Meta tags are used a lot... there's widespread knowledge of so-called "google bombing".. Google pops up some of its search results based on the content between an A HREF tag, as you can read about here: Google Bomb...
Much like security, I think this is the kind of thing that hackers and tinkerers will always find a way to exploit. The question is who can stay ahead in the race?
Remember, this is the same country whose leader believes that HIV does not cause AIDS. Their leaders (and by default, government) are quite obviously insane.
I think that the PC folks tend to overrate the amount of hardware tweaking they can actually do that makes any difference...
Memory interleaving is a feature of my old (early 1996) PowerMac 7600's motherboard....
Well, if memory interleaving doesn't "make any difference", why include it as a feature? Oh, that's right, because you have no idea what you're talking about.
I think that the PC folks tend to overrate the amount of hardware tweaking they can actually do that makes any difference, other than putting some new video card in.
I take that statement to mean that you've never heard of memory interleaving
And just how would you ensure safety of these air tanks? That's a HELL of a lot of pressure!
I used to scuba dive quite a bit, though I haven't for a few years now. For those of you who don't you may not be aware that there are quite a few laws/guidelines about air tanks and safety.
Each time you pressurize a dive tank you are doing two things: first, you're causing a huge amount of heat to build up and secondly, you're stressing the metal of the tank. The hotter the tank gets the more quickly the metal it's made of will become stressed over time and become unsafe. That's why scuba tanks are placed in water when they're being filled. A dive shop is required by law (at least around here) to render a tank unusable if they see ANY signs of damage or metal fatigue. It's just a fact of physics that a tank has only so many use cycles before the metal fatigue renders it unsafe.
The dive shop owner who trained me had an interesting story about an experience he'd had. Many years ago his shop purchased a number of surplus tanks from the military. They had certified that they were in good shape and safe to use. Being a cautious guy he decided to fill them up and use them himself before selling any to his customers. While he was filling one of them he noticed a slight odd sound. He thought it could be a leak, so he placed his hand near the gasket at the top of the tank to see if he could feel any air escaping. He didn't actually touch the tank.
The next thing he knew he was lying on his back in a different room. The tank had exploded, blowing him over 50 feet through two walls! All the interior walls in his shop were flattened, his ear drums were broken, he was bleeding from tears at the corners of his mouth and eyes, plus tons of other crap was damaged/destroyed. The tank was about 3/4 full when this happened.
This was a steel tank, which has a max pressure of 1500PSI. And these cars are at 4500PSI???
I dunno. I'd have to be VERY confident of the safety measures they use before I'd consider riding in one of these things.
Because a little piece of paper called the US constitution defines freedom of speech as something the "government" may NOT take away NO MATTER HOW IMPORTANT a situation is.
Or you could wait for the American DVD, which will almost certainly have the dub and the sub, and play in USA DVD players that aren't region-hacked to boot.
Anyone who buys a single region DVD player is a tool. But hey, it's not my money. Just don't complain when Palladium+MPAA+DMCA has you by the balls.
Seriously. He did a great job summing up every single Disney movie ever made:
The hero begins reluctant, yet signs and portents foretell his pre-ordained greatness. He receives dire warnings and sage wisdom from a mentor, acquires quirky-but-faithful companions, faces a series of steepening crises, explores the pit of his own fears and emerges triumphant to bring some boon/talisman/victory home to his admiring tribe/people/nation.
History is an great thing to bring up, actually, because this pre-emptory banning of P2P services is ridiculous. When Thomas Jefferson put the idea of intellectual property into the Constitution of the United States, he did so because he realized that information leaks; once people learn something, they can reuse that knowledge. Jefferson believed that if there was no protection to intellectual property, people would not be encouraged to share knowledge with others. Writers would not write, inventors would not invent, artists would not . So in the US Constitution, it says:
Congress shall have the power [...] To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
The reason why this is important is spelled out in Jefferson's own writings:
If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it...He who receives an idea from me, receives instructions himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should be spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature... Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property.
