Treaties are not irrevocable or binding in perpituity. They can be repudiated, adjusted or amended.
Once signed they can only legally be revoked by the agreement of all paries concerned.
Treaties are not irrevocable or binding in perpituity. They can be repudiated, adjusted or amended.
That's because the current administration are a bunch of cowboys with no respect for international law. Except of course when it serves their own purposes, and in that case woe betide any country breaking a treaty with the USA. To repudiate a treaty is to break it, end of story full stop.
Because the way international treaties are implemented undermines democracy. The fundamental tenet of democracy is that if the people don't like the laws a government passes then they can vote that government out of office and elect one that will repeal the disliked laws. Governments are now bypassing this constraint by having unpopular laws written into international treaties so that future governments are constrained by these treaties. That's why no government has legalised cannabis, instead we get decriminalisation.
To make matters worse these treaties are often decided behind closed doors and never subjected to proper scrutiny. One wonders what threats are used to ensure some measures are foisted upon unwilling populaces.
The parent post is 100% correct, it's that simple. And for those interested it's got nothing to do with the left or right side of the brain. The cerebellum is to the back and base of the brain and controls movement in learned skills. By the way the cerebellum doesn't know if your performing an act for real or not, so imagining yourself drawing letters in great detail will also help improve handwriting.
You try setting up an Active Directory infrastructure with multiple sites and domains, and tell me it's not hard, the first time you've ever done it, without knowing anything about the subject.
That's my point, and you certainly wouldn't expect to do it from a live cd, unless you were familiar with the process. You've learned to think in a certain way, and that is counterproductive on a different system. You might be knowledgeable on windows but on Linux you're a beginner. Linux is hard for beginners but more rewarding for advanced users. If you expect to be as proficient on the new (to you) system as you are on the old then you are setting yourself up for failure.
When I said basics, I meant basics. What you were trying to do wasn't a basic task. Linux is a Unix clone, and Unix machines were designed for centrally adminstred networks, with expert admins, adding mass storage devices is something that users aren't meant to do on such systems. Get an easy to use distro like SUSE and use the a dedicated machine for simple stuff, use the command line and you'll begin to appreciate how fast you can do certain tasks that are problematic on windows. It's a different way of working, and more efficient, but it's only more efficient if you're equally clueful in both ways of working. Believe me the task you described, and your frustration with it demonstrates you don't think the Unix way.
Use a Linux machine at home for browsing slashdot, writing emails and farting around. No pressure, no deadlines. Learn the basics through play and then you can evaluate the system.
Case study:
Booting a *LIVE CD* distribution of Linux, it was impossible for me to make it detect my USB Mass Storage device. Then the autoconf script to place a/home folder on that device, and check for its presence at boot, never worked. I never did get that working -- and that's not even kernel hacking.
Since you seem to have multiple machines in order to make the most out of your MS pro license you could surely have done a proper install, and put some time into learning the new system. Live CD's are great for home users who want to get an idea of what Linux looks like, or for experts to perform tasks where no Linux machine is avaliable. However anyone who would judge an OS solely on their experience of trying to administer a machine from such a disk has no business representing themselves as a computer professional/expert. You must be one of these clueless MSCP's.
If you can't learn the basics of a new OS within a month you don't have the aptitude, if you're not prepared to devote the time and effort you don't have the vocation. In either case you're in the wrong business.
If the solution to spam is an MS email monopoly,
on
Gates on Spam
·
· Score: 1
then how in fuck's name do we explain all these spam related viruses.
Credible evidence would be verifiable evidence of a death threat, by email or telephone for example, that cannot be dismissed as a crank.
I think you've hit the nail on the head here. Anyone with a high enough public profile in an area of controversy will get death threats. Almost always from cranks, and 99.9% of these threats are completely empty. The normal course of action is to pass these threats on to the police and say nothing about them. To use them for publicity to try and make yourself out as a victim is a sure sign of a scumbag.
Does that count as Chinese software or is it still 'American'?
