For example, when the Alien & Sedition Acts were passed, while Democrats like Thomas Jefferson were vehemently opposed, nobody would have thought to argue it unconstitutional on Free Speech grounds.
Democratic-Republicans -- usually called Republicans -- if you please. Jefferson's party is the parent of both parties today, though he'd hardly recognize either. And of course they were argued as unconstitutional on free speech grounds. See the third Kentucky Resolution.
Even if these initiatives weren't both limited and in partnership with other groups, just what would Google do that would be harmful to K-12 computer science education? Make everyone learn Go?
Now, if you want a real issue, go check on the Gates Foundation's influence on the much-derided Common Core.
(Disclosure: I work for Google, but this means less than you probably think)
Hell yes, in a New York minute. I even think I would be willing to find a lawyer that could take 100% of any sort of damage award (aka I don't want anything other than to see the troll rot in hell) in exchange for the case.
Not a chance. The DMCA is set up so the chance of winning a countersuit is so small that no lawyer would take such a case on contingency. You'd have to pay yourself. And that's after paying to defend yourself from the original suit, however meritless it may be.
The problem is if you are already in a legal grey area of copyright law, in which case you should think twice about sending the counter-notice.
Oh, you're a just-worlder. No. Doesn't matter. There ain't no justice. The individual can't afford to win a lawsuit (where "winning" means you don't lose any more money and you get to keep your content up, not that you get any damages yourself), let alone lose.
For something like GitHub with a mass automated pile of take-down notices, I doubt once you send the counter-notice that anything more would happen for very similar reasons.... you are small fish that they don't want to bother with an actual lawsuit.
Would you bet your house and your savings on that? It'll cost you that if you win; somewhat less if you settle, more if you lose.
It's zero risk for them to send a takedown and you have to put your head in a guillotine to get things put back up. And hope they don't trip the lever.
Once the ISP receives a "put back" notice, they must pass to the original complainant in a timely manner.
Wrong. The only consequence of ignoring a counter-notice is they lose the safe harbor against their own customer. But they probably have terms of service which say they can remove anything for any reason and you have no recourse, so they can simply ignore counter-notices to no effect.
After the 10 day waiting period, if the ISP has not received notice of a restraining order blocking the put back because of an impending court hearing, then it is allowed to restore the content.
Wrong again. They need only receive notice that the complaintant filed a lawsuit; no order is required. Note the complaintant can just lie about this. Or simply file another DMCA notice once the material goes back up.
As an individual, once you're in court, you lose. A DMCA counternotice is an invitation to sue -- literally, you tell them where you can be sued. Inviting companies with lawyers on staff to sue you is a great way to lose all your money. Regardless of merit.
Also known as the Separate System. It was a system of organizing prisons so every inmate spend their time in solitary. A lot of the inmates went crazy. This isn't anything to do with modern society. There's a reason solitary in modern prisons is punishment.
As people learned once this law collided with the real world, a hosting provider can do less for the customer and also avoid liability. They can immediately fold and pull content as soon as they get a takedown notice, and not even bother to wait for a counter-notice.
Lobbyists for the MPAA and RIAA wrote this law. This is exactly what they wanted and expected. It's also a major reason why the DMCA is unconstitutional, though the courts will take it at face value so they can pretend otherwise.
But I digress. The point is this: AC power is a waveform, oscillating at 60 Hz. It cannot vary much at all...because within the same grid, everything is interconnected. Every generator is in sync, or has a syncrophasor to re-sync the power coming from it before it hits the grid.
Sure, the fundamental won't tell you much. There's a lot of other crap on the power lines though, and that might give you a signature of the location.
What effect on the economy would a series of coordinated attacks on malls have on the day after Thanksgiving?
Perhaps an end to the insanity that is Black Friday and the Christmas season in general? Shopping being better-distributed throughout the year rather than packed into a month? Should be a long-term win. Hell, if I were a cop I'd fantasize about doing it for just those reasons.
From the letter to NFSN from the Treasury Solcitor's office: "Clearly, the publication of personal contact information in the knowledge (or constructive knowledge) that such publication may lead to harassment of others, is illegal. We do not wish, however, to cite the relevant law in these circumstances. " Is there any clearer way for a lawyer to state "Yeah, we got nothing"?
