Sure the Near Field Infrared Experiment (NFIRE) has a low-orbit only kill-vehicle now, but how long before it has an Electron Beam Device that can annihilate a person playing golf or taking a shower (possibly with company)?
Well, I've looked at most of the current posts, and this early one was one of the closest to insightful. The reason for space weapons is to sustain the terror, and bringing the terror to the individual level is only the natural extension.
In today's example, think how convenient it would be to have snuffed that new troublemaker in Iraq? The tin hats really will be in fashion. All the crazies will have all their followers parading around in them. Not with any fantasy of blocking the high energy beams. Just trying to confuse the spotters who would be able to direct the beam to the target.
The current violence-based situation in Iraq is that the country is dangling on the edge of total chaos. The Sunnis have been causing trouble all along, mostly because they had it relatively good under Saddam. Now the Shia are on the edge of general revolt. They're still the majority, and they've been sort of quiet on the theory that they would get control when "democracy" arrived. [Can't imagine how they got that idea if they were paying any attention to Florida 2000 and 5-4.] Since the Shia have apparently woken up and realized they're getting conned, it isn't likely to quiet down now. All that's left is for the Kurds to go nuts again. And why not? The Kurds know they're going to get screwed again no matter who wins, so they might as well get what they can while the getting's good.
The neocon fantasy of ruling by pure force just doesn't work. You can only stay awake so long, and when you blink, when you drop the barrel of the gun for the shortest moment, hell breaks loose. If they have nothing to lose, their ONLY remaining interest is how to take you with them.
The solution is sharing the toys. People that have something to lose have the tendency to want to keep it.
Nah, it will never work. The BushCo people got rich because they were greedy and wanted more. The kernel of greed is not to be satisfied, but always to want more, and more, and more. More guns. Less sleep.
This link shows SCOX price relative to IBM over the last three months. While this will change depending on when it is generated, right now it shows a steady drop of SCOX relative to IBM, on the order of 60% loss for SCOX.
Here is a one year version. It currently shows that SCOX rose pretty steadily relative to IBM until last September, and then it oscillated a bunch until January, when it started down. In this view, SCOX still hasn't gone below the relative position it was at last year.
Of course, there's also the short term absolute status, which currently shows SCOX under $8 and falling. I believe that's already below the critical panic level for Darl. Don't they have to put up some real money now?
Considering the explosive growth in our ability to store personal information, and that most of this personal data is stored out there somewhere, perhaps to be used against us without warning, can you say anything succinct about the relationship between personal data, privacy, and our freedom. (My own conclusion is that the underlying principle of privacy protection should be based on possession as nine points of the law, and extension of the Fifth Amendment to our personal data storage devices.)
By the way, I used to know Mike Godwin pretty well. Very thought provoking chap. We were both living in Austin in those years, from a couple of years before he studied law until a couple of years afterwards. I don't want to reveal all his personal secrets, except that I'll say he was the big dull man of the Dull Man's Club (but there was an interesting woman's auxilliary). Even if my question doesn't make the cut, feel free to include my regards from Kawasaki...
That's the weak version of the joke. Sorry, but I didn't even know about it until after I'd posted, or I'd have included a reference to the stronger version that I'd read. In the strong version, he doesn't just shout "gotcha", he shouts it while grabbing his balls.
I've just read what ZDnet had to say. From article:
She ordered IBM to produce memos from IBM Chief Executive Sam Palmisano and from Irving Wladawsky-Berger, a top Linux executive.
Does anyone know what these memos are supposed to be about or is SCO just grasping at straws?
The secret is out... Sam was wearing the blue dress and hiding under the desk while Irving was playing with the WMDs.
Naw. SCO is just grasping at straws. If they didn't know what their own lawsuit was really about in the first place, you have to ask why they ever filed it. Except that the answer is obvious. They are using the legal system as part of an elaborate stock scam. Seasoning provided courtesy of FUD, Inc.
Reminds me of the conviction of Shoko Asahara for the Sarin gassing of the Tokyo subway. Only eight years to finally sentence him to hang.
Well, I actually think that watching him dangle should be counted as part of the punishment. He isn't going anywhere. The only substantive question is whether they hang him before he dies of old age. At least with a life sentence the suspense would be over. Sort of reminds me of the golf joke about the second "gotcha".
As regards the actual topic of this thread, SCO, my own opinion is that this situation is different because the crime is ongoing, and SCO is actually using the legal system to help commit the fraud. This is a case where justice delayed is not merely justice denied, but actual injustice perpetuated.
On the positive side, I think IBM should just turn over everything, and immediately. I can't even imagine why they haven't done so already--except that lawyers love playing games and SCO's lawyers are probably desperately phishing for anything they can imagine. Sure, SCO's original claims will turn out to be completely bogus, but SCO is hoping to find a blue dress or some WMDs somewhere in there, and then they can start a whole NEW lawsuit against IBM.
