I have not read it. Based on the summary, it doesn't sound like LotR from the "other side"... it sounds more like LotR from the perspective of the Mordor Propoganda Department.
Or LotR was the story from the perspective of the Valar propaganda department. History being written by the victors and all that.
And they were fighting against *the rest* of the world, pretty much.
I got the impression from LotR that Sauron's forces actually had numerical superiority.
Furthermore, this completely fails to reconcile with the "historical" accounts of Morgoth and his servant Sauron. Unless I am to understand that somehow Morgoth was right all along and everyone else was crazy?
Why not, it's been done (many times) with the Christian devil.
If there's a conference call between your UK office and your Frankfurt office, and the local time on one side or the other changes, there's no way the calendar software will know which is correct.
If you're going to store a local time-of-day value instead of an epoch, it would be silly to do so without a timezone. So if the record is created by someone in the Frankfurt office, it will read something like "14:00:00 CET". This is not a problem.
Originally the meeting was scheduled at 14:00 in Frankfurt and 13:00 in the UK. Now UK changes their time. The calendar thinks it's scheduled at 14:00 in Frankfurt and 14:00 in the UK. But perhaps that's not the desired result; perhaps it should have followed UK local time and been scheduled for 13:00 in the UK and 13:00 in Frankfurt. There's no way the calendar program can know.
Most notebook computers use spinning drives, and no one whines about moving those around while they're powered up. Just saying...
It's unavoidable (unless you go to SSD) but it's still a problem, hence the IBM Active Protection System and the Apple Sudden Motion Sensor and a few others.
The calendar software we run had stored future calendar events as unix timestamps, and those timestamps were generated by the old DST rules. Once the new timezone files had been installed, for events that took place between the old & new start/end dates and which were setup before the new timezone files were in place, all the timestamps were off by 1 hour.
And that's a problem that's impossible to solve in general. You could say that calendar events should be stored in local time, but in fact that's not always the case (consider an event intended to occur at dawn or sunset). And which local time? If there's a conference call between your UK office and your Frankfurt office, and the local time on one side or the other changes, there's no way the calendar software will know which is correct.
As for most embedded crap, well, it never gets DST right anyway. Just set the clocks manually, or tell it to do its job in UTC in the first place.
Yeah, you know why it doesn't get DST right? Because when it was made, DST was something other than what was built into it. Which means that if the DST dates changed by a week, you'll either have to be a week wrong, or you'll have to manually adjust it twice when DST change happens. Or, if it allows you to turn DST off, at least you only have to manually adjust it once.
One company I was at was building an embedded device at the time Bush messed with DST dates. We eventually gave up on fancy downloadable DST systems and had the timezone offset get set when the system checked in with a server. If you weren't connected, tough luck. Not really an option with non-internet connected systems, though. And it's worse if your system needs retrospective dates (ours didn't)
When you buy the PS3, you're not just buying hardware, you're buying a hardware+software combination. You may own the physical hardware but you don't own the software.
Certainly I own the copy of the software that's contained in the device.
Meaning, You don't have a license to modify/disassemble and/or publish the details of the software in the consumer electronic device.
Nor do I need any such license, any more than I need a license to disassemble the console hardware.
In other words, you can watch/use your HDTV, but you don't have the right to take the software that's on it and redistribute it, or modify it so you get free Netflix or something similar.
Redistributing it is covered by 17 USC 506. Modifying it _to get free Netflix_ is covered by 17 USC 1201(a). But modifying it in general does not fall within the scope of copyright law.
There is nothing wrong with the model, it works fine if everyone plays by the rules.
It's what the rules are which are in dispute. Sony's rules are "we made the device, we control it forever, even after we sell it to you". However, this is a violation of the whole concept of ownership and sale, the rules of which are "once a piece of property is sold, the new owner gets to control it and the former owner relinquishes the right to control it".
DRM may not be evil per se, but it sure is associated with a lot of evil. DMCA 1201, region coding, non-skippable commercials on DVDs, Sony rootkits, proposals to ban ADCs, etc. Its few non-evil _uses_ (e.g. enforcing a rental model) are IMO not enough to redeem it.
They are NOT, however, going to publish it without some sort of control mechanism.
Granted, part of my job is network security, so I might not be the typical parent.
Yeah, but as a result, your kid might not be the typical kid. Ask Robert Morris.
Although I suppose it would be a case of mixed feelings if you find your kid has managed to locate a camera to surreptitiously record the password, and ran a side-channel attack on the keyfob.
There is a razor fine line a parent walks between giving a child the freedom to express themselves and explore and grow and protecting both the child and themselves from some of the very ugly bits of reality in this world.
