...They don't cut off cyclists in the bike lane. They don't get impatient. They don't get frustrated. They don't get angry. They don't get sleepy. They don't get distracted. "[they] can't be reasoned with, [they] can't be bargained with [they don't] feel pity or remorse or fear and they absolutely will not stop. Ever. [They just drive, in a deliberate, controlled, and entirely boring fashion.] Until you are dead."
Well, you see, when I retire from the FCC, I will have a paid position at AT&D and as a consumer I will be able to have more choices. And my money trickles down to the rest of the country, growing the money supply for everyone. This is how capitalism works and I can't really see how blocking the merger would benefit anyone. It clearly wouldn't benefit me. -- Any FCC Commissioner
If your information is out there, it's out there whether Google indexes it or not. This is an unenforceable law. It's as simple as that. I mean, I could mention somebody's name right here and say they went bankrupt. We all know who I'm talking about. Should slashdot be shutdown as a result unless they remove my post?
How about you comply and delete your comment? I don't like it. Even though you posted before me, and had no intention of addressing it to me, it is insulting to me and I don't wish to see it ever again. It pains me. If I lived in Europe and asked them to remove your comment, would they do it? I'd argue they shouldn't. But it really does pain me.
And finally, if I do business in Europe, how am I supposed to know what I can publish? Am I allowed to publish everything and just wait for the requests to come in? Or will there be some list of facts which may not be published on the internet? I wonder if anyone, such as yourself, could compile such facts into a book, or some sort of index of some sort to help new businesses comply with the law. Such a list would surely help prevent people from publishing facts no one needs to know. Oh the irony!
That's what I don't understand. All this metadata, and yet they couldn't prevent Boston bomber? This is a guy who got away with murdering people. He should have been in prison. Instead "statistics say we need to invade everyone's liberties". I haven't seen a single reporter ask about the metadata they had on the Boston bomber. If they couldn't prevent that attack, what attacks are they actually preventing?
Instead of "server huggers" we think of cloud sysadmins as Lakitu, a helpful koopa that rescues your applications when they've gone off track. Lakitu also throws spiny eggs at those suspender-ed and unshaven hackers who try to penetrate your kingdom's defenses. True, Lakitu can be knocked offline allowing such hackers to steal your bitcoins easily while your cloud floats along unattended, but this rarely happens. Given the success rate of Lakitu in the literature, I think we can easily agree that it's koopas all the way up for cloud computing.
Is Title II going to work? I see it prevents unreasonable discrimination, so I'm not sure how that's different than what we have today if the government thinks its reasonable to charge netflix more.
Seriously, that's what I would do. How long would this law stay around? I mean I understand there are people who wish annoyingly stupid things in the past weren't tied to their names, but the legalization of the right to forget is a slippery slope (i.e. Stalin photoshopped Trotsky out of his photos) with plenty of examples of why revisionism is a bad idea. I sympathize with the originator of the idea, but if we are led to believe that most people are honest and decent, then a simple explanation is all that would be in order to understand his plight. To those ignorant who would see something on Google and blindly discriminate against individuals forever, I think it says more about society's inability to have mercy, then the need to enforce an unenforceable right to be forgotten. What next? When we determine how to erase memories, everyone will have to sit in the chair to forget about stuff like this?
I hear you. It was hard for me to get past the technical interviews even when I was fresh out of school. My brain doesn't work that way at all. I had one question where they asked me about biographic numbers, and I struggled for 30 minutes about. Got back to the hotel afterward and solved the problem in about 5 min. on paper. Or many times the answer is some kind of way of breaking the problem down into a part that can be recursed, but I have trouble with those in a short time too.
Yet I'm very good at taking some theoretical complicated models and putting them in code. It's harder for me to come up with samples because I really only have proprietary software from work. But I agree that is beyond frustrating they won't even look at your code.
Well, time and stamp and possibly a 5% royalty to me for my recently patented method of submitting prior art to the patent office in a white envelope. I'm working on the different colors, but that's a trade secret.