All parties involved -- Microsoft, NoIP, and NoIPs registrar -- are in the US. What court would you expect to have jurisdiction? The problem is that the court went batshit crazy in issuing this order, not that it was in the US.
As with most of Myrhvold's stuff, it's not so hard to blue-sky it (and take out a broad patent which covers everything while teaching nothing); it is hard to actually implement it. Take the optical sensor to detect browning. Yeah, works great... except it's got to be inside an oven. Which gets grease all over it. Grease that is not transparent.
If you want to make something practical for a residential oven, it has to work in an oven environment. Reliably. Without much maintenance.
No-IP punished their legitimate customers by allowing their service by failing to take action against those who abuse their service.
Begs so many questions. 1) Did they have a duty to take action against those distributing malware via their service? 2) If they did have such a duty, what actions were they required to take? 3) If they were required to take actions they failed to take, was seizing their entire domain an appropriate remedy?
But nobody even got to ask these questions, because the order was ex parte.
This is like the MPAA shutting down a mall because they claim pirated DVDs are being sold there.
And how long has there been misogny in women in IT discussion on slashdot?
Damned if I know; check the archives. Long time, certainly.
How long have guys like you been throwing around "social justice warrior" as an epithet?
Oh, rather more recently I suspect.
And I'm the bad guy for throwing a few curses around?
Throwing them around as indiscriminately as you (and others I would tag "social justice warriors") do certainly doesn't make you a good guy. It isn't just the words, it's the demonizing; I mean, we know we're not demons, at least, most of us do. Maybe your vitriol will convince a few insecure straight white males that they don't deserve what they have; maybe it'll find root in a few who actually had the easy time of it that you claim we all did. But for most of us, it's just a false accusation and indeed marks you as the bad guy.
In the long term it is. Because then you will HAVE to earn what you get fairly against real competition without "cheating"
In the long term, we're all dead. Discriminating against me because of the actions of some straight white males in the past (or even some other straight white males in the present) doesn't better me, so it certainly doesn't better "us all". As for "cheating", no, I haven't cheated. Even the narrative of privilege doesn't claim those benefiting from privilege are actually cheating.
Let me use a gaming example? Isn't it more rewarding to beat a game without cheats, than with? Beat it on "Normal" and not "easy"?
According to Scalzi, I don't have a choice what level I play on. But I reject the idea that I'm cheating or even playing on "easy".
I don't think so, I've not seen any feminist use [white knight], but I sure have seen a lot of anti-feminist men do so here on Slashdot.
Check various feminism websites.
Modern Slashdotters in their 20's have more in common with jocks than old style geeks/nerds.
ROTFL. You know this how? I can't speak for slashdotters, but I work with a lot of younger software engineers, and they're still geeks, not jocks.
You've seen the term "brogrammer" bandied around. They may be a programmer, but they watch ESPN and drink brewskis with the bros rather than put on spock ears, go to a con and play Battletech.
Brogramming was a hoax; a joke, based on the juxtaposition of two opposite stereotypes, the geek/nerd and the "bro". Now it serves the purpose of demonstrating that those taken in by it have no idea what they're talking about.
The "program" is simple, it's: "Don't be a misogynist/racist/etc, and we need to remedy past and present discrimination" What part of that is controversial? We learned the value of that years ago.
Well, first of all, the definitions of the terms keep changing. Used to be that not being a racist meant not discriminating based on race, and similarly for sexist. We were fine with that. Now we're being told it's OK to discriminate based on race and sex, as long as it's against white people and males.... whoa, whoa, whoa, that's moving the goalpost, and it's definitely not OK. The term "misogyny", similarly, has been widened, even so far as to include completely non-discriminatory behavior that is supposedly characteristic of men and disproportionately affects women.
Further, the idea that remedying past discrimination is desirable is controversial in itself. It quickly gets into a muddle of just who discriminated against who and who benefited and was hurt. The idea that "white people benefited from discrimination against black people, so to remedy that we should discriminate against different white people to benefit different black people" is quite controversial.
The same goes for present discrimination to a lesser extent; remedying specific instances of discrimination is uncontroversial, but adding a general counterbalance to present discrimination against one group by discriminating for that group is controversial.
