One of the conspiracy websites that I have read was saying that combat airplanes, normally on 24 hour alert, at this base should have and could have prevented the plane from entering the restricted airspace in DC. They were saying that this site was removed because it provided evidence that somebody dropped the ball.
The interview talked a little about throwing more machines on when the demand deems necessary. I wonder if it is possible to do this over the internet? I mean, I'm seeing something along the lines of SETI, where millions of people worldwide donate their unused processor power. Would it be possible to distribute the searches to remote computers over the internet in real time?
It might happen sooner than you think. Last week they were reporting that the government was moving towards a standardized drivers license. This idea of digital signature could work well in that system. But I agree, the US has been pretty bad with bureacracy..
Exactly and people have never been able to actually get other states to comply or be able to track who is paying the tax or not. In the past it didn't matter, b/c the mail order industry was a relatively small industry. But now, with the internet, states are losing a huge chunk of money because of this. And they are urging congress to do something about it.
Are we going to say this everytime a linux company becomes popular to the general masses? If so, why bother getting it to the general masses? Red Hat has done a lot of good for linux. It has put a legitimate "face" or brand to this grassroot development of linux. It has brought linux down to the common users (or at least attempted to)
Unacceptable publications include, but are not limited to: Material that is unlawful in the jurisdiction of the server. For instance, if a customer's machine is hosted on Sealand by HavenCo, content which is illegal in Sealand may not be published or housed on that server. Sealand's laws prohibit child pornography. Sealand currently has no regulations regarding copyright, patents, libel, restrictions on political speech, non-disclosure agreements, cryptography, restrictions on maintaining customer records, tax or mandatory licensing, DMCA, music sharing services, or other issues; child pornography is the only content explicitly prohibited. At the present time, child pornography is not precisely defined; HavenCo is obeying rules similar to those of the United States, specifically a prohibition on any depiction of those under 18 in a sexual context.
Also, with the support of UK (whom granted them sovereignty), it is quite unlikely that they get disconnected. It is like saying that we are going to cut off all the internet to California because a Gnutella hub is based there. Also, they are seeking a second connection to another place in Europe. For RIAA (for example) to be able to get the power to do such a thing would be quite unlikely and/or cost a lot of money. Also, I don't think the EU is quite supportive of RIAA.
There is an old anti aircraft fortress off the coast of England that someone claimed soveriegnty. He named it Principality of Sealand. On this nation, he created a company called Havenco which will host anything that might be considered: "risky, subversive or plain old anti-establishment" without any legal actions from any government.
Sealand was originally used as an armed fortress in the Second World War as one of the most easterly aspects of the UK, whose main role was shooting down Nazi bombers, U2 rockets and other undesirables.
In 1967, the island - then known as Roughs Tower - was founded as a sovereign principality with a currency called the Sealand dollar - which runs at parity with the US dollar - and with English as its official language.
Sealand was founded on the principle that a group of people dissatisfied with oppressive laws and restrictions of existing nation states can declare independence in any place that is not under the jurisdiction of another sovereign entity.
The state's independence was upheld in the British courts in the late 1960s when a judge held that Roughs Tower stood in international waters and did not fall under UK legal jurisdiction.
...
HavenCo is offering what it calls "secure Web hosting" on its server farm for any company or organization that is looking for a Web hosting service that is free of any existing global legislation and tax laws.
Although Samir acknowledged that HavenCo could well attract companies wanting to offer tax-free havens for customers wanting offshore services, the firm's main emphasis would be in attracting organizations looking for Web site hosting facilities free from any possible monitoring or censorship from third-party governments.
With its high degree of independence, he said, Sealand offers an ideal home for those organizations looking for a totally offshore Web hosting facility.
Samir said that, while Sealand obviously cannot defend itself against a serious military attack from a country such as Great Britain, its operation is heavily armed to protect the firm from pirates.