His assumptions are based on the fact that you can not control what people do with information that you give to them. If you hand someone a book, they can transcribe it. If you give someone a physical invention, they can disassemble it. But if you give them a new form of media, say, a song on a copy-protected CD, and they can no longer listen to it except on approved devices that they cannot copy from, why should the government provide the same protection to you? The record companies and movie studios want to have their cake and eat it too. They want traditional copyright protection, technological copyright protection, and a government guarantee of technological copyright protection. They want to deprive all those bearded Linux hippies their DeCSS, so they can't watch bootleg Buffy the Vanpire Slayer DVDs in their parents' basement. But if they have technological protection, then why should the government give them traditional protection? It was only there because information was hard to protect as property.
How far are we going to let the copyrighters go? We need to remind people that copyright, like most laws in the US, is a balance between two forces, and the scale should not be tipped too far to one side.
The point you made at the end of your original comment was a good one. My comment was on your introductory paragraph - that's why I quoted it in my comment.
The introductory paragraph was a synopsis of Jefferson's beliefs, so to say I'm "overstating my point" means you didn't read the rest of the post, where I actually state my point, in contrast to Jefferson's point.
But I should have known better; slashbots like you never read past the first two paragraphs before making a pseudo-pithy karma-whore comment to an out-of-context quote, so how can I fault you? You're just proving the stereotype. Congratulations.
Well I guess this explains why Britain has never had any art or culture or scientific discoveries to speak of... Sorry - I know there is some good art, literature, music and science being made in the USA today. I'm just saying you're over-stating your point.
I think you missed this part: His assumptions are based on the fact that you can not control what people do with information that you give to them... But if you give them a new form of media, say, a song on a copy-protected CD, and they can no longer listen to it except on approved devices that they cannot copy from, why should the government provide the same protection to you?
In other words, your sarcastic yammering is moot, had you read my entire post. Thanks for paying attention.
So, I'm paying $10 a month for no tangible product?
Seriously. Is such a paid, streaming content model really a viable solution? When Thomas Jefferson put the idea of intellectual property into the Constitution of the United States, he did so because he realized that information leaks; once people learn something, they can reuse that knowledge. If there was no protection to intellectual property, people would not be encouraged to share knowledge with others. Writers would not write, inventors would not invent, artists would not . So in the US Constitution, it says:
Congress shall have the power [...] To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
The reason why this is important is spelled out in Jefferson's own writings:
If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it...He who receives an idea from me, receives instructions himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should be spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature... Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property.
His assumptions are based on the fact that you can not control what people do with information that you give to them. If you hand someone a book, they can transcribe it. If you give someone a physical invention, they can disassemble it. But if you give them a new form of media, say, a song on a copy-protected CD, and they can no longer listen to it except on approved devices that they cannot copy from, why should the government provide the same protection to you? The record companies and movie studios want to have their cake and eat it too. They want traditional copyright protection, technological copyright protection, and a government guarantee of technological copyright protection. They want to deprive all those bearded Linux hippies their DeCSS, so they can't watch bootleg Buffy the Vanpire Slayer DVDs in their parents' basement. But if they have technological protection, then why should the government give them traditional protection? It was only there because information was hard to protect as property.
How far are we going to let the copyrighters go? We need to remind people that copyright, like most laws in the US, is a balance between two forces, and the scale should not be tipped too far to one side.
Slashdot Mirror
Meta tags are used a lot... there's widespread knowledge of so-called "google bombing".. Google pops up some of its search results based on the content between an A HREF tag, as you can read about here: Google Bomb...
Much like security, I think this is the kind of thing that hackers and tinkerers will always find a way to exploit. The question is who can stay ahead in the race?
Remember, this is the same country whose leader believes that HIV does not cause AIDS. Their leaders (and by default, government) are quite obviously insane.
This, of course, in stark contrast to our country, whose leader believes that Africans should, under no circumstances, be educated about how AIDS is spread.
This is the same man that believes, down to the letter, in a book that says women and unborn children are property, among other ridiculous assertions
I think that the PC folks tend to overrate the amount of hardware tweaking they can actually do that makes any difference...
Memory interleaving is a feature of my old (early 1996) PowerMac 7600's motherboard....
Well, if memory interleaving doesn't "make any difference", why include it as a feature? Oh, that's right, because you have no idea what you're talking about.
