Right now at least. But what happens if the media outlets publish too many stories that the men in power don't like? Will we see this unit given the power to force the media not to run stories the military doesnt like? Will we see the head of this unit turn into the american answer to Joseph Goebbels?
Having the machines behind a NAT router should stop a lot of attacks. And if that isnt enough, find a NAT router with a built in firewall (or add an extra firewall appliance such as a old PC with linux on it)
I have yet to see a windows based firewall that doesnt suck.
Woah, a political candidate who posts to Slashdot. Never seen that before...
If I lived in Utah and not Australia, I would vote for this guy in a heartbeat (and not just because he posts to Slashdot, I actually aggree with the things he says). Now if only we could find someone in australia willing to do the same (such as favoring the little guy instead of the big multinational, giving the iraqi people a say in who should control their country etc)
The reason the media companies chose Hatch to help them get their bills through (and paid him big $$$ to do it) is because he has such a strong support base from the religious groups that he is very hard to vote out of office. (and replace with someone less likely to listen to their lobbying efforts)
Why not take existing proven rocket engines (such as those used on the Titan booster, the Saturn rocket, the shuttle, the Delta rocket, whatever the russians use to launch soyuz or whatever it is) and strap it to the rear end of a big fuel tank with the payload (ISS module or whatever else) strapped to the nose or something. No new technologies or anything, just use what we have now and know works. If takeoff weight is an issue, do what the russians did with Sputnik or what was done with the Saturn 5 and just have more rocket engines firing at once. Then, once you have it working, you can go forward and say "ok, this works, lets design a new rocket engine that can plug into this launch vehicle but would provide more takeoff weight" or whatever.
Of course, IANARS (I am not a rocket scientist) so I dont know exactly how feesable this idea is.
Another idea that has come up is to simply take the shuttle SRBs and external tank as they are now (or replace the shuttle SRBs with liquid rockets) and strap a set of rocket engines on to the rear end of the external tank (to substitute for the shuttle main engines) and strap a payload in (on top of it or on the back in place of the orbiter).
You dont need to make it that complex. Essentially, if the recipiant supports encryption, the recipiants public key is pulled from a key server. Then, the email client encrypts it using something similar to PGP or GPG. Something thats standard enough that anyone can implement it. At the other end, it is decrypted by the mail client using the recipiants private key. All that the servers in the middle see is an encrypted email (same as they would see if you encrypted an email right now with PGP or GPG or whatever). The servers dont need to know about the encryption or be changed in any way.
No issues with being able to access the email from anywhere, as long as you have your private key, any email client with the right encryption support would be able to decrypt the email (including web based email clients if you were willing to trust uploading your private key to a https:/// server run by whoever provides your email)
And with this, mail servers (and mail server admins) never see the unencrypted email.
Assuming the key management is good enough (i.e. that you can trust that who the system says owns the key actually owns it), it can also be used to verify that the sender is who they say thay are.
The downside is the need to en- and de-crypt on the client side which might be an issue for some embedded applications (although these days most mobile phones, PDAs and the like that have internet/email generally have web browsers that understand SSL and if they have the CPU to handle SSL, they can probobly handle encrypted email)
Hopefully in 30 years from now, we will live in a world where encrypting email, IM conversations, personal documents and anything else that you would rather not be public becomes something everyday people do and not something that "geeks" do. Hopefully we see a world where the major email clients (including Thunderbird/Seamonkey) come with easy to use email encryption out of the box. Hopefully we see a world where your communications and data are safe from people you would rather didnt see them (black-hat hackers, identity thieves, your worst enemy, your boss, the RIAA etc etc)
My (limited non lawyerly) understanding of US copyright law and the DMCA is that as long as google removes any content when requested by the copyright holder, they are safe legally (for much the same reasons Geocities or Photobucket is not legally required to activly police every upload to hosted homepages/photo albums). Or was there a specific takedown request from comedy central?
