Barr has definitely gotten my attention. I voted Libertarian the last time around, as I hated both Bush and Kerry (and I hated Bush and Gore the first time and voted Green).
With Obama caving on FISA, and McCain pretty much being Bush's clone, what choice does a real American have, other than to vote for Barr, or someone like him.
Period. End of story Your wrong... Both title III and FISA laws allow for tapping an American citizen without a warrant at all under specific circumstances. Perhaps you should investigate what your talking about before making such bold statements.
Title III of the wiretapping law "Title III authorizes only a court of "competent jurisdiction" to issue wiretap orders. The term is defined as a "court of general criminal jurisdiction of a State who is authorized by a statute of that State" to issue wiretap orders" (Reference: http://pd.co.la.ca.us/overv.htm)
So, clearly, wiretapping always requires some type of warrant issued by a court.
FISA, if I recall requires a FISA court to issue the order. Besides that, not al parts of the FISA bill are even constitutional.
As for constitutional protection of non-citizens, you are correct that citizens are granted more protection than non-citizens, but MANY sites, including the ACLU website, among others, clearly state that the Bill of Rights applies to anyone within the borders of the United States.
And, to be honest, if Telecoms didn't break any laws, then why do they need retroactive immunity? Let the cases go to court and let the judge rule in favor of the Telecoms
Tapping the phone of a US resident who is protected by the Constitution of the United States without a valid warrant is illegal.
Period. End of story.
The supreme court rules years ago that Constitutional protection applies to all people within US borders. I learned that back in high school.
If the Bush administration wanted to change that, they should have pushed for a Constitutional amendment.
The Constitution was written to prevent a police state from evolving. Warrantless wiretapping, suspension of Habeas Corpus, these are the first things that could lead to that.
What these companies did was illegal. It would not have killed them to get a warrant. If there was insufficient grounds for a warrant on our end, they should have dealt legally at the other end to get surveillance.
Here's the issue. Warrantless wiretapping is illegal, even if the President asks you to do it.
Some Telcos asked the executive branch for a warrant and DID NOT wiretap.
Others turned over records right away.
The most egregious offender was AT&T, which is the same company championing a tiered Internet. They probably thought if they capitulated with the executive branch, then they could get net neutrality squashed.
All these big companies have DEEP POCKETS, legal departments and lawyers on retainer. They should have passed all these request through their legal department, who should have recommended against it. As far as I am concerned, they can all GO TO HELL for spying on people without a warrant.
Bush could have gotten a warrant from a FISA court literally in MINUTES. There's a FISA judge on standby 24/7 just to issue these kinds of warrants, yet Bush chose not to do so.
By giving telecoms retroactive immunity the executive branch is protecting it's own ass, because, if the telecoms can't be sued for warrantless eavesdropping, then it ends there. No accountability of any kind.
Isn't this the SAME JUDGE that oversaw the breakup of Microsoft after Pennfield-Jackson screwed things up? She decided the current agreement with the Justice Department (which the Justice Department claims in unenforcible and now regrets doing) was good enough for a convicted monopolist.
Somehow we're supposed to trust this woman with proper interpretation of the law?
I stand corrected. The Constitution is law, but unlike other laws, you can't easily repeal part of it with an executive order or congressional vote. Only an amendment can change the constitution.
The US Constitution is a very well thought out and written document that can be help up as a standard for other countries to read.
The constitution is not the issue, it's the way people think only certain parts apply to them, or when parts a blatantly ignored, like the invasion of Iraq without a US formal declaration of war by the US Congress.
I understand what you say. Amendments are there to modify the constitution. But, until they actually PASS, the letter of the word of the Constitution still supersedes any and all laws and governing bodies. It is the one constant in our country.
The only people that have the right to even try to tell the president the executive branch does not have to abide by the 4th amendment is the US Supreme Court.
The Constitution is not a law. It's the framework of how the country operates. It applies to everyone in this country regardless of political position, military rank or accumulated wealth.
Unlike laws, which can be written to exclude certain groups, the Constitution applies to everyone in all 50 states, all citizens abroad, and all people in US facilities abroad. To think any differently is treason.
"ZapMedia applied for the patents in 1999. One was granted in March 2006, the other on Tuesday."