I think that the PC folks tend to overrate the amount of hardware tweaking they can actually do that makes any difference, other than putting some new video card in.
I take that statement to mean that you've never heard of memory interleaving
was wondering if I could be given a list of anal sex techniques
Hmm.. not sure, but they all probably involve BSD somehow.
My favorite part of the discussion:
[19:20:41] * bwilson pets the cow
Seriously, it's in there.
What would *you* do to be on Slashdot?
I think the real question is, what would Jesus do to be on Slashdot?
37? In a row?
And just how would you ensure safety of these air tanks? That's a HELL of a lot of pressure!
I used to scuba dive quite a bit, though I haven't for a few years now. For those of you who don't you may not be aware that there are quite a few laws/guidelines about air tanks and safety.
Each time you pressurize a dive tank you are doing two things: first, you're causing a huge amount of heat to build up and secondly, you're stressing the metal of the tank. The hotter the tank gets the more quickly the metal it's made of will become stressed over time and become unsafe. That's why scuba tanks are placed in water when they're being filled. A dive shop is required by law (at least around here) to render a tank unusable if they see ANY signs of damage or metal fatigue. It's just a fact of physics that a tank has only so many use cycles before the metal fatigue renders it unsafe.
The dive shop owner who trained me had an interesting story about an experience he'd had. Many years ago his shop purchased a number of surplus tanks from the military. They had certified that they were in good shape and safe to use. Being a cautious guy he decided to fill them up and use them himself before selling any to his customers. While he was filling one of them he noticed a slight odd sound. He thought it could be a leak, so he placed his hand near the gasket at the top of the tank to see if he could feel any air escaping. He didn't actually touch the tank.
The next thing he knew he was lying on his back in a different room. The tank had exploded, blowing him over 50 feet through two walls! All the interior walls in his shop were flattened, his ear drums were broken, he was bleeding from tears at the corners of his mouth and eyes, plus tons of other crap was damaged/destroyed. The tank was about 3/4 full when this happened.
This was a steel tank, which has a max pressure of 1500PSI. And these cars are at 4500PSI???
I dunno. I'd have to be VERY confident of the safety measures they use before I'd consider riding in one of these things.
Which is probably why I won't be watching it tonight, but maybe I'll download it later.
No, you probably will catch it when it runs, because FOX pre-empted it with FUCKING BASEBALL.
Fox comes through for us yet again.
Because a little piece of paper called the US constitution defines freedom of speech as something the "government" may NOT take away NO MATTER HOW IMPORTANT a situation is.
Well, unless you shout fire in a crowded theater.
Or, they classify what you say (or write) as obscenity, which is illegal.
Or, maybe they'll just convict you of conspiracy, though you've committed no actual crime.
Or, they'll hold you and your friends for 12 hours and search your car, because of what someone thought they heard you say.
Yeah, God bless America. Land of the free^H^H^H^H.
Or you could wait for the American DVD, which will almost certainly have the dub and the sub, and play in USA DVD players that aren't region-hacked to boot.
Anyone who buys a single region DVD player is a tool. But hey, it's not my money. Just don't complain when Palladium+MPAA+DMCA has you by the balls.
You'd be better off simply NOT buying it than hurting Ghibli by encouraging the bootlegging of its titles.
Then buy the official Ghibli release.
It's still better than the theater release, because it has English subtitles instead of crap-ass Disney dubbing.
No it's not. The movie came out in 2001 in Japan, so it's already on DVD there.
Wouldn't you rather buy an official US release, to encourage distributors to bring us more great stuff from overseas?
No, I'd rather still buy the official Japanese release, encouraging the MPAA to realize that Region coding is fucking stupid.
Been wanting to see this one for a long time.
Then why haven't you bought it on DVD?
Er, I don't think that "Fantasia" follows that plot at all.
Have you ever seen Fantasia? It fits, albeit in a fucked-up drug-haze way.
But then, it's a fucked-up drug-haze movie.
What a rip off, especially when you can do the same thing in under an hour with the Guaranteed Gain System.
Bah, it's cheaper than the first 2x CDROM drive I bought! Kids these days, don't know how easy they got it....
