That I still do post things as AC if I don't want the public to know, but don't mind if CowboyNeal and the government know.
In fact, if it were possible to block Timothy stories and keep track of responses to your posts without having an account I'd post everything as AC. But once I start tying views and details to a single account, that information already identifies me as uniquely as (in fact more than) my name.
OK, it's a given that government agencies probably have access to your details, but by using your real name, you give everyone who knows about google.com the same ability.
Eh, that was already possible anyway. It doesn't take too many details to uniquely identify a person. Unless I'm going to be on guard all the time about revealing my former workplaces, my email address, the states I've lived in, the cop who pulled me over the day before, etc, it's already possible to figure it out.
Seriously though, each of us has a worrying amount of data available to anyone who knows where to look. That only works if we used our real names all the time.
I don't have a worrying amount of data available to anyone. If an empolyer isn't going to hire me because of my political views, I don't want to work for that employer anyway. If a girlfriend is going to break up with me because of my opinion of some movie, well, I'd still want her to be my girlfriend but I'll just find one that doesn't read slashdot:).
If I don't want the public to know something, I don't post it on slashdot. It's that simple.
Now, say that everything you say or do on the net is logged and tracked. Would you be so forward in voicing your opinion if you know it will single you out and appear on your permanent record?
Of course. I already assume that everything I say or do on the net is logged and tracked. Why do you think I use my real name on Slashdot? To remind myself of this fact.
I'm not talking about Napster. I'm talking about copyright law enforcement.
You're talking about DMCA enforcement? Why? That's off topic.
"Bankruptcy. Big deal. Especially since there's about 0% chance I'll get caught."
That's why the DMCA exists, and why we will have DRM. Because jerks like you are ruining it for everyone else.
Just because I don't agree with a law doesn't mean I'm forcing even more harsh laws to be passed. That's a pretty stupid statement. It's like saying people who escaped from slavery are responsible for the harsh laws against escaping from slavery.
I dunno, I see celebrating Christmas as an atheist kind of like celebrating Hitler's birthday as a Jew. I'm not going to criticise those who do it, but it seems a little out of place.
It may be the cheapest short term solution, but it's going to cost more than money (and that too) in the long run.
How is it going to cost more than money (and that too) in the long run?
Buying back stolen property or paying "protection" money is only a bad idea because there's no guarantee you'll get your property back or your "protection". In this case you enter into a contract to get your domain back for a certain price, and if you don't get your domain back you cancel the check.
MPAA still gets a cut; even if not directly, the cost is offset in the feature price.
Yeah, but they get less money if you watch a matinee.
A boycott truly means: never watching movies outside of independent films, and never listening to music outside of independent music.
Not exactly, it means not paying for these products outside of independent ones. Radio, borrowing from friends, borrowing from the library, using napster, etc.
Also, if they stopped used product sales, then everyone would be forced to buy new instead of used. By buying a used product, you shut down one used product sale.
OK, I agree with all that you said, including that I properly should have said frequency rather than wavelength. But your comment about Einstein's non-locality being moot I don't think is quite right.
Imagine a source that emits two photons at a time, in opposite directions. We know that they must be oppositely polarised, so if I can set the polarisation of the photons you can measure them and I can send you a binary message, can't I?
Sure, but this is easily explained by a hidden variables theory. One photon was always polarized one way, the other was always polarized the opposite way.
The current QM theory says that both photons were initially polarized both ways. Then when the measurement was taken the photons instantaneously collapsed into opposite polarizations. This is a much different interpretation, at least philosophically.
There is no useful information transmitted, and relativity is preserved.
Einstein's problem with non-locality was not just that relativity could be destroyed, it went to a fundamental belief about the universe. Perhaps it would be incorrect, but it should only be thrown out if there were absolutely no other way to justify experimental results.
Does Bell's theorem put us in that position? I have a couple more years of studying before I can even have an opinion on that one.
Slashdot Mirror
That I still do post things as AC if I don't want the public to know, but don't mind if CowboyNeal and the government know.
In fact, if it were possible to block Timothy stories and keep track of responses to your posts without having an account I'd post everything as AC. But once I start tying views and details to a single account, that information already identifies me as uniquely as (in fact more than) my name.
OK, it's a given that government agencies probably have access to your details, but by using your real name, you give everyone who knows about google.com the same ability.
Eh, that was already possible anyway. It doesn't take too many details to uniquely identify a person. Unless I'm going to be on guard all the time about revealing my former workplaces, my email address, the states I've lived in, the cop who pulled me over the day before, etc, it's already possible to figure it out.
Seriously though, each of us has a worrying amount of data available to anyone who knows where to look. That only works if we used our real names all the time.
