You made an excellent point and you are using your intellect instead of emotion.
This is/. Flying off half-cocked and over-reacting is encouraged. The average poster here is something of a cross between chicken little and Agent Fox Mulder.
The rest of the Spurgeon quote seems so reasonable. Why do people have to exaggerate and make things seem so dire? I know,I know. Money. To me it's just dishonest. I get tired of the fact that everyting is an con, or a sell of some sort.
If a musician is being exploited, the publisher is the most likely culprit. Somehow, this is twisted and suddenly it's the people using the internet to download files? Please.
"Law-abiding motorists should have nothing to fear and will be pleased to see untaxed, uninsured and unregistered being caught in the act." I don't care so much about them being "caught in the act". Here's my wish. I would be most pleased if my insurance rates were to go down *IF* this system helps remove said drivers from driving.
If he didn't want one before, I'm sure the guy would like a full-time gig. I've always been uneasy with contracting companies. It has never seemed like a good deal to me. I've been fortunate that I've been able to find full time employment. For me, a contracting company would be a last choice. They demand too much and provide too little in return.
The post says "Fujitsu hs a strong presence in Asia, a place Microsoft has been trying to cultivate."
The article states "While Fujitsu lacks those competitors' market share, it does have a strong position in Asia, where Red Hat is trying to expand."
The article doesn't mention Microsoft.
Looks like someone woke up hating Microsoft today. (I know. This is shashdot. What do I expect?). This just strikes me as unneeded FUD generating bullshit. Of course, I'm a little grumpy myself. I need more coffee.
What? Companies want to sell software? In other news, the sky is blue, the sun is hot, and sex is enjoyable.
I know this post is against slashdot custom. It doesn't bash microsoft, and it implies that a slashdot member has gone outdoors and has even *gasp!* actually had sex!;-)
"For the record, EchoStar was going to pay $30 billion before the FCC shot them down."
The article neglects to mention that Murdoch has offered more (much more) in the past He had planned a more than $20 billion offer for the company in 2001, and an even larger, $30 billion-plus offer in 2000.
I found the above info in a google search. We do contract work for DTV and I remember kind of scratching our heards when the Echostar bid was the one accepted. Directv accepted the offer from Echostar, even though iirc Newscorp offerd more. No one was confident that the Echostar deal would get approved. The rumor was that the management at Directv was scared that if Murdoch bought the business they were all out of work. Now Murdoch gets Directv at a much better rate.
"A firewall that does NAT translation." (Emphasis is mine)
Nothing in the proposed bills prohibit firewalls, but NAT translation could be considered an offense. This is from the link to the proprosed Texas bill:
SECTION 6. Sections 31.14(a), (b), and (d), Penal Code, are amended to read as follows:
(a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally or knowingly manufactures, assembles, imports into the state, exports out of the state, distributes, advertises, sells, or leases, or offers for sale or lease:
(1) a communication device with an intent to:
(A) aid in the commission of an offense under Section 31.12 or 31.13; or
(B) conceal from a communication service provider, or from any lawful authority, the existence or place of origin or destination of any communication;
(2) an unauthorized access device; or
(3) plans or instructions for assembling or manufacturing a communication device or unauthorized access device, with the knowledge that another person intends to use the plans or instructions for an unlawful purpose [, a device, a kit or part for a device, or a plan for a system of components wholly or partly designed to make intelligible an encrypted, encoded, scrambled, or other nonstandard signal carried or caused by a multichannel video or information services provider].
"A firewall that does NAT translation." (Emphasis is mine)
Nothing in the proposed bills prohibit firewalls, but NAT translation could be considered an offense. This is from the link to the proprosed Texas bill:
SECTION 6. Sections 31.14(a), (b), and (d), Penal Code, are amended to read as follows:
(a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally or knowingly manufactures, assembles, imports into the state, exports out of the state, distributes, advertises, sells, or leases, or offers for sale or lease:
(1) a communication device with an intent to:
(A) aid in the commission of an offense under Section 31.12 or 31.13; or
(B) conceal from a communication service provider, or from any lawful authority, the existence or place of origin or destination of any communication;
(2) an unauthorized access device; or
(3) plans or instructions for assembling or manufacturing a communication device or unauthorized access device, with the knowledge that another person intends to use the plans or instructions for an unlawful purpose [, a device, a kit or part for a device, or a plan for a system of components wholly or partly designed to make intelligible an encrypted, encoded, scrambled, or other nonstandard signal carried or caused by a multichannel video or information services provider].