2x CDROM? When I was a kid, all we had was a 1x CDROM with a caddy.
Seriously. He did a great job summing up every single Disney movie ever made:
The hero begins reluctant, yet signs and portents foretell his pre-ordained greatness. He receives dire warnings and sage wisdom from a mentor, acquires quirky-but-faithful companions, faces a series of steepening crises, explores the pit of his own fears and emerges triumphant to bring some boon/talisman/victory home to his admiring tribe/people/nation.
History is an great thing to bring up, actually, because this pre-emptory banning of P2P services is ridiculous. When Thomas Jefferson put the idea of intellectual property into the Constitution of the United States, he did so because he realized that information leaks; once people learn something, they can reuse that knowledge. Jefferson believed that if there was no protection to intellectual property, people would not be encouraged to share knowledge with others. Writers would not write, inventors would not invent, artists would not . So in the US Constitution, it says: The reason why this is important is spelled out in Jefferson's own writings: His assumptions are based on the fact that you can not control what people do with information that you give to them. If you hand someone a book, they can transcribe it. If you give someone a physical invention, they can disassemble it. But if you give them a new form of media, say, a song on a copy-protected CD, and they can no longer listen to it except on approved devices that they cannot copy from, why should the government provide the same protection to you? The record companies and movie studios want to have their cake and eat it too. They want traditional copyright protection, technological copyright protection, and a government guarantee of technological copyright protection. They want to deprive all those bearded Linux hippies their DeCSS, so they can't watch bootleg Buffy the Vanpire Slayer DVDs in their parents' basement. But if they have technological protection, then why should the government give them traditional protection? It was only there because information was hard to protect as property.
How far are we going to let the copyrighters go? We need to remind people that copyright, like most laws in the US, is a balance between two forces, and the scale should not be tipped too far to one side.
But as a capitalist, I say, let the best product win!
Then why do you buy Macs?
The point you made at the end of your original comment was a good one. My comment was on your introductory paragraph - that's why I quoted it in my comment.
The introductory paragraph was a synopsis of Jefferson's beliefs, so to say I'm "overstating my point" means you didn't read the rest of the post, where I actually state my point, in contrast to Jefferson's point.
But I should have known better; slashbots like you never read past the first two paragraphs before making a pseudo-pithy karma-whore comment to an out-of-context quote, so how can I fault you? You're just proving the stereotype. Congratulations.
Well I guess this explains why Britain has never had any art or culture or scientific discoveries to speak of ... Sorry - I know there is some good art, literature, music and science being made in the USA today. I'm just saying you're over-stating your point.
... But if you give them a new form of media, say, a song on a copy-protected CD, and they can no longer listen to it except on approved devices that they cannot copy from, why should the government provide the same protection to you?
I think you missed this part: His assumptions are based on the fact that you can not control what people do with information that you give to them
In other words, your sarcastic yammering is moot, had you read my entire post. Thanks for paying attention.
Seriously. Is such a paid, streaming content model really a viable solution? When Thomas Jefferson put the idea of intellectual property into the Constitution of the United States, he did so because he realized that information leaks; once people learn something, they can reuse that knowledge. If there was no protection to intellectual property, people would not be encouraged to share knowledge with others. Writers would not write, inventors would not invent, artists would not . So in the US Constitution, it says: The reason why this is important is spelled out in Jefferson's own writings: His assumptions are based on the fact that you can not control what people do with information that you give to them. If you hand someone a book, they can transcribe it. If you give someone a physical invention, they can disassemble it. But if you give them a new form of media, say, a song on a copy-protected CD, and they can no longer listen to it except on approved devices that they cannot copy from, why should the government provide the same protection to you? The record companies and movie studios want to have their cake and eat it too. They want traditional copyright protection, technological copyright protection, and a government guarantee of technological copyright protection. They want to deprive all those bearded Linux hippies their DeCSS, so they can't watch bootleg Buffy the Vanpire Slayer DVDs in their parents' basement. But if they have technological protection, then why should the government give them traditional protection? It was only there because information was hard to protect as property.
How far are we going to let the copyrighters go? We need to remind people that copyright, like most laws in the US, is a balance between two forces, and the scale should not be tipped too far to one side.