How is Swartz worse? He may have intended to commit massive copyright violations, but he DID not. And he had rights to this information per JSTORs own terms of service. He was going to be prosecuted for 50 years to life for a thought crime. If thought crime is worse than actual crime, that is a big problem.
OSVDB says there is a debate about whether this information is copyrightable, but they aren't pursuing that angle.
If McAfee workers read these documents to improve software that they are developing, then that's a commercial use and it violates the terms under which the information was provided.
I thought that regularly changing one's password was unnecessary https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/11/changing_passwo.html. I thought that it needs to be changed if found to be hacked, but otherwise as long as its strong, there's no need to change it. So while promoting good password habits is a good idea, I'm not sure that "annually change all your passwords on the same day every year so that any eavesdropper/keylogger can look for possible password change activity on one day" is one of them.
You just said it yourself. The problem is that Comcast is a monopoly, has abused their position, and other ISP/Content creator combos are planning to follow suit.
Title II Common Carrier status would force Comcast to not discriminate. It can't charge Netflix more than what it charges any other customer.
I suppose another solution would be forcing Comcast to split its lines of business, but that is not a task the Government tends to want to do.
What we need are nickel pages in a book. For some reason Thomas Edison thought he could store 1000s of books in the same space as a paper book, although his invention never came to be, and so I don't really know what he was talking about.
Oh yeah? Well you try turning the phone off when you're driving! I need some kind of animatronic assistant with opposable thumbs to execute my orders. Your "kill switch" approach is just another demonstration of the stagnation of technology by those who don't understand what kind of lip service I'm trying to avoid! If people like me succumbed to that sort of humdrum do-it-yourself dystopia, I'd hate to imagine what sort of synergy-less society we'd all become. Luckily I'll keep talking to all my best friends forever in my socialnetworkhood with my augmented reality headset where all us dreamers chill until we come up with something that truly solves my problem forever: distraction-free flying virtual segways coasting the information superhighway picking up apps that inspire and awe all future generations. And you just want me to turn it off. How dumb am I?!?!?!
IANAL, but can I send them this? Note that I would include my name and birth year per their legal requirements if I decide to send it.
Any attempt to contact me via phone, email, or newspaper, constitutes acceptance of these legal terms. Any coupons for products produced by your company that are sent to me without my explicit request or that show up in an advertisement on the internet confirm your agreement to these terms.
I do not agree to binding arbitration. I do not agree to any terms which General Mills has proscribed. I hereby agree to ignore any response, and only to send bills in the amount of $100,000.00 to General Mills if I receive a response. If I currently have any existing customer relationship with General Mills I hereby declare that relationship null and void. Any coupons from General Mills which arrive in my mailbox or in my email will result in a $10,000.00 per coupon recycling charge.
ANY attempt to reply to my email will cost General Mills $100,000.00. There are no exceptions. If you disagree, if you think these terms are unfair, the only acceptable way to avoid payment of these terms that I have proscribed is to change your legal terms: http://generalmills.com/Legal_... to something compatible with US Constitutional law.
Again, I am not bound by your legal terms. If your legal team finds some way that I am inadvertently bound by your legal terms (e.g. member of a particular website, that I was not aware was owned by General Mills), then General Mills owes me $100,000.00 and is required to remove me from that website at its own expense. If after that removal, you find that I'm still somehow related to General Mills in anyway, that will be another $100,000.00. So get it right the first time! Because I explicitly requested not to be bound by your legal terms and this notice serves as a record of that statement per your own legal terms.
Slashdot Mirror
...They don't cut off cyclists in the bike lane. They don't get impatient. They don't get frustrated. They don't get angry. They don't get sleepy. They don't get distracted.
"[they] can't be reasoned with, [they] can't be bargained with [they don't] feel pity or remorse or fear and they absolutely will not stop. Ever. [They just drive, in a deliberate, controlled, and entirely boring fashion.] Until you are dead."