From the post regarding the Texas & Massachusetts bills:
Both bills would flatly ban the possession, sale, or use of technologies that "conceal from a communication service provider... the existence or place of origin or destination of any communication". Your ISP is a communcation service provider, so anything that concealed the origin or destination of any communication from your ISP would be illegal -- with no exceptions.
If you send or receive your email via an encrypted connection, you're in violation, because the "To" and "From" lines of the emails are concealed from your ISP by encryption. (The encryption conceals the destinations of outgoing messages, and the sources of incoming messages.)
Worse yet, Network Address Translation (NAT), a technology widely used for enterprise security, operates by translating the "from" and "to" fields of Internet packets, thereby concealing the source or destination of each packet, and hence violating these bills. Most security "firewalls" use NAT, so if you use a firewall, you're in violation.
"In effect, they would extend the already-extant laws relating to theft of cable TV services to any telecom service."
It does more than that. The language of the bills uses the word "harm" instead of "fraud". The language is vague enough that it could be twisted to be used against anyone. Just having a firewall that does nat translation is a violation of these bills.
All brought to us by the friendly folks at the MPAA. Jerks
1) Hire vets. People getting out of the service are a good source for these skills. That was where I got my training.
2) Pay more. Companies have to adjust.
This just happens to be interesting because it is unusual in this job market. It's nice to know I have some skills that might be in demand if my current job goes away.
"It's a no-brainer. Anything which lets people pirate more music like this has to be very bad news for the music industry," says a spokesman for Britain's record industry trade association, the BPI.
The record industry is an authority on "no-brains"
The question I have is what kind of quality will I get? If I pay, I expect better quality than most of the junk found on Kazaa.
If I can get better quality fairly simply, I'm willing to pay. I still buy CDs, for crying out loud.
"Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., senior Democrat on the subcommittee, said of the program, "Jerry's against it, and I'm against it, so we kept the Senate amendment." Of the Pentagon, he said, "They've got some crazy people over there."
"Simply plug the InnoMedia IP VideoPhone into a quality-of-service enabled broadband IP network, configure and dial. In an instant you are enjoying high-quality, face-to-face communication."
The only way I'll see this any time soon is if it gets used in the workplace. It is difficult to get Broadband period, let alone "quality-of-service":-).
Eaterbrook's article is right on. The shuttle has killed the space program. I heard Walter Cronkite being interviewed right after the burn up. He spoke about the exploration of space. Made me sad. That was what NASA was about in the 60's when he was covering launches. Now it's a waste of time joyride that accomplishes nothing and everyone knows it. I hate to admit it because I'm a space nut. I want to see man in the stars. I want to see the human race out there. Right now all I see is us marking time. There are cheaper and more efficent ways that are available. Hell, there were better ways when the Mercury capsules were being shot around the world. Check out the x-13 project.
NASA and Congress like the income generated from shuttle launches. That carries more weight than any dream of space.
Mr. Jacobson said he recognized the obvious need to alter the flavour of drugs, "particularly life-saving drugs, where taste is an impediment to taking them." But he also raised concerns that these new compounds could allow food manufacturers to use "cheaper, crappy ingredients."
"I once asked a pasta sauce maker how come you sometimes see corn syrup on the list of ingredients in a tomato sauce and he told me it was to mask the taste of cheaper tomatoes," said Mr. Jacobson. "We could see more things like that."
I just went for a checkup with my doctor. One of the things we discussed was nutrition. He spoke of the nutritional value of foods being degraded, what with over farming, mass production of food, corporate farming, and the like. I know this is vulgar, but this is another way to make shit taste like ambrosia. Ever think there is a reason why things taste bad? I probably sound alarmist or anti-technology. I'm not. At the same time, I'm not one to blindly say technology or so called progress is a good thing. This seems to me to be another way to increase profit and reduce costs. Good for business, not so good for consumers. But we're sheep. What do consumers know?
The article points out that AIX is handled by the Server group at IBM, not the software group. So while this Mills guy says exciting things, he isn't necessarily the guy to make that decision.
Slashdot Mirror
I use Firebird and I couldn't figure out why I was unable to re-create the issue. Finally I realized "I'm not using IE"
;-)
I need more coffee
You made an excellent point and you are using your intellect instead of emotion.
/.
This is
Flying off half-cocked and over-reacting is encouraged.
The average poster here is something of a cross between chicken little and Agent Fox Mulder.
The rest of the Spurgeon quote seems so reasonable. Why do people have to exaggerate and make things seem so dire? I know,I know. Money. To me it's just dishonest. I get tired of the fact that everyting is an con, or a sell of some sort.
