The government doesn't understand temporary. Once a law is enacted it's a law forever unless it's written with the legal equivalent of an expiration date. Somehow I don't see that happening here. Once you give power to these people they'll fight tooth and claw to keep it forever.
The one time I had to call Linksys (I use their 4-port router) I didn't have a problem getting through and the phone guy had a solution off the top of his head. His attitude was kind of abrupt, though.
I think it's interesting that bin Laden is disclaiming responsibility. In the past terrorist groups have always been aggressive about taking 'credit' for their efforts. In fact, this seems to me to be a requirement for their actions to be effective. The goal of terrorism is to affect some political, social or other change desired by the terrorist. If a group doesn't take credit then no one will get the point, so to speak.
If you think they've been ineffective doing this then you're insane.
Define effective. In what way do you think the parts of American policy the perpetrators find offensive will be different next week, next month or next year?
The idiots who did this obiously have no understanding of history or US politics. Historically a strong reaction to outside threats has been a great way for political leaders to consolidate support at home (e.g. Hitler's blaming all of Germany's problems on the Jews). A weak President, in terms of popular/election support, such as Mr. Bush will be able to use this situation to bolster his position.
The poser of the question didn't specify the context in which the games would be used. It sounds like this might be better suited to a psych/clinical environment rather than as a distraction for their free time.
Guilty of what, exactly? He created a 'circumvention device' but he didn't do it here. As far as I know he didn't try to market/sell/distribute a 'circumvention device' - his employer did. He did speak about a 'circumvention device' in this country but in a scholarly fashion at a professional conference.
AOL definitly controls the content by exercising censorship according to their notion of "community standards". How can AOL exercise censorship without controling content?
If you ask the average high school science teacher what the Second Law of Thermodynamics is, your odds are 50/50 that he/she won't know.
That's a pretty radical statement. I could accept that some wouldn't but 50% sounds extreme. Do you have a citation for that or was it just your opinion?
The problem is that DSL customers don't have a relationship with Microsoft and Cisco. They have a relationship with Qwest. Qwest has agreed to provide them with a service and if they don't then the customers shouldn't have to pay them. The fact that the interruption occured because of a defect in their equipment is a result of poor business decisions on their end for which they are responsible.
How have you reduced your wire count? In your current state the computer is acting as the USB hub - everything plugs into it. It sounds like your not reducing the number of wires, just shifting them to another collection point.
While your descriptions sound like the ridiculous rewards some have come to expect from our legal system I wonder if the juries had all the information you listed. Judges are routinely asked to exclude evidence on the grounds that it would unreasonably prejudice the jury. For example, the jury may never have known how the man locked in the garage found his way there.
Footballers who get old get layed off, models who lose their looks loose their jobs, typists who can't type loose their jobs
Does anyone know the specifics of how the Americans with Disabilities Act and its relatives are worded. Your comment about football players made me wonder - could the infirmities that come with age be considered a disability?
I don't believe I said that human life wasn't worth protecting. I also don't believe I said all life should be protected under all circumstances. What I said was I don't understand the position that man has an exalted place in the universe that puts him above all other species.
I think your analogy has some holes. Bush didn't say "You can do all the research you want just don't break the things." He said they can do the research but they have to work with the existing materials. This is more like saying "You can write any programs you want but they have to run on the Cray we've got - we're not going to get you another one."
I agree there's a certain arrogance here. Western religion has always given man an exalted place in the universe as the 'animal' made in god's image.
I've never quite understood it myself.
Yes music can be purchased legally even given your assumptions. What can't happen is you can't have all the music you want when you want it. Just like I can't have that house in the Caymans even though I want it.
While I do have issues with the music company's pricing/distribution models, I think the problem here is that your desires exceed your means.
Arthur Clarke was right when he suggested, I think it was in The Songs of Distant Earth but it's been a long time, that anyone who wanted a political office was by definition emotionally unsuited to have it.
I agree that item (4) has a problem. Why would you need to carry a pocket knife to school?
I also have a problem with item (5). The locker belongs to the school not the student. This is like arguing that a parent can't search their children's room because the room 'belongs' to the child. Now, a student's purse or backpack would be a different story but even then I could see an argument in favor of searches. Airport security is allowed to search your bags and if you don't like it you can leave.
I wouldn't pay $1 a year for Napster either. I would, however, be willing to pay for a service that let me download the music I liked for a per song charge. It's paying $16 for a CD with only 2 or 3 songs that I really like that burns my ass.
My point, however, was that even given the presence of abuse it is absurd to expect them to willing accept oversight. Consider the recent difficulties for which they are being pilloried by Congress (e.g. missing laptops and the Wen Ho Lee affair). I haven't followed the hearings closely but I would be very surprised to hear that any FBI representative had said, "Sure, we'd love for our activities to be more closely supervised by Congress."
"They have no need to control their own authority because they aren't planning to misuse it"
Well aren't you the trusting soul. What we need to remember is that the FBI is made up of people each of whom has their own agendas, personal as well as professional. If the agenda of every member of the FBI was 'to protect and serve' I would gladly climb onto your bandwagon. If, on the other hand, those agendas involve 'catching the bad guys at any cost' or 'getting attention, promotion and personal power' then we're going to have some problems.
I join with the founding fathers in betting on the latter.
Slashdot Mirror
The government doesn't understand temporary. Once a law is enacted it's a law forever unless it's written with the legal equivalent of an expiration date. Somehow I don't see that happening here. Once you give power to these people they'll fight tooth and claw to keep it forever.