In this case, it's not just "extremely hard to exploit" (which means the NSA had it done 10 years ago and the other black hats 5). It appears that it's impossible -- to cause the overrun requires an compressed block size larger than the affected programs will accept. (of course, this doesn't preclude the possibility of other bugs which allow a larger compressed block through)
We are always told how efficient cities are as compared to other forms of living but the cities are the only places that actually seem to need high levels of subsidization. If they were so efficient they wouldn't.
Haha, you haven't looked at agricultural subsidies lately (or ever), have you?
Mass transit is certainly massively subsidized (often by the same drivers that urbanistas despise so much), but to say that cities are the only places that need subsidization is ridiculous.
Unfair or not, I think a bigger problem is it's not going to work. Because it's based on the idea that the reason women aren't going into programming in large numbers is due to relative lack of opportunity, which simply isn't so.
The difference is that few would argue that going hunting by connecting your gun to a couple of $9 servos, and operating it over a glitchy radio link where you have a tiny field of view through a bad camera, and it may randomly go off if you lose radio is a sane thing to do.
The FAA opposes that, but they're perfectly fine with operating it over a glitchy radio link where all you have is a Mk I eyeball located a thousand feet away.
Slashdot Mirror
Democratic-Republicans -- usually called Republicans -- if you please. Jefferson's party is the parent of both parties today, though he'd hardly recognize either. And of course they were argued as unconstitutional on free speech grounds. See the third Kentucky Resolution.
Even if these initiatives weren't both limited and in partnership with other groups, just what would Google do that would be harmful to K-12 computer science education? Make everyone learn Go?
Now, if you want a real issue, go check on the Gates Foundation's influence on the much-derided Common Core.
(Disclosure: I work for Google, but this means less than you probably think)
Not a chance. The DMCA is set up so the chance of winning a countersuit is so small that no lawyer would take such a case on contingency. You'd have to pay yourself. And that's after paying to defend yourself from the original suit, however meritless it may be.
Oh, you're a just-worlder. No. Doesn't matter. There ain't no justice. The individual can't afford to win a lawsuit (where "winning" means you don't lose any more money and you get to keep your content up, not that you get any damages yourself), let alone lose.
Would you bet your house and your savings on that? It'll cost you that if you win; somewhat less if you settle, more if you lose.
It's zero risk for them to send a takedown and you have to put your head in a guillotine to get things put back up. And hope they don't trip the lever.
Wrong. The only consequence of ignoring a counter-notice is they lose the safe harbor against their own customer. But they probably have terms of service which say they can remove anything for any reason and you have no recourse, so they can simply ignore counter-notices to no effect.
Wrong again. They need only receive notice that the complaintant filed a lawsuit; no order is required. Note the complaintant can just lie about this. Or simply file another DMCA notice once the material goes back up.
As an individual, once you're in court, you lose. A DMCA counternotice is an invitation to sue -- literally, you tell them where you can be sued. Inviting companies with lawyers on staff to sue you is a great way to lose all your money. Regardless of merit.
Also known as the Separate System. It was a system of organizing prisons so every inmate spend their time in solitary. A lot of the inmates went crazy. This isn't anything to do with modern society. There's a reason solitary in modern prisons is punishment.
What glorious, gloroius nonsense! I mean, do you really think no one here remembers the world before 1999?
Lobbyists for the MPAA and RIAA wrote this law. This is exactly what they wanted and expected. It's also a major reason why the DMCA is unconstitutional, though the courts will take it at face value so they can pretend otherwise.
802.11a was released in 1999; DFS in 2003. While it was blocked in Europe before DFS, it was legal in the US.
Sure, the fundamental won't tell you much. There's a lot of other crap on the power lines though, and that might give you a signature of the location.
Perhaps an end to the insanity that is Black Friday and the Christmas season in general? Shopping being better-distributed throughout the year rather than packed into a month? Should be a long-term win. Hell, if I were a cop I'd fantasize about doing it for just those reasons.
Or just old 802.11a devices that pre-date the Dynamic Frequency Selection requirements.
From the letter to NFSN from the Treasury Solcitor's office:
"Clearly, the publication of personal contact information in the knowledge (or constructive
knowledge) that such publication may lead to harassment of others, is illegal. We do not
wish, however, to cite the relevant law in these circumstances. "
Is there any clearer way for a lawyer to state "Yeah, we got nothing"?