"We also chose to locate in Sealand because we know that the UK respects the law. Any legal problems that could develop regarding our sovereignty would be heard in an English Court of Law," he said.
This is probably the first action where an internet company has avoided a court order by moving its base of operation to another country. If this is continued, KaZaa could potentially avoid shutting down by doing this each time they are sued. One thing though, this would cost RIAA a whole lot of money to keep up with them.
It's not a matter of the type or quality of the memory but how the chip address the memory. There is a flaw in the chip itself. A layman's analogy might be: if a telephone book only list the first 5 numbers of a phone number. What you are suggesting is to replace all the telephones in the world. Even if you do, the phone book still won't work because the phone numbers are incorrect. What has to be fixed is the phone book [or the way of finding phone numbers]. Go here for more technical information.
Uh, scuze me but most (if not all) states put the burden of paying sales tax on sellers, not buyers, and whether they are liable for a tax bill depends on the extent to which they do business in a given state.
Sorry, but you are wrong on this. If a product is sold by a business to a customer in a state that the business operates, that business must collect sales tax. It is the same way that if you go down to a store down the street. However, if the business is in a different state, the US Supreme Court has ruled that the state cannot force a company that is operating outside of its jurisdiction to collect sales tax. Many states, however, have put the burden of paying sales tax on the individual. Now, states very rarily have the resources to crack down on this and often people don't even know these laws. In addition, counties and towns can add their own sales tax laws. So all of these are the responsibility of the individual.
Because the states, counties, and municipalities make their own tax laws, this has been the main reason that congress has not enacted a internet tax [in addition to the fact that it could prevent growth in the industry]. Below, I've copied a number of state's out of state sales tax laws.
New Jersey:
If you purchase taxable merchandise from an out-of-state mail order business and no New Jersey sales tax is collected, you owe 6% use tax on the purchase price of the goods. Use tax is due within twenty days after the merchandise is delivered into New Jersey. Shipping charges separately listed on the bill are exempt from tax.
NJ
Pennsylvania:
Q. How are out-of-state purchases/sales taxed?
A. In Pennsylvania, the responsibility to pay Sales Tax is ultimately placed on the consumer. When a resident purchases a taxable item outside of Pennsylvania and does not pay Sales Tax at the time of purchase, the tax is then due to Pennsylvania in the form of Use Tax at the same 6 percent rate. The Use Tax is due and payable when the item is brought to or received in Pennsylvania, and it is up to the purchaser to remit the tax to the Department. Out of state sales are not subject to Pennsylvania Sales Tax when the item is shipped directly to an out of state location. PA Tax
California:
(B) From Other States -- When Sales Tax Does Not Apply. Sales tax does not apply when the order is sent
by the purchaser directly to the retailer at a point outside this state, or to an agent of the retailer in this state, and the
property is shipped to the purchaser, pursuant to the contract of sale, from a point outside this state directly to the
purchaser in this state, or to the retailer's agent in this state for delivery to the purchaser in this state, provided there
is no participation whatever in the transaction by any local branch, office, outlet or other place of business of the
retailer or by any agent of the retailer having any connection with such branch, office, outlet, or place of business.
CA Tax [Note: in this case there is no tax]
Maine:
Are sales over the Internet taxable?
Sales made over the Internet are subject to the same sales tax application as mail order sales. If the seller is required to be registered to collect Maine Sales Tax, then the seller should collect the tax on the sale. If the seller is not required to be registered, then the seller is not required to collect tax on the sale. The purchaser, however, would still owe a Maine Use Tax, payable directly to Maine Revenue Services, based on the sale price of the goods. Most Maine taxpayers report this use tax liability on their Maine 1040.
