One thing I would do is add a remote kill switch, and then keep an eye on it while it is running. That way if it gets into trouble, you can stop it quickly.
For those who don't happen to have the US Code memorized, here's what they are: (and corrections to the above number)
Sec 1030 (a)(2)(C) "Whoever intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains - information from any protected computer if the conduct involved an interstate or foreign communication..."
(c)(2)(A) "The punishment for an offense under subsection (a) or (b) of this section is...a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both"
Sec 1037 (Look! it's the CAN SPAM act doing something!) (a)(2) "Whoever, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly - uses a protected computer to relay or retransmit multiple commercial electronic mail messages, with the intent to deceive or mislead recipients, or any Internet access service, as to the origin of such messages"
(b)(2)(C) "The punishment for an offense under subsection (a) is-- a fine under this title, imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or both, if-- the volume of electronic mail messages transmitted in furtherance of the offense exceeded 2,500 during any 24-hour period, 25,000 during any 30-day period, or 250,000 during any 1-year period"
(b)(2)(E) "The punishment for an offense under subsection (a) is-- a fine under this title, imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or both, if--as a result of the offense any individual committing the offense obtained anything of value aggregating $5,000 or more during any 1-year period"
Sec. 2314 prohibits the interstate transportation of illegally obtained stuff
Sec 1037 doesn't seem to exist... maybe it's a typo in the filing or something
"$ mail -s "hockey scores" coconspirator@spook.net typescript.gpg"
Nono... you need to burn it to CD, then go through a suspensful and elaborate handoff sequence in slow motion only to have absolutely no difficulty at all. Then Peter Gibbons can email it to the spammer.
Firing someone has a lower burden of proof (and rightly so) than a criminal conviction; if there's enough for an arrest and charges to be brought, then there's probably enough evidence to warrant a firing.
This is interesting, because it reminds me of something I've wanted. It's a bit off topic, but anyway...
I've thought it would be cool if you could plug in two mice and keyboards and have two separate cursors. Have one blue and the other green, or something like that, and have two people independently work on a project. Anyone know a way to do this? Either *nix or Windows XP
Of course, if someone wants to try and report an existing and used hotmail account as spam and gets banned as easily, well then there is a problem.
I would agree with what you say. For his email, big deal. Just make another. But, I somehow doubt that they treated him differently than others; after all, if they did enough checking to determine that he hadn't used the account, they also probably did enough checking to determine that he hadn't sent any email at all, which probably should have set off an alert that he wasn't sending out spam...
So many people and companies get screwed because they get thier bandwidth and email from the same provider. I tell all my clients to get thier bandwidth separatly from email, and that way they can change either provider with out problems like this.
A related idea is to use the email service your ISP provides, but through a forwarding address. That way you don't have to use some free email crap (Gmail's the only one I've liked recently; others are too slow and ad ridden, though I've only used pretty major ones) nor pay for service.
A liter of water at 1 atm would only gain about 0.05 mL in volume if you took it into space. If you started with a liter at the bottom of the Mariana trench and took it into space, it would only gain about 50 mL in volume. That's a fair amount, but remember that the pressure there is 3 orders of magnitude above STP.
In case you want to try your own calculations, the bulk modulus of water is 2.2 * 10^9 N/m^2. The relevant equation is Dp = B * DV / V, where Dp is the change in pressure, B the bulk modulus, DV the change in volume, and V the original volume. 1 L = 0.001 m^3. STP is 1.01 x 10^5 Pa (1 Pa = 1 N/m^2).
just to nitpick further, SCOTUS isn't interpreting the law, they're interpreting the US Constitution to allow the law. They have to use the interpretation of the state law the Nevada Supreme Court gave them.
Note to self, proofread posts before submitting them...;-) Yeah, this is what I meant. So interpreting the Constitution to see if it allows the law...
Oh, and don't forget the other Constitutional crime, questioning the validity of the public debt of the United States (see Amendment 14, Section 4.)
Very interesting. I had just remembered treason before.
If something SHOULD be a Right, but its not in the Constitution, its not a Right.
Bull. As multiple people pointed out, the 9th and 10th amendments explicitly state this. If this was all that could be said on the matter, I wouldn't even post.
But I want to point something out. When the founding fathers were trying to get states to ratify the Constitution, they ran into some opposition. Some people wanted the Constitution to explicitly state some of the rights that they saw the US should be explicitly founded on. So they drafted the Bill of Rights.
But the Bill of Rights initially had SIGNIFICANT opposition. Why? For exactly people like you. (That's not meant to be disparaging BTW.) They feared that people would see the list of rights the Constitution gurantees, think of something that doesn't appear there, and say "look, it's not listed in the Bill of Rights, so we can take that right away." This is why the 9th and 10th amendmends were added to the Bill of Rights. And this is why this statement is flat out wrong, moreso than just because "the Constitution says so."
This is not a law. This is an interpretation by the SCOTUS as to what the constitution says on the matter. I wouldn't count on it gettig any better.
