However, if I use those tools to steal a car, or break into a building, I'll also be charged with going equipped to do so.
In the U.S., such provisions are used to arbitrarily "tag on" charges in situations where the police wish to apply more punishment to an already caught criminal. This allows those with police powers leverage to exercise power along political, racial, or socioeconomic lines, and also allows the police to reflect public paranoia with regard to things such as computer related crime.
As such voting Democratic is safer than the alternative. Unless you'd like to live in a country were the Constitution doesn't apply to it's residents.
Well, my point is that we already do, and I think I adequately proved that we haven't since at least 1992. I think that the point I didn't do a good job of communicating is that if you translate a genuine concern for the state of freedom into the current construct of the American party system, your efforts will be defused. The two American parties are about doing the same thing while appearing to offer choice. I therefore find the act of interpreting the current crisis into (2 party) partisan enthusiasm disgusting.
The only way to deal with the problem, IMHO, is to break the two party system. Therefore, I will not vote for any of the two major parties for president. I voted Libertarian in 2000, and will probably do so again in 2004.
That's a damnned good point. Actually, if you think about it, it's really impossible to use any modern operating system without the use of some level of encryption. (even Win95 seeks to obfuscate the user password, if pitiably) Therefore, it would seem that this adds 5 years to the penalty of any crime whose details in any way are associated with computers.
...and anyone voting to keep the current Bush administration, must be insane.
Yeah, because Gore's record on stuff like this is SO good. To say nothing of the fact that the Bush-Ashcroft justice department has yet to approach the (shock warning - this link is disturbing)Reno body count, much less Clinton's.
I suppose, therefore, that according to your interpretation of this problem, our choice is between insanity and amnesia.
Apparently terrorists have tragically gone free due to the inability of investigators to pull up their credit records.
I also like the bit about how the use of encryption in the commission of a crime would be a felony. Recursion anyone? Sounds like a blank check search warrant on anyone using PGP to me.
Actually, the problem is not so much the altitude of the orbit, but its inclination. Columbia probably had enough OMS fuel to get to ISS's orbital altitude, as certainly does the Soyuz (to get "down" to the shuttle) currently docked there. Changing orbital inclination is roughly analogous to spinning up a gyroscope, and then rotating it against the gyroscopic resistance. Making a 20 or 30 degree inclination change at LEO is about as expensive in terms of energy as is the liftoff. Neither STS nor Soyuz has anywhere near the order of magnitude of orbital maneuverability to attempt this.
Of course, there's all the other problems, such as no docking interface, whether both ships could have been configured for EVAs for an external evacuation, and that fact that the Soyuz can only seat two of the shuttle astronauts after the pilot from the ISS.
The long and short of it is that the tolerance for fatal failure in spaceflight is razor thin, and the technical complexities involved would have prevented Bruce Willis, nay, even Tommy Lee Jones from doing anything to save Columbia.
Well, I appreciate your candor. I always regard an honest statement of "I'm not sure" as a very reasonable and respectable point of view, but I guess I just don't see the ambiguity here. Many of your questions are answered in the article. I've written a quantity of CSS, and having a completely seperate CSS document that keys off the browser identification, and which has a left margin that could be 26(!) pixels different under the most explicable and innocent of circumstances is just a bit much.
Why is it that so many/. readers evaluate issues like this in terms of a determination of intent and plausibility of the action when the damn style sheet is right there for everyone to see?
This is fine for a personal or hobby site but for e-commerce, you need to write to users, not standards.
E-commerce (gag) is a subset of the web, not the other way around. If you want to use a computer information network for commercial purposes and take advantage of the work and resources of others in doing so, fine. But understand that you are making a decision to join a community in which your actions have consequences and in which you have certain responsibilities. Exposing an unpatched SQL server to the web is a public nuisance to that community. Running an open SMTP relay is as well. Operating a web site in flagrant and deliberate disregard to the accepted web standards of that community is no different.
but it really looks like an honest typo in the style sheet.
Really? Let's look and see...
MSIE stylesheet:
margin: -2px 0px 0px 23px;
Opera stylesheet:
margin: -2px 0px 0px -30px;
I don't know how you go about typing, but I'd have to throw silly putty at the keyboard from the other side of the room to hit the "-" key instead of the "2".
If you truly want to get good quality goods, don't expect to keep forcing the market to make cheaper and cheaper products.
What the hell is this? Communism in reverse? You're going to blame consumers for demanding a fair price? Seems to me the problem is a lack of information, not a lack of money.
