attached in some way to the bearing and also to the pipe on either side of the bullet.
pull back the band to "cock", let go to fire, and hope the shell casing doen't hit you in the eye and make you blind.
I'm sorry that you recieved an email from me calling you an ignorant lazy fuck and that I would rathar die of a butt hemmorage than work here a minute longer. That was my spiffy Windows XP (Great purchasing descion, boss! You are such a clever guy! I have always thought so, you know, that's why you're the boss, right?) machine dictating, um, everything Johnson was saying. Yeah, Johnson, you know, the cubicle "partner" you place in here last month. He may need another one of those nifty anger management sessions you had us to go on last week instead of fixing our code (Boy, I loved it too. I only wish I could go in Johnson's place when you ship him off!). Please disregard that message, thanks!
Does the legislation mention the recording industries by name, or does it just say generally what kind of groups the money should go to? I might be time for me to incorperate myself and become a recording industry fatcat.
Re:Ad Absurdum is a logical fallacy
on
SSSCA Editorials
·
· Score: 2
Taking the bill to it's "logical conclusion" as you call it would be commiting a logical fallacy, invalidating any argument that you have against it. All you have done is set up a "straw man" that anyone can knock down.
It was supposed to be kind of ironic and sarcastic, actually, not really an argument.
You'd have to split the money somewhat proportionnally to how much people value the music. How'd you do that? If your player reports what you're listening to for counting purposes, this will be hacked in no time due to the large amounts of money at stake. If you resort to surveys, this will be tricky too (again due to large amounts of money at stake). Not counting deaf people who might object being taxed for this.
No no, this would have to be a direct flat tax. Income irrelevant. Even the poor gotta listen to tunes, right? The deaf too, even people without kids have to pay for the taxes that fund schools, right? Direct from your pockets to thiers. After all, they've EARNED it, right?
Ad Absurdum and the SSSCA
on
SSSCA Editorials
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
What I can't understand is why the writers of bills like the SSSCA can't just bite the bullet and take the bill to it's logical conclusion. It exists for one reason and one reason only, right? Money. No one has argued anything else. The almighty Right to Compensation. Why stop at simple DRM and hope it doesn't get cracked in the first 20 minutes? Why not just let all the music in the world go free and create a direct music/artist tax for everyone. Cut out the middle man and have the people pay directly into the bank accounts of the copyright holders.
Seriously! Wouldn't this be incredibly efficient? Isn't this the logical conclusion of laws that are designed to guarantee profits for a particular group?
Spiders that follow the rules, of course, can be detected, so what you need is some more to stop spiders that don't, or those that know how not to get stuck in tarpits and those spoofing other clients and not reading robots.txt. The easiest way I can think to do this would be to count how many hits a particular IP has to your server in relation to individual pages. The more unique pages it pulls in a minute, the slower (geometrically) the connection should get. That way even the most hardcore human reader (or group of more casual readers behind a NAT) can click on 30-40 links in a minute and only see a 100ms slowdown, probably not even noticable, but a spider pulling 100 pages will see a 1000ms slowdown, and pulling 200 pages will result in a 10000ms slowdown per page. Sure they can eventually download all the pages, but make it take a week to do it. Combine that with what you already have and it will make for a very unpleasant spidering expierence.
If you wanted to run a secure web server, would you run it on NT, Linux, Solaris or the Mac?
*Up go hands of Linux advocates*
Answer: Mac because it is the least available operating system and as such fewer attacks have been created for it, even if there are hypothetically more bugs. As such, you would be less likely to suffer a problem, all else being equal.
This is short sighted, becuase it does not take into account what you are securing AGAINST. If you are securing against random, non targeted attacks from script kiddies, you might be right, becuase said script kiddies aren't going to spend the time to figure the system out... but if you are trying to secure against a real, concerted attack by agents of a competitor trying to steal your ideas or ruin your business, then you have made a very grave mistake.
When you say "all things being equal", then you are saying that 1 defaced web page is exactly equal to 1 stolen top secret formula, which is preposterous. A hypothetical question can not consider all types of attacks to be equal and still produce a valid and meaningful result.
If you use that logic, then using a completely open and unsecured network would be ok if you sealed the computer in a locked metal box, since it would deter physical attacks by baseball bats (ALL attacks are of equal value, right?). Or you could say that adding the line "WWJD" to the telnet login prompt would be a valid defense since it would lower the instance of attacks by Christians by 80%.