Silly me, there I was thinking Linux was the result of the efforts of geeks of just about every nationality. Damn clever you Americans, I'm sure Finland will be eternally grateful.
No, no! What you do is you patent the idea of X with some trivial idea of something that would be needed to implement it (say Y). Then you wait for someone with the smarts to implement the difficult bits and sue them for stealing Y. Until patents require you to produce i) a working implementation, and ii) are required to be assessed by experts in the field for being non-obvious, they will never again satisfy the purpose of protecting inventors from exploitation. Reducing their cost so that they are affordable to ordinary individuals would also help.
All businesses lose there licence and would be in breach of contract
Don't be silly, there is no legal mechanism by which the license can be revoked. Even if there was the law could be changed. MS don't have the power over governments that say an oil company does. An oil company can cut of the oil, a government can cut of the indulgence that is copyright and MS are screwed. Remember Europe is their biggest market and one copy of Windows is enough to do all of Europe.
When I got home from work I sent the BBC the following complaint:
At a time when the is reeling from the aftermath of the Hutton report, and needs to demonstrate its journalistic and editorial integrity how does one of the most scurrilous and dishonest reports I have ever had the misfortune to read come to be published on the BBC's website. I refer to Stephen Evans's piece entitled "Linux cyber-battle turns nasty". This one sided and nasty piece of polemic is a far cry from the type of objective comment that should be expected from a BBC correspondent.
Firstly I would object to the way that Mr. Stephens denigrates and stereotypes computer programmers. In his third paragraph he states:
"Deep in the darkness of the psyche, vandals and arsonists no doubt have their reasons - and so, presumably, do the run-of-the-mill geeks who wreak damage on the unsuspecting computer user."
The run of the mill geek is the person who writes the software and maintains the systems upon which computer user depends. It is the run of the mill geek who has to clear up the mess created by the individuals who write and propagate trojans such as MyDoom. If Mr. Evans had the gumption to research his piece he would have known this, all he would have had to do is talk to a few of the technical support staff at the BBC. He would have found that the average geek detests such behaviour, and is heartily sick of dealing with the mess created by it.
While it is true that the creators of such malicious code are geeks is does not follow that the run of the mill geek creates such destruction. Vandals and arsonists are members of the public but they are hardly representative of the average member of the public. Mr. Evans is a journalist but I would hope and expect that the run of the mill journalist shows more integrity than Mr. Evans.
The article goes on to claim that the motive for 'seems clear', I wish that I had Mr. Evans powers of divination. It is certainly possible that MyDoom was created by a misguided proponent of the Free Software movement, but there are two other equally plausible theories. MyDoom also carries a payload that allows it to be used by spammers to use infected machines as gateways for unsolicited bulk email, and has been linked to Russian spammers. It also neatly coincides with SCO's Darl McBride's agenda of demonising the creators and advocates of fee software as a criminal and 'unamerican' threat to the right to profit. An agenda which lazy and biased reports like that Mr. Evans parrot.
Until those responsible for MyDoom are caught their motives can only remain a matter for speculation, and any objective reporter should not favour any one plausible theory over another.
The article goes on to portray open source advocates as zealots and extremists, Mr. Evans is entitled to this viewpoint, but he should not allow it to colour his reporting. Nor should he allow it to stand in the way of his reporting of facts the contempt for SCO is not because of it being a 'big bad company' it is because SCO has demanded money from other companies, and individuals, for property it claims without providing any evidence to back up these claims. It appears to many that SCO's actions amount to little more than an attempt at extortion. There is already a court order in Germany prohibiting SCO from making such demands until such time that they can prove ownership of the code in question.
Mr. Evans finishes his article by raising the specter of individuals blackmailing companies through denial of service attacks. Such blackmail is already part of the internet experience for millions of ordinary computer users. They are subjected to a barrage of pop-ad's for software to block these self same pop-ups (http://news.com.com/2100-1023-975298.html?tag=prn tfr). Unfortunately because these attacks are made by companies on individuals the legal authorities seem to be blind to the criminality of such behaviour. The problem of internet blackmail is a real one and it precede
*rolls yes* talk about double standards. Glad I don't live in america.