Acording to http://www.opensource.org/licenses/ the SUN CDDL (which is what they used for OpenSolaris) is an open source license. It is not a Free Software licence and is incompatible with the GNU GPL but it is still an open source license.
So long as there is even one image out there that is pornographic or offensive, there will be people who want to see it gone. And as long as there are people who want to see pornographic images gone, there will be polititians who promise to pass laws restricting or banning it in exchange for votes (and sheeple who will vote for them because of it).
They will keep trying until they end up with a law that the courts dont reject (just like various state governments are going to keep trying anti-video-game legislation until they find one that the courts dont reject)
The 2 problems with any "anti-pornography" bill are: A.How do you define what should be blocked or restricted in a way that everyone can aggree on (answer: you cant) and B.How do you apply these new laws to all the porn from countries without such laws (answer: you cant)
The problem is basicly that the only vehicle on the planet that can get to hubble is the shuttle Discovery. And, NASA have decided that they cant afford the risks (to the crew but more to the point to the shuttle which is essential to the ISS project) of sending Discovery to hubble.
Hopefuly they change their mind and go and fix one of the most important astronomical tools ever created.
It is about other media players being able to use ITMS content and about allowing other stores to release content that can be played on the iPod (and on other media players that can now play the ITMS content).
Fact is, if you want to operate a music store, you are going to need some kind of DRM. This module allows one particular kind of DRM (that happens to be used by the #1 online media store) to play on more media players players than it can currently be played on and to allow organizations other than Apple to release media protected with this DRM.
Most companies realize that if you give the customers what they want, they will continue to give you money. Dell knows that if they keep making the kinds of computers they are making now, people will keep buying Dells. Walmart knows that if they keep offering stuff really really cheap, people will keep comming back to walmart instead of going elsewhere.
Sony on the other hand has fallen into a trap that a number of companies are in (or have been in) where making huge profits is more important that doing what the customers want (and therefore getting their customers to come back). Most of the companies that follow the "screw the customers" model have a monopoly (or something close enough to one) and can get away with it since there is really no other choice (for example, Microsoft, Verizon etc) but Sony is probobly going to find that it wont work for them in this case.
However, until people start saying "these are the only mailservers permitted to send mail for my domain, anything else should be rejected outright", mailservers wont reject mail from support@paypal.com sent from paypalscam.ru.
Does microsoft have plans for an IE feedback form similar to what they have now for Visual Studio? Having such a feedback form would mean that people could post things like "Support " or "Fix issue where adds an extra pixel to the border" or whatever and then the IE team could investigate them (just like the Visual Studio team does with the Visual Studio feedback) and provide feedback such as "no, we cant fix this at this time" or "we will consider this for the next release" or "we have investigated this and have a fix already" or "here is a workaround" or whatever else it is. If there was a vote system so people can vote for what they think is important, microsoft could use that information to see how many people want which features (and therefore which features it makes the most sense to implement).
Why is YouTube different to Photobucket, GeoCities, Rapidshare or any other service that allows people to upload stuff and have it hosted on their server for others to download.
Is GeoCities being sued because people have uploaded illegally copied content to a GeoCities homepage? Is Photobucket beung sued because people have uploaded illegally copied photos to a Photobucket account?
If I upload a copyrighted video to Rapidshare without permission, the copyright holder can ask rapidshare for it to be removed. But Rapidshare isnt liable for that copyrighted video as long as they comply with takedown notices.
All those other services have appropriate things (including "uploading copyrighted stuff without permission is a violation of the terms of service" rules and "if you hold the copyright to anything on our service, we will take it down no questions asked" procedures). So why cant Google Video/YouTube do the same?
Slashdot Mirror
Right now at least.
But what happens if the media outlets publish too many stories that the men in power don't like? Will we see this unit given the power to force the media not to run stories the military doesnt like? Will we see the head of this unit turn into the american answer to Joseph Goebbels?
Having the machines behind a NAT router should stop a lot of attacks. And if that isnt enough, find a NAT router with a built in firewall (or add an extra firewall appliance such as a old PC with linux on it)
I have yet to see a windows based firewall that doesnt suck.