Loki's investors probably think that they will be able to grab whatever IP is left over once the company vanishes for good, maybe they will add it to thier VC vaults... But, since the employees weren't paid, I don't think you could actually call them employees at all. So all of the NDA's and employment contracts are null and void, it's all bad faith. If they hope to touch the leftover IP, they had better pay the employees pretty quick.
Sorting through this unexpected discovery is a secondary concern. The main goal is testing different materials under different lengths and strengths of laser pulses to see what might give the most efficient result.
I have been watching the discover and history channels lately, and one thing that seems to stick out like a sore thumb in science is people finding incredible discoveries, and then shelving them or ignoring them becuase it isn't part of the expierement that was being performed. Then maybe 5, 10 or even 100 years later someone will stumble on to it and change the world.
If these guys are just going to table this really intruiging discovery for a few years while they work on ho-hum materials testing, then is has GOT to be big...
Why you racist bastard! Just 'case I'm asian doesn't mean I'm "yellow"!
Oh, I see you were using "yellow bellied" in the sense of "cowardice"... kind of ironic coming from an AC, don't you think?
With countrymen like you, who needs Al Queda?
Wow, not only are you witty, but so right too! How could baby murdering terrorists compare to the evils and unAmericanness of people like myself? I completely understand how you would prefer to have thousands of innocent people die horrible burning deaths rathar than have scum like me wandering around in this country spouting my thoughts.
Slashdot Mirror
But I do know he would be somewhat more angry at the people who actually killed him.
Then your uncle was short sighted. Who would you be more angry at: a) The confused dimwit who hit you over the head in a fit of rage, or b) the evil, plotting megalomaniac who rapes your dead body and grinds it up to feed to your children and then marries your widow so he can abuse her?
Ashcroft is NOT honoring the memories of the dead, he is using them as a pawn in his sick twisted Orwellian game to bring about dystopia.
Yes, the actual murders are BAD PEOPLE. But they are also lame and stupid people who don't really have any clue about what they are doing. Ashcroft knows full well that he is dirting the values your Uncle held true, and he doesn't give a damn.
that it's obvious no one in your family was killed in the Sept. 11 attacks.
And it's obvious that it was a very terrible misfortune that YOU were not killed in the attack.
Using the deaths of innocent Americans to set up a Nazi-like, anti-American police state is an INSULT to those that died.
Those who died in the attack were, for the most part, proud of this country, and it's long tradition of freedom and liberty. To use thier deaths as an excuse to take those very freedoms that they died believing is worse than insulting, it's vile, it's abhorant. I would rathar forget forever and spit on the graves of the dead than let thier memory be used to corrupt the world for thier children. And if you really used your head for a minute, you would say the same.
I cannot stress enough how much of a complete and total jerkwad this guy is. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand how destroying or damaging the ONE AND ONLY THING that this country was founded is, by definition, bad for this country.
If we cannot discuss the flaws of our current system of laws, then how can we ever hope to create new and better ones?
Here's a very simple way to understadn what is so incredibly wring with everything that is going on in that guy's head: Take every single argument he makes and place the replace the word "legalization" with "slavery".
Imagine if a hundred years ago people were hunted down by the government because they were against slavery laws?
The current stance our country takes on drugs was NOT handed down by God. It was written by men who had motives. Maybe the laws are good, maybe they are NOT. ANY attempt to squash the discussion and merits of changing the laws is tantamount to advocating totalitarianism.
A republic or a democracy where the "people" can not advocate new and better laws is not a free place. It is a banana republic.
Is it just me, or does the background in the "illustration" on the article look suspisciously like a post-apocolyptic wasteland?
Is it a good thing that the people desiging these suits are working from the premise that the world will be a shattered smoking dystopia? I'm not convinced they have the right frame of mind...
More accurate would be Uranium rims. Far more expensive than gold, not all that pretty, and in general a dangerous thing to have around.
I may just be naive here, but why are files sotred in this way? It seems to be the smart way to implement a filesystem would be to have one monolithif "file" that spanned every block in the whole disk, and have a "virtual" filesystem driver that reads/writes/defragemtns/etc that large file as though it were a physical disk. You would never see loss to block size again, and it would have other benifits too, like making make automagic encryption a breeze.
Of course, any liability law would have to have a clause for beta testers, becuase you can't hold somone liable for failing while in the TESTING phase (If you could, test tracks all over the country would be bankrupt). The solution will naturally be that everything gets released as a beta. Everything. Office Xb, Mac OSb, Linux Kernal 2.5.4.7.1.1-prebeta-RC4-b ... um, ok, Linux kernals will remain unchanged.
the general opinion on here that it should be allowed shows that anyone will be a criminal if they feel they can get away with it.
