most spam comes from outside of the EU, or turns out to be untraceable anyway... so the question is if this new legislature would have any noticeable effect.
So, for the purposes of legislation, maybe the answer is to divide spam into two categories.
First category would be random junk, with no real product, or with no realistic way to reach the purveyor of said junk. It happens, you can't do much about it, let it slide.
Second category, however, would be the spam advertising a real product/service, with some way of reaching the purveyor of said product/service. Such spam can be legislated against, by making it illegal to use spam to deliver advertising. If there's a means for a buyer to reach the seller, the same means can be used by law enforcement to kick the seller's ass.
Think it couldn't happen? When was the last time you saw a billboard with a cigarette ad? I don't know if there was specific legislation against tobacco product ads, but there must certainly have been some "encouragement" for the tobacco companies to stop their ads.
OK, so what if life on Earth evolved from stuff that fell out of the sky? That's not so radical a proposition, either. There have been theories that recurrent illnesses such as flu could be caused by space-borne viruses/bacteria.
OK, here's a question - the royals own fairly large chunks of the British Isles, so what would happen if they answered an abolishment attempt by offering to evict everyone from their properties? I believe Charles owns Cornwall, for example...
Just wondering - if the monarchy went away, why would that stop people looking at the castles?
I mean, a lot (maybe all?) of the castles in the UK have been around since before America was discovered, so they won't just go away overnight if the monarchy dies out. In fact, aren't a lot of the castles and stately homes owned either privately or by the National Trust?
And of course, CERN is in Geneva, Switzerland. So, not only was the Web invented by a Brit, it was invented in Switzerland, which is possibly even further away from North America than the UK...
OK, I wasn't trying to be authoritative regarding EDS stock. IIRC, the stock dropped dramatically after a revised earnings estimate, was just stabilizing again at a lower level and then the idiot analyst downgraded the stock "by mistake". The stock dropped further and the analyst subsequently apologised.
Personally, I think that kind of thing should get him kicked off the trading floor, but hey, that's just my opinion. I also think it fairly stupid for the market to react to what is basically just guesses by people that may or may not hve an agenda. Again, that's just my opinion, and maybe there are good reasons for that.
You were sleeping when he put the company together, on his time, with his money.
That's not necessarily true anymore. Dick Brown, for instance, was CEO of EDS for only about 4 years. He was recently handed about $36M and told to fuck off, and the company is still playing catch-up.
Mind you, having a Wall Street analyst downgrade their stock, only later to say "Wups, didn't mean it..." didn't help much either. What exactly is the liability there? EDS stock took a beating mainly because of that one moron, and he gets off with a wrist-slap and an apology?
Reminds me of the Atari Transputer box that didn't really make it, about 20 years ago. Apparently they had one at Comdex, or some similar show, and it was running a flight simulator. Multiple transputers in one box, running displays and joysticks. The way it was reported, up to four people could dogfight in real time, with no discernible lag in image updating.
Of course, these days a single CPU box has more power than that Atari, but in its day it looked like the Next Big Thing(tm). Probably what killed it was not adopting MS-DOS - it ran Helios, an honest-to-god SMP OS in a desktop box, when the world was just discovering the joys of running Windows2.x on the 80386...
So, basically, I'm not seeing much of a reason to go minimalistic on computers.
Perhaps the point is simply to demonstrate that it can be done? Look at it this way:
1) Given that this thing can be crammed into an orange-sized cube, think how much more stuff could be crammed into a normal desktop (or laptop), using these components; 2) Space - it doesn't occupy much, doesn't weigh much, and if you're launching one into space, those are both good characteristics.
Sure, the thing as it is right now may not be the most useful toy around, but the techniques used in building it may well help put a Chinese base on the Moon...
Wanna bet that a tag in any battery powered device would be limited to inches?
How far can a cellphone can reach out to hit a cell tower? A mile or two? A tag in the battery ought to be able to reach out many yards, at least. Similarly, a tag in a car battery ought to have a good range...
From that point on, they had as much clearance as that real person had, not surprising at all.
Was anything done to prevent the real person showing up? If the organisers had discovered that person's badge had already been issued, they should have cancelled its clearance and sent someone through the crowd with a scanner looking for the associated rfid tag.