Sapphire reached its peak scanning rate of over 55 million scans per second across the Internet in under 3 minutes... worm defenses need to be automatic; there is no conceivable way for system administrators to respond to threats of this speed
That statement borders in irresponsible. There is no reasonable way to deal with a threat like this after the fact, however fast your gee-whiz IDP solution claims to shut down an anomaly incident. Don't even get me started on the estimated response speed of a federal Internet crisis center. The bottom line is that more public thought needs to go into making long term security decisions, starting with what software is selected for a particular purpose and how effectively and strictly that software is managed.
All this statement is going to do is give the executive level FUD meisters at (insert your favorite security/network gear company here) more ammo to shut down the ability of IT administrators to do their job.
I did. I've also been trying to get in on Birmingham's most popular radio talk show and congratulate him on air. I still need to try to get letters posted in the newspaper.
Classic slashdot argument tactics - change what is said into a bizarre absolute and then hold it to ridicule.
Actually, the only classic thing I see about this debate is your plaintive "Help, I'm being straw-manned!" Though you did avoid the actual buzzword, your comment would have had more class if you'd simply accused your opponent of trolling.
The very fact that the UKian government is using predictive AI algorithms to electronically decide that you are behaving suspiciously puts the argument well into what you would characterize as a bizare absolute.
Anyone who knows the UK government (all colours) which is too mean to fund decent railways, roads and infrastructure will know that they couldn't be bothered to monitor us ALL 24/7.
Invalid assumption. A government's willingness to provide for its population to move around has little bearing on its willingness to control those people (except for perhaps an inverse relationship).
Spencer Bachus, my representative, is also cosponsoring the bill. This is a real turnaround for him, as he has usually voted for whichever side of the issue is commercial. We've had several e- and snail mail arguments about electronic freedom issues, and his cosponsorship of this bill demonstrates that he is doing just what his job title indicates - representing.
A big attaboy to my man Bachus for pitching in on this! Let this be an inspiration to anyone else out there who believes that getting involved is hopeless - if you speak, they will listen.
If you're grabbing human manure from Haitian orphans, you've got bigger issues than some possible pathogens...
Thank you for that mental image. I am a sad and wiser man now that I know of at least one example of how the term "turd burglar" might be applicably defined.
Slashdot Mirror
However, if I use those tools to steal a car, or break into a building, I'll also be charged with going equipped to do so.
In the U.S., such provisions are used to arbitrarily "tag on" charges in situations where the police wish to apply more punishment to an already caught criminal. This allows those with police powers leverage to exercise power along political, racial, or socioeconomic lines, and also allows the police to reflect public paranoia with regard to things such as computer related crime.
Yeah, that's really what I was trying to get at, but didn't do a very good job of it.
As such voting Democratic is safer than the alternative. Unless you'd like to live in a country were the Constitution doesn't apply to it's residents.
Well, my point is that we already do, and I think I adequately proved that we haven't since at least 1992. I think that the point I didn't do a good job of communicating is that if you translate a genuine concern for the state of freedom into the current construct of the American party system, your efforts will be defused. The two American parties are about doing the same thing while appearing to offer choice. I therefore find the act of interpreting the current crisis into (2 party) partisan enthusiasm disgusting.
The only way to deal with the problem, IMHO, is to break the two party system. Therefore, I will not vote for any of the two major parties for president. I voted Libertarian in 2000, and will probably do so again in 2004.
PGP? What about ssh??
That's a damnned good point. Actually, if you think about it, it's really impossible to use any modern operating system without the use of some level of encryption. (even Win95 seeks to obfuscate the user password, if pitiably) Therefore, it would seem that this adds 5 years to the penalty of any crime whose details in any way are associated with computers.
Yeah, because Gore's record on stuff like this is SO good. To say nothing of the fact that the Bush-Ashcroft justice department has yet to approach the (shock warning - this link is disturbing)Reno body count, much less Clinton's.
I suppose, therefore, that according to your interpretation of this problem, our choice is between insanity and amnesia.
Apparently terrorists have tragically gone free due to the inability of investigators to pull up their credit records.
I also like the bit about how the use of encryption in the commission of a crime would be a felony. Recursion anyone? Sounds like a blank check search warrant on anyone using PGP to me.
Who could ask for more?
Are you kidding? That will buy two or three full sized multi-story development campuses full of engineers in India!
Actually, the problem is not so much the altitude of the orbit, but its inclination. Columbia probably had enough OMS fuel to get to ISS's orbital altitude, as certainly does the Soyuz (to get "down" to the shuttle) currently docked there. Changing orbital inclination is roughly analogous to spinning up a gyroscope, and then rotating it against the gyroscopic resistance. Making a 20 or 30 degree inclination change at LEO is about as expensive in terms of energy as is the liftoff. Neither STS nor Soyuz has anywhere near the order of magnitude of orbital maneuverability to attempt this.