Actually, we learned that little pearl of wisdom from the RIAA themselves!
One of the features I'm working on now is some basic intelligence to detect out-of-character behavior by a mail server client -- such as attempting to download all messages, which would indicate they've been subpoenaed. If that happens, then we would attempt to contact the customer and get positive confirmation that they are *not* being investigated before allowing the transaction to continue. It's a trade-off between allowing normal function and protecting against legal attacks.
Why not give them two passwords. One for "normal" use, and one that automatically flags your alarm system. They can ostensibly be "complying" with the court order while at the same time having your system automagically alter or destroy all the "good stuff".
It seems that the absolutle pinnicale of a googlewhack you be to have the original page dissapear and ONLY have the page that published the googlewhack remain. It would be like a zen googlewhack.
Now, I'm not one of those people who thinks Google should try and filter hate speech from search results. Likewise, I don't think that the Free Occident should somehow be prevented from using SourceForge's software - open source means open, Voltaire was right, etc. However, I think google should draw the line at serving advertisements for articles about how "If you hear about a 100-million-dollar swindle, then you know that it has to be a Jew." [freeoccident.org]
Bah, you're looking at it the wrong way. No one in modern society with the ability to tie thier own shoes and form complete sentences can be swayed to prejudice and racism by reading a web page. No matter HOW spiffy, trust me here. People get predudiced either by training from thier parents of some tramatic childhood expierence that they don't want to deal with correctly when they grow up.
I can assure you, there is no danger of an impressionable 7 year old being swayed into facisim by an extreemly poorly written rant on Enron. After a bowl or two of Lucky Charms, there is serious difficulting getting the swayed into sitting still for more than five minutes, let alone having them read an incredibly dry, illogical and uninformative blog.
The *only* people who will be reading this are the people who either A) already agree with it and wouldn't change thier minds in the ghost of Hitler himself were to come back and admit he made a mistake, or B) people who think reading the rantings of supremicists (Be they white, black, jeweish, or Japanese revisionist, it's all good) is terribly entertaining and an eerie yet exciting (horror movie esque) look into the mush that a nonfunctional human brain can devolve in to.
The end result of Google taking thier money is not so bad. A few people get to rant thier heart's content about secret race-based conspircaies, the fans of those kooks get to laugh thier asses off and/or write nasty letters to thier congressmen. And schoolkids all across the country can easily find things to stick in thier bibliographies the day before thier inevitable 10th grade essay of Elie Wiesel's Night is due. It's all good.
Hey, you discovered a zip gun. I can simplify it for you too:
1 metal pipe (diamter of a bullet)
1 metal ball bearing
1 strong rubber band
1 bullet
bullet goes in the pipe, bearing rests aainst the firing pin, rubber band gets glued/ducte taped, attached in some way to the bearing and also to the pipe on either side of the bullet.
pull back the band to "cock", let go to fire, and hope the shell casing doen't hit you in the eye and make you blind.
I'm sorry that you recieved an email from me calling you an ignorant lazy fuck and that I would rathar die of a butt hemmorage than work here a minute longer. That was my spiffy Windows XP (Great purchasing descion, boss! You are such a clever guy! I have always thought so, you know, that's why you're the boss, right?) machine dictating, um, everything Johnson was saying. Yeah, Johnson, you know, the cubicle "partner" you place in here last month. He may need another one of those nifty anger management sessions you had us to go on last week instead of fixing our code (Boy, I loved it too. I only wish I could go in Johnson's place when you ship him off!). Please disregard that message, thanks!
Sincerely,
Employee
Does the legislation mention the recording industries by name, or does it just say generally what kind of groups the money should go to? I might be time for me to incorperate myself and become a recording industry fatcat.
Taking the bill to it's "logical conclusion" as you call it would be commiting a logical fallacy, invalidating any argument that you have against it. All you have done is set up a "straw man" that anyone can knock down.
It was supposed to be kind of ironic and sarcastic, actually, not really an argument.
You'd have to split the money somewhat proportionnally to how much people value the music. How'd you do that? If your player reports what you're listening to for counting purposes, this will be hacked in no time due to the large amounts of money at stake. If you resort to surveys, this will be tricky too (again due to large amounts of money at stake). Not counting deaf people who might object being taxed for this.
No no, this would have to be a direct flat tax. Income irrelevant. Even the poor gotta listen to tunes, right? The deaf too, even people without kids have to pay for the taxes that fund schools, right? Direct from your pockets to thiers. After all, they've EARNED it, right?