FTFY
Well, you see, when I retire from the FCC, I will have a paid position at AT&D and as a consumer I will be able to have more choices. And my money trickles down to the rest of the country, growing the money supply for everyone. This is how capitalism works and I can't really see how blocking the merger would benefit anyone. It clearly wouldn't benefit me. -- Any FCC Commissioner
If your information is out there, it's out there whether Google indexes it or not. This is an unenforceable law. It's as simple as that. I mean, I could mention somebody's name right here and say they went bankrupt. We all know who I'm talking about. Should slashdot be shutdown as a result unless they remove my post?
How about you comply and delete your comment? I don't like it. Even though you posted before me, and had no intention of addressing it to me, it is insulting to me and I don't wish to see it ever again. It pains me. If I lived in Europe and asked them to remove your comment, would they do it? I'd argue they shouldn't. But it really does pain me.
And finally, if I do business in Europe, how am I supposed to know what I can publish? Am I allowed to publish everything and just wait for the requests to come in? Or will there be some list of facts which may not be published on the internet? I wonder if anyone, such as yourself, could compile such facts into a book, or some sort of index of some sort to help new businesses comply with the law. Such a list would surely help prevent people from publishing facts no one needs to know. Oh the irony!
That's what I don't understand. All this metadata, and yet they couldn't prevent Boston bomber? This is a guy who got away with murdering people. He should have been in prison. Instead "statistics say we need to invade everyone's liberties". I haven't seen a single reporter ask about the metadata they had on the Boston bomber. If they couldn't prevent that attack, what attacks are they actually preventing?
Instead of "server huggers" we think of cloud sysadmins as Lakitu, a helpful koopa that rescues your applications when they've gone off track. Lakitu also throws spiny eggs at those suspender-ed and unshaven hackers who try to penetrate your kingdom's defenses. True, Lakitu can be knocked offline allowing such hackers to steal your bitcoins easily while your cloud floats along unattended, but this rarely happens. Given the success rate of Lakitu in the literature, I think we can easily agree that it's koopas all the way up for cloud computing.
Is Title II going to work? I see it prevents unreasonable discrimination, so I'm not sure how that's different than what we have today if the government thinks its reasonable to charge netflix more.
Dear Europe,
You have been forgotten by Google.
Seriously, that's what I would do. How long would this law stay around? I mean I understand there are people who wish annoyingly stupid things in the past weren't tied to their names, but the legalization of the right to forget is a slippery slope (i.e. Stalin photoshopped Trotsky out of his photos) with plenty of examples of why revisionism is a bad idea. I sympathize with the originator of the idea, but if we are led to believe that most people are honest and decent, then a simple explanation is all that would be in order to understand his plight. To those ignorant who would see something on Google and blindly discriminate against individuals forever, I think it says more about society's inability to have mercy, then the need to enforce an unenforceable right to be forgotten. What next? When we determine how to erase memories, everyone will have to sit in the chair to forget about stuff like this?
I hear you. It was hard for me to get past the technical interviews even when I was fresh out of school. My brain doesn't work that way at all. I had one question where they asked me about biographic numbers, and I struggled for 30 minutes about. Got back to the hotel afterward and solved the problem in about 5 min. on paper. Or many times the answer is some kind of way of breaking the problem down into a part that can be recursed, but I have trouble with those in a short time too.
Yet I'm very good at taking some theoretical complicated models and putting them in code. It's harder for me to come up with samples because I really only have proprietary software from work. But I agree that is beyond frustrating they won't even look at your code.
Well, time and stamp and possibly a 5% royalty to me for my recently patented method of submitting prior art to the patent office in a white envelope. I'm working on the different colors, but that's a trade secret.
Yeah, I see what you mean. CFAA is overly broad. Any "scary stuff with computer".
Yeah I'd have to agree. Clearly they violated the terms of service, although it's debatable about whether that's legal or not.
How is Swartz worse? He may have intended to commit massive copyright violations, but he DID not. And he had rights to this information per JSTORs own terms of service. He was going to be prosecuted for 50 years to life for a thought crime. If thought crime is worse than actual crime, that is a big problem.
