So you literally want to "throw the baby out with the bathwater"? My god, I had no idea Ron Paul was so radically destructive of primary institutions and infrastructure. I find this position indefensible in any possible sort of pragmatic, real world sense.
Personally, I suspect that this is just the tip of an iceberg. The telcos are asking for immunity because someone somewhere found out too much about something that was going on, and now the telcos are saying to the administration, "We played ball, but we won't take the fall...alone." So our administration is pushing for immunity, but it isn't so easy now that they don't control all three branches. I say not only should they have to face it w/o retroactive immunity, but also the hearings should be public.
1 a: government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections
We are a democratic republic. We *are* a democracy, even though we use representation. We are a republic, even though the supreme power is vested in the people.
Well it *does* have a backdoor, the only question is does anyone have the constants? FTFA:
What Shumow and Ferguson showed is that these numbers have a relationship with a second, secret set of numbers that can act as a kind of skeleton key. If you know the secret numbers, you can predict the output of the random-number generator after collecting just 32 bytes of its output.
Also FTFA:
The researchers don't know what the secret numbers are. But because of the way the algorithm works, the person who produced the constants might know; he had the mathematical opportunity to produce the constants and the secret numbers in tandem.
Interesting historical synthesis. Too bad you were modded down for the link. Marketing is, after all, what MS does best, and regardless of technical merit, or legality, they *win*
At the same workshop, Joe Armstrong gave a presentation on "Concurrency Oriented Programming in Erlang" (see presentation, view video). In it, he illustrated how Erlang, with its built-in support for lightweight processes and extremely fast process creation, was far superior to either Java or C# in its ability to quickly create new processes. In fact, when an Erlang-based web server was compared to Apache (comparing KBytes/sec vs session load), the ability of Erlang to effectively support many concurrent, parallel processes meant that the Erlang-based web server was able to run over 80,000 sessions while the Apache web server died at around 4,000 sessions.
Would you consider fighting forest fires? Working as a Nurses Aid in ghetto clinics? Riding in ambulances that service ghetto areas? There are many areas of service that would qualify...
IANAL (but wouldn't it be fun?) so take me with a large grain of salt, but it seems like most cases I hear about settle out of court. I suspect the settlement screws you in terms of "review", because you can't appeal a case that didn't occur. Right?
In terms of damages, it should be considered. The assumption is that if they hadn't downloaded it, they would have bought it. Sometimes that assumption makes sense and other times its ridiculous.
"The illegality of the private investigations is also known to defendants," says Lybeck in the court document.
Most states require licensing or registration of private investigators. In Oregon, unlicensed investigators are subject to civil and criminal penalties. These licensing laws are well known to reputable investigators. On information and belief, MediaSentry and his investigators are not and have not been licensed to conduct private investigations of private citizens in Oregon or any other state. Their investigations are illegal.
For years, the RIAA and its member companies have been using flawed and illegal private investigation information as part of their co-ordinated scheme and comment enterprise to threaten, intimidate and coerce payment from private citizens across the United States.
I agree that the Declaration of Independence is a beautiful work of poetic statements of intention. I suspect that only the Constitution really counts in a court of law, although I am not a lawyer and only argue on slashdot because I care. Agreed, though, in re: unwarranted search, up to the point where it doesn't matter to what degree there is invasion of privacy. I still suggest the difference is more than quantity (the number of phone records recorded, say) and one of quality (the types of information recorded, and whose). It is perhaps even the difference between complaining and mobilizing action, although elections can be fickle.
Surely agree that the authority to judge right and wrong is at least somewhat related to borders? Perhaps the difference is that of "right and wrong" which tends to be black and white, and less absolute measures of behavior?
Anyone who needs to apply a thick enough brush to cover both of these activities with the same whitewash is doing a disservice.
Whether doing something wrong is local or international, it is still wrong.
Under social contract theory, arguments can be made for the formation of laws and governance. I'm not sure it would always be appropriate to apply these externally to others whose social contract may have formed differently, as it seems to me you want to imply should be done. It would be wrong to extend all the rights of a US Citizen to foreign citizens not under US authority. It appears you agree this would be "overbearing".