No, there really isn't. There is, in fact, a wide path within which a child can turn out just fine.
Since my wife I are the ones that are going to get our asses raked over the coals by CPS / The Police / Family Court if our child does something stupid
So this isn't about the children at all. It's about your own fear of punishment at the hands of a different bogeyman.
I'm not sure why you think your story is proof of lack of due diligence in the US government. Previous use of marijuana isn't an absolute bar to obtaining government employment. Tom's boss was an idiot for confronting Tom without checking, but he didn't actually take any action based on his mistaken assumption.
So hacking into the government systems of an oppressive government in order to cause it damage somehow as part of a larger campaign to topple it without invading and killing lots of people would be "evil"?
No, but it would be "black hat" by the computer security definition.
HBGary seems to me to be in the same ethical position as any weapons manufacturer.
Jailhouse lawyer: A man who had the law on his side and could prove it... though it did him no good, as he was convicted regardless, by people who would taunt you because you're a known extrovert whose sister is a thespian.
He lied his way in - and that makes it a criminal trespass.
Then you'll have no problem citing the Michigan law which he violated. Because I sure can't find it under "trespass" in the Michigan penal code.
He lied to the school to gain access to their kids.
That is criminal trespass under almost any jurisdiction you could name.
I name "Michigan", and I do not believe that lying to obtain permission to access a school is criminal trespass. I also dispute the idea that the kids belong to the school.
Without permission, he used an empty classroom as a stage for his sexually explicit performance. That again is criminal trespass.
That again is not. Furthermore, he had permission: "The teacher had bowling practice, and he told us we could use the room."
The video makes these kids part of the performance
No, it does not. It makes the kids appear as if they were part of the performance. The performance took place in an empty room.
and that is all that Michigan law requires for prosecution on the felony charge
Really? He was arraigned on a charge of "manufacturing child sexually abusive material". Even ignoring any constitutional questions, the definition of child sexually abusive material from MCLA 750.145c is
(m) "Child sexually abusive material" means any depiction, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, including a developed or undeveloped photograph, picture, film, slide, video, electronic visual image, computer diskette, computer or computer-generated image, or picture, or sound recording which is of a child or appears to include a child engaging in a listed sexual act; a book, magazine, computer, computer storage device, or other visual or print or printable medium containing such a photograph, picture, film, slide, video, electronic visual image, computer, or computer-generated image, or picture, or sound recording; or any reproduction, copy, or print of such a photograph, picture, film, slide, video, electronic visual image, book, magazine, computer, or computer-generated image, or picture, other visual or print or printable medium, or sound recording.
The key thing to notice is that it must include a child, or appear to include a child, engaging in a listed sexual act. Listening to a song (raunchy or otherwise), is not included in the list, which is
"sexual intercourse, erotic fondling, sadomasochistic abuse, masturbation, passive sexual involvement, sexual excitement, or erotic nudity."
The video was posted to YouTube and played to a local comedy club. That looks less like a prank and more like commercial exploitation.
Pranks and commercial exploitation aren't mutually exclusive.
Typical, of course. You're like most people, with such a pro-authority bias that no matter how ludicrous a charge is, you'll tie yourself in knots to justify it.
...that prosecutors and lawmakers felt pain for writing and enforcing unconstitutional laws. Not simple fines, but something akin to what they'd do to the defendant if they won. Or, if that's cruel and unusual, they should simply be executed.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Hotz is required to deliver his computers, hard drives, CD-roms, DVDs, USB sticks, and any other storage devices on which any Circumvention Devices are stored
Wait a minute here... surely there's a question of whether or not there ARE any "Circumvention Devices", that being a term defined by 17 USC 1201. By requiring Hotz to turn over "Circumvention Devices" the judge is requiring him to either a) Concede the point here and now OR b) Risk contempt of court charges for not turning them over.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the $10,000.00 posted by SCEA on January 27, 2011 as security for the Court's issuance of the Temporary Restraining Order shall suffice 3 for this Preliminary Injunction.
I didn't realize purchasing a preliminary injunction was so cheap.
I see the "Honorable" Susan Illston is still giving us a demonstration of what "due process" looks like nowadays; first issue a broad ex parte injunction, THEN hold a hearing, then ratify the original injunction with only minor changes, requiring the defendant to cede the case to comply. No opinion was published, so apparently we're not going to get to see her "reasoning" in this case.
They are not *energy* companies.
They are *extraction* companies.
Nope, they are vertically integrated energy companies. They do exploration, extraction, refinement, distribution, retailing, power generation, research, etc.