Right now it looks like we'll have to wait another 45 days for SCO to clarify anything, and then there'll be another delay while they analyze those claims, and IBM will deny all of them, and SCO will claim they need more information from IBM, then amend their claims some more, and then, and then... By now we're somewhere in 2007. Anyway, you can safely bet that Darl et al. will have dumped their SCO stock by then. Actually, looking at Darl's track record, he's due to change employeers again any day now. We're all sure the next guy will be glad to clean up the mess, right?
I think it's just some kind of coil. When I worked at an electronics store in Akihabara the network cables would routinely trip the alarms when they went through. We would just take the cable out of the bag, let them go through the detector, and then hand them the cable separately.
Not sure of the exact details, but I think the detectors are actually fishing for some kind of recognition code from the proper devices. Basically a kind of transponder-like approach. They're able to detect that a possible antenna is present, but something like a network cable is definitely not going to provide the correct response.
You managed only 2 correct out of your 18 guesses, but it was obviously just a flamebait post. One of those 2 was probably wrong, too, but I was trying to be generous.
I will comment on the most offensive of your wild-assed guesses. While Saddam was a minor nuisance, the major reason for the Iraq "war" was simply that Saddam was a major ongoing embarrassment to BushCo. Not particularly related to Microsoft, but it makes me feel good to say it again.
I obviously can't challenge you to a battle of wits. It's against my principles to attack an unarmed opponent.
Returning to the actual Microsoft topic, I'll note that it was probably a different building that got raided, a few minutes farther south of the Tex-Mex restaurant. (Not to be confused with Mexican food, which I don't particularly care for.) I'm actually rather surprised Microsoft would have their main Japan headquarters there. It's a little hard to describe the atmosphere of the district. I find it quite unpleasant and rarely visit. Very commercial, but not in the business office sense. Mostly very modern buildings with little respect for Japanese traditions. Very trendy, especially with young people, but also rather sleazy. Yakuza are fairly visible. Rumored to be the best place in Tokyo to pick up teen-age girls. The anonymous coward is probably the expert on that topic.
Actually, I think it was probably the Odakyu Southern Terrace (Tower?) that got raided, so I'll give a bit of context... I frequently eat in a pretty good Tex-Mex restaurant in the basement. (Well, actually it's considered a basement even though it's at ground level on one side. The building is actually built into a hill.) Nice new building, white, about 25 stories, with "Microsoft" written on the top left corner. It's about a 4-minute walk south from Shinjuku Station, which may be the busiest train station in the world, but it's actually located in Shibuya-ku. Actually my manager is the one who checked the address--I didn't think Shibuya-ku extended so far to the north.
Too bad I wasn't visiting Tokyo today. If it was a really good raid, maybe I'd have been able to see them throwing papers and hard disks out of the top floors.
(It also might have been a different Microsoft office that's actually closer to Shibuya Station, but I can't give any context for that. It's not really my kind of neighborhood and I don't know it very well, though the Tex-Mex place has a branch there, too.)
How long until the spammers put a political comment on the front of their spam and claim it's just a political ad sponsored by the penis enlargement people? Of course the reality underlying the claim is that they don't care if they cost "their" candidate votes. The spammers main concern is with finding the candidates with the dumbest supporters and the greatest "need" for their products. Is Dan Quayle running for anything this time around?
By the way, none of this political spam is new, though it looks like they are much better organized than usual. For severals years BushCo has been orchestrating issue responses through mailing lists and mass fax systems to keep their supporters "on the same page" as far as the latest spin is concerned. For example, the latest attempts to spin the AWOL Bush issue as "old news" are being orchestrated that way. And you just thought all of the brilliant dittoheads were spontaneously reaching the same conclusions? Sorry, but great minds do NOT all think alike.
I've already been targeted by a couple of the Democratic candidates. As much as I hate spam (see http://www.acm.org/ubiquity/views/s_jacobs_2.html) , I think this political stuff should be tolerated, though it's a rather tough call. On the one hand, I think it does open up the political process to more participants. On the other hand, it can certainly be abused. For example, a rich candidate could do a Joe job by spamming lies in the name of his opponent.
Then again, my political philosophy is fundamentally in sync with that crazy liberal Winston Churchill. I agree that democracy is a terrible system, except for the little detail that it's better than all of the others.
Okay, I've reviewed all of the highly ranked comments, and don't see ANYONE addressing the real root of the problem here.
Q: Why is Amazon doing any of this?
A: To make a buck.
The "customer" reviews are just part of that purpose. For example, from my own experience I can assure you that Amazon does not want honest and negative reviews, because such reviews might discourage some people from buying the book. I've submitted a couple of such reviews, thoughtful pieces that covered both sides, but which ultimately came down on the negative side, and which were rejected with various doublespeak explanations. The REAL problem was that I made a persuasive case against buying those books.
From their perspective, a totally bogus but glowing review is fine, just as long as it will sell more books.
