Good idea but you're missing the obvious point here. What you just described requires effort on the part of the parent. The good parents are already making sure their child isn't cruising the porn sites and the other ones want a quick fix. What you described requires more effort then your average "Protect the children!" fanatic wants to put into it. If you want to keep your kids from being online when your not home or otherwise able to watch them, take the cord with you. If nothing else they'll learn the computer trying to figure out how to fix it so they can get online again. ("Damn! The modem isn't working! What's wrong? Hey, whats behind this beige box with the power switch?")
Protect my children! Protect my children! Because it seems that I won't be able to because I'm too busy trying to decide if my SUV should be green or blue.
If they really want to protect their families then they should be paying attention to what they are doing NOT trying to foist off some software solution that doesn't even work. If they worry about their children accessing porn at the library then they shouldn't leave their children there by themselves. If they worry about it at home then they can shell out the money and install the software on their own machine. Even, God forbid, you discuss the matter with your children and tell them about it instead of treating them like mushrooms (keep them in the dark and feed them shit).
The argument about protecting children is old and overused. Protect YOUR child and leave your damn nose out of my parenting. I don't want you foisting your ideas of what my child should see and hear onto me. Do I believe that porn should be shown to minors? No. Do I believe that the minors will see it if they really want to? Yes. How many of you had a copy of Playboy/Penthouse/Hustler when you weren't old enough to own one? oh and didn't have your house burned to the ground by lighting?
These people are simply trying to further a agenda. And when the Holland Library is hauled into court for violations of the First Amendment will these people foot the legal bill. No. They'll be in another town screaming "SAVE THE CHILDREN!" and trying to get people to believe in their snake oil solution.
That should do it for now. Any other complaining I need to do I'll save for later.
I agree. The only people who read those rants (for the most part) are people who already know the difference. As for the media, they can check online too and see the difference. Why don't they? Because it is ultimately a non-issue and the majority of their readers/watchers don't really care. Cracker, hacker, black hat, white hat, whatever. People are going to use what they feel the listener will understand. By bitching and moaning at people everytime it comes up, it makes you look like some kind of crank, loon or weirdo. Mention it once and then let it go. There are more important things to worry about in our community then this.
Good point. But think on it for just a moment. They are going to put in a serious hole into the encryption security so that they can help themselves to whatever is floating around on Windows boxes. Do you think they will trust Microsoft to do it? Or do you think they will check it over a few times to make sure there's no screw ups. This is the agency that managed to stay pretty much a secret for almost thirty years after all.
Here's one for you. Maybe the NSA is funding the Cult of the Dead Cow so that they can make tools for them! It makes sense. They couldn't have made BO and BO2K by themselves. It's just too well done.
It has to be the work of a evil agency bent on getting the UN into power as the one world government (never mind that the bulk of UN troops are United States AND the United States has a ultimate veto power in the Security Council).
I think stories like this are generally a little far fetched. As for the NSA key I think the Crypto Newsletter from Counterpane said it best. If you want to put a key into a program you don't put your agency name on it where anyone can see it.
This is the NSA. They do know a little about security and something this stupid is a little below them. After all if Windows is as insecure as everyone keeps saying why do they need to put some secret key in? They can just go in like any script kiddie and see what they want.
As for the DOS argument about trying to get a standard system in place... was DOS really that powerful or was I missing something? Windows I could kinda see but DOS? Never mind most of the major corporations they would want to spy on at the time were using UNIX or some other kind of heavy duty OS.
How did the NSA know that Microsoft would be well recieved? Maybe everyone would fall in love with the MAC and use it instead and then the NSA would be up a creek. Also the countries that the NSA would be most interested in (Sudan, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Cuba, etc) can't have computers exported to them anyway. This whole thing is full of holes if you just take a moment to think about it from a logical point of view.
Not true. The NSA and CIA are not allowed to spy on internal matters. This was backed up by Congress in either the late 50's or 60's (I'm foggy right know on which).
That was one of the big deals about them spying on email. They aren't supposed to do that to Americans and some American mail might have gone through foriegn servers and hence been seen. The FBI generally handles the internal matters that would be handled by the NSA if they could work inside US borders.
In an interview with about South Park it was said that every time one of the censors made a comment about a scene they made it even worse. They kept doing this and eventually the movie got a R rating for some bizzare reason. Or it might have just been along the lines of a publicity stunt to sell the movie more. "Hey, we tricked the censors by just making worse and worse! After a while they couldn't take it and gave it a R!" And the more I think about it the more sense it makes. (So I'm a little off topic)
Why go to the ESA for funding? Why not approach some private investors? This probe cost LESS to make and launch then it did to make the movie Waterworld.
