The "secret conspiracy" consisting of at least Rudy, Shaftoe, Root, and Bischoff was using an uncrippled version of Arethusa (the crippled version was indeed being used by the Axis, under the name Azure/Pufferfish) - Rudy had given it to Goering but crippled it first) and Waterhouse breaks one of the messages because he knows that there are a number of possible cribs, one of which is "crocodile" (others of which include "Shaftoe) because Shaftoe has died and they are holding a meeting of the conspiracy at his funeral.
See p. 877 of the large paperback edition for details, a chapter called, appropriately, "cribs."
Considering how little attention most people pay to who signs their certificates even if they are warned about them, even people with browsers which perform proper checks on these things may be able to affect themselves. Lesson there: read the certificate warnings, I guess.
$5 for an mp3? You've got to be kidding that you'd pay that. Especially if the "know" it won't be copied, because they don't have to compensate for "lost sales" due to "piracy."
For anyone who didn't read the article, or didn't read all of it, the author also wrote a book called Copyrights and Copywrongs. I bought it and haven't finished it, but it's excellent so far; a more in-depth treatment of some the issues he mentions in the article. I recommend it.
Note: I'm not affiliated with it in any way, I just think it's a good book.
I think both the parent of your comment and its parent were pointing out the ambiguity of your phrasing.
The way to make a concinvincing case against legalizing a certain activity is NOT to commit that crime yourself.
This can mean two things:
1) Not committing a crime is a way to make a convincing case to decriminalize the thing you're not doing.
2) Committing the act that you don't want legalized is not the way to make a convincing case.
Presumably you meant (2), but (1) is a less convoluted way of interpreting your statement, so the people who responded were making fun of that.
Certainly doing the thing that you don't want decriminalized, which is what seems to have happened, doesn't make much sense.
However, if (as seems somewhat unlikely) they'd rather make DoS attacks legal for everyone, then what they did is actually civil disobedience, and even if you disagree with their aim, it is one of the ways to protest a law.
Fundamentally, the way to fight it is to kick them where it hurts - in their pocketbooks.
Boycott the RIAA and the MPAA, and don't buy stuff that uses DRM to forbid you to do legal things that you want to do.
Eventually even people who aren't extremely aware of these issues are going to figure out that Congress and the xxAAs are pulling all kinds of bullshit on them, and a widespread public boycott might work. Then call your congresscritter and tell them why the entertainment industry is losing money.
Another idea: when Congress adjourns for the year and your critters come back to campaign, make sure to ask them hard questions, and encourage people not to vote for them if they're in the pocket of the entertainment industry.
Goody for you, but spam is still a problem for the many people whose addresses must be posted publicly for business or technical reasons -- the same ones the Dutch court apparently doesn't care about, since they also can't change their addresses easily.
Why does the ACLU need their report to show up "exacly as they want it"? It's a report. It's an ideal document type for HTML. Headings and logical styles are all you need.
PDFs read very slowly compared to HTML because they are read page by page with lots of scrolling. And most converters don't work very well.
I don't think blending Linux and Windows would get you "set and forget" workability or security. If you "forget" to keep actively administering something, it will most likely start to suck, regardless of what kind of box it is.
Slashdot Mirror
Ahem. Not all child pornography is illegal. At least, not all things that appear to be child pornography.
Remember this ruling?
The "secret conspiracy" consisting of at least Rudy, Shaftoe, Root, and Bischoff was using an uncrippled version of Arethusa (the crippled version was indeed being used by the Axis, under the name Azure/Pufferfish) - Rudy had given it to Goering but crippled it first) and Waterhouse breaks one of the messages because he knows that there are a number of possible cribs, one of which is "crocodile" (others of which include "Shaftoe) because Shaftoe has died and they are holding a meeting of the conspiracy at his funeral. See p. 877 of the large paperback edition for details, a chapter called, appropriately, "cribs."
Considering how little attention most people pay to who signs their certificates even if they are warned about them, even people with browsers which perform proper checks on these things may be able to affect themselves. Lesson there: read the certificate warnings, I guess.
$5 for an mp3? You've got to be kidding that you'd pay that. Especially if the "know" it won't be copied, because they don't have to compensate for "lost sales" due to "piracy."
For anyone who didn't read the article, or didn't read all of it, the author also wrote a book called Copyrights and Copywrongs. I bought it and haven't finished it, but it's excellent so far; a more in-depth treatment of some the issues he mentions in the article. I recommend it. Note: I'm not affiliated with it in any way, I just think it's a good book.
The way to make a concinvincing case against legalizing a certain activity is NOT to commit that crime yourself.
This can mean two things:
1) Not committing a crime is a way to make a convincing case to decriminalize the thing you're not doing.
2) Committing the act that you don't want legalized is not the way to make a convincing case.
Presumably you meant (2), but (1) is a less convoluted way of interpreting your statement, so the people who responded were making fun of that.
Certainly doing the thing that you don't want decriminalized, which is what seems to have happened, doesn't make much sense. However, if (as seems somewhat unlikely) they'd rather make DoS attacks legal for everyone, then what they did is actually civil disobedience, and even if you disagree with their aim, it is one of the ways to protest a law.
Fundamentally, the way to fight it is to kick them where it hurts - in their pocketbooks.
Boycott the RIAA and the MPAA, and don't buy stuff that uses DRM to forbid you to do legal things that you want to do.
Eventually even people who aren't extremely aware of these issues are going to figure out that Congress and the xxAAs are pulling all kinds of bullshit on them, and a widespread public boycott might work. Then call your congresscritter and tell them why the entertainment industry is losing money.
Another idea: when Congress adjourns for the year and your critters come back to campaign, make sure to ask them hard questions, and encourage people not to vote for them if they're in the pocket of the entertainment industry.
Goody for you, but spam is still a problem for the many people whose addresses must be posted publicly for business or technical reasons -- the same ones the Dutch court apparently doesn't care about, since they also can't change their addresses easily.
Why does the ACLU need their report to show up "exacly as they want it"? It's a report. It's an ideal document type for HTML. Headings and logical styles are all you need. PDFs read very slowly compared to HTML because they are read page by page with lots of scrolling. And most converters don't work very well.
Maybe you need that $700 to pay bills.
Mod this baby down. What the hell is it doing in a thread about cripped audio discs?
I don't think blending Linux and Windows would get you "set and forget" workability or security. If you "forget" to keep actively administering something, it will most likely start to suck, regardless of what kind of box it is.