Um, actually, it's an interpretation by the SCOTUS of a LAW (on the books in 20 states) that was applied in this situation. There is exactly one act that is illegal under the Constitution: treason. Anything anyone is arrested for other than treason is for a suspected violation of local, state, or federal law. (Or abuse of the power to arrest people, but that's another matter.)
So the law that allowed this certainly can be appealed.
"Ah, this is obviously some strange usage of the word safe that I wasn't previously aware of."
I'm only being a little facetious here. I don't think I'd really want anyone else trying to continue the H2G2 line. I don't know of any authors who have a style similar to Adams, though I don't really know many authors, and any who do should have plenty of material of their own to write and don't need to go off of The Guide. I think it would be better left ended. I've seen too many bad Sherlock Holmes stories...
But at the same time, during testing you don't push it past its limits then ignore the fact that it's past the limits. So if they started to burn through the cables they should have gotten it to the point where even during the extensive, extreme testing the cables weren't harmed so that under typical use (as much as you can call these flights typcial use) you'd be completely sure that they wouldn't fail.
(I'm not saying that they shouldn't test what happens if they did fail either, but it sounds like they were getting burn through in even normal tests.)
Holy crap, I mean I know that if it burns through it's not catastrophic failure (as was demonstrated today), but I don't see why they allowed that. Brings back memories of NASA going "oh, the o-rings are suffering burn through and blow by? fly it anyway" in the early to mid 80s...
Do you honestly think it will take private industry 30+ years to go from SSO to something that can carry a good payload? It took NASA that long.
It was closer to 20. The first shuttle flight was in very early 80s, the first manned flight in general was early 60s. If you go from Sputnik and the formation of NASA you're at about 25 years.
Once a private company can launch greater than 100 tons to the Moon and NASA can't do more (like the Saturn V), I'll be ashamed. Until then please realize that $20M is not puting anything useful into space, nor can it without going over 200 miles up. Neat for space tourism, but hardly comparable with even the most trivial accomplishments of NASA.
From what I understand, this flight bears a lot of resemblance to Alan Shepard's flight; a short "up you go, down you come" flight.
Slashdot Mirror
One thing I would do is add a remote kill switch, and then keep an eye on it while it is running. That way if it gets into trouble, you can stop it quickly.
"Sec 1037 doesn't seem to exist... maybe it's a typo in the filing or something"
Ignore this bit. I was gonna post it without 1037 because it isn't at law.cornell yet, but then decided to search harder and forgot to remove it.
For those who don't happen to have the US Code memorized, here's what they are: (and corrections to the above number)
Sec 1030 (a)(2)(C) "Whoever intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains - information from any protected computer if the conduct involved an interstate or foreign communication..."
(c)(2)(A) "The punishment for an offense under subsection (a) or (b) of this section is...a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both"
Sec 1037 (Look! it's the CAN SPAM act doing something!) (a)(2) "Whoever, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly - uses a protected computer to relay or retransmit multiple commercial electronic mail messages, with the intent to deceive or mislead recipients, or any Internet access service, as to the origin of such messages"
(b)(2)(C) "The punishment for an offense under subsection (a) is-- a fine under this title, imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or both, if-- the volume of electronic mail messages transmitted in furtherance of the offense exceeded 2,500 during any 24-hour period, 25,000 during any 30-day period, or 250,000 during any 1-year period"
(b)(2)(E) "The punishment for an offense under subsection (a) is-- a fine under this title, imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or both, if--as a result of the offense any individual committing the offense obtained anything of value aggregating $5,000 or more during any 1-year period"
Sec. 2314 prohibits the interstate transportation of illegally obtained stuff
Sec 1037 doesn't seem to exist... maybe it's a typo in the filing or something
"$ mail -s "hockey scores" coconspirator@spook.net typescript.gpg"
Nono... you need to burn it to CD, then go through a suspensful and elaborate handoff sequence in slow motion only to have absolutely no difficulty at all. Then Peter Gibbons can email it to the spammer.
A later list was sold for 100 grand... that's a bit better. (And yeah, the first was 52K, not 25)
Firing someone has a lower burden of proof (and rightly so) than a criminal conviction; if there's enough for an arrest and charges to be brought, then there's probably enough evidence to warrant a firing.
This is interesting, because it reminds me of something I've wanted. It's a bit off topic, but anyway...
I've thought it would be cool if you could plug in two mice and keyboards and have two separate cursors. Have one blue and the other green, or something like that, and have two people independently work on a project. Anyone know a way to do this? Either *nix or Windows XP
Of course, if someone wants to try and report an existing and used hotmail account as spam and gets banned as easily, well then there is a problem.
I would agree with what you say. For his email, big deal. Just make another. But, I somehow doubt that they treated him differently than others; after all, if they did enough checking to determine that he hadn't used the account, they also probably did enough checking to determine that he hadn't sent any email at all, which probably should have set off an alert that he wasn't sending out spam...
That doesn't mean that it isn't a stupid or asinine thing to do. It just means that they wouldn't be held culpable.
So many people and companies get screwed because they get thier bandwidth and email from the same provider. I tell all my clients to get thier bandwidth separatly from email, and that way they can change either provider with out problems like this.
