This is just another example of why aggressive archaelology is generally a bad thing. Archaeologists, whose real aim is to 'advance science' which just so happens to translate into not ever having to leave academia and get a job, make it their aim to uproot and document everything.
Once all the evidence and traces, which happened to have survived all the years for various reasons, is housed in steel and glass buildings, we can be assured that within a few generations it'll be reduced to dust.
Two hundred years from now when they've perfected some sort of x-ray telemetry measurement and can 'view' tombs without doing anything at all to disturb their contents, there won't be any tombs left undisturbed.
But Johnny won't have had to go out and get a job after graduating. He's got tenure now.
Less chemical and biological weapons in the posession of a madman who has used them against his own people, has committed human rights violations that should make ACLU supporters faint, etc. etc.
Don't buy into the myth that Saddam has popular support. Also don't buy into the myth that the media in any other country is less biased than the media in this country.
But then they can't distribute it at all. Not to their soldiers, spies, or anyone else, regardless of their clearance.
They can distribute it to anybody within their organization. Further, the only people who have the right to ask for the source are people they distribute it to, and third, fourth, fifth party it is distributed to.
I can release something under the GPL. If the only person I give it to is a friend of mine, and he doesn't release it to anybody else (he has the right to, mind you, but he doesn't have to) then we can keep the source between us. Even if we're not in the same organization.
The best way of saying it is: The only people an organization that uses GPL software has to distribute the source to are people they distribute binaries to. This obligation ripples through the system.
And it wasn't long after that we had the US Congress ruining people's careers because someone said the word "commie".
In spite of the mess created when an amateur zealot like Senator McCarthy got ahold of the microphone, there were Communists who needed to be rooted out of government. The Soviet Union has fallen, many of the Kremlin and KGB archives have been opened.
1. The Rosenbergs deserved to die for treason. 2. There was a Communist conspiracy trying to overthrow the US government in an undemocratic fashion. 3. Hell, Henry Wallace has been well documented as a Communist sympathizer, and he was a Vice President.
There's no room for a "one-man, one-vote, one-time, then one-party" regime in a democracy, and that's what Communism is about.
Is there user-level security in OS X similar to Unix? Does the user have to log out of his regular account and into a different account, or enter a root password, to do admin tasks like adding new software? I admit I haven't run OS X but I think from what I've heard, the answer to these questions is no. (correct me if I'm wrong, I am always willing to learn something new) It's as secure as any other Unix machine where every user runs as Root. That's not secure.
Don't some of those mod chips for cars render the car no longer street-legal?
I know there are agencies of the government who frown on people using those mod chips. Screwing with the engine's algorhythms often increases the pollution the car emits. It definitely does an end-run around the regulatory boys at the EPA.
If Algore had been inaugurated president (let's just set aside the issue of who was 'elected' president for now) I am sure that whomever his appointed henchman was would be doing the same thing.
But it's fun to slag Ashcroft, because it's partisan and all that stuff. Sorry for bringing it up.
Don't we need to do somesuch trickery with DNS, i.e. stick it in a line in the static host file on our machines, in order to do more than load the initial HTML file pointed to? Any hrefs, etc., on that initial page are gonna jump to the new IP.
I wonder when they are going to start confiscating the 'collectors item' Copy II PC hardware cards that vintage computer enthusiasts buy and sell on forums like eBay.
I don't think the Federal government could ban them across the board. The Feds work in more devious ways to circumvent the US Constitution. They'd withdraw Federal funds to states that didn't ban them, if it was enough of a priority.
*******Offtopic Drift******* (mods please note that the above part of my comment is ON topic)
Me, I have wondered almost forever why the government doesn't develop an inexpensive 'radar-band' emitter. It could be a simple transmitter that sends aproximately the same signal as a police radar. All it would need to do is transmit a signal that triggers Radar Detectors. It would be a significantly less expensive instrument than a real police radar, so they could have ten or one hundred for ever 'real' Police Radar. They could be built into traffic signals, etc.
These emitters could be placed at strategic locations where people speed unsafely. They could be intermittantly activated, and sometimes a real police officer with a radar gun could be there instead. 'Radar Detectors' would instantly be transformed from a 'fight back against the cops' device into a benign 'slow down' warning beacon.
I didn't spend the whatever amount of money to find out what info they are claiming is 'sent back to Microsoft.' Did you?
Probably it was your eBay password, your mother's maiden name, and your SSN.
Right?
Re:Sounds like Tinfoil Hat Time-A xerox moment.
on
NYT on RFID Tags
·
· Score: 1
Serial numbers have been used to track individuals. It's common enough that 'marked money' is one of those cliches of crime drama cinema and television.
Serial numbers on currency aren't that useful for anti-counterfeiting. Counterfeiters make their money by passing the bills to the kind of people who don't look at S/N's, not big banks that might notice 48 twenties came through recently with the same S/N.
I doubt if the bureaucrats raking in the ad revenue for the ads in the subway are the same bureaucrats as the ones do-gooding about tobacco. There's no hypocrisy there.
There are hypocrites spending lots and lots of the money earmarked for anti-tobacco campaigns that came from the lawsuits against the tobacco industry, however. Tax-and-spend politicians can't help but want to direct some of that big pile of money to their pet unrelated interests, and they certainly do. But who has ever claimed politicians aren't hypocrites?
I love how that article you linked to says that Microsoft uses SSL to transfer the small amount of info back to Microsoft. It's thought of as a bad thing, I suppose.
I would be more worried if they weren't using encryption.
That technique works pretty well for eBay browsing. There are tools out there now that give you a GUI interface to enter eBay IDs. It presents a list of all items that person has bid on that are current. It has a 'favorites' feature so you can have 'favorite' people you track.
It finds the 'good' stuff, i.e. the things that anybody would actually bid on. By cultivating collections of people who buy the kinds of things I am interested in, I seldom anymore actually browse 'raw' ebay for items to buy.
Interestingly, when you pull up a query for an eBay account held by someone in Germany, eBay returns a message that they aren't allowed to gather and give out that information for German citizens.
Sometimes I think that the real problem some of the paranoid freaks out there have is that they're terribly afraid they aren't important enough for anybody to actually care to surveille them.
Some of the 'tracking' theories people are throwing around are just weird and inconceivable. If there are RFID tags in everything, then if a long-range pinging device is activated, it would receive so many responses that it's likely the noise would overwhelm the ability of the device to identify unique items out of the thousands in range.
Anyway, it sure seems like another 'tinfoil hat enthusiast' topic to me.
Re:Sounds like Tinfoil Hat Time
on
NYT on RFID Tags
·
· Score: 1
But I suspect the "new money" that will be arriving relatively soon,
There is already a unique serial number on every piece of currency anyway, and there has been for over a hundred years.
Still, if paranoia helps you get through your day.....
Slashdot Mirror
This is just another example of why aggressive archaelology is generally a bad thing. Archaeologists, whose real aim is to 'advance science' which just so happens to translate into not ever having to leave academia and get a job, make it their aim to uproot and document everything.
Once all the evidence and traces, which happened to have survived all the years for various reasons, is housed in steel and glass buildings, we can