So am I, but I'm less happy that my government has decided that I can be extradited to the US without any right of appeal, and that once I get there I have no rights because I'm not an American citizen. So now as a UK citizen I have no rights at all.
Actually I might be wrong, the article keeps suggesting that he was a Democrat, but the only facts it gives are just enough to know that he was assigned to them. It seems strange to me that both parties conduct party business on shared government machines. Is that a recipe for disaster or what?
The article even mentions that the tech who was responsible for the glitch was a Democrat
Learn to read, the article says:
A technician hired by the new judiciary chairman, Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, apparently made a mistake that allowed anyone to access newly created accounts on a Judiciary Committee server shared by both parties
Nowhere in that is there anything from which you can infer the political leanings of the tech. All it says is he was hired by the chairman of the Judiciary committee who happens to be a Democrat. The tech was working for the government not the Democrats.
It's a person a script wouldn't have misread RayRNond as RayMond. Trolls trolling trolls and idiot moderators sucking up to an imposter, isn't Slashdot great.
I agree, though the internet wasn't a factor in the disappearance of the independents during the 1980's. Before then the small shops had pretty direct access to the warehouse. You would have had your record within a week.
What do you sell me when I go into a shop like yours. I think it is expertise. Personally when I buy celtic or rock music I know the genres so well I don't need advice, but for say classical or jazz I'm usually reliant on some advice. Even though I don't need advice in certain genres I can see an advantage in buying such music from knowledgeable retailers, because they introduce others to good music and help keep it viable. Unfortunately distribution is such that such retailers operate at a price disadvantage, and my disposable income isn't so large as that I can afford to ignore such a factor. Hence you get squeezed, and hence the reliance on the sale of used music so that you can be price competitive.
I don't think downloads are such an immediate threat to you. They do threaten the stupid business model of recent years where record companies buy their own singles so they make a profit on the royalties from compilation albums. I find the original posters attitude somewhat strange, I buy on average a CD a week, always have always will. Not as much as the original poster but still way more than the average. I download a lot but still buy CD's, it's not altruism I just know that if I stop paying for music the supply of music will dwindle.
The problem for you is that more and more through the years I have tended to buy direct from the artists at concerts, or shop for the best price on the internet. If I were you I'd be looking to specialise or at least provide specialist knowledge, and find a way of using that knowledge to drive internet based sales. That at least would position you to take advantage of new avenues of music sales as they came along. I know that I will happily pay for music downloads I just want fair prices, and services aimed at adults, not the teenage single buying market, ie not iTunes. Sorry, but that's the best I can think of.
It will need something that dramatic to shake politicians out their current malaise. Remember though when it does happen all that content will become bankrupt stock. With any luck the new owners will see fit to reissue stuff that's currently sitting in vaults for life plus seventy. It's not nice for people like you, but in a fast changing world everyone is at risk of being made redundant. It's happened to me three times in life, I've moved on.
I can remember a time when a town of ten thousand souls would have at least one, and usually two, independent record shops. They were usually run by music enthusiasts, and what they didn't have they would get. If you ordered a record and found you didn't like it, no problem, it just got returned to the distributor. Of course all this changed a couple of decades ago when the distibutors decided that they didn't like taking returns back.
Now small independents only exists in towns of at least twenty thousand, and they almost all rely on the sale of used records/CD's to remain viable. I'd love to support my local store, but there isn't one, unless you count the local superstore with its limited selection.
I'm afraid the dark days have been with us for years. The smallest stores have been disappearing for years. Now your size of store is now the smallest and likely to go next. I wish that were not the case, but it is. Unfortunately the music business is dominated by philistines who know how to extract cash from culture, but know not how to nourish culture.
Slashdot Mirror
Treaties are not irrevocable or binding in perpituity. They can be repudiated, adjusted or amended.
Once signed they can only legally be revoked by the agreement of all paries concerned.