The one time I had to call Linksys (I use their 4-port router) I didn't have a problem getting through and the phone guy had a solution off the top of his head. His attitude was kind of abrupt, though.
I think it's interesting that bin Laden is disclaiming responsibility. In the past terrorist groups have always been aggressive about taking 'credit' for their efforts. In fact, this seems to me to be a requirement for their actions to be effective. The goal of terrorism is to affect some political, social or other change desired by the terrorist. If a group doesn't take credit then no one will get the point, so to speak.
If you think they've been ineffective doing this then you're insane.
Define effective. In what way do you think the parts of American policy the perpetrators find offensive will be different next week, next month or next year?
I find this difficult to credit. If you're going to make incredible claims like this you should provide a better source than "listen to the radio".
The idiots who did this obiously have no understanding of history or US politics. Historically a strong reaction to outside threats has been a great way for political leaders to consolidate support at home (e.g. Hitler's blaming all of Germany's problems on the Jews). A weak President, in terms of popular/election support, such as Mr. Bush will be able to use this situation to bolster his position.
The poser of the question didn't specify the context in which the games would be used. It sounds like this might be better suited to a psych/clinical environment rather than as a distraction for their free time.
Guilty of what, exactly? He created a 'circumvention device' but he didn't do it here. As far as I know he didn't try to market/sell/distribute a 'circumvention device' - his employer did. He did speak about a 'circumvention device' in this country but in a scholarly fashion at a professional conference.
AOL definitly controls the content by exercising censorship according to their notion of "community standards". How can AOL exercise censorship without controling content?
If you ask the average high school science teacher what the Second Law of Thermodynamics is, your odds are 50/50 that he/she won't know.
That's a pretty radical statement. I could accept that some wouldn't but 50% sounds extreme. Do you have a citation for that or was it just your opinion?
The problem is that DSL customers don't have a relationship with Microsoft and Cisco. They have a relationship with Qwest. Qwest has agreed to provide them with a service and if they don't then the customers shouldn't have to pay them. The fact that the interruption occured because of a defect in their equipment is a result of poor business decisions on their end for which they are responsible.
How have you reduced your wire count? In your current state the computer is acting as the USB hub - everything plugs into it. It sounds like your not reducing the number of wires, just shifting them to another collection point.
While your descriptions sound like the ridiculous rewards some have come to expect from our legal system I wonder if the juries had all the information you listed. Judges are routinely asked to exclude evidence on the grounds that it would unreasonably prejudice the jury. For example, the jury may never have known how the man locked in the garage found his way there.
You may find this difficult to believe but not everything makes its way onto the Internet.
Footballers who get old get layed off, models who lose their looks loose their jobs, typists who can't type loose their jobs
Does anyone know the specifics of how the Americans with Disabilities Act and its relatives are worded. Your comment about football players made me wonder - could the infirmities that come with age be considered a disability?
I don't believe I said that human life wasn't worth protecting. I also don't believe I said all life should be protected under all circumstances. What I said was I don't understand the position that man has an exalted place in the universe that puts him above all other species.
I think your analogy has some holes. Bush didn't say "You can do all the research you want just don't break the things." He said they can do the research but they have to work with the existing materials. This is more like saying "You can write any programs you want but they have to run on the Cray we've got - we're not going to get you another one."
I agree there's a certain arrogance here. Western religion has always given man an exalted place in the universe as the 'animal' made in god's image. I've never quite understood it myself.
If you're going to do business in a country then you company's legal department should be familiar with that country's laws.
Yes music can be purchased legally even given your assumptions. What can't happen is you can't have all the music you want when you want it. Just like I can't have that house in the Caymans even though I want it.
While I do have issues with the music company's pricing/distribution models, I think the problem here is that your desires exceed your means.
Arthur Clarke was right when he suggested, I think it was in The Songs of Distant Earth but it's been a long time, that anyone who wanted a political office was by definition emotionally unsuited to have it.
I agree that item (4) has a problem. Why would you need to carry a pocket knife to school?
I also have a problem with item (5). The locker belongs to the school not the student. This is like arguing that a parent can't search their children's room because the room 'belongs' to the child. Now, a student's purse or backpack would be a different story but even then I could see an argument in favor of searches. Airport security is allowed to search your bags and if you don't like it you can leave.
I wouldn't pay $1 a year for Napster either. I would, however, be willing to pay for a service that let me download the music I liked for a per song charge. It's paying $16 for a CD with only 2 or 3 songs that I really like that burns my ass.
Point well taken.
My point, however, was that even given the presence of abuse it is absurd to expect them to willing accept oversight. Consider the recent difficulties for which they are being pilloried by Congress (e.g. missing laptops and the Wen Ho Lee affair). I haven't followed the hearings closely but I would be very surprised to hear that any FBI representative had said, "Sure, we'd love for our activities to be more closely supervised by Congress."
"They have no need to control their own authority because they aren't planning to misuse it" Well aren't you the trusting soul. What we need to remember is that the FBI is made up of people each of whom has their own agendas, personal as well as professional. If the agenda of every member of the FBI was 'to protect and serve' I would gladly climb onto your bandwagon. If, on the other hand, those agendas involve 'catching the bad guys at any cost' or 'getting attention, promotion and personal power' then we're going to have some problems. I join with the founding fathers in betting on the latter.