If a musician is being exploited, the publisher is the most likely culprit. Somehow, this is twisted and suddenly it's the people using the internet to download files? Please.
"Study after study after study have shown this to be the absolute truth."
I agree with point of your post, but ambiguity bugs me.
Do you have 1 specific example? Something along the lines of "Study #1756 at New York University..."
"Law-abiding motorists should have nothing to fear and will be pleased to see untaxed, uninsured and unregistered being caught in the act." I don't care so much about them being "caught in the act". Here's my wish. I would be most pleased if my insurance rates were to go down *IF* this system helps remove said drivers from driving.
If he didn't want one before, I'm sure the guy would like a full-time gig. I've always been uneasy with contracting companies. It has never seemed like a good deal to me. I've been fortunate that I've been able to find full time employment. For me, a contracting company would be a last choice. They demand too much and provide too little in return.
The post says "Fujitsu hs a strong presence in Asia, a place Microsoft has been trying to cultivate."
;-)
The article states "While Fujitsu lacks those competitors' market share, it does have a strong position in Asia, where Red Hat is trying to expand."
The article doesn't mention Microsoft.
Looks like someone woke up hating Microsoft today. (I know. This is shashdot. What do I expect?). This just strikes me as unneeded FUD generating bullshit. Of course, I'm a little grumpy myself. I need more coffee.
What? Companies want to sell software? In other news, the sky is blue, the sun is hot, and sex is enjoyable.
I know this post is against slashdot custom. It doesn't bash microsoft, and it implies that a slashdot member has gone outdoors and has even *gasp!* actually had sex!
must...stop...can't...resist...
"For the record, EchoStar was going to pay $30 billion before the FCC shot them down."
The article neglects to mention that Murdoch has offered more (much more) in the past
He had planned a more than $20 billion offer for the company in 2001, and an even larger, $30 billion-plus offer in 2000.
I found the above info in a google search. We do contract work for DTV and I remember kind of scratching our heards when the Echostar bid was the one accepted. Directv accepted the offer from Echostar, even though iirc Newscorp offerd more. No one was confident that the Echostar deal would get approved. The rumor was that the management at Directv was scared that if Murdoch bought the business they were all out of work.
Now Murdoch gets Directv at a much better rate.
"A firewall that does NAT translation." (Emphasis is mine)
Nothing in the proposed bills prohibit firewalls, but NAT translation could be considered an offense. This is from the link to the proprosed Texas bill:
SECTION 6. Sections 31.14(a), (b), and (d), Penal Code, are
amended to read as follows:
(a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally
or knowingly manufactures, assembles, imports into the state,
exports out of the state, distributes, advertises, sells, or
leases, or offers for sale or lease:
(1) a communication device with an intent to:
(A) aid in the commission of an offense under
Section 31.12 or 31.13; or
(B) conceal from a communication service
provider, or from any lawful authority, the existence or place of
origin or destination of any communication;
(2) an unauthorized access device; or
(3) plans or instructions for assembling or
manufacturing a communication device or unauthorized access
device, with the knowledge that another person intends to use the
plans or instructions for an unlawful purpose [, a device, a kit or
part for a device, or a plan for a system of components wholly or
partly designed to make intelligible an encrypted, encoded,
scrambled, or other nonstandard signal carried or caused by a
multichannel video or information services provider].
"A firewall that does NAT translation." (Emphasis is mine)
Nothing in the proposed bills prohibit firewalls, but NAT translation could be considered an offense. This is from the link to the proprosed Texas bill:
SECTION 6. Sections 31.14(a), (b), and (d), Penal Code, are
amended to read as follows:
(a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally
or knowingly manufactures, assembles, imports into the state,
exports out of the state, distributes, advertises, sells, or
leases, or offers for sale or lease:
(1) a communication device with an intent to:
(A) aid in the commission of an offense under
Section 31.12 or 31.13; or
(B) conceal from a communication service
provider, or from any lawful authority, the existence or place of
origin or destination of any communication;
(2) an unauthorized access device; or
(3) plans or instructions for assembling or
manufacturing a communication device or unauthorized access
device, with the knowledge that another person intends to use the
plans or instructions for an unlawful purpose [, a device, a kit or
part for a device, or a plan for a system of components wholly or
partly designed to make intelligible an encrypted, encoded,
scrambled, or other nonstandard signal carried or caused by a
multichannel video or information services provider].