Surely some one would be willing to invest some money in this. Take a cue from the Soviets and put some adds onto the side of the rockets.
So it's tacky. So what? If it gets me one step closer to a chance to retire to LEO or the moon then I can put up with it.
No. Call the cops if some one breaks into your house. Call the cops if some one breaks into your computer. But if you had bad security (cheap locks, no deadbolts on your door, no passwords on your computer or didn't implement your server security like you should've) then you are asking for trouble.
Yes, it would be wonderful if you didn't have to worry about this but crime has been with us since humans have been around and will continue to be for a long time to come. If you don't take precautions then it's your own fault. If it still happens then you did your best. Report the crime and move on. Remember: there's a reason your insurance won't pay up if you leave the keys in your car ignition, your insurance gives you a discount because you have deadbolts and smoke alarms and the crime for burglary is less if you left the door unlocked (second or third degree as opposed to first).
Give me a break. Ask any bodyguard (which is what the president's protective services are) what you do when there principal is at risk. You get them out of the situation and/or neutralize the risk (i.e. knocking down the subject, bullets, etc). You don't wait five minutes after hearing some one yell "Kill!" and THEN go see what the problem was.
This does smack of him getting revenge. Remember it was during a election year and he was trying to give a good public image of himself. Don't forget this is the same guy who had FBI files on his rivals in his possesion.
Of course not, because that wouldn't give you a chance to put up a "Look how cool I am!" web page.
Look how cool I am? We must be looking at different web sights. That was just a flat re-telling of what happened. I mean come on... no colors, no pictures, nothing. Just text. If I was writing a "LOOK AT ME!" site I would at least put in some background color.
It was a joke and he even seemed to have apoligized. Anyone who knows politics will know that no polictician will make such a blatant statement in a public forum. It was funny but he's lucky the Secret Service wasn't knocking at his front door.
Slashdot Mirror
I can see it know. Just like the Simpsons commercial for Intel. A big sign on my forehead that says "Intel Inside."
Good idea but you're missing the obvious point here. What you just described requires effort on the part of the parent. The good parents are already making sure their child isn't cruising the porn sites and the other ones want a quick fix. What you described requires more effort then your average "Protect the children!" fanatic wants to put into it. If you want to keep your kids from being online when your not home or otherwise able to watch them, take the cord with you. If nothing else they'll learn the computer trying to figure out how to fix it so they can get online again. ("Damn! The modem isn't working! What's wrong? Hey, whats behind this beige box with the power switch?")
Protect my children! Protect my children! Because it seems that I won't be able to because I'm too busy trying to decide if my SUV should be green or blue.
If they really want to protect their families then they should be paying attention to what they are doing NOT trying to foist off some software solution that doesn't even work. If they worry about their children accessing porn at the library then they shouldn't leave their children there by themselves. If they worry about it at home then they can shell out the money and install the software on their own machine. Even, God forbid, you discuss the matter with your children and tell them about it instead of treating them like mushrooms (keep them in the dark and feed them shit).
The argument about protecting children is old and overused. Protect YOUR child and leave your damn nose out of my parenting. I don't want you foisting your ideas of what my child should see and hear onto me. Do I believe that porn should be shown to minors? No. Do I believe that the minors will see it if they really want to? Yes. How many of you had a copy of Playboy/Penthouse/Hustler when you weren't old enough to own one? oh and didn't have your house burned to the ground by lighting?
These people are simply trying to further a agenda. And when the Holland Library is hauled into court for violations of the First Amendment will these people foot the legal bill. No. They'll be in another town screaming "SAVE THE CHILDREN!" and trying to get people to believe in their snake oil solution.
That should do it for now. Any other complaining I need to do I'll save for later.
I agree. The only people who read those rants (for the most part) are people who already know the difference. As for the media, they can check online too and see the difference. Why don't they? Because it is ultimately a non-issue and the majority of their readers/watchers don't really care. Cracker, hacker, black hat, white hat, whatever. People are going to use what they feel the listener will understand. By bitching and moaning at people everytime it comes up, it makes you look like some kind of crank, loon or weirdo. Mention it once and then let it go. There are more important things to worry about in our community then this.