I can imagine a world where people are proud of their individuals rights. I can imagine a world where an FBI agent, told to violate the constitution he has sworn to defend, would simply refuse to do so, as would any other replacements. Having read Stanly Milgram's Obedience to Authority, the dream is less easy in the light of day...
The Washington Post seems to agree: "President Bush signed a secret order in 2002 authorizing the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on U.S. citizens and foreign nationals in the United States, despite previous legal prohibitions against such domestic spying, sources with knowledge of the program said last night."
And also, "Congressional sources familiar with limited aspects of the program would not discuss any classified details but made it clear there were serious questions about the legality of the NSA actions. The sources, who demanded anonymity, said there were conditions under which it would be possible to gather and retain information on Americans if the surveillance were part of an investigation into foreign intelligence.
Note that potential gets you on the list: "The effort, which began within days after the attacks, has consisted partly of monitoring domestic telephone conversations, e-mail and even fax communications of individuals identified by the NSA as having some connection to al Qaeda events or figures, or to potential terrorism-related activities in the United States, the official said."
Here is the clincher, though:
Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies, said the secret order may amount to the president authorizing criminal activity.
The law governing clandestine surveillance in the United States, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, prohibits conducting electronic surveillance not authorized by statute. A government agent can try to avoid prosecution if he can show he was "engaged in the course of his official duties and the electronic surveillance was authorized by and conducted pursuant to a search warrant or court order of a court of competent jurisdiction," according to the law.
"This is as shocking a revelation as we have ever seen from the Bush administration," said Martin, who has been sharply critical of the administration's surveillance and detention policies. "It is, I believe, the first time a president has authorized government agencies to violate a specific criminal prohibition and eavesdrop on Americans."
Patent awarded in 2002... I assume that it is more expensive to produce the L- than the D- isomer? Why else continue manufacturing the D- ? I'm astounded.
Terrorists are a problem, yes. But the broader problem is fanaticism. I'm not talking about mere fanboy-ism, but the sort of "my country right or wrong", my belief-system regardless of rationality, to the point of violence. Communication is the essence of all things. That which blocks rational dialog should be suspect. We might not be able to predict who will fall victim to this malady of emotion, but we should be aware it exists and watch for it, and *tag* such behavior. Many people are football fans, yes, but few of them resort to violence to vent their frustration.
At the very least I'd like to see the Congress and the Senate start pushing laws forward stating unequivocally that presidential abuse of authority in the circumvention of civil liberties is a crime. While said laws might be vetoed, they could be voted on again and sent forward to be vetoed and yet voted upon again and again. Make it impossible for anyone to pretend that what is happening isn't wrong and needs to be addressed, and try to make it harder to happen next time.
Speculation, perhaps, put also witnesses and court cases that can't proceed because of national security interests. The fact that this shouldn't be happening is why the matter is so *serious*.
"Psuedoephedrine's optical isomer is just as effective at relieving congestion, can't be turned into meth, and has fewer side-effects to boot. You have three guesses which bunch of dickbags are sitting on the patent." This is news to me. Pray tell, who? And why isn't this public knowledge?
This is different. The DEA was tracking the phone numbers of international calls, not the conversations of local, domestic calls, and local, domestic internet traffic. This is *different*. Please don't mistake the current situation for the status que.
Yeah but what about his family? What about his friends? What about learning that cousin Fred told aunt Shelia than Tommy was pissed off about topic 'A'? You could use this sort of information to plant seeds of destruction, and push just the right levers while pulling just the right strings to make their group self-destruct. At least, seems possible...
Slashdot Mirror
So you literally want to "throw the baby out with the bathwater"? My god, I had no idea Ron Paul was so radically destructive of primary institutions and infrastructure. I find this position indefensible in any possible sort of pragmatic, real world sense.
Personally, I suspect that this is just the tip of an iceberg. The telcos are asking for immunity because someone somewhere found out too much about something that was going on, and now the telcos are saying to the administration, "We played ball, but we won't take the fall...alone." So our administration is pushing for immunity, but it isn't so easy now that they don't control all three branches. I say not only should they have to face it w/o retroactive immunity, but also the hearings should be public.
Its a noun, which means: We are a democratic republic. We *are* a democracy, even though we use representation. We are a republic, even though the supreme power is vested in the people.
hehehe...maybe its time for google to step up to the plate?