I know we are all against software patents... but these guys have been waiting for 9 years to be able to use this patent by the rules that everyone is supposed to play by. calling them Patent Trolls for standing by and watching while Apple used thier technology to make billions, is not quite accurate. I would hope we're all against business process patents, which is what this is. There is no way you should be able to patent HOW you sell something! Business process patents are pretty new also. Can you imagine if someone had a patent on selling health care (essentially patenting the HOSPITAL!)? Where would we be now? BUSINESS PROCESS PATENTS ARE AS EVIL AS SOFTWARE PATENTS! There's a reason they're not allowed in the European patent system.
Patents are for physical objects. And you should still be required to build a working model, like you did in the old days.
Has anyone actually done an enterprise deployment of Vista? Give me the news that everyone wants. When is XP SP3 coming out? That's what everyone really cares about. That's the news Microsoft is keeping silent. They don't want enterprise customers to know that XP is viable.
Apple makes the iPod and it's Windows only. Demand for it is so great, that Apple ends up porting iTunes to it's competitor, Windows. The iPod happily plays MP3 files, and boatload of other formats, pretty much anything except ogg and wma.
Now there's this other company called Microsoft that makes this device called a Zune. The Zune doesn't work with the Mac and it doesn't work with Linux. Microsoft's Zune software is Windows only. NO other online music store works with the Mac, other than Amazon.
Who's got the monopoly here?
By "viable", they mean fertile. What's the point to having offspring that can't breed. You'd be an evolutionary dead end. For offspring to biologically viable, it has to be fertile.
They are not separate species. They are subspecies on their way to becoming separate species. Evolution is action. The line may be blurred if subspecies a can breed with b and b can breed with c, but a cannot breed with c. They are a number of North America birds in that blurry line. That's the end stages of evolution creating a new species.
If the offspring are viable, then they're the same species. That is the definition of a species. Doesn't matter if they geographically isolated, or not.
You would think big media could care less about DRM these days, with the move even by Microsoft to offer songs in non-DRMed MP3 format.
Of course, we all know, the point to this DRM-free music is to simply attack the iTunes Music Store. If they could actually successfully knock iTunes down a lot, then watch and see how fast DRM-free tracks will disappear from Amazon, Microsoft and other online outfits, claiming the big experiment was a failure and piracy must be curbed.
I used to believe that Comcast was like Microsoft. I had no choice but to use them for some tasks. However, my cable modem, at a supposed 6 Mbps, gave me evening downloads of around 60-80K/sec. At 9 AM I could easily get 300K/sec.
So, I decided to go down the road less traveled and I got DirectTV and Verizon DSL at 3 Mbit. No FIOS here yet. Well, the TV picture is far superior on my SD television and my download speed 24/7 is almost always arond 340-350K/sec. My DSL has been out TWICE in the 2 years I have had it. My cable gave me issues that lasted as long as a week sometimes.
Comcast has gotte so big, it can't react any more. They're not willing to do what needs to be done to win customer loyalty.
One plus Comcast does have is that when I call Tech Support, I get routed to Canada and someone I can understand. Verizon Tech Support go to somewhere in India where trained monkeys follow a script. I've only ever had to call them twice when my modem was out luckily.
The DirectTV experience however, far outshines anything Comcast can offer customer service wise.
If you had to pick between RHEL and SLES, which would be a better choice. Sure, you can install SLES on a unlimited number of workstations for free. Now try and patch those copies after 30 days.
CentOS lets RHEL customers install an OS they can patch on their dev testing boxes, and only buy licenses for the boxes that need support.
Universal is really trying to get control of the music business back from Apple. Looks like they're willing to use any means necessary to do so.
There's a huge Catch 22 here. I'm all for competition, but if they win, and crush the iPod, do you think we'll be better off? They're the music business after all. Out to screw the customer and the artist. In the end, we'll all lose out.
Slashdot Mirror
There are terrorists to be caught! That's the ultimate excuse. In times of illegal activity, scare people into thinking you're right.
You know, I fully support Barr.
We need to strive for election reform. We need a debate with McCain, Obama, Barr, and whoever the Green Party has up.
Sadly that will never happen. The two party system sucks. The parties no longer represent ideologies. They only represent themselves....
Barr has definitely gotten my attention. I voted Libertarian the last time around, as I hated both Bush and Kerry (and I hated Bush and Gore the first time and voted Green).