Maine Tax
1) My comments was not in regards to specifically Somalia, but US military as a whole. Look at Afghanistan. Military researchers and analysts have found that by sending in ground troops in full force, they have a better chance a succeeding in their mission with less innocent casualties. However, instead, they decide to pretty much carpet bomb Afghanistan, destroying Red Cross Building and innocent civilians and villages. In addition, instead of using the Delta force or the elite US soldiers, they are hiring Afghans to fight a proxy war for the US. This is mainly because the battle in Somalia was a major turning point in US military history. The idea of losing even one soldier unnecessarily is a political disaster to the politicians calling the shots.
2) I never said the US had bad intentions. However, the politicians were misdirected in providing the necessary supplies to successfully complete their mission. In the book, they discussed that the General requested a number of attack helicopters and military tanks, however, the people in Congress turned down his request because they deemed that the supplies that they were given already was enough to accomplish their mission. [The APC that you saw in the movie was actually "borrowed" from the Pakistani military that was part of the UN.] Secondly, the politicians, including Clinton, made decisions that practically tired their hands of the military in charge in terms of what they can and cannot do.
Lastly, you said "AFAIK the US has (believe it or not) mostly used them only in clearly warlike situations such as in Yugoslavia." Now would you say that what is going on in Afghanistan is a war? If you believe so, you are clearly wrong. There are international regulations on wars, specifically on the fact that it has to be formally declared [Geneva Convention]. As of yet, the US and Congress has not formally declared war. Now, if this is a war, the Prisoners of War must be returned to their countries at the conclusion of battle. If that is the case, the "American Taliban" John Walker cannot be tried in the US Judicial courts and must be returned to Afghanistan when this "war" ends. This is a major dilemma.
First of all, this movie was based on a book about a real life event. Not all real life events play out like a movie. I was quite impressed that they kept the integrity of the book and didn't use too much scriptual licensing on this.
#1-- Too many indistinguishable (and flawless) characters - This movie lacked any kind of single person for us to latch onto. Everyone got equal screentime, more or less, and I had no idea who of the many character's story I was supposed to identify with.
That's the way they were though. A lot of the people that were sent to war in the Rangers were just normal 18-22 year old kids. They weren't more exceptional to each other in any way.
#2-- Media not portrayed at all - For me the most important point of the Somalia story was the famous image of the body being dragged through the streets, which was given short-
I agree, in the book they went into the media a little bit more. There was one great scene where Mike Durant (the captured pilot) writes a letter for the Red Cross to deliver to his family. In it he leaves a coded message..something like..Ranger Never Died. Which was crossed out by the Red Cross...but then Durant watches TV and his wife repeats this coded message.
#3-- No examination of the larger picture -- I know someone said this is about the battle, not the larger view, but without compelling characters (and face it, the "I wanna see some action"->"war is hell" transformation is a little uninteresting to anyone who's EVER seen a war movie made after 1980) this movie needs
Again, the book goes into this a little more. And the movie touched on it a little bit (when the General was talking about how he was suppose to win a war if the people up top don't give them supplies). But in the end, there was very little of the big picture that the Rangers knew about. They did what they were ordered to and that's it.
I have also read the book. It was such incredible reading that I couldn't put it down. And I agree that there were some inaccuracies.
One thing that I would disagree with you on is the "cowardly" method of fighting that you talked about. I remember that scene in the book also. Now, I ask you, what is more cowardly: shooting from behind a human shield or firing missiles from hundreds of miles away and destroying anything in site including innocent men, women, and children? A war is not a game. People fight to win. People fight for life and death. When you fight, you use your enemies weakness against them. US uses technology over the opponents, and the Somalis happend to use human shields.
Now, I'm not defending one side or the other. But the main thing I got out of the book is that it was the fault of the people at the top that they got stuck in this situation. Prior to this incident, another Blackhawk was shot down. [BTW: the picture that we all saw from the papers of the pilot being dragged through the street was this incident] In addition, the "somalis" were not necessarily from somalia. There were evidence coming out recently that Osama bin Ladin had sent fighters to Somalia to combat the US.