Amazon claims an impartiality that is totally lacking in practice, but I say they are shooting themselves in the foot--or maybe in the head. I think the people who most want to buy and read books are the same people who most strongly object to censorship. Actually the desire of those people for access to all of the data is likely to cause them to read more books from all angles. (And I really don't think the fans of the goddess of hate could actually be reading more than one book a year.)
Amazon's money-grubbing slanted policies have so damaged their credibility that I actively avoid buying anything from them (unless I really can't find another source--but unfortunately they are also abusing their market influence to become an increasingly monopolistic sole source).
Is it really that surprising that a stupid lawsuit is the direct result of unfair and unreasonable legislation such as the DMCA? Wouldn't it be nice if AOL took the DMCA all the way to the Supreme Court on the grounds that it is unconstitutional? Of course, that's unlikely because AOL/TW actually want the DMCA -- they just don't want it to apply to them.
That may well be what Ellison is really up to. I'm not disputing that he's a crazy bastard, but he's a smart one. It would be VERY like him to hoist AOL by their own petard. I really doubt he's in it for the money. He's always blathering about some principle or other.
One important datum which I can't find around here is where the posts originated. If the poster who violated his copyright was a customer of AOL, then AOL may be in a special liability situation there. Yes, they can probably take it out on their customer as a ToS violation, but imagine you're the lawyer involved here. Who would you rather sue? Some poor schmuck? Or AOL? The lawyers are definitely in it for the money, and screw the principles.
Ah, it's Godwin's Law and the source is Mike Godwin, a fairly prominent attorney who used to work for the EFF. See http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/g/Godwin_s_La w.html
(Actually, I knew him personally before and during his time at the UT Law School.)
Re:It's like Netscape v. Microsoft in that...
on
Google v. Microsoft
·
· Score: 1
Google has indexed the internet. That data is ultimately more powerful than having software installed on the majority of desktops.
Aye, there's the rub. Google has only indexed it, but they have no ownership over the information. Anything which is publicly accessible can be indexed. Any search strategy or ranking system can be copied, at least copied roughly enough to satisfy most users.
Actually, the best example I know of functional-level copying involves the Windows interface, which is actually a very crude but usable copy of the Mac interface. Sorry that I can't recall the URL for the Mac design notes, but there is an excellent explanation of how and why it works, and how Microsoft maneuvered around the places where things like patents interfered with their copying.
Google does have an excellent collection of old usenet information, but they don't really own that, either. If Microsoft really wants the old stuff, they could probably find another seller, work out a deal with Google, steal it with a lot of tedious robotic searches, or possibly even strong-arm Google for a copy. However, Microsoft could equally well blow off the old stuff and wait until Google goes bankrupt, and then buy the archives during the liquidation. After all, that's how Google got the usenet archives from ye olde Deja-News.
And in the last resort, Microsoft has already demonstrated their willingness to cheat beyond the edges. For example, if users try to favor Google with robot.txt restrictions (as suggested elsewhere in this discussion), Microsoft could just have their crawlers ignore that polite convention. Microsoft could even get down and dirty. For example, they could release a "security patch" that "accidentally" breaks the Google toolbar in a massively unpleasant way. Whatever it takes to "win", we already know Microsoft will do it, and without penalty.
Already old news here. Been dealing with it for a couple of days...
The Subject: is actually more applicable to the spammers, who really are waging all out war on the utility of email. This one is more like a hit-and-run attack.
Still, the similarity is that they are hoping to find a few "good" suckers to click on their links. This one is actually an interesting combination. Partly it seems to be testing the efficiency of a propagation mechanism, which seems to result in greater "apparent locality" of the email, with higher odds that it seems to have come from someone you know. However, it also seems to be ready to launch some more insidious payload that was to be downloaded from some Web sites.
Right now all of those Web sites seem to have been taken off the net--or maybe they're waiting to pop them onto the net once the thing has propagated sufficiently. That part of the Trojan apparently tries to check in every 10 minutes to announce itself.
The thing that bothers me about this combination malware is that the anti-virus people could easily miss something. For example, in this case, what if the thing included a new variation on the email backchannel for the harvested email addresses. Or maybe a well-concealed bit of code to suddenly mung the URLs to point to live sites somewhere else? However, whatever it is hasn't triggered yet, and the anti-virus people perhaps have only detected the distractor HTTP-channel. If that were the case, they could still get a massive harvest of email addresses. (Yes, I still think the spammers are probably really the people behind this one--spamming just naturally attracts the lowest life forms. It's a question of the crudest motivations for the crudest acts.)
By the way, has anyone seen the reason for the bagle/beagle confusion here? Trying to incriminate the Israelis? Or the dogs? Or both?
Interestingly enough, I just checked what they actually are buying lately--and what came up was real estate. European real estate. Seems like the Carlyle Group knows what BushCo's policies are doing to the dollar.
I didn't mention that aspect in the earlier post, but not much chance the US government will be able to afford any kind of space program if the dollar continues to drop 20% a year.