OSVDB says there is a debate about whether this information is copyrightable, but they aren't pursuing that angle.
If McAfee workers read these documents to improve software that they are developing, then that's a commercial use and it violates the terms under which the information was provided.
I thought that regularly changing one's password was unnecessary https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/11/changing_passwo.html. I thought that it needs to be changed if found to be hacked, but otherwise as long as its strong, there's no need to change it. So while promoting good password habits is a good idea, I'm not sure that "annually change all your passwords on the same day every year so that any eavesdropper/keylogger can look for possible password change activity on one day" is one of them.
You just said it yourself. The problem is that Comcast is a monopoly, has abused their position, and other ISP/Content creator combos are planning to follow suit.
Title II Common Carrier status would force Comcast to not discriminate. It can't charge Netflix more than what it charges any other customer.
I suppose another solution would be forcing Comcast to split its lines of business, but that is not a task the Government tends to want to do.
What we need are nickel pages in a book. For some reason Thomas Edison thought he could store 1000s of books in the same space as a paper book, although his invention never came to be, and so I don't really know what he was talking about.
In other news, solar energy will never be viable as long as innovation bubble engines continue to run on coal and oil.
Have you seen the classified next level 5h17? Why code when you can teleport yourself? Steve Jobs never did that either. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVHFRNU3q_k
It's a good idea, but I fear the outcome will be like Animal Farm.
Oh yeah? Well you try turning the phone off when you're driving! I need some kind of animatronic assistant with opposable thumbs to execute my orders. Your "kill switch" approach is just another demonstration of the stagnation of technology by those who don't understand what kind of lip service I'm trying to avoid! If people like me succumbed to that sort of humdrum do-it-yourself dystopia, I'd hate to imagine what sort of synergy-less society we'd all become. Luckily I'll keep talking to all my best friends forever in my socialnetworkhood with my augmented reality headset where all us dreamers chill until we come up with something that truly solves my problem forever: distraction-free flying virtual segways coasting the information superhighway picking up apps that inspire and awe all future generations. And you just want me to turn it off. How dumb am I?!?!?!
Hopefully your name isn't B^HTuttle.
The new way to specify no 404:
What could possibly go wrong?
http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/24/...
Rat-infested nuclear Cherynobyl.
Have you no experience dealing with a Vogon?
I think it is the opposite of interesting.
You mean because their medicine makes my head hurt :)
Seriously, thank you, I did not realize the proscribe is the opposite of prescribe in terms of the law.
IANAL, but can I send them this? Note that I would include my name and birth year per their legal requirements if I decide to send it.
Any attempt to contact me via phone, email, or newspaper, constitutes acceptance of these legal terms. Any coupons for products produced by your company that are sent to me without my explicit request or that show up in an advertisement on the internet confirm your agreement to these terms.
I do not agree to binding arbitration. I do not agree to any terms which General Mills has proscribed. I hereby agree to ignore any response, and only to send bills in the amount of $100,000.00 to General Mills if I receive a response. If I currently have any existing customer relationship with General Mills I hereby declare that relationship null and void. Any coupons from General Mills which arrive in my mailbox or in my email will result in a $10,000.00 per coupon recycling charge.
ANY attempt to reply to my email will cost General Mills $100,000.00. There are no exceptions. If you disagree, if you think these terms are unfair, the only acceptable way to avoid payment of these terms that I have proscribed is to change your legal terms: http://generalmills.com/Legal_... to something compatible with US Constitutional law.
Again, I am not bound by your legal terms. If your legal team finds some way that I am inadvertently bound by your legal terms (e.g. member of a particular website, that I was not aware was owned by General Mills), then General Mills owes me $100,000.00 and is required to remove me from that website at its own expense. If after that removal, you find that I'm still somehow related to General Mills in anyway, that will be another $100,000.00. So get it right the first time! Because I explicitly requested not to be bound by your legal terms and this notice serves as a record of that statement per your own legal terms.