Still sounds like a kill switch to me - whether Obama presses a physical red button under his desk or he makes a phone call to threaten corporate employees with jail or physical harm or else, still a kill switch to me. This is semantic bullshit.
Which is more likely to be used frivolously: a red button on Obama's desk that he can press any time he feels like it, or an order sending out troops to point M-16s at network operators? If the "kill switch" requires a lot of work and potentially a lot of mess to use, and furthermore has no authority but naked force behind it, it's less likely (in the US, anyway) to be abused than if it is easy and specifically authorized by law for the government to use it.
That's because any such law would be illegal under the US Constitution. We have a strong prohibition against any ex post facto law, and for good reason.
Actually, we don't. The first crack might have been the Gun Control Act of 1968, which prohibited felons from owning firearms, even if their crimes were committed before the effective date of the law. The various Megan's Law decisions widened that considerably, and US v. Comstock (allowing indefinite "civil commitment" for sex offenders following their prison term) drove the final nail in. The government need merely claim the purpose of the law is protection rather than punishment, and the ex-post-facto prohibition vanishes.
I'm looking for a decent prepaid data option to just go wifi + prepaid + google voice and drop regular voice/data plans for good. Eying t-mobile's $1.49 unlimited data 24-hour day pass. I'm so rarely in a non-wifi environment (subway commute) it hardly makes sense to pay for a standard voice/data plan.
That's what I'm using. $100/1000 minutes, good for a year, and the $1.49 daypasses come out of the $100.
No, they aren't. A lot of explosives are unstable, but it's not necessary for an explosive to be unstable, and it's often desirable that it not be. TNT is stable, RDX is stable. Nitroglycerin is unstable in liquid form, and it was worth a good deal of money to Nobel to come up with a way of making it more stable.
IIRC it has a recipe for nitro, which is a recipe for disaster.
Is there even a safe way to make nitroglycerine? IIRC the biggest problem for a do-it-yourselfer is temperature control. Heat sets the stuff off, and the synthesis is exothermic.
Slashdot Mirror
Nope, an Al Queda propaganda piece. A bunch of terrorists led by a man from a desert world set out to take down an empire... and succeed.
Or LotR was the story from the perspective of the Valar propaganda department. History being written by the victors and all that.
I got the impression from LotR that Sauron's forces actually had numerical superiority.
Why not, it's been done (many times) with the Christian devil.
Originally the meeting was scheduled at 14:00 in Frankfurt and 13:00 in the UK. Now UK changes their time. The calendar thinks it's scheduled at 14:00 in Frankfurt and 14:00 in the UK. But perhaps that's not the desired result; perhaps it should have followed UK local time and been scheduled for 13:00 in the UK and 13:00 in Frankfurt. There's no way the calendar program can know.
It's unavoidable (unless you go to SSD) but it's still a problem, hence the IBM Active Protection System and the Apple Sudden Motion Sensor and a few others.
And that's a problem that's impossible to solve in general. You could say that calendar events should be stored in local time, but in fact that's not always the case (consider an event intended to occur at dawn or sunset). And which local time? If there's a conference call between your UK office and your Frankfurt office, and the local time on one side or the other changes, there's no way the calendar software will know which is correct.
Yeah, you know why it doesn't get DST right? Because when it was made, DST was something other than what was built into it. Which means that if the DST dates changed by a week, you'll either have to be a week wrong, or you'll have to manually adjust it twice when DST change happens. Or, if it allows you to turn DST off, at least you only have to manually adjust it once.
One company I was at was building an embedded device at the time Bush messed with DST dates. We eventually gave up on fancy downloadable DST systems and had the timezone offset get set when the system checked in with a server. If you weren't connected, tough luck. Not really an option with non-internet connected systems, though. And it's worse if your system needs retrospective dates (ours didn't)
Certainly I own the copy of the software that's contained in the device.
Nor do I need any such license, any more than I need a license to disassemble the console hardware.
Redistributing it is covered by 17 USC 506. Modifying it _to get free Netflix_ is covered by 17 USC 1201(a). But modifying it in general does not fall within the scope of copyright law.
It's what the rules are which are in dispute. Sony's rules are "we made the device, we control it forever, even after we sell it to you". However, this is a violation of the whole concept of ownership and sale, the rules of which are "once a piece of property is sold, the new owner gets to control it and the former owner relinquishes the right to control it".
DRM may not be evil per se, but it sure is associated with a lot of evil. DMCA 1201, region coding, non-skippable commercials on DVDs, Sony rootkits, proposals to ban ADCs, etc. Its few non-evil _uses_ (e.g. enforcing a rental model) are IMO not enough to redeem it.