Woah, a political candidate who posts to Slashdot. Never seen that before...
If I lived in Utah and not Australia, I would vote for this guy in a heartbeat (and not just because he posts to Slashdot, I actually aggree with the things he says).
Now if only we could find someone in australia willing to do the same (such as favoring the little guy instead of the big multinational, giving the iraqi people a say in who should control their country etc)
The reason the media companies chose Hatch to help them get their bills through (and paid him big $$$ to do it) is because he has such a strong support base from the religious groups that he is very hard to vote out of office. (and replace with someone less likely to listen to their lobbying efforts)
Why not take existing proven rocket engines (such as those used on the Titan booster, the Saturn rocket, the shuttle, the Delta rocket, whatever the russians use to launch soyuz or whatever it is) and strap it to the rear end of a big fuel tank with the payload (ISS module or whatever else) strapped to the nose or something.
No new technologies or anything, just use what we have now and know works.
If takeoff weight is an issue, do what the russians did with Sputnik or what was done with the Saturn 5 and just have more rocket engines firing at once.
Then, once you have it working, you can go forward and say "ok, this works, lets design a new rocket engine that can plug into this launch vehicle but would provide more takeoff weight" or whatever.
Of course, IANARS (I am not a rocket scientist) so I dont know exactly how feesable this idea is.
Another idea that has come up is to simply take the shuttle SRBs and external tank as they are now (or replace the shuttle SRBs with liquid rockets) and strap a set of rocket engines on to the rear end of the external tank (to substitute for the shuttle main engines) and strap a payload in (on top of it or on the back in place of the orbiter).
You dont need to make it that complex.
Essentially, if the recipiant supports encryption, the recipiants public key is pulled from a key server. Then, the email client encrypts it using something similar to PGP or GPG. Something thats standard enough that anyone can implement it.
At the other end, it is decrypted by the mail client using the recipiants private key.
All that the servers in the middle see is an encrypted email (same as they would see if you encrypted an email right now with PGP or GPG or whatever). The servers dont need to know about the encryption or be changed in any way.
No issues with being able to access the email from anywhere, as long as you have your private key, any email client with the right encryption support would be able to decrypt the email (including web based email clients if you were willing to trust uploading your private key to a https:/// server run by whoever provides your email)
And with this, mail servers (and mail server admins) never see the unencrypted email.
Assuming the key management is good enough (i.e. that you can trust that who the system says owns the key actually owns it), it can also be used to verify that the sender is who they say thay are.
The downside is the need to en- and de-crypt on the client side which might be an issue for some embedded applications (although these days most mobile phones, PDAs and the like that have internet/email generally have web browsers that understand SSL and if they have the CPU to handle SSL, they can probobly handle encrypted email)
Hopefully in 30 years from now, we will live in a world where encrypting email, IM conversations, personal documents and anything else that you would rather not be public becomes something everyday people do and not something that "geeks" do.
Hopefully we see a world where the major email clients (including Thunderbird/Seamonkey) come with easy to use email encryption out of the box.
Hopefully we see a world where your communications and data are safe from people you would rather didnt see them (black-hat hackers, identity thieves, your worst enemy, your boss, the RIAA etc etc)
My (limited non lawyerly) understanding of US copyright law and the DMCA is that as long as google removes any content when requested by the copyright holder, they are safe legally (for much the same reasons Geocities or Photobucket is not legally required to activly police every upload to hosted homepages/photo albums).
Or was there a specific takedown request from comedy central?
Acording to http://www.opensource.org/licenses/ the SUN CDDL (which is what they used for OpenSolaris) is an open source license. It is not a Free Software licence and is incompatible with the GNU GPL but it is still an open source license.
So long as there is even one image out there that is pornographic or offensive, there will be people who want to see it gone. And as long as there are people who want to see pornographic images gone, there will be polititians who promise to pass laws restricting or banning it in exchange for votes (and sheeple who will vote for them because of it).