Treaties are not irrevocable or binding in perpituity. They can be repudiated, adjusted or amended.
That's because the current administration are a bunch of cowboys with no respect for international law. Except of course when it serves their own purposes, and in that case woe betide any country breaking a treaty with the USA. To repudiate a treaty is to break it, end of story full stop.
Because the way international treaties are implemented undermines democracy. The fundamental tenet of democracy is that if the people don't like the laws a government passes then they can vote that government out of office and elect one that will repeal the disliked laws. Governments are now bypassing this constraint by having unpopular laws written into international treaties so that future governments are constrained by these treaties. That's why no government has legalised cannabis, instead we get decriminalisation.
To make matters worse these treaties are often decided behind closed doors and never subjected to proper scrutiny. One wonders what threats are used to ensure some measures are foisted upon unwilling populaces.
The parent post is 100% correct, it's that simple. And for those interested it's got nothing to do with the left or right side of the brain. The cerebellum is to the back and base of the brain and controls movement in learned skills. By the way the cerebellum doesn't know if your performing an act for real or not, so imagining yourself drawing letters in great detail will also help improve handwriting.
You try setting up an Active Directory infrastructure with multiple sites and domains, and tell me it's not hard, the first time you've ever done it, without knowing anything about the subject.
That's my point, and you certainly wouldn't expect to do it from a live cd, unless you were familiar with the process. You've learned to think in a certain way, and that is counterproductive on a different system. You might be knowledgeable on windows but on Linux you're a beginner. Linux is hard for beginners but more rewarding for advanced users. If you expect to be as proficient on the new (to you) system as you are on the old then you are setting yourself up for failure.
When I said basics, I meant basics. What you were trying to do wasn't a basic task. Linux is a Unix clone, and Unix machines were designed for centrally adminstred networks, with expert admins, adding mass storage devices is something that users aren't meant to do on such systems. Get an easy to use distro like SUSE and use the a dedicated machine for simple stuff, use the command line and you'll begin to appreciate how fast you can do certain tasks that are problematic on windows. It's a different way of working, and more efficient, but it's only more efficient if you're equally clueful in both ways of working. Believe me the task you described, and your frustration with it demonstrates you don't think the Unix way.
Use a Linux machine at home for browsing slashdot, writing emails and farting around. No pressure, no deadlines. Learn the basics through play and then you can evaluate the system.
Case study: Booting a *LIVE CD* distribution of Linux, it was impossible for me to make it detect my USB Mass Storage device. Then the autoconf script to place a /home folder on that device, and check for its presence at boot, never worked. I never did get that working -- and that's not even kernel hacking.
Since you seem to have multiple machines in order to make the most out of your MS pro license you could surely have done a proper install, and put some time into learning the new system. Live CD's are great for home users who want to get an idea of what Linux looks like, or for experts to perform tasks where no Linux machine is avaliable. However anyone who would judge an OS solely on their experience of trying to administer a machine from such a disk has no business representing themselves as a computer professional/expert. You must be one of these clueless MSCP's.
If you can't learn the basics of a new OS within a month you don't have the aptitude, if you're not prepared to devote the time and effort you don't have the vocation. In either case you're in the wrong business.
then how in fuck's name do we explain all these spam related viruses.
Credible evidence would be verifiable evidence of a death threat, by email or telephone for example, that cannot be dismissed as a crank.
I think you've hit the nail on the head here. Anyone with a high enough public profile in an area of controversy will get death threats. Almost always from cranks, and 99.9% of these threats are completely empty. The normal course of action is to pass these threats on to the police and say nothing about them. To use them for publicity to try and make yourself out as a victim is a sure sign of a scumbag.
Does that count as Chinese software or is it still 'American'?
Silly me, there I was thinking Linux was the result of the efforts of geeks of just about every nationality. Damn clever you Americans, I'm sure Finland will be eternally grateful.
That would be spelling.