What I can't understand is why the writers of bills like the SSSCA can't just bite the bullet and take the bill to it's logical conclusion. It exists for one reason and one reason only, right? Money. No one has argued anything else. The almighty Right to Compensation. Why stop at simple DRM and hope it doesn't get cracked in the first 20 minutes? Why not just let all the music in the world go free and create a direct music/artist tax for everyone. Cut out the middle man and have the people pay directly into the bank accounts of the copyright holders.
Seriously! Wouldn't this be incredibly efficient? Isn't this the logical conclusion of laws that are designed to guarantee profits for a particular group?
Spiders that follow the rules, of course, can be detected, so what you need is some more to stop spiders that don't, or those that know how not to get stuck in tarpits and those spoofing other clients and not reading robots.txt. The easiest way I can think to do this would be to count how many hits a particular IP has to your server in relation to individual pages. The more unique pages it pulls in a minute, the slower (geometrically) the connection should get. That way even the most hardcore human reader (or group of more casual readers behind a NAT) can click on 30-40 links in a minute and only see a 100ms slowdown, probably not even noticable, but a spider pulling 100 pages will see a 1000ms slowdown, and pulling 200 pages will result in a 10000ms slowdown per page. Sure they can eventually download all the pages, but make it take a week to do it. Combine that with what you already have and it will make for a very unpleasant spidering expierence.
If you wanted to run a secure web server, would you run it on NT, Linux, Solaris or the Mac?
*Up go hands of Linux advocates*
Answer: Mac because it is the least available operating system and as such fewer attacks have been created for it, even if there are hypothetically more bugs. As such, you would be less likely to suffer a problem, all else being equal.
This is short sighted, becuase it does not take into account what you are securing AGAINST. If you are securing against random, non targeted attacks from script kiddies, you might be right, becuase said script kiddies aren't going to spend the time to figure the system out... but if you are trying to secure against a real, concerted attack by agents of a competitor trying to steal your ideas or ruin your business, then you have made a very grave mistake.
When you say "all things being equal", then you are saying that 1 defaced web page is exactly equal to 1 stolen top secret formula, which is preposterous. A hypothetical question can not consider all types of attacks to be equal and still produce a valid and meaningful result.
If you use that logic, then using a completely open and unsecured network would be ok if you sealed the computer in a locked metal box, since it would deter physical attacks by baseball bats (ALL attacks are of equal value, right?). Or you could say that adding the line "WWJD" to the telnet login prompt would be a valid defense since it would lower the instance of attacks by Christians by 80%.
Go set him straight.
Loki's investors probably think that they will be able to grab whatever IP is left over once the company vanishes for good, maybe they will add it to thier VC vaults... But, since the employees weren't paid, I don't think you could actually call them employees at all. So all of the NDA's and employment contracts are null and void, it's all bad faith. If they hope to touch the leftover IP, they had better pay the employees pretty quick.
Sorting through this unexpected discovery is a secondary concern. The main goal is testing different materials under different lengths and strengths of laser pulses to see what might give the most efficient result.
I have been watching the discover and history channels lately, and one thing that seems to stick out like a sore thumb in science is people finding incredible discoveries, and then shelving them or ignoring them becuase it isn't part of the expierement that was being performed. Then maybe 5, 10 or even 100 years later someone will stumble on to it and change the world.
If these guys are just going to table this really intruiging discovery for a few years while they work on ho-hum materials testing, then is has GOT to be big...
You want to joke about leaving the country? Fine. I'm asking you what's holding you back.
What's holding me back? Getting a visa, it's not easy to do. Thus the comment on slashdot looking for countries that grant visas easily to Americans.
You are yellow bellied
Why you racist bastard! Just 'case I'm asian doesn't mean I'm "yellow"!
Oh, I see you were using "yellow bellied" in the sense of "cowardice"... kind of ironic coming from an AC, don't you think?
With countrymen like you, who needs Al Queda?
Wow, not only are you witty, but so right too! How could baby murdering terrorists compare to the evils and unAmericanness of people like myself? I completely understand how you would prefer to have thousands of innocent people die horrible burning deaths rathar than have scum like me wandering around in this country spouting my thoughts.
So what countries are there out there that accept expatriot Americans fleeing the madness of thier government? Preferably island countries.
Using RIAA numbers:
3.6 Billion songs downloaded every month...
6000 / 3 students / 2 days = 1000 dl per day per person...
= 3.6 Million people per month
= 1.4% of the population of the U.S.
BUT, the RIAA never said this was only in the US, so if we take the world population into account...
0.06% of the world population...
Oh, the horror! The RIAA can't survive on the money of only the "honest" 99.94% of the population!!!