With Obama caving on FISA, and McCain pretty much being Bush's clone, what choice does a real American have, other than to vote for Barr, or someone like him.
Andy
The Supreme Court needs to step in and strike this down. Someone needs to bring a lawsuit and get it sent up to the Supreme Court.
When FISA courts can grant RETROACTIVE warrants, why does the Bush administration insist on not getting a warrant?
Because they were doing far more than just looking for terrorists.
A true sad day in the US.
Glad I voted for Ron Paul. I'll be using him as a write in come November.
Ok, let's try this again...
Period. End of story Your wrong... Both title III and FISA laws allow for tapping an American citizen without a warrant at all under specific circumstances. Perhaps you should investigate what your talking about before making such bold statements.
Title III of the wiretapping law "Title III authorizes only a court of "competent jurisdiction" to issue wiretap orders. The term is defined as a "court of general criminal jurisdiction of a State who is authorized by a statute of that State" to issue wiretap orders" (Reference: http://pd.co.la.ca.us/overv.htm)
So, clearly, wiretapping always requires some type of warrant issued by a court.
FISA, if I recall requires a FISA court to issue the order. Besides that, not al parts of the FISA bill are even constitutional.
As for constitutional protection of non-citizens, you are correct that citizens are granted more protection than non-citizens, but MANY sites, including the ACLU website, among others, clearly state that the Bill of Rights applies to anyone within the borders of the United States.
And, to be honest, if Telecoms didn't break any laws, then why do they need retroactive immunity? Let the cases go to court and let the judge rule in favor of the Telecoms
Tapping the phone of a US resident who is protected by the Constitution of the United States without a valid warrant is illegal.
Period. End of story.
The supreme court rules years ago that Constitutional protection applies to all people within US borders. I learned that back in high school.
If the Bush administration wanted to change that, they should have pushed for a Constitutional amendment.
The Constitution was written to prevent a police state from evolving. Warrantless wiretapping, suspension of Habeas Corpus, these are the first things that could lead to that.
What these companies did was illegal. It would not have killed them to get a warrant. If there was insufficient grounds for a warrant on our end, they should have dealt legally at the other end to get surveillance.
Here's the issue. Warrantless wiretapping is illegal, even if the President asks you to do it.
Some Telcos asked the executive branch for a warrant and DID NOT wiretap.
Others turned over records right away.
The most egregious offender was AT&T, which is the same company championing a tiered Internet. They probably thought if they capitulated with the executive branch, then they could get net neutrality squashed.
All these big companies have DEEP POCKETS, legal departments and lawyers on retainer. They should have passed all these request through their legal department, who should have recommended against it. As far as I am concerned, they can all GO TO HELL for spying on people without a warrant.
Bush could have gotten a warrant from a FISA court literally in MINUTES. There's a FISA judge on standby 24/7 just to issue these kinds of warrants, yet Bush chose not to do so.
By giving telecoms retroactive immunity the executive branch is protecting it's own ass, because, if the telecoms can't be sued for warrantless eavesdropping, then it ends there. No accountability of any kind.
Isn't this the SAME JUDGE that oversaw the breakup of Microsoft after Pennfield-Jackson screwed things up? She decided the current agreement with the Justice Department (which the Justice Department claims in unenforcible and now regrets doing) was good enough for a convicted monopolist.
Somehow we're supposed to trust this woman with proper interpretation of the law?
Hopefully this will get overturned on appeal...
I stand corrected. The Constitution is law, but unlike other laws, you can't easily repeal part of it with an executive order or congressional vote. Only an amendment can change the constitution.
That would be the opinion of about half of America, and I would think a good chunk of the rest of the globe.
The US Constitution is a very well thought out and written document that can be help up as a standard for other countries to read. The constitution is not the issue, it's the way people think only certain parts apply to them, or when parts a blatantly ignored, like the invasion of Iraq without a US formal declaration of war by the US Congress.
I understand what you say. Amendments are there to modify the constitution. But, until they actually PASS, the letter of the word of the Constitution still supersedes any and all laws and governing bodies. It is the one constant in our country. The only people that have the right to even try to tell the president the executive branch does not have to abide by the 4th amendment is the US Supreme Court.
The Constitution is not a law. It's the framework of how the country operates. It applies to everyone in this country regardless of political position, military rank or accumulated wealth. Unlike laws, which can be written to exclude certain groups, the Constitution applies to everyone in all 50 states, all citizens abroad, and all people in US facilities abroad. To think any differently is treason.