Of course, there's all the other problems, such as no docking interface, whether both ships could have been configured for EVAs for an external evacuation, and that fact that the Soyuz can only seat two of the shuttle astronauts after the pilot from the ISS.
The long and short of it is that the tolerance for fatal failure in spaceflight is razor thin, and the technical complexities involved would have prevented Bruce Willis, nay, even Tommy Lee Jones from doing anything to save Columbia.
Well, I appreciate your candor. I always regard an honest statement of "I'm not sure" as a very reasonable and respectable point of view, but I guess I just don't see the ambiguity here. Many of your questions are answered in the article. I've written a quantity of CSS, and having a completely seperate CSS document that keys off the browser identification, and which has a left margin that could be 26(!) pixels different under the most explicable and innocent of circumstances is just a bit much.
Why is it that so many /. readers evaluate issues like this in terms of a determination of intent and plausibility of the action when the damn style sheet is right there for everyone to see?
This is fine for a personal or hobby site but for e-commerce, you need to write to users, not standards.
E-commerce (gag) is a subset of the web, not the other way around. If you want to use a computer information network for commercial purposes and take advantage of the work and resources of others in doing so, fine. But understand that you are making a decision to join a community in which your actions have consequences and in which you have certain responsibilities. Exposing an unpatched SQL server to the web is a public nuisance to that community. Running an open SMTP relay is as well. Operating a web site in flagrant and deliberate disregard to the accepted web standards of that community is no different.
but it really looks like an honest typo in the style sheet.
Really? Let's look and see...
MSIE stylesheet:
Opera stylesheet:
I don't know how you go about typing, but I'd have to throw silly putty at the keyboard from the other side of the room to hit the "-" key instead of the "2".
If you truly want to get good quality goods, don't expect to keep forcing the market to make cheaper and cheaper products.
What the hell is this? Communism in reverse? You're going to blame consumers for demanding a fair price? Seems to me the problem is a lack of information, not a lack of money.
No more floppy drives? How will computer users transfer data from one machine to another via physical removeable media?
:glances at a CD lying on his desk...:
OH...NO....
C:\>tracert life.liberty.pursuit-of-happiness
Host not found.
From TFA:
Sapphire reached its peak scanning rate of over 55 million scans per second across the Internet in under 3 minutes... worm defenses need to be automatic; there is no conceivable way for system administrators to respond to threats of this speed
That statement borders in irresponsible. There is no reasonable way to deal with a threat like this after the fact, however fast your gee-whiz IDP solution claims to shut down an anomaly incident. Don't even get me started on the estimated response speed of a federal Internet crisis center. The bottom line is that more public thought needs to go into making long term security decisions, starting with what software is selected for a particular purpose and how effectively and strictly that software is managed.
All this statement is going to do is give the executive level FUD meisters at (insert your favorite security/network gear company here) more ammo to shut down the ability of IT administrators to do their job.
So write him and tell him.
I did. I've also been trying to get in on Birmingham's most popular radio talk show and congratulate him on air. I still need to try to get letters posted in the newspaper.
Classic slashdot argument tactics - change what is said into a bizarre absolute and then hold it to ridicule.
Actually, the only classic thing I see about this debate is your plaintive "Help, I'm being straw-manned!" Though you did avoid the actual buzzword, your comment would have had more class if you'd simply accused your opponent of trolling.
The very fact that the UKian government is using predictive AI algorithms to electronically decide that you are behaving suspiciously puts the argument well into what you would characterize as a bizare absolute.
Anyone who knows the UK government (all colours) which is too mean to fund decent railways, roads and infrastructure will know that they couldn't be bothered to monitor us ALL 24/7.
Invalid assumption. A government's willingness to provide for its population to move around has little bearing on its willingness to control those people (except for perhaps an inverse relationship).
Spencer Bachus, my representative, is also cosponsoring the bill. This is a real turnaround for him, as he has usually voted for whichever side of the issue is commercial. We've had several e- and snail mail arguments about electronic freedom issues, and his cosponsorship of this bill demonstrates that he is doing just what his job title indicates - representing.
A big attaboy to my man Bachus for pitching in on this! Let this be an inspiration to anyone else out there who believes that getting involved is hopeless - if you speak, they will listen.
Nice post. I'm sure you'll be protesting the launch of this , that is - if you're not going to try to convince us that Al Gore invented it.
If you're grabbing human manure from Haitian orphans, you've got bigger issues than some possible pathogens...
Thank you for that mental image. I am a sad and wiser man now that I know of at least one example of how the term "turd burglar" might be applicably defined.
Just out of curiousity, just how and/or when is it fun to shovel one's own sh!t around?
What is this, Quake?
If Jar Jar proposed that the board vote on the consolidations.