I don't have a worrying amount of data available to anyone. If an empolyer isn't going to hire me because of my political views, I don't want to work for that employer anyway. If a girlfriend is going to break up with me because of my opinion of some movie, well, I'd still want her to be my girlfriend but I'll just find one that doesn't read slashdot :).
If I don't want the public to know something, I don't post it on slashdot. It's that simple.
I don't think this helps anything, anyone who wants to "talk" on the internet is going to use SSL/SSH if they know what they are doing
Sure, and where are most people going to download these SSL/SSH clients from?
Now, say that everything you say or do on the net is logged and tracked. Would you be so forward in voicing your opinion if you know it will single you out and appear on your permanent record?
Of course. I already assume that everything I say or do on the net is logged and tracked. Why do you think I use my real name on Slashdot? To remind myself of this fact.
I'm not talking about Napster. I'm talking about copyright law enforcement.
You're talking about DMCA enforcement? Why? That's off topic.
"Bankruptcy. Big deal. Especially since there's about 0% chance I'll get caught."
That's why the DMCA exists, and why we will have DRM. Because jerks like you are ruining it for everyone else.
Just because I don't agree with a law doesn't mean I'm forcing even more harsh laws to be passed. That's a pretty stupid statement. It's like saying people who escaped from slavery are responsible for the harsh laws against escaping from slavery.
And like I said, I think DRM is a good thing.
You could use MURS along with a ham rig. Or even better if you have the time, use a licensed frequency.
I don't believe I did.
I dunno, I see celebrating Christmas as an atheist kind of like celebrating Hitler's birthday as a Jew. I'm not going to criticise those who do it, but it seems a little out of place.
I think we agree that what the pornsite is doing isn't morally ok
I disagree with that.
It may be the cheapest short term solution, but it's going to cost more than money (and that too) in the long run.
How is it going to cost more than money (and that too) in the long run?
Buying back stolen property or paying "protection" money is only a bad idea because there's no guarantee you'll get your property back or your "protection". In this case you enter into a contract to get your domain back for a certain price, and if you don't get your domain back you cancel the check.
Yet another case of the rich get richer, the poor get poorer.
Well, in this case it would be the rich get domain names, the poor lose domain names.
What holiday?
MPAA still gets a cut; even if not directly, the cost is offset in the feature price.
Yeah, but they get less money if you watch a matinee.
A boycott truly means: never watching movies outside of independent films, and never listening to music outside of independent music.
Not exactly, it means not paying for these products outside of independent ones. Radio, borrowing from friends, borrowing from the library, using napster, etc.
Better artists? Not usually.
Yeah exactly... By buying CDs, you're supporting terrorism...
Also, if they stopped used product sales, then everyone would be forced to buy new instead of used. By buying a used product, you shut down one used product sale.
and people will come
OK, I agree with all that you said, including that I properly should have said frequency rather than wavelength. But your comment about Einstein's non-locality being moot I don't think is quite right.
Imagine a source that emits two photons at a time, in opposite directions. We know that they must be oppositely polarised, so if I can set the polarisation of the photons you can measure them and I can send you a binary message, can't I?
Sure, but this is easily explained by a hidden variables theory. One photon was always polarized one way, the other was always polarized the opposite way.
The current QM theory says that both photons were initially polarized both ways. Then when the measurement was taken the photons instantaneously collapsed into opposite polarizations. This is a much different interpretation, at least philosophically.
There is no useful information transmitted, and relativity is preserved.
Einstein's problem with non-locality was not just that relativity could be destroyed, it went to a fundamental belief about the universe. Perhaps it would be incorrect, but it should only be thrown out if there were absolutely no other way to justify experimental results.
Does Bell's theorem put us in that position? I have a couple more years of studying before I can even have an opinion on that one.
Shut down what? Sales of used products? So they can sell used products at jacked up prices.
So you might as well take advantage of it.
Survivor is a great show. And "than" is spelled "than."
fund the policy from your employees salaries.
Allow employees to get a refund of most of the insurance salary deduction by being bonded for a few million dollars.
Alternatively, just take your chances and hope shit doesn't happen, or that if it does, you catch the person and they don't go bankrupt.
because you bought the used one that they otherwise would have bought.
You can protest copyright by violating the law, but you need to accept the consequences if you are caught.
Bankruptcy. Big deal. Especially since there's about 0% chance I'll get caught.
In this case, the DMCA, although bad legislation, is the consequence for piracy.
You clearly don't understand the DMCA, since it has nothing whatsoever to do with napster.
No, because if you buy one used that's one person who would have bought one used that now has to buy one new.