I know we are all against software patents... but these guys have been waiting for 9 years to be able to use this patent by the rules that everyone is supposed to play by. calling them Patent Trolls for standing by and watching while Apple used thier technology to make billions, is not quite accurate. I would hope we're all against business process patents, which is what this is. There is no way you should be able to patent HOW you sell something! Business process patents are pretty new also. Can you imagine if someone had a patent on selling health care (essentially patenting the HOSPITAL!)? Where would we be now? BUSINESS PROCESS PATENTS ARE AS EVIL AS SOFTWARE PATENTS! There's a reason they're not allowed in the European patent system.
Patents are for physical objects. And you should still be required to build a working model, like you did in the old days.
I was using Napster back in 1998. Wouldn't that constitute prior art?
I've worked with AD, and though I see the benefits of having a directory, I find Novell's eDirectory to be a far superior product to Active Directory.
I try to like AD, but every time I have to do something with it, or about it's configuration, I see deficiencies, compared to eDir.
Andy
Has anyone actually done an enterprise deployment of Vista? Give me the news that everyone wants. When is XP SP3 coming out? That's what everyone really cares about. That's the news Microsoft is keeping silent. They don't want enterprise customers to know that XP is viable.
Apple makes the iPod and it's Windows only. Demand for it is so great, that Apple ends up porting iTunes to it's competitor, Windows. The iPod happily plays MP3 files, and boatload of other formats, pretty much anything except ogg and wma. Now there's this other company called Microsoft that makes this device called a Zune. The Zune doesn't work with the Mac and it doesn't work with Linux. Microsoft's Zune software is Windows only. NO other online music store works with the Mac, other than Amazon. Who's got the monopoly here?
By "viable", they mean fertile. What's the point to having offspring that can't breed. You'd be an evolutionary dead end. For offspring to biologically viable, it has to be fertile.
They are not separate species. They are subspecies on their way to becoming separate species. Evolution is action. The line may be blurred if subspecies a can breed with b and b can breed with c, but a cannot breed with c. They are a number of North America birds in that blurry line. That's the end stages of evolution creating a new species.
Andy
"if you put them in zoos, they breed freely."
If the offspring are viable, then they're the same species. That is the definition of a species. Doesn't matter if they geographically isolated, or not.
You would think big media could care less about DRM these days, with the move even by Microsoft to offer songs in non-DRMed MP3 format.
Of course, we all know, the point to this DRM-free music is to simply attack the iTunes Music Store. If they could actually successfully knock iTunes down a lot, then watch and see how fast DRM-free tracks will disappear from Amazon, Microsoft and other online outfits, claiming the big experiment was a failure and piracy must be curbed.
I used to believe that Comcast was like Microsoft. I had no choice but to use them for some tasks. However, my cable modem, at a supposed 6 Mbps, gave me evening downloads of around 60-80K/sec. At 9 AM I could easily get 300K/sec.
So, I decided to go down the road less traveled and I got DirectTV and Verizon DSL at 3 Mbit. No FIOS here yet. Well, the TV picture is far superior on my SD television and my download speed 24/7 is almost always arond 340-350K/sec. My DSL has been out TWICE in the 2 years I have had it. My cable gave me issues that lasted as long as a week sometimes.
Comcast has gotte so big, it can't react any more. They're not willing to do what needs to be done to win customer loyalty.
One plus Comcast does have is that when I call Tech Support, I get routed to Canada and someone I can understand. Verizon Tech Support go to somewhere in India where trained monkeys follow a script. I've only ever had to call them twice when my modem was out luckily.
The DirectTV experience however, far outshines anything Comcast can offer customer service wise.
Andy
If you had to pick between RHEL and SLES, which would be a better choice. Sure, you can install SLES on a unlimited number of workstations for free. Now try and patch those copies after 30 days.
CentOS lets RHEL customers install an OS they can patch on their dev testing boxes, and only buy licenses for the boxes that need support.
Andy
Universal is really trying to get control of the music business back from Apple. Looks like they're willing to use any means necessary to do so.
There's a huge Catch 22 here. I'm all for competition, but if they win, and crush the iPod, do you think we'll be better off? They're the music business after all. Out to screw the customer and the artist. In the end, we'll all lose out.
Andy