A DMCA counternotice is literally an invitation to sue.
Obviously. Just step 1 of Microsoft's usual playbook -- embrace, extend, extinguish.
Look up the "special needs" exception, used e.g. in the NYC subway search case. It's basically "... but we really, really want to"
All parties involved -- Microsoft, NoIP, and NoIPs registrar -- are in the US. What court would you expect to have jurisdiction? The problem is that the court went batshit crazy in issuing this order, not that it was in the US.
As with most of Myrhvold's stuff, it's not so hard to blue-sky it (and take out a broad patent which covers everything while teaching nothing); it is hard to actually implement it. Take the optical sensor to detect browning. Yeah, works great... except it's got to be inside an oven. Which gets grease all over it. Grease that is not transparent.
If you want to make something practical for a residential oven, it has to work in an oven environment. Reliably. Without much maintenance.
Begs so many questions.
1) Did they have a duty to take action against those distributing malware via their service?
2) If they did have such a duty, what actions were they required to take?
3) If they were required to take actions they failed to take, was seizing their entire domain an appropriate remedy?
But nobody even got to ask these questions, because the order was ex parte.
This is like the MPAA shutting down a mall because they claim pirated DVDs are being sold there.
Damned if I know; check the archives. Long time, certainly.
Oh, rather more recently I suspect.
Throwing them around as indiscriminately as you (and others I would tag "social justice warriors") do certainly doesn't make you a good guy. It isn't just the words, it's the demonizing; I mean, we know we're not demons, at least, most of us do. Maybe your vitriol will convince a few insecure straight white males that they don't deserve what they have; maybe it'll find root in a few who actually had the easy time of it that you claim we all did. But for most of us, it's just a false accusation and indeed marks you as the bad guy.
In the long term, we're all dead. Discriminating against me because of the actions of some straight white males in the past (or even some other straight white males in the present) doesn't better me, so it certainly doesn't better "us all". As for "cheating", no, I haven't cheated. Even the narrative of privilege doesn't claim those benefiting from privilege are actually cheating.
According to Scalzi, I don't have a choice what level I play on. But I reject the idea that I'm cheating or even playing on "easy".
Check various feminism websites.
ROTFL. You know this how? I can't speak for slashdotters, but I work with a lot of younger software engineers, and they're still geeks, not jocks.
Brogramming was a hoax; a joke, based on the juxtaposition of two opposite stereotypes, the geek/nerd and the "bro". Now it serves the purpose of demonstrating that those taken in by it have no idea what they're talking about.
Well, first of all, the definitions of the terms keep changing. Used to be that not being a racist meant not discriminating based on race, and similarly for sexist. We were fine with that. Now we're being told it's OK to discriminate based on race and sex, as long as it's against white people and males.... whoa, whoa, whoa, that's moving the goalpost, and it's definitely not OK. The term "misogyny", similarly, has been widened, even so far as to include completely non-discriminatory behavior that is supposedly characteristic of men and disproportionately affects women.
Further, the idea that remedying past discrimination is desirable is controversial in itself. It quickly gets into a muddle of just who discriminated against who and who benefited and was hurt. The idea that "white people benefited from discrimination against black people, so to remedy that we should discriminate against different white people to benefit different black people" is quite controversial.
The same goes for present discrimination to a lesser extent; remedying specific instances of discrimination is uncontroversial, but adding a general counterbalance to present discrimination against one group by discriminating for that group is controversial.
In this case, it's not just "extremely hard to exploit" (which means the NSA had it done 10 years ago and the other black hats 5). It appears that it's impossible -- to cause the overrun requires an compressed block size larger than the affected programs will accept. (of course, this doesn't preclude the possibility of other bugs which allow a larger compressed block through)
Haha, you haven't looked at agricultural subsidies lately (or ever), have you?
Mass transit is certainly massively subsidized (often by the same drivers that urbanistas despise so much), but to say that cities are the only places that need subsidization is ridiculous.
Unfair or not, I think a bigger problem is it's not going to work. Because it's based on the idea that the reason women aren't going into programming in large numbers is due to relative lack of opportunity, which simply isn't so.
The FAA opposes that, but they're perfectly fine with operating it over a glitchy radio link where all you have is a Mk I eyeball located a thousand feet away.