Competition with China has been mentioned several times in this discussion. The amazing thing there is that the Chinese are able to come up with the money required. The not amusing aspect is that the Chinese currency does not float, but is fixed against that same American dollar, and they also lost 20% last year on any part of their space program that has to be purchased abroad....
Another very bad sign for America will be when the Chinese decide to switch their currency to the Euro. Quite possibly this year, if they decide they can't afford to lose another 20% (or more, the way things are going).
By the way, no flamebait intended. That some people may see it that way is mostly a reflection of how divided America is becoming. Yet another one of Dubya's lies was "uniter, not divider".
Every heard of the Carlyle Group?
on
The Future of NASA
·
· Score: 4, Flamebait
Carlyle is a big BushCo business, and this space thing is exactly their kind of scam. They mostly look for defense-related companies that are relatively cheap. The "relatively" is the tricky part. It depends either on insider knowledge that is liable to soon change the value of a target company's products, or sometimes the use of overt influence to change defense spending priorities to make the company's products more valuable. In either case, what they bought cheap suddenly becomes much more valuable--and they sell it off and look for another.
Space technology has been on the fringes of their interests. However, if you want to figure out the real motivation behind this latest space deal, look to see what the Carlyle folks have been buying lately. These guys only think with the brains in their hip pockets.
By the way, Poppy Bush and his friends are major participants. Saudis like the royals and Bin Ladins used to be big players in the group, too, but they were persuaded to get out. Looked bad, you know.
Remember when SCO gave IBM all the paper with useless source code on it? IBM should respond by giving SCO whatever it asks for--but printed REALLY one big. One giant letter per page. They could wheel the crates into court, and then apologize:
"We're sorry, but we think the pages may have gotten shuffled a bit during shipping."
This isn't the leader to kick it off, but he's the only one who has.
No, the leader who kicked it off was JFK. The last White House resident who sort of made big mumbles about it was actually Poppy Bush--but most people don't even remember his Mars by 2035 mumble. Dubya is just trying to get it back on Daddy's schedule.
In terms of doing something useful in space, probably the strongest claim would be the international space station--but Dubya is destroying the international cooperation that depends on. Only natural, since Dubya's real motivation for supporting space flight is military dominance.
Actually, I'm a big supporter of real science, including the space program. However, you also have to deal with the economic realities, and if Dubya keeps losing 20% of the dollar's value every year, the US won't be able to afford anything remotely resembling a real space program.
I don't think this is the proper term at this point, because they haven't filed suit against anyone, nor are they actively encouraging other people to sue each other. Also, no ships involved for the other sense of the term.
At this stage, SCO appears to be committing a different crime whose name I can't recall just now, though it may be similar to barratry. That is the specific crime of threatening to sue someone without actually doing so. I believe it's regarded as worse when the person making the threat has reason to believe the threat is baseless and there is no real intent of suing.
British law seems to be more punitive of frivolous lawsuits, so it seems quite unlikely that SCO is even seriously considering such lawsuits, though of course they ought to consider them if they win any part of their suit against IBM.
No, spam is an ECONOMIC problem, not a social problem. You're never going to get "perfect" people who always act morally.
We pretend email is free, so the spammers think they are dividing by zero--and any return on zero investment looks very impressive. This is actually a silly legacy of when the nascent Internet was a non-commercial and purely cooperative enterprise. "You help me with my email and I'll help you with yours. We just won't worry about the details of the bean counting."
Now the spammers say "You help me with my 10 million emails and maybe I'll find a sucker who'll send me $10!"
I got one of these yesterday that was supposed to be from Citibank. Practically every other word was garbled. However, based on my experiences with the incompetence of Citibank, it could have been from them. However, asking for my cash card information and PIN was a bit much, even for them. Also, it was in my spamtrap Yahoo address. Yahoo has the worst spam filtering of all of my email routings.
Actually, since I did have a Citibank account a while ago, and since some of the details of the spam did match Citibank business procedures, I actually wonder whether their account information may have been compromised. Hopefully, it was just a random fishing expedition, though I'm certain the ethical aspects and legal would not worry the spammers.
(On the Citibank topic, it REALLY did take me about 6 months of hard effort to get all my money out of Citibank and get all of my accounts closed. An amazing experience filled with quotes like "but we can't give you cash unless you pay extra" and "we don't offer that service today". AFaIK, they only overcharged me one time on one of the Euro transactions...)
Well, the election results were definitely wrong, but at least we had them instantly!!
That's why we should amend the Constitution to allow only people of, at least, basic intelligence to vote. I mean think about it, if they're not intelligent enough to figure out a system for placing a vote - as complicated as it may be, there are instructions always provided - how much weight do you want to give their opinion on who should be in power? I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
Well, well, well. Advocating democracy and the suppression of democratic diologue in the same post. We can see that this guy has already failed the "basic intelligence" test and we can now cancel his right to vote.