From the post regarding the Texas & Massachusetts bills:
... the existence or place of origin or destination of any communication". Your ISP is a communcation service provider, so anything that concealed the origin or destination of any communication from your ISP would be illegal -- with no exceptions.
Both bills would flatly ban the possession, sale, or use of technologies that "conceal from a communication service provider
If you send or receive your email via an encrypted connection, you're in violation, because the "To" and "From" lines of the emails are concealed from your ISP by encryption. (The encryption conceals the destinations of outgoing messages, and the sources of incoming messages.)
Worse yet, Network Address Translation (NAT), a technology widely used for enterprise security, operates by translating the "from" and "to" fields of Internet packets, thereby concealing the source or destination of each packet, and hence violating these bills. Most security "firewalls" use NAT, so if you use a firewall, you're in violation.
Nope, MPAA is the culprit, according to "Freedom to Tinker".
Of course, it is posted on the internet, so I supose I should verify it else where before casting blame.
"In effect, they would extend the already-extant laws relating to theft of cable TV services to any telecom service."
It does more than that. The language of the bills uses the word "harm" instead of "fraud". The language is vague enough that it could be twisted to be used against anyone. Just having a firewall that does nat translation is a violation of these bills.
All brought to us by the friendly folks at the MPAA. Jerks
1) Hire vets. People getting out of the service are a good source for these skills. That was where I got my training.
2) Pay more. Companies have to adjust.
This just happens to be interesting because it is unusual in this job market. It's nice to know I have some skills that might be in demand if my current job goes away.
"It's a no-brainer. Anything which lets people pirate more music like this has to be very bad news for the music industry," says a spokesman for Britain's record industry trade association, the BPI.
The record industry is an authority on "no-brains"
The question I have is what kind of quality will I get? If I pay, I expect better quality than most of the junk found on Kazaa.
If I can get better quality fairly simply, I'm willing to pay. I still buy CDs, for crying out loud.
BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!
That's 2 quesions.
Sorry. couldn't resist
The action was praised by Democrats and Republicans and by outside groups on both the political right and left.
Nice to see some soundness of mind (for a change)
I liked this quote better:
"Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., senior Democrat on the subcommittee, said of the program, "Jerry's against it, and I'm against it, so we kept the Senate amendment." Of the Pentagon, he said, "They've got some crazy people over there."
No shit.
"Simply plug the InnoMedia IP VideoPhone into a quality-of-service enabled broadband IP network, configure and dial. In an instant you are enjoying high-quality, face-to-face communication."
:-).
The only way I'll see this any time soon is if it gets used in the workplace. It is difficult to get Broadband period, let alone "quality-of-service"
Engage your brain.
Eaterbrook's article is right on. The shuttle has killed the space program. I heard Walter Cronkite being interviewed right after the burn up. He spoke about the exploration of space. Made me sad. That was what NASA was about in the 60's when he was covering launches. Now it's a waste of time joyride that accomplishes nothing and everyone knows it. I hate to admit it because I'm a space nut. I want to see man in the stars. I want to see the human race out there. Right now all I see is us marking time.
There are cheaper and more efficent ways that are available. Hell, there were better ways when the Mercury capsules were being shot around the world.
Check out the x-13 project.
NASA and Congress like the income generated from shuttle launches. That carries more weight than any dream of space.
From the article:
Mr. Jacobson said he recognized the obvious need to alter the flavour of drugs, "particularly life-saving drugs, where taste is an impediment to taking them." But he also raised concerns that these new compounds could allow food manufacturers to use "cheaper, crappy ingredients."
"I once asked a pasta sauce maker how come you sometimes see corn syrup on the list of ingredients in a tomato sauce and he told me it was to mask the taste of cheaper tomatoes," said Mr. Jacobson. "We could see more things like that."
I just went for a checkup with my doctor. One of the things we discussed was nutrition. He spoke of the nutritional value of foods being degraded, what with over farming, mass production of food, corporate farming, and the like. I know this is vulgar, but this is another way to make shit taste like ambrosia. Ever think there is a reason why things taste bad?
I probably sound alarmist or anti-technology. I'm not. At the same time, I'm not one to blindly say technology or so called progress is a good thing. This seems to me to be another way to increase profit and reduce costs. Good for business, not so good for consumers. But we're sheep. What do consumers know?
I guess I'm bitter. Maybe I can use some.
The article points out that AIX is handled by the Server group at IBM, not the software group. So while this Mills guy says exciting things, he isn't necessarily the guy to make that decision.
In science fiction. Sounds like a Heinlein universe.