Then they can not publish it.
Yeah, but as a result, your kid might not be the typical kid. Ask Robert Morris.
Although I suppose it would be a case of mixed feelings if you find your kid has managed to locate a camera to surreptitiously record the password, and ran a side-channel attack on the keyfob.
No, there really isn't. There is, in fact, a wide path within which a child can turn out just fine.
So this isn't about the children at all. It's about your own fear of punishment at the hands of a different bogeyman.
Some friends of mine tried that with their kid. It almost worked: As a teenager, he became very fond of missionary.
I'm not sure why you think your story is proof of lack of due diligence in the US government. Previous use of marijuana isn't an absolute bar to obtaining government employment. Tom's boss was an idiot for confronting Tom without checking, but he didn't actually take any action based on his mistaken assumption.
No, but it would be "black hat" by the computer security definition.
HBGary seems to me to be in the same ethical position as any weapons manufacturer.
Jailhouse lawyer: A man who had the law on his side and could prove it... though it did him no good, as he was convicted regardless, by people who would taunt you because you're a known extrovert whose sister is a thespian.
Then you'll have no problem citing the Michigan law which he violated. Because I sure can't find it under "trespass" in the Michigan penal code.
I name "Michigan", and I do not believe that lying to obtain permission to access a school is criminal trespass. I also dispute the idea that the kids belong to the school.
That again is not. Furthermore, he had permission: "The teacher had bowling practice, and he told us we could use the room."
No, it does not. It makes the kids appear as if they were part of the performance. The performance took place in an empty room.
Really? He was arraigned on a charge of "manufacturing child sexually abusive material". Even ignoring any constitutional questions, the definition of child sexually abusive material from MCLA 750.145c is
The key thing to notice is that it must include a child, or appear to include a child, engaging in a listed sexual act. Listening to a song (raunchy or otherwise), is not included in the list, which is "sexual intercourse, erotic fondling, sadomasochistic abuse, masturbation, passive sexual involvement, sexual excitement, or erotic nudity."
Pranks and commercial exploitation aren't mutually exclusive. Typical, of course. You're like most people, with such a pro-authority bias that no matter how ludicrous a charge is, you'll tie yourself in knots to justify it.
...that prosecutors and lawmakers felt pain for writing and enforcing unconstitutional laws. Not simple fines, but something akin to what they'd do to the defendant if they won. Or, if that's cruel and unusual, they should simply be executed.
Wait a minute here... surely there's a question of whether or not there ARE any "Circumvention Devices", that being a term defined by 17 USC 1201. By requiring Hotz to turn over "Circumvention Devices" the judge is requiring him to either
a) Concede the point here and now OR
b) Risk contempt of court charges for not turning them over.
I didn't realize purchasing a preliminary injunction was so cheap.
I see the "Honorable" Susan Illston is still giving us a demonstration of what "due process" looks like nowadays; first issue a broad ex parte injunction, THEN hold a hearing, then ratify the original injunction with only minor changes, requiring the defendant to cede the case to comply. No opinion was published, so apparently we're not going to get to see her "reasoning" in this case.
Nope, they are vertically integrated energy companies. They do exploration, extraction, refinement, distribution, retailing, power generation, research, etc.
Which is more likely to be used frivolously: a red button on Obama's desk that he can press any time he feels like it, or an order sending out troops to point M-16s at network operators? If the "kill switch" requires a lot of work and potentially a lot of mess to use, and furthermore has no authority but naked force behind it, it's less likely (in the US, anyway) to be abused than if it is easy and specifically authorized by law for the government to use it.
Actually, we don't. The first crack might have been the Gun Control Act of 1968, which prohibited felons from owning firearms, even if their crimes were committed before the effective date of the law. The various Megan's Law decisions widened that considerably, and US v. Comstock (allowing indefinite "civil commitment" for sex offenders following their prison term) drove the final nail in. The government need merely claim the purpose of the law is protection rather than punishment, and the ex-post-facto prohibition vanishes.
These side-channel attacks have been known for years; the TPM guys know them too, and have likely at least made attempts to stymie them.
That's what I'm using. $100/1000 minutes, good for a year, and the $1.49 daypasses come out of the $100.
No, they aren't. A lot of explosives are unstable, but it's not necessary for an explosive to be unstable, and it's often desirable that it not be. TNT is stable, RDX is stable. Nitroglycerin is unstable in liquid form, and it was worth a good deal of money to Nobel to come up with a way of making it more stable.
Is there even a safe way to make nitroglycerine? IIRC the biggest problem for a do-it-yourselfer is temperature control. Heat sets the stuff off, and the synthesis is exothermic.