On a more serious note, Churchill was right. I remind you that in spite of his Nobel Prize for literature, Churchill was NOT a liberal, so he is alllowed to reply. What Churchill said is that democracy is a lousy political system, but it works better than any other--and there have been PLENTY of tests over the centuries.
We don't need the rule of law to protect us from weak people. We need laws, including election laws, to protect us from the strong people. Abuse of voting laws has a long and ignoble history. Actually, this particular suggestion is most similar to the voting tests that were used to prevent the "niggers" from voting before LBJ signed the voting reform laws. At that time, he is supposed to have predicted that the South would switch to the GOP for at least a generation.
I still wonder why the dittoheads like AD haven't figured out that BushCo is screwing them, too. It must be one of masochistic things.
Oh yeah, I forgot to explain about the rope in the Subject. While you still have some slack, the rope is falling along with you. When the rope stops moving...
The judge wants to see the goods. He wants to see them NOW. SCO don't have no goods. He's a hanging judge.
This is really getting loony--but I just realized that time is up. It's already been about a month since SCO was told to produce some REAL goods. It's obviously some sort of diversionary move, but a really crazy one. I'm straining my brain to understand it, but all I can think is that they want to claim this is how they are "protecting" their IP rather than performing normal due diligence. I bet the judge is not going to be amused. Can you say "contempt of court"?
Remember the NORMAL non-SCO behavior is to say what the disputed IP actually is--but in that case the problem--if there is any real problem--would have been fixed LONG ago. Want to take any bets if there's any code in the 2.6 Linux kernel that has ANY relation at all to anything from SCO?
In related news, SCO admits they paid $9 million to the lawyers last year--but also claims they managed to clear $5 million net. Which number do you trust more? I say the 5 is just more FUDging.
Slashdot Mirror
In today's example, think how convenient it would be to have snuffed that new troublemaker in Iraq? The tin hats really will be in fashion. All the crazies will have all their followers parading around in them. Not with any fantasy of blocking the high energy beams. Just trying to confuse the spotters who would be able to direct the beam to the target.
The current violence-based situation in Iraq is that the country is dangling on the edge of total chaos. The Sunnis have been causing trouble all along, mostly because they had it relatively good under Saddam. Now the Shia are on the edge of general revolt. They're still the majority, and they've been sort of quiet on the theory that they would get control when "democracy" arrived. [Can't imagine how they got that idea if they were paying any attention to Florida 2000 and 5-4.] Since the Shia have apparently woken up and realized they're getting conned, it isn't likely to quiet down now. All that's left is for the Kurds to go nuts again. And why not? The Kurds know they're going to get screwed again no matter who wins, so they might as well get what they can while the getting's good.
The neocon fantasy of ruling by pure force just doesn't work. You can only stay awake so long, and when you blink, when you drop the barrel of the gun for the shortest moment, hell breaks loose. If they have nothing to lose, their ONLY remaining interest is how to take you with them.
The solution is sharing the toys. People that have something to lose have the tendency to want to keep it.
Nah, it will never work. The BushCo people got rich because they were greedy and wanted more. The kernel of greed is not to be satisfied, but always to want more, and more, and more. More guns. Less sleep.
Until the big thud.
Here is a one year version. It currently shows that SCOX rose pretty steadily relative to IBM until last September, and then it oscillated a bunch until January, when it started down. In this view, SCOX still hasn't gone below the relative position it was at last year.
Of course, there's also the short term absolute status, which currently shows SCOX under $8 and falling. I believe that's already below the critical panic level for Darl. Don't they have to put up some real money now?
By the way, I used to know Mike Godwin pretty well. Very thought provoking chap. We were both living in Austin in those years, from a couple of years before he studied law until a couple of years afterwards. I don't want to reveal all his personal secrets, except that I'll say he was the big dull man of the Dull Man's Club (but there was an interesting woman's auxilliary). Even if my question doesn't make the cut, feel free to include my regards from Kawasaki...
That's the weak version of the joke. Sorry, but I didn't even know about it until after I'd posted, or I'd have included a reference to the stronger version that I'd read. In the strong version, he doesn't just shout "gotcha", he shouts it while grabbing his balls.
Naw. SCO is just grasping at straws. If they didn't know what their own lawsuit was really about in the first place, you have to ask why they ever filed it. Except that the answer is obvious. They are using the legal system as part of an elaborate stock scam. Seasoning provided courtesy of FUD, Inc.
As regards the actual topic of this thread, SCO, my own opinion is that this situation is different because the crime is ongoing, and SCO is actually using the legal system to help commit the fraud. This is a case where justice delayed is not merely justice denied, but actual injustice perpetuated.
On the positive side, I think IBM should just turn over everything, and immediately. I can't even imagine why they haven't done so already--except that lawyers love playing games and SCO's lawyers are probably desperately phishing for anything they can imagine. Sure, SCO's original claims will turn out to be completely bogus, but SCO is hoping to find a blue dress or some WMDs somewhere in there, and then they can start a whole NEW lawsuit against IBM.