No, no! What you do is you patent the idea of X with some trivial idea of something that would be needed to implement it (say Y). Then you wait for someone with the smarts to implement the difficult bits and sue them for stealing Y. Until patents require you to produce i) a working implementation, and ii) are required to be assessed by experts in the field for being non-obvious, they will never again satisfy the purpose of protecting inventors from exploitation. Reducing their cost so that they are affordable to ordinary individuals would also help.
All businesses lose there licence and would be in breach of contract
Don't be silly, there is no legal mechanism by which the license can be revoked. Even if there was the law could be changed. MS don't have the power over governments that say an oil company does. An oil company can cut of the oil, a government can cut of the indulgence that is copyright and MS are screwed. Remember Europe is their biggest market and one copy of Windows is enough to do all of Europe.
Perhaps you can explain to me why a site that purports to be against media bias is running this.
Feel free to mod me as a Troll before reading my sources.
After reading your sources I can only commend you for your excellent advice.
When I got home from work I sent the BBC the following complaint:
At a time when the is reeling from the aftermath of the Hutton report, and needs to demonstrate its journalistic and editorial integrity how does one of the most scurrilous and dishonest reports I have ever had the misfortune to read come to be published on the BBC's website. I refer to Stephen Evans's piece entitled "Linux cyber-battle turns nasty". This one sided and nasty piece of polemic is a far cry from the type of objective comment that should be expected from a BBC correspondent.
Firstly I would object to the way that Mr. Stephens denigrates and stereotypes computer programmers. In his third paragraph he states:
"Deep in the darkness of the psyche, vandals and arsonists no doubt have their reasons - and so, presumably, do the run-of-the-mill geeks who wreak damage on the unsuspecting computer user."
The run of the mill geek is the person who writes the software and maintains the systems upon which computer user depends. It is the run of the mill geek who has to clear up the mess created by the individuals who write and propagate trojans such as MyDoom. If Mr. Evans had the gumption to research his piece he would have known this, all he would have had to do is talk to a few of the technical support staff at the BBC. He would have found that the average geek detests such behaviour, and is heartily sick of dealing with the mess created by it.
While it is true that the creators of such malicious code are geeks is does not follow that the run of the mill geek creates such destruction. Vandals and arsonists are members of the public but they are hardly representative of the average member of the public. Mr. Evans is a journalist but I would hope and expect that the run of the mill journalist shows more integrity than Mr. Evans.
The article goes on to claim that the motive for 'seems clear', I wish that I had Mr. Evans powers of divination. It is certainly possible that MyDoom was created by a misguided proponent of the Free Software movement, but there are two other equally plausible theories. MyDoom also carries a payload that allows it to be used by spammers to use infected machines as gateways for unsolicited bulk email, and has been linked to Russian spammers. It also neatly coincides with SCO's Darl McBride's agenda of demonising the creators and advocates of fee software as a criminal and 'unamerican' threat to the right to profit. An agenda which lazy and biased reports like that Mr. Evans parrot.
Until those responsible for MyDoom are caught their motives can only remain a matter for speculation, and any objective reporter should not favour any one plausible theory over another.
The article goes on to portray open source advocates as zealots and extremists, Mr. Evans is entitled to this viewpoint, but he should not allow it to colour his reporting. Nor should he allow it to stand in the way of his reporting of facts the contempt for SCO is not because of it being a 'big bad company' it is because SCO has demanded money from other companies, and individuals, for property it claims without providing any evidence to back up these claims. It appears to many that SCO's actions amount to little more than an attempt at extortion. There is already a court order in Germany prohibiting SCO from making such demands until such time that they can prove ownership of the code in question.
Mr. Evans finishes his article by raising the specter of individuals blackmailing companies through denial of service attacks. Such blackmail is already part of the internet experience for millions of ordinary computer users. They are subjected to a barrage of pop-ad's for software to block these self same pop-ups (http://news.com.com/2100-1023-975298.html?tag=prn tfr). Unfortunately because these attacks are made by companies on individuals the legal authorities seem to be blind to the criminality of such behaviour. The problem of internet blackmail is a real one and it precede
This is because the British government subsidizes textbook costs in the UK. Bzzzt, wrong. No such subsidy exists.
and not let such a hostage to fortune pass us by.