Lastly, there was one thing in the movie that I don't think actually happend. Near the end of the movie where the warlords were firing a huge cannon on the people bunkered down in the building. And these two delta force snuck up on them and strangled them to death using piano wire and then use the cannon on the other warlords. Tell me if I had missed something in the book.
I typically check out the forums to see if there's any good deals on anything out on the internet. You can still find good deals out there on the internet. They have just become less and less.
TECHNICALLY you're suppose to file a form with IRS whenever you purchase stuff through mailorder or online. However, most people don't do this and IRS never really cracks down on this.
Hell If I was in charge of Airport security, after seeing this I would set up a honeypot and get ahold of a 200 dollar rdf and start nabbing anyone that tried this, thow em up on federal charges and let shit lands where it may.
First of all, Airport security has been stretched to their limits. The majority of these people are minimum wage employees. The managers are slightly above that. They are probably not educated enough to even know what a honey pot is. Secondly, why put in the money and resources to setup a honeypot rather than fix the problem in the first place? A great deal could be done by setting up encryption on the WiFi cards. People will say that encryption is not hack-proof..but 128bit encryption is better than 0 encryption. Also, if you make people have to hack the encryption, they are then knowingly and willingly committing a crime. As it stands, it's hard to tell who is committing a crime and who is just stumbling onto the network.
I KNOW its insecure an it need to be fixed, be fucking responsible for once in you life and do something responsible with that info, like find the person in charge and let them know, give them resources they obviously dont have to get it fixed. Your a Geek heres you chance to do something that actually might matter.
The article actually says that the people in charge were informed but their response was "American Airlines spokesman Gus Whitcomb said that Luster and Comerford exaggerated the security risk because their companies provide security services." Since we're all geeks, we know that when there is an unsecure system, it is totally negligent to keep it up unsecured. They took down the curbside checkin system for approximately a month after 9/11, but put it back up in late October. This is just another of many vulnerabilities within the system.
How bout this scenario: A terrorist checks a bag with a bomb within. Then uses the vulnerability to delete the log that he checked it. Since a number of airlines haven't invested in xrays and there might still be some holes in the check-in system, it gets through and there is no log of which bag actually contained the plane.
Try saying that at Airport Security or on an airplane. See if you get on the plane or even get to join one of the thousands of detainees. In addition, with Carnivore, FBI could read all your emails and if you email something regarding an assasination or something, it would probably get logged and you'd probably be investigated by the Secret Service.
Remember..telling yourself you have freedom is not the same as actually having freedom.
I disagree. I think to start off, AOL will use linux to create a dumbed down AOL computer [like what everyone else is saying]. Then from there, get people to get used to this consumer (ie dumb downed, limited) version of linux before they start offering consumer based linux for PCs.
The problem that AOL has been having is that they have to work within the framework of MS OS's. If you look in any articles from a year ago or two years ago about MS and AOL, there has been much squabble about this. AOL wants to remove that "middleman." They want people to solely use AOL as an OS or a desktop. And it could be done. Imagine the AOL interface as your desktop or AOL totally built into the OS.
On the other hand, this could just be another random corporate purchase thought up by a drunken VP at a bar...
Slashdot Mirror
A number of you have asked whether the websites taken down since 9/11 are available on archive.org. The answer is yes. One example is:
DC Air National Guard on Archive
Same Page - 404
One of the conspiracy websites that I have read was saying that combat airplanes, normally on 24 hour alert, at this base should have and could have prevented the plane from entering the restricted airspace in DC. They were saying that this site was removed because it provided evidence that somebody dropped the ball.
The interview talked a little about throwing more machines on when the demand deems necessary. I wonder if it is possible to do this over the internet? I mean, I'm seeing something along the lines of SETI, where millions of people worldwide donate their unused processor power. Would it be possible to distribute the searches to remote computers over the internet in real time?