Right now it looks like we'll have to wait another 45 days for SCO to clarify anything, and then there'll be another delay while they analyze those claims, and IBM will deny all of them, and SCO will claim they need more information from IBM, then amend their claims some more, and then, and then... By now we're somewhere in 2007. Anyway, you can safely bet that Darl et al. will have dumped their SCO stock by then. Actually, looking at Darl's track record, he's due to change employeers again any day now. We're all sure the next guy will be glad to clean up the mess, right?
I think it's just some kind of coil. When I worked at an electronics store in Akihabara the network cables would routinely trip the alarms when they went through. We would just take the cable out of the bag, let them go through the detector, and then hand them the cable separately.
Not sure of the exact details, but I think the detectors are actually fishing for some kind of recognition code from the proper devices. Basically a kind of transponder-like approach. They're able to detect that a possible antenna is present, but something like a network cable is definitely not going to provide the correct response.
You managed only 2 correct out of your 18 guesses, but it was obviously just a flamebait post. One of those 2 was probably wrong, too, but I was trying to be generous.
I will comment on the most offensive of your wild-assed guesses. While Saddam was a minor nuisance, the major reason for the Iraq "war" was simply that Saddam was a major ongoing embarrassment to BushCo. Not particularly related to Microsoft, but it makes me feel good to say it again.
I obviously can't challenge you to a battle of wits. It's against my principles to attack an unarmed opponent.
Returning to the actual Microsoft topic, I'll note that it was probably a different building that got raided, a few minutes farther south of the Tex-Mex restaurant. (Not to be confused with Mexican food, which I don't particularly care for.) I'm actually rather surprised Microsoft would have their main Japan headquarters there. It's a little hard to describe the atmosphere of the district. I find it quite unpleasant and rarely visit. Very commercial, but not in the business office sense. Mostly very modern buildings with little respect for Japanese traditions. Very trendy, especially with young people, but also rather sleazy. Yakuza are fairly visible. Rumored to be the best place in Tokyo to pick up teen-age girls. The anonymous coward is probably the expert on that topic.
Actually, I think it was probably the Odakyu Southern Terrace (Tower?) that got raided, so I'll give a bit of context... I frequently eat in a pretty good Tex-Mex restaurant in the basement. (Well, actually it's considered a basement even though it's at ground level on one side. The building is actually built into a hill.) Nice new building, white, about 25 stories, with "Microsoft" written on the top left corner. It's about a 4-minute walk south from Shinjuku Station, which may be the busiest train station in the world, but it's actually located in Shibuya-ku. Actually my manager is the one who checked the address--I didn't think Shibuya-ku extended so far to the north.
Too bad I wasn't visiting Tokyo today. If it was a really good raid, maybe I'd have been able to see them throwing papers and hard disks out of the top floors.
(It also might have been a different Microsoft office that's actually closer to Shibuya Station, but I can't give any context for that. It's not really my kind of neighborhood and I don't know it very well, though the Tex-Mex place has a branch there, too.)
By the way, none of this political spam is new, though it looks like they are much better organized than usual. For severals years BushCo has been orchestrating issue responses through mailing lists and mass fax systems to keep their supporters "on the same page" as far as the latest spin is concerned. For example, the latest attempts to spin the AWOL Bush issue as "old news" are being orchestrated that way. And you just thought all of the brilliant dittoheads were spontaneously reaching the same conclusions? Sorry, but great minds do NOT all think alike.
I've already been targeted by a couple of the Democratic candidates. As much as I hate spam (see http://www.acm.org/ubiquity/views/s_jacobs_2.html) , I think this political stuff should be tolerated, though it's a rather tough call. On the one hand, I think it does open up the political process to more participants. On the other hand, it can certainly be abused. For example, a rich candidate could do a Joe job by spamming lies in the name of his opponent.
Then again, my political philosophy is fundamentally in sync with that crazy liberal Winston Churchill. I agree that democracy is a terrible system, except for the little detail that it's better than all of the others.
-
Q: Why is Amazon doing any of this?
- A: To make a buck.
The "customer" reviews are just part of that purpose. For example, from my own experience I can assure you that Amazon does not want honest and negative reviews, because such reviews might discourage some people from buying the book. I've submitted a couple of such reviews, thoughtful pieces that covered both sides, but which ultimately came down on the negative side, and which were rejected with various doublespeak explanations. The REAL problem was that I made a persuasive case against buying those books.From their perspective, a totally bogus but glowing review is fine, just as long as it will sell more books.
Amazon claims an impartiality that is totally lacking in practice, but I say they are shooting themselves in the foot--or maybe in the head. I think the people who most want to buy and read books are the same people who most strongly object to censorship. Actually the desire of those people for access to all of the data is likely to cause them to read more books from all angles. (And I really don't think the fans of the goddess of hate could actually be reading more than one book a year.)
Amazon's money-grubbing slanted policies have so damaged their credibility that I actively avoid buying anything from them (unless I really can't find another source--but unfortunately they are also abusing their market influence to become an increasingly monopolistic sole source).