Only seven hundred and twenty nine days left till Sir Billy banishes spam, and counting.
*rolls yes* talk about double standards. Glad I don't live in america.
So am I, but I'm less happy that my government has decided that I can be extradited to the US without any right of appeal, and that once I get there I have no rights because I'm not an American citizen. So now as a UK citizen I have no rights at all.
Actually I might be wrong, the article keeps suggesting that he was a Democrat, but the only facts it gives are just enough to know that he was assigned to them. It seems strange to me that both parties conduct party business on shared government machines. Is that a recipe for disaster or what?
The article even mentions that the tech who was responsible for the glitch was a Democrat
Learn to read, the article says:
Nowhere in that is there anything from which you can infer the political leanings of the tech. All it says is he was hired by the chairman of the Judiciary committee who happens to be a Democrat. The tech was working for the government not the Democrats.
2 + 3 = 5 They're using Winamp's 2.x engine that allows 3.x skins to work with it.
That's what they say. Personally I think they didn't like the idea of Winamp 4 Skins.
It's a person a script wouldn't have misread RayRNond as RayMond. Trolls trolling trolls and idiot moderators sucking up to an imposter, isn't Slashdot great.
I agree, though the internet wasn't a factor in the disappearance of the independents during the 1980's. Before then the small shops had pretty direct access to the warehouse. You would have had your record within a week.
What do you sell me when I go into a shop like yours. I think it is expertise. Personally when I buy celtic or rock music I know the genres so well I don't need advice, but for say classical or jazz I'm usually reliant on some advice. Even though I don't need advice in certain genres I can see an advantage in buying such music from knowledgeable retailers, because they introduce others to good music and help keep it viable. Unfortunately distribution is such that such retailers operate at a price disadvantage, and my disposable income isn't so large as that I can afford to ignore such a factor. Hence you get squeezed, and hence the reliance on the sale of used music so that you can be price competitive.
I don't think downloads are such an immediate threat to you. They do threaten the stupid business model of recent years where record companies buy their own singles so they make a profit on the royalties from compilation albums. I find the original posters attitude somewhat strange, I buy on average a CD a week, always have always will. Not as much as the original poster but still way more than the average. I download a lot but still buy CD's, it's not altruism I just know that if I stop paying for music the supply of music will dwindle.
The problem for you is that more and more through the years I have tended to buy direct from the artists at concerts, or shop for the best price on the internet. If I were you I'd be looking to specialise or at least provide specialist knowledge, and find a way of using that knowledge to drive internet based sales. That at least would position you to take advantage of new avenues of music sales as they came along. I know that I will happily pay for music downloads I just want fair prices, and services aimed at adults, not the teenage single buying market, ie not iTunes. Sorry, but that's the best I can think of.
It will need something that dramatic to shake politicians out their current malaise. Remember though when it does happen all that content will become bankrupt stock. With any luck the new owners will see fit to reissue stuff that's currently sitting in vaults for life plus seventy. It's not nice for people like you, but in a fast changing world everyone is at risk of being made redundant. It's happened to me three times in life, I've moved on.
I can remember a time when a town of ten thousand souls would have at least one, and usually two, independent record shops. They were usually run by music enthusiasts, and what they didn't have they would get. If you ordered a record and found you didn't like it, no problem, it just got returned to the distributor. Of course all this changed a couple of decades ago when the distibutors decided that they didn't like taking returns back.
Now small independents only exists in towns of at least twenty thousand, and they almost all rely on the sale of used records/CD's to remain viable. I'd love to support my local store, but there isn't one, unless you count the local superstore with its limited selection.
I'm afraid the dark days have been with us for years. The smallest stores have been disappearing for years. Now your size of store is now the smallest and likely to go next. I wish that were not the case, but it is. Unfortunately the music business is dominated by philistines who know how to extract cash from culture, but know not how to nourish culture.