Secondly, I don't think the demo is a copy of the system (like AOL), but more of a flash/video commercial.
stole the idea from Ebay who has been profitable since the beginning...b/c of VERY low overhead costs
Just like what was posted on here yesterday.
It might happen sooner than you think. Last week they were reporting that the government was moving towards a standardized drivers license. This idea of digital signature could work well in that system. But I agree, the US has been pretty bad with bureacracy..
Very true...but look at it like this. How many people leave their credit cards sitting around? If it's just a card, it could fit easily into a wallet.
Exactly and people have never been able to actually get other states to comply or be able to track who is paying the tax or not. In the past it didn't matter, b/c the mail order industry was a relatively small industry. But now, with the internet, states are losing a huge chunk of money because of this. And they are urging congress to do something about it.
Are we going to say this everytime a linux company becomes popular to the general masses? If so, why bother getting it to the general masses? Red Hat has done a lot of good for linux. It has put a legitimate "face" or brand to this grassroot development of linux. It has brought linux down to the common users (or at least attempted to)
Also, with the support of UK (whom granted them sovereignty), it is quite unlikely that they get disconnected. It is like saying that we are going to cut off all the internet to California because a Gnutella hub is based there. Also, they are seeking a second connection to another place in Europe. For RIAA (for example) to be able to get the power to do such a thing would be quite unlikely and/or cost a lot of money. Also, I don't think the EU is quite supportive of RIAA.
Go here to read more
excerpt:
This is probably the first action where an internet company has avoided a court order by moving its base of operation to another country. If this is continued, KaZaa could potentially avoid shutting down by doing this each time they are sued. One thing though, this would cost RIAA a whole lot of money to keep up with them.
It's not a matter of the type or quality of the memory but how the chip address the memory. There is a flaw in the chip itself. A layman's analogy might be: if a telephone book only list the first 5 numbers of a phone number. What you are suggesting is to replace all the telephones in the world. Even if you do, the phone book still won't work because the phone numbers are incorrect. What has to be fixed is the phone book [or the way of finding phone numbers]. Go here for more technical information.
Actually, there is a law saying that you can lose your American citizenship if: "serving as an officer in a foreign country's military service, or serving in the armed forces of a country which is engaged in hostilities against the US;" John Walker fits the second description. In effect, he is no longer a US citizen.
Sorry, but you are wrong on this. If a product is sold by a business to a customer in a state that the business operates, that business must collect sales tax. It is the same way that if you go down to a store down the street. However, if the business is in a different state, the US Supreme Court has ruled that the state cannot force a company that is operating outside of its jurisdiction to collect sales tax. Many states, however, have put the burden of paying sales tax on the individual. Now, states very rarily have the resources to crack down on this and often people don't even know these laws. In addition, counties and towns can add their own sales tax laws. So all of these are the responsibility of the individual.
Because the states, counties, and municipalities make their own tax laws, this has been the main reason that congress has not enacted a internet tax [in addition to the fact that it could prevent growth in the industry]. Below, I've copied a number of state's out of state sales tax laws.
New Jersey:
Pennsylvania:
California:
Maine:
btw: I Am Not A Lawyer (IANAL)
1) My comments was not in regards to specifically Somalia, but US military as a whole. Look at Afghanistan. Military researchers and analysts have found that by sending in ground troops in full force, they have a better chance a succeeding in their mission with less innocent casualties. However, instead, they decide to pretty much carpet bomb Afghanistan, destroying Red Cross Building and innocent civilians and villages. In addition, instead of using the Delta force or the elite US soldiers, they are hiring Afghans to fight a proxy war for the US. This is mainly because the battle in Somalia was a major turning point in US military history. The idea of losing even one soldier unnecessarily is a political disaster to the politicians calling the shots.