One important datum which I can't find around here is where the posts originated. If the poster who violated his copyright was a customer of AOL, then AOL may be in a special liability situation there. Yes, they can probably take it out on their customer as a ToS violation, but imagine you're the lawyer involved here. Who would you rather sue? Some poor schmuck? Or AOL? The lawyers are definitely in it for the money, and screw the principles.
Ah, it's Godwin's Law and the source is Mike Godwin, a fairly prominent attorney who used to work for the EFF. See http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/g/Godwin_s_La w.html
(Actually, I knew him personally before and during his time at the UT Law School.)
Aye, there's the rub. Google has only indexed it, but they have no ownership over the information. Anything which is publicly accessible can be indexed. Any search strategy or ranking system can be copied, at least copied roughly enough to satisfy most users.
Actually, the best example I know of functional-level copying involves the Windows interface, which is actually a very crude but usable copy of the Mac interface. Sorry that I can't recall the URL for the Mac design notes, but there is an excellent explanation of how and why it works, and how Microsoft maneuvered around the places where things like patents interfered with their copying.
Google does have an excellent collection of old usenet information, but they don't really own that, either. If Microsoft really wants the old stuff, they could probably find another seller, work out a deal with Google, steal it with a lot of tedious robotic searches, or possibly even strong-arm Google for a copy. However, Microsoft could equally well blow off the old stuff and wait until Google goes bankrupt, and then buy the archives during the liquidation. After all, that's how Google got the usenet archives from ye olde Deja-News.
And in the last resort, Microsoft has already demonstrated their willingness to cheat beyond the edges. For example, if users try to favor Google with robot.txt restrictions (as suggested elsewhere in this discussion), Microsoft could just have their crawlers ignore that polite convention. Microsoft could even get down and dirty. For example, they could release a "security patch" that "accidentally" breaks the Google toolbar in a massively unpleasant way. Whatever it takes to "win", we already know Microsoft will do it, and without penalty.
Already old news here. Been dealing with it for a couple of days...
The Subject: is actually more applicable to the spammers, who really are waging all out war on the utility of email. This one is more like a hit-and-run attack.
Still, the similarity is that they are hoping to find a few "good" suckers to click on their links. This one is actually an interesting combination. Partly it seems to be testing the efficiency of a propagation mechanism, which seems to result in greater "apparent locality" of the email, with higher odds that it seems to have come from someone you know. However, it also seems to be ready to launch some more insidious payload that was to be downloaded from some Web sites.
Right now all of those Web sites seem to have been taken off the net--or maybe they're waiting to pop them onto the net once the thing has propagated sufficiently. That part of the Trojan apparently tries to check in every 10 minutes to announce itself.
The thing that bothers me about this combination malware is that the anti-virus people could easily miss something. For example, in this case, what if the thing included a new variation on the email backchannel for the harvested email addresses. Or maybe a well-concealed bit of code to suddenly mung the URLs to point to live sites somewhere else? However, whatever it is hasn't triggered yet, and the anti-virus people perhaps have only detected the distractor HTTP-channel. If that were the case, they could still get a massive harvest of email addresses. (Yes, I still think the spammers are probably really the people behind this one--spamming just naturally attracts the lowest life forms. It's a question of the crudest motivations for the crudest acts.)
By the way, has anyone seen the reason for the bagle/beagle confusion here? Trying to incriminate the Israelis? Or the dogs? Or both?
Interestingly enough, I just checked what they actually are buying lately--and what came up was real estate. European real estate. Seems like the Carlyle Group knows what BushCo's policies are doing to the dollar.
I didn't mention that aspect in the earlier post, but not much chance the US government will be able to afford any kind of space program if the dollar continues to drop 20% a year.
Competition with China has been mentioned several times in this discussion. The amazing thing there is that the Chinese are able to come up with the money required. The not amusing aspect is that the Chinese currency does not float, but is fixed against that same American dollar, and they also lost 20% last year on any part of their space program that has to be purchased abroad....
Another very bad sign for America will be when the Chinese decide to switch their currency to the Euro. Quite possibly this year, if they decide they can't afford to lose another 20% (or more, the way things are going).
By the way, no flamebait intended. That some people may see it that way is mostly a reflection of how divided America is becoming. Yet another one of Dubya's lies was "uniter, not divider".
Carlyle is a big BushCo business, and this space thing is exactly their kind of scam. They mostly look for defense-related companies that are relatively cheap. The "relatively" is the tricky part. It depends either on insider knowledge that is liable to soon change the value of a target company's products, or sometimes the use of overt influence to change defense spending priorities to make the company's products more valuable. In either case, what they bought cheap suddenly becomes much more valuable--and they sell it off and look for another.
Space technology has been on the fringes of their interests. However, if you want to figure out the real motivation behind this latest space deal, look to see what the Carlyle folks have been buying lately. These guys only think with the brains in their hip pockets.