A related idea is to use the email service your ISP provides, but through a forwarding address. That way you don't have to use some free email crap (Gmail's the only one I've liked recently; others are too slow and ad ridden, though I've only used pretty major ones) nor pay for service.
Okay, some calculations:
A liter of water at 1 atm would only gain about 0.05 mL in volume if you took it into space. If you started with a liter at the bottom of the Mariana trench and took it into space, it would only gain about 50 mL in volume. That's a fair amount, but remember that the pressure there is 3 orders of magnitude above STP.
In case you want to try your own calculations, the bulk modulus of water is 2.2 * 10^9 N/m^2. The relevant equation is Dp = B * DV / V, where Dp is the change in pressure, B the bulk modulus, DV the change in volume, and V the original volume. 1 L = 0.001 m^3. STP is 1.01 x 10^5 Pa (1 Pa = 1 N/m^2).
Precisely; and because the volume changes, the amount of mass that fits within a fixed volume also changes.
Not enough to make any mesaurable difference really. Water is, in all intents and purposes (even almost all scientific ones) incompressable.
Amazingly, you're speaking and writing English. So use the logically correct spelling, or change the way you pronounce it to match how you spell it.
Yes, because we all know how consistent English spelling is with pronounciation. (Hint: very little compared with most languages)
It even knows the answer to life, the universe, and everything.
just to nitpick further, SCOTUS isn't interpreting the law, they're interpreting the US Constitution to allow the law. They have to use the interpretation of the state law the Nevada Supreme Court gave them.
;-) Yeah, this is what I meant. So interpreting the Constitution to see if it allows the law...
Note to self, proofread posts before submitting them...
Oh, and don't forget the other Constitutional crime, questioning the validity of the public debt of the United States (see Amendment 14, Section 4.)
Very interesting. I had just remembered treason before.
According to numerous other posts here on /., the number is 20. So more than a third, but still far under "many if not all".
If something SHOULD be a Right, but its not in the Constitution, its not a Right.
Bull. As multiple people pointed out, the 9th and 10th amendments explicitly state this. If this was all that could be said on the matter, I wouldn't even post.
But I want to point something out. When the founding fathers were trying to get states to ratify the Constitution, they ran into some opposition. Some people wanted the Constitution to explicitly state some of the rights that they saw the US should be explicitly founded on. So they drafted the Bill of Rights.
But the Bill of Rights initially had SIGNIFICANT opposition. Why? For exactly people like you. (That's not meant to be disparaging BTW.) They feared that people would see the list of rights the Constitution gurantees, think of something that doesn't appear there, and say "look, it's not listed in the Bill of Rights, so we can take that right away." This is why the 9th and 10th amendmends were added to the Bill of Rights. And this is why this statement is flat out wrong, moreso than just because "the Constitution says so."
This is not a law. This is an interpretation by the SCOTUS as to what the constitution says on the matter. I wouldn't count on it gettig any better.
Um, actually, it's an interpretation by the SCOTUS of a LAW (on the books in 20 states) that was applied in this situation. There is exactly one act that is illegal under the Constitution: treason. Anything anyone is arrested for other than treason is for a suspected violation of local, state, or federal law. (Or abuse of the power to arrest people, but that's another matter.)
So the law that allowed this certainly can be appealed.
So what is it that they are trying to reduce here? Crashes along the highway?
Better hope they don't use Windows...
Now, of course, it's safe to mention it.
"Ah, this is obviously some strange usage of the word safe that I wasn't previously aware of."
I'm only being a little facetious here. I don't think I'd really want anyone else trying to continue the H2G2 line. I don't know of any authors who have a style similar to Adams, though I don't really know many authors, and any who do should have plenty of material of their own to write and don't need to go off of The Guide. I think it would be better left ended. I've seen too many bad Sherlock Holmes stories...
But at the same time, during testing you don't push it past its limits then ignore the fact that it's past the limits. So if they started to burn through the cables they should have gotten it to the point where even during the extensive, extreme testing the cables weren't harmed so that under typical use (as much as you can call these flights typcial use) you'd be completely sure that they wouldn't fail.
(I'm not saying that they shouldn't test what happens if they did fail either, but it sounds like they were getting burn through in even normal tests.)
Holy crap, I mean I know that if it burns through it's not catastrophic failure (as was demonstrated today), but I don't see why they allowed that. Brings back memories of NASA going "oh, the o-rings are suffering burn through and blow by? fly it anyway" in the early to mid 80s...
Do you honestly think it will take private industry 30+ years to go from SSO to something that can carry a good payload? It took NASA that long.
It was closer to 20. The first shuttle flight was in very early 80s, the first manned flight in general was early 60s. If you go from Sputnik and the formation of NASA you're at about 25 years.
Once a private company can launch greater than 100 tons to the Moon and NASA can't do more (like the Saturn V), I'll be ashamed. Until then please realize that $20M is not puting anything useful into space, nor can it without going over 200 miles up. Neat for space tourism, but hardly comparable with even the most trivial accomplishments of NASA.
From what I understand, this flight bears a lot of resemblance to Alan Shepard's flight; a short "up you go, down you come" flight.