2) I never said the US had bad intentions. However, the politicians were misdirected in providing the necessary supplies to successfully complete their mission. In the book, they discussed that the General requested a number of attack helicopters and military tanks, however, the people in Congress turned down his request because they deemed that the supplies that they were given already was enough to accomplish their mission. [The APC that you saw in the movie was actually "borrowed" from the Pakistani military that was part of the UN.] Secondly, the politicians, including Clinton, made decisions that practically tired their hands of the military in charge in terms of what they can and cannot do.
Lastly, you said "AFAIK the US has (believe it or not) mostly used them only in clearly warlike situations such as in Yugoslavia." Now would you say that what is going on in Afghanistan is a war? If you believe so, you are clearly wrong. There are international regulations on wars, specifically on the fact that it has to be formally declared [Geneva Convention]. As of yet, the US and Congress has not formally declared war. Now, if this is a war, the Prisoners of War must be returned to their countries at the conclusion of battle. If that is the case, the "American Taliban" John Walker cannot be tried in the US Judicial courts and must be returned to Afghanistan when this "war" ends. This is a major dilemma.
That's the way they were though. A lot of the people that were sent to war in the Rangers were just normal 18-22 year old kids. They weren't more exceptional to each other in any way. I agree, in the book they went into the media a little bit more. There was one great scene where Mike Durant (the captured pilot) writes a letter for the Red Cross to deliver to his family. In it he leaves a coded message
I have also read the book. It was such incredible reading that I couldn't put it down. And I agree that there were some inaccuracies.
One thing that I would disagree with you on is the "cowardly" method of fighting that you talked about. I remember that scene in the book also. Now, I ask you, what is more cowardly: shooting from behind a human shield or firing missiles from hundreds of miles away and destroying anything in site including innocent men, women, and children? A war is not a game. People fight to win. People fight for life and death. When you fight, you use your enemies weakness against them. US uses technology over the opponents, and the Somalis happend to use human shields.
Now, I'm not defending one side or the other. But the main thing I got out of the book is that it was the fault of the people at the top that they got stuck in this situation. Prior to this incident, another Blackhawk was shot down. [BTW: the picture that we all saw from the papers of the pilot being dragged through the street was this incident] In addition, the "somalis" were not necessarily from somalia. There were evidence coming out recently that Osama bin Ladin had sent fighters to Somalia to combat the US.
Lastly, there was one thing in the movie that I don't think actually happend. Near the end of the movie where the warlords were firing a huge cannon on the people bunkered down in the building. And these two delta force snuck up on them and strangled them to death using piano wire and then use the cannon on the other warlords. Tell me if I had missed something in the book.
Who said that any one spot could only contain one message? It could contain multiple messages. In other words, these circles could overlap.
Check out these forums:
TECHNICALLY you're suppose to file a form with IRS whenever you purchase stuff through mailorder or online. However, most people don't do this and IRS never really cracks down on this.
How bout this scenario: A terrorist checks a bag with a bomb within. Then uses the vulnerability to delete the log that he checked it. Since a number of airlines haven't invested in xrays and there might still be some holes in the check-in system, it gets through and there is no log of which bag actually contained the plane.
Try saying that at Airport Security or on an airplane. See if you get on the plane or even get to join one of the thousands of detainees. In addition, with Carnivore, FBI could read all your emails and if you email something regarding an assasination or something, it would probably get logged and you'd probably be investigated by the Secret Service.
Remember..telling yourself you have freedom is not the same as actually having freedom.
I disagree. I think to start off, AOL will use linux to create a dumbed down AOL computer [like what everyone else is saying]. Then from there, get people to get used to this consumer (ie dumb downed, limited) version of linux before they start offering consumer based linux for PCs.
The problem that AOL has been having is that they have to work within the framework of MS OS's. If you look in any articles from a year ago or two years ago about MS and AOL, there has been much squabble about this. AOL wants to remove that "middleman." They want people to solely use AOL as an OS or a desktop. And it could be done. Imagine the AOL interface as your desktop or AOL totally built into the OS.
On the other hand, this could just be another random corporate purchase thought up by a drunken VP at a bar...