By the way, Poppy Bush and his friends are major participants. Saudis like the royals and Bin Ladins used to be big players in the group, too, but they were persuaded to get out. Looked bad, you know.
Remember when SCO gave IBM all the paper with useless source code on it? IBM should respond by giving SCO whatever it asks for--but printed REALLY one big. One giant letter per page. They could wheel the crates into court, and then apologize:
"We're sorry, but we think the pages may have gotten shuffled a bit during shipping."
No, the leader who kicked it off was JFK. The last White House resident who sort of made big mumbles about it was actually Poppy Bush--but most people don't even remember his Mars by 2035 mumble. Dubya is just trying to get it back on Daddy's schedule.
In terms of doing something useful in space, probably the strongest claim would be the international space station--but Dubya is destroying the international cooperation that depends on. Only natural, since Dubya's real motivation for supporting space flight is military dominance.
Actually, I'm a big supporter of real science, including the space program. However, you also have to deal with the economic realities, and if Dubya keeps losing 20% of the dollar's value every year, the US won't be able to afford anything remotely resembling a real space program.
I don't think this is the proper term at this point, because they haven't filed suit against anyone, nor are they actively encouraging other people to sue each other. Also, no ships involved for the other sense of the term.
At this stage, SCO appears to be committing a different crime whose name I can't recall just now, though it may be similar to barratry. That is the specific crime of threatening to sue someone without actually doing so. I believe it's regarded as worse when the person making the threat has reason to believe the threat is baseless and there is no real intent of suing.
British law seems to be more punitive of frivolous lawsuits, so it seems quite unlikely that SCO is even seriously considering such lawsuits, though of course they ought to consider them if they win any part of their suit against IBM.
No, spam is an ECONOMIC problem, not a social problem. You're never going to get "perfect" people who always act morally.
We pretend email is free, so the spammers think they are dividing by zero--and any return on zero investment looks very impressive. This is actually a silly legacy of when the nascent Internet was a non-commercial and purely cooperative enterprise. "You help me with my email and I'll help you with yours. We just won't worry about the details of the bean counting."
Now the spammers say "You help me with my 10 million emails and maybe I'll find a sucker who'll send me $10!"
I got one of these yesterday that was supposed to be from Citibank. Practically every other word was garbled. However, based on my experiences with the incompetence of Citibank, it could have been from them. However, asking for my cash card information and PIN was a bit much, even for them. Also, it was in my spamtrap Yahoo address. Yahoo has the worst spam filtering of all of my email routings.
Actually, since I did have a Citibank account a while ago, and since some of the details of the spam did match Citibank business procedures, I actually wonder whether their account information may have been compromised. Hopefully, it was just a random fishing expedition, though I'm certain the ethical aspects and legal would not worry the spammers.
(On the Citibank topic, it REALLY did take me about 6 months of hard effort to get all my money out of Citibank and get all of my accounts closed. An amazing experience filled with quotes like "but we can't give you cash unless you pay extra" and "we don't offer that service today". AFaIK, they only overcharged me one time on one of the Euro transactions...)
Well, well, well. Advocating democracy and the suppression of democratic diologue in the same post. We can see that this guy has already failed the "basic intelligence" test and we can now cancel his right to vote.
On a more serious note, Churchill was right. I remind you that in spite of his Nobel Prize for literature, Churchill was NOT a liberal, so he is alllowed to reply. What Churchill said is that democracy is a lousy political system, but it works better than any other--and there have been PLENTY of tests over the centuries.
We don't need the rule of law to protect us from weak people. We need laws, including election laws, to protect us from the strong people. Abuse of voting laws has a long and ignoble history. Actually, this particular suggestion is most similar to the voting tests that were used to prevent the "niggers" from voting before LBJ signed the voting reform laws. At that time, he is supposed to have predicted that the South would switch to the GOP for at least a generation.
I still wonder why the dittoheads like AD haven't figured out that BushCo is screwing them, too. It must be one of masochistic things.
Oh yeah, I forgot to explain about the rope in the Subject. While you still have some slack, the rope is falling along with you. When the rope stops moving...
The judge wants to see the goods. He wants to see them NOW. SCO don't have no goods. He's a hanging judge.
This is really getting loony--but I just realized that time is up. It's already been about a month since SCO was told to produce some REAL goods. It's obviously some sort of diversionary move, but a really crazy one. I'm straining my brain to understand it, but all I can think is that they want to claim this is how they are "protecting" their IP rather than performing normal due diligence. I bet the judge is not going to be amused. Can you say "contempt of court"?
Remember the NORMAL non-SCO behavior is to say what the disputed IP actually is--but in that case the problem--if there is any real problem--would have been fixed LONG ago. Want to take any bets if there's any code in the 2.6 Linux kernel that has ANY relation at all to anything from SCO?
In related news, SCO admits they paid $9 million to the lawyers last year--but also claims they managed to clear $5 million net. Which number do you trust more? I say the 5 is just more FUDging.