Good point. But think on it for just a moment. They are going to put in a serious hole into the encryption security so that they can help themselves to whatever is floating around on Windows boxes. Do you think they will trust Microsoft to do it? Or do you think they will check it over a few times to make sure there's no screw ups. This is the agency that managed to stay pretty much a secret for almost thirty years after all.
Here's one for you. Maybe the NSA is funding the Cult of the Dead Cow so that they can make tools for them! It makes sense. They couldn't have made BO and BO2K by themselves. It's just too well done.
It has to be the work of a evil agency bent on getting the UN into power as the one world government (never mind that the bulk of UN troops are United States AND the United States has a ultimate veto power in the Security Council).
I think stories like this are generally a little far fetched. As for the NSA key I think the Crypto Newsletter from Counterpane said it best. If you want to put a key into a program you don't put your agency name on it where anyone can see it.
This is the NSA. They do know a little about security and something this stupid is a little below them. After all if Windows is as insecure as everyone keeps saying why do they need to put some secret key in? They can just go in like any script kiddie and see what they want.
As for the DOS argument about trying to get a standard system in place... was DOS really that powerful or was I missing something? Windows I could kinda see but DOS? Never mind most of the major corporations they would want to spy on at the time were using UNIX or some other kind of heavy duty OS.
How did the NSA know that Microsoft would be well recieved? Maybe everyone would fall in love with the MAC and use it instead and then the NSA would be up a creek. Also the countries that the NSA would be most interested in (Sudan, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Cuba, etc) can't have computers exported to them anyway. This whole thing is full of holes if you just take a moment to think about it from a logical point of view.
Not true. The NSA and CIA are not allowed to spy on internal matters. This was backed up by Congress in either the late 50's or 60's (I'm foggy right know on which).
That was one of the big deals about them spying on email. They aren't supposed to do that to Americans and some American mail might have gone through foriegn servers and hence been seen. The FBI generally handles the internal matters that would be handled by the NSA if they could work inside US borders.
In an interview with about South Park it was said that every time one of the censors made a comment about a scene they made it even worse. They kept doing this and eventually the movie got a R rating for some bizzare reason. Or it might have just been along the lines of a publicity stunt to sell the movie more. "Hey, we tricked the censors by just making worse and worse! After a while they couldn't take it and gave it a R!" And the more I think about it the more sense it makes. (So I'm a little off topic)
Why go to the ESA for funding? Why not approach some private investors? This probe cost LESS to make and launch then it did to make the movie Waterworld.
Surely some one would be willing to invest some money in this. Take a cue from the Soviets and put some adds onto the side of the rockets.
So it's tacky. So what? If it gets me one step closer to a chance to retire to LEO or the moon then I can put up with it.
Where I saw it (one of the major ciniplexes around here) people actually started applauding and cheering when they shot Gates. It was hysterically.
No. Call the cops if some one breaks into your house. Call the cops if some one breaks into your computer. But if you had bad security (cheap locks, no deadbolts on your door, no passwords on your computer or didn't implement your server security like you should've) then you are asking for trouble.
Yes, it would be wonderful if you didn't have to worry about this but crime has been with us since humans have been around and will continue to be for a long time to come. If you don't take precautions then it's your own fault. If it still happens then you did your best. Report the crime and move on. Remember: there's a reason your insurance won't pay up if you leave the keys in your car ignition, your insurance gives you a discount because you have deadbolts and smoke alarms and the crime for burglary is less if you left the door unlocked (second or third degree as opposed to first).
Add a 19 to email me (you figure out where).
Give me a break. Ask any bodyguard (which is what the president's protective services are) what you do when there principal is at risk. You get them out of the situation and/or neutralize the risk (i.e. knocking down the subject, bullets, etc). You don't wait five minutes after hearing some one yell "Kill!" and THEN go see what the problem was.
This does smack of him getting revenge. Remember it was during a election year and he was trying to give a good public image of himself. Don't forget this is the same guy who had FBI files on his rivals in his possesion.
Of course not, because that wouldn't give you a chance to put up a "Look how cool I am!" web page.
Look how cool I am? We must be looking at different web sights. That was just a flat re-telling of what happened. I mean come on... no colors, no pictures, nothing. Just text. If I was writing a "LOOK AT ME!" site I would at least put in some background color.
It was a joke and he even seemed to have apoligized. Anyone who knows politics will know that no polictician will make such a blatant statement in a public forum. It was funny but he's lucky the Secret Service wasn't knocking at his front door.