Don't forget Lisp and Haskell :-)
Interesting historical synthesis. Too bad you were modded down for the link. Marketing is, after all, what MS does best, and regardless of technical merit, or legality, they *win*
In terms of concurrency and web servers:
Would you consider fighting forest fires? Working as a Nurses Aid in ghetto clinics? Riding in ambulances that service ghetto areas? There are many areas of service that would qualify...
IANAL (but wouldn't it be fun?) so take me with a large grain of salt, but it seems like most cases I hear about settle out of court. I suspect the settlement screws you in terms of "review", because you can't appeal a case that didn't occur. Right?
In terms of damages, it should be considered. The assumption is that if they hadn't downloaded it, they would have bought it. Sometimes that assumption makes sense and other times its ridiculous.
They aren't licensed anywhere.
I agree that the Declaration of Independence is a beautiful work of poetic statements of intention. I suspect that only the Constitution really counts in a court of law, although I am not a lawyer and only argue on slashdot because I care. Agreed, though, in re: unwarranted search, up to the point where it doesn't matter to what degree there is invasion of privacy. I still suggest the difference is more than quantity (the number of phone records recorded, say) and one of quality (the types of information recorded, and whose). It is perhaps even the difference between complaining and mobilizing action, although elections can be fickle.
Surely agree that the authority to judge right and wrong is at least somewhat related to borders? Perhaps the difference is that of "right and wrong" which tends to be black and white, and less absolute measures of behavior?
I can imagine a world where people are proud of their individuals rights. I can imagine a world where an FBI agent, told to violate the constitution he has sworn to defend, would simply refuse to do so, as would any other replacements. Having read Stanly Milgram's Obedience to Authority, the dream is less easy in the light of day...
And also, "Congressional sources familiar with limited aspects of the program would not discuss any classified details but made it clear there were serious questions about the legality of the NSA actions. The sources, who demanded anonymity, said there were conditions under which it would be possible to gather and retain information on Americans if the surveillance were part of an investigation into foreign intelligence.
Note that potential gets you on the list: "The effort, which began within days after the attacks, has consisted partly of monitoring domestic telephone conversations, e-mail and even fax communications of individuals identified by the NSA as having some connection to al Qaeda events or figures, or to potential terrorism-related activities in the United States, the official said."
Here is the clincher, though:
Patent awarded in 2002... I assume that it is more expensive to produce the L- than the D- isomer? Why else continue manufacturing the D- ? I'm astounded.
Terrorists are a problem, yes. But the broader problem is fanaticism. I'm not talking about mere fanboy-ism, but the sort of "my country right or wrong", my belief-system regardless of rationality, to the point of violence. Communication is the essence of all things. That which blocks rational dialog should be suspect. We might not be able to predict who will fall victim to this malady of emotion, but we should be aware it exists and watch for it, and *tag* such behavior. Many people are football fans, yes, but few of them resort to violence to vent their frustration.
At the very least I'd like to see the Congress and the Senate start pushing laws forward stating unequivocally that presidential abuse of authority in the circumvention of civil liberties is a crime. While said laws might be vetoed, they could be voted on again and sent forward to be vetoed and yet voted upon again and again. Make it impossible for anyone to pretend that what is happening isn't wrong and needs to be addressed, and try to make it harder to happen next time.
Speculation, perhaps, put also witnesses and court cases that can't proceed because of national security interests. The fact that this shouldn't be happening is why the matter is so *serious*.
"Psuedoephedrine's optical isomer is just as effective at relieving congestion, can't be turned into meth, and has fewer side-effects to boot. You have three guesses which bunch of dickbags are sitting on the patent." This is news to me. Pray tell, who? And why isn't this public knowledge?
This is different. The DEA was tracking the phone numbers of international calls, not the conversations of local, domestic calls, and local, domestic internet traffic. This is *different*. Please don't mistake the current situation for the status que.
Yeah but what about his family? What about his friends? What about learning that cousin Fred told aunt Shelia than Tommy was pissed off about topic 'A'? You could use this sort of information to plant seeds of destruction, and push just the right levers while pulling just the right strings to make their group self-destruct. At least, seems possible...
May I distribute/email your post?