They will keep trying until they end up with a law that the courts dont reject (just like various state governments are going to keep trying anti-video-game legislation until they find one that the courts dont reject)
The 2 problems with any "anti-pornography" bill are:
A.How do you define what should be blocked or restricted in a way that everyone can aggree on (answer: you cant)
and B.How do you apply these new laws to all the porn from countries without such laws (answer: you cant)
Most likely they will use the same license as they used for OpenSolaris.
Open source VMs already exist, what we need is for sun to open source the java libraries.
The problem is basicly that the only vehicle on the planet that can get to hubble is the shuttle Discovery. And, NASA have decided that they cant afford the risks (to the crew but more to the point to the shuttle which is essential to the ISS project) of sending Discovery to hubble.
Hopefuly they change their mind and go and fix one of the most important astronomical tools ever created.
Thats assuming there even IS an OEM version of Vista Ultimate.
I am sure that if NVIDIA and ATI were to open their drivers or specs, it would make it much easier for companies with patents to go after them.
It is about other media players being able to use ITMS content and about allowing other stores to release content that can be played on the iPod (and on other media players that can now play the ITMS content).
Fact is, if you want to operate a music store, you are going to need some kind of DRM. This module allows one particular kind of DRM (that happens to be used by the #1 online media store) to play on more media players players than it can currently be played on and to allow organizations other than Apple to release media protected with this DRM.
Most companies realize that if you give the customers what they want, they will continue to give you money. Dell knows that if they keep making the kinds of computers they are making now, people will keep buying Dells. Walmart knows that if they keep offering stuff really really cheap, people will keep comming back to walmart instead of going elsewhere.
Sony on the other hand has fallen into a trap that a number of companies are in (or have been in) where making huge profits is more important that doing what the customers want (and therefore getting their customers to come back).
Most of the companies that follow the "screw the customers" model have a monopoly (or something close enough to one) and can get away with it since there is really no other choice (for example, Microsoft, Verizon etc) but Sony is probobly going to find that it wont work for them in this case.
However, until people start saying "these are the only mailservers permitted to send mail for my domain, anything else should be rejected outright", mailservers wont reject mail from support@paypal.com sent from paypalscam.ru.
Does microsoft have plans for an IE feedback form similar to what they have now for Visual Studio?
Having such a feedback form would mean that people could post things like "Support " or "Fix issue where adds an extra pixel to the border" or whatever and then the IE team could investigate them (just like the Visual Studio team does with the Visual Studio feedback) and provide feedback such as "no, we cant fix this at this time" or "we will consider this for the next release" or "we have investigated this and have a fix already" or "here is a workaround" or whatever else it is. If there was a vote system so people can vote for what they think is important, microsoft could use that information to see how many people want which features (and therefore which features it makes the most sense to implement).
How does microsoft choose which bits of the CSS and DOM standard to implement?
Windows 2000 I can understand but anyone still using Windows XP without SP2 is stupid IMO...
SSL doesnt help when the machine you are using is running a software or hardware keylogger.
Its not like you cant find plans for a hydrogen bomb with a Google Search...
Why is YouTube different to Photobucket, GeoCities, Rapidshare or any other service that allows people to upload stuff and have it hosted on their server for others to download.
Is GeoCities being sued because people have uploaded illegally copied content to a GeoCities homepage?
Is Photobucket beung sued because people have uploaded illegally copied photos to a Photobucket account?
If I upload a copyrighted video to Rapidshare without permission, the copyright holder can ask rapidshare for it to be removed. But Rapidshare isnt liable for that copyrighted video as long as they comply with takedown notices.
All those other services have appropriate things (including "uploading copyrighted stuff without permission is a violation of the terms of service" rules and "if you hold the copyright to anything on our service, we will take it down no questions asked" procedures). So why cant Google Video/YouTube do the same?
Maybe the solution is to stop tracking sales and revenue seperatly.
If it was all "Sony", importing wouldnt matter.