Four different tags, one for each tire? Or just one tagged tire? How long would it be before folks started holding swap-meets to exchange tires? Make that illegal too, I suppose.
But then, are you going to make illegal the large parking lots full of swappable tires outside, say, WalMart? Or any Mall? How long would it take to exchange 1 "hot" tire without the knowledge of the donor?
Why stop at tires anyway? A tag in the battery would be more difficult to remove, and look at all the power available for it to punch a signal out with when it gets pinged by the detector... Tag the oil filter, engine crankcase, transmission. All this would be done in the guise of tracking down thieves that steal cars and strip them for parts...
Forget tagging car parts, consider how much easier it would be to tag the people... No need to carry a forgeable ID, just let the officer ping your embedded tag. Think you don't have one? Remember that prostate exam, or the last flu shot, or that root canal, or other similar procedure? Hmmm...
I'm assuming I'm remembering correctly something I read recently about the tags only being about the size of a grain of rice. Obviously anything bigger would be difficult to implant without the implantee being aware.
See "Debt of Honor" by Tom Clancy. An "Easter Egg" in a computer program effectively crashes the stock market. Our All-American hero Jack Ryan saves the day. For a book written in 1994, it has an oddly prophetic view of what happens when you crash a fucking big airplane into a building.
Sure I'm a citizen, of some country, and by the way the MPAA are hounding folks like DeCSS Jon, they don't really give a damn which country... Oh wait, is there a difference between the MPAA and the CA legislature?
But, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, I don't think there's anything in Linux that comes from the original Unix source?
I said what I said because I seem to remember somewhere in Darl's ravings that he feels that SCO owns the concept of Unix, not just the source code. Anything that looks like Unix and feels like Unix, must in fact be Unix, and is therefore a derivative of SCO's property, according to Darl. Maybe I'm misremembering - easy enough with Darl's ever more frantic twists and turns while trying to pump SCO's stock price...
...but there's certainly a lot of it that was part of the Linux kernel, or a contribution by hundreds, perhaps thousands, of open source developers.
You're missing an essemtial part of Darl's reasoning. Darl believes his company owns the rights to Unix and to all derivative works. If true, then all the Linux kernel developers have been extending and improving a derivative of the original Unix (never mind that Linus started from scratch). Not only that, they've been doing it without permission of the copyright holder and it doesn't matter that these derivatives are GPL'd because they're illegal, unauthorized copies.
Note: I'm not supporting Darl, I'm just trying to show that he could very well be ignoring the possibility of legal retaliation by the kernel developers simply because he believes they don't have a leg to stand on.
Not necessarily all base-10. Back when steam trains were invented, it was "scientifically" proved that at speeds in excess of 21 miles per hour, all the air would be forced from the train, thereby killing the passengers.
Voting should not be about trust, it should be about results
No, voting is all about trust. You make your mark on the ballot with pen on paper, finger on touchscreen, or whatever, and from the moment you commit your vote, you are trusting the system to be honest.
In the case of a Diebold machine, you trust that nobody sneaks in the Access database via the backdoor to fiddle with the results. In the case of paper ballots going into boxes, you trust that your box doesn't disappear in transit to the counting place, and that your ballot doesn't somehow stick to someone else's, or get accidentally damaged.
I think the only way to be really sure the count is correct would be to hand each voter a bunch of colored tickets with the candidates name clearly printed on each ticket. The voter would sort out his choices and drop the remaining cards into a shredder an then drop the vote cards into a big glass box. When the box gets filled, or at the end of the days voting, have a public count performed at the box by someone unimpeachable. Perhaps a band of Trappist monks, or bankers from Swiss Banks. Have them engrave or paint the tallys on the inside if the box, then seal the box and guard it in a very public place.
If a recount is demanded, have a different set of Trappists open the box ans recount the tickets. Make sure the results of each count are clearly displayed inside thre glass box. Call in the counts for boxN with more Trappists or bankers verifying the transactions.
The problem with the current system seems to be the general belief that everyone wants to know the results and faster, and so we have empty-headed reporters trying to guess the exit vote so that thay can make wild predictions about the final tally.
I wonder if Ernest Brenot would go on national TV to ricidule the RIAA and to demand a public apology for libel and defamation of character? Probably wouldn't stop the RIAA at all, but it might help to raise public awareness of the stupidity of what they're doing.
I read it as bring his case back before an enraged panel of judges and I thought, "Oh crap, what're his chances if the judges are already pissed off before the re-trial even starts..."
Re:Exclusion for Independently Generated Info
on
Who Owns The Facts?
·
· Score: 1
The person executing case 2 ought to do the same, to avoid having the phone company "reverse engineer" his book and then attempt to prosecute for infringement. Of course, it would be in his best interests to actually look up his dummy entries in the "official" book, to make sure he wasn't accidentally inventing the same dummy data as the phone company...
Slashdot Mirror
So, for the purposes of legislation, maybe the answer is to divide spam into two categories.
First category would be random junk, with no real product, or with no realistic way to reach the purveyor of said junk. It happens, you can't do much about it, let it slide.
Second category, however, would be the spam advertising a real product/service, with some way of reaching the purveyor of said product/service. Such spam can be legislated against, by making it illegal to use spam to deliver advertising. If there's a means for a buyer to reach the seller, the same means can be used by law enforcement to kick the seller's ass.
Think it couldn't happen? When was the last time you saw a billboard with a cigarette ad? I don't know if there was specific legislation against tobacco product ads, but there must certainly have been some "encouragement" for the tobacco companies to stop their ads.
OK, so what if life on Earth evolved from stuff that fell out of the sky? That's not so radical a proposition, either. There have been theories that recurrent illnesses such as flu could be caused by space-borne viruses/bacteria.
OK, here's a question - the royals own fairly large chunks of the British Isles, so what would happen if they answered an abolishment attempt by offering to evict everyone from their properties? I believe Charles owns Cornwall, for example...
The Queen Mum was also a farily nice person, according to my father, who met with her on a number of official occasions.
I mean, a lot (maybe all?) of the castles in the UK have been around since before America was discovered, so they won't just go away overnight if the monarchy dies out. In fact, aren't a lot of the castles and stately homes owned either privately or by the National Trust?
And of course, CERN is in Geneva, Switzerland. So, not only was the Web invented by a Brit, it was invented in Switzerland, which is possibly even further away from North America than the UK...
Personally, I think that kind of thing should get him kicked off the trading floor, but hey, that's just my opinion. I also think it fairly stupid for the market to react to what is basically just guesses by people that may or may not hve an agenda. Again, that's just my opinion, and maybe there are good reasons for that.
That's not necessarily true anymore. Dick Brown, for instance, was CEO of EDS for only about 4 years. He was recently handed about $36M and told to fuck off, and the company is still playing catch-up.
Mind you, having a Wall Street analyst downgrade their stock, only later to say "Wups, didn't mean it..." didn't help much either. What exactly is the liability there? EDS stock took a beating mainly because of that one moron, and he gets off with a wrist-slap and an apology?
Of course, these days a single CPU box has more power than that Atari, but in its day it looked like the Next Big Thing(tm). Probably what killed it was not adopting MS-DOS - it ran Helios, an honest-to-god SMP OS in a desktop box, when the world was just discovering the joys of running Windows2.x on the 80386...
Perhaps the point is simply to demonstrate that it can be done? Look at it this way:
1) Given that this thing can be crammed into an orange-sized cube, think how much more stuff could be crammed into a normal desktop (or laptop), using these components;
2) Space - it doesn't occupy much, doesn't weigh much, and if you're launching one into space, those are both good characteristics.
Sure, the thing as it is right now may not be the most useful toy around, but the techniques used in building it may well help put a Chinese base on the Moon...
How far can a cellphone can reach out to hit a cell tower? A mile or two? A tag in the battery ought to be able to reach out many yards, at least. Similarly, a tag in a car battery ought to have a good range...
Was anything done to prevent the real person showing up? If the organisers had discovered that person's badge had already been issued, they should have cancelled its clearance and sent someone through the crowd with a scanner looking for the associated rfid tag.
But then, are you going to make illegal the large parking lots full of swappable tires outside, say, WalMart? Or any Mall? How long would it take to exchange 1 "hot" tire without the knowledge of the donor?
Why stop at tires anyway? A tag in the battery would be more difficult to remove, and look at all the power available for it to punch a signal out with when it gets pinged by the detector... Tag the oil filter, engine crankcase, transmission. All this would be done in the guise of tracking down thieves that steal cars and strip them for parts...
Forget tagging car parts, consider how much easier it would be to tag the people... No need to carry a forgeable ID, just let the officer ping your embedded tag. Think you don't have one? Remember that prostate exam, or the last flu shot, or that root canal, or other similar procedure? Hmmm...
I'm assuming I'm remembering correctly something I read recently about the tags only being about the size of a grain of rice. Obviously anything bigger would be difficult to implant without the implantee being aware.
Oh come on... They still haven't dealt with Hitler and the Nazis hiding out of the Moon...
A lot of people want to see the pretty pictures so they know something is happening...
See "Debt of Honor" by Tom Clancy. An "Easter Egg" in a computer program effectively crashes the stock market. Our All-American hero Jack Ryan saves the day. For a book written in 1994, it has an oddly prophetic view of what happens when you crash a fucking big airplane into a building.
Sure I'm a citizen, of some country, and by the way the MPAA are hounding folks like DeCSS Jon, they don't really give a damn which country... Oh wait, is there a difference between the MPAA and the CA legislature?
I said what I said because I seem to remember somewhere in Darl's ravings that he feels that SCO owns the concept of Unix, not just the source code. Anything that looks like Unix and feels like Unix, must in fact be Unix, and is therefore a derivative of SCO's property, according to Darl. Maybe I'm misremembering - easy enough with Darl's ever more frantic twists and turns while trying to pump SCO's stock price...
Well, just how long do you think it will be before such a law is quietly extended such that cinema includes home theater?
You're missing an essemtial part of Darl's reasoning. Darl believes his company owns the rights to Unix and to all derivative works. If true, then all the Linux kernel developers have been extending and improving a derivative of the original Unix (never mind that Linus started from scratch). Not only that, they've been doing it without permission of the copyright holder and it doesn't matter that these derivatives are GPL'd because they're illegal, unauthorized copies.
Note: I'm not supporting Darl, I'm just trying to show that he could very well be ignoring the possibility of legal retaliation by the kernel developers simply because he believes they don't have a leg to stand on.
Idiots...
No, voting is all about trust. You make your mark on the ballot with pen on paper, finger on touchscreen, or whatever, and from the moment you commit your vote, you are trusting the system to be honest.
In the case of a Diebold machine, you trust that nobody sneaks in the Access database via the backdoor to fiddle with the results. In the case of paper ballots going into boxes, you trust that your box doesn't disappear in transit to the counting place, and that your ballot doesn't somehow stick to someone else's, or get accidentally damaged.
I think the only way to be really sure the count is correct would be to hand each voter a bunch of colored tickets with the candidates name clearly printed on each ticket. The voter would sort out his choices and drop the remaining cards into a shredder an then drop the vote cards into a big glass box. When the box gets filled, or at the end of the days voting, have a public count performed at the box by someone unimpeachable. Perhaps a band of Trappist monks, or bankers from Swiss Banks. Have them engrave or paint the tallys on the inside if the box, then seal the box and guard it in a very public place.
If a recount is demanded, have a different set of Trappists open the box ans recount the tickets. Make sure the results of each count are clearly displayed inside thre glass box. Call in the counts for boxN with more Trappists or bankers verifying the transactions.
The problem with the current system seems to be the general belief that everyone wants to know the results and faster, and so we have empty-headed reporters trying to guess the exit vote so that thay can make wild predictions about the final tally.
I wonder if Ernest Brenot would go on national TV to ricidule the RIAA and to demand a public apology for libel and defamation of character? Probably wouldn't stop the RIAA at all, but it might help to raise public awareness of the stupidity of what they're doing.
I read it as bring his case back before an enraged panel of judges and I thought, "Oh crap, what're his chances if the judges are already pissed off before the re-trial even starts..."
The person executing case 2 ought to do the same, to avoid having the phone company "reverse engineer" his book and then attempt to prosecute for infringement. Of course, it would be in his best interests to actually look up his dummy entries in the "official" book, to make sure he wasn't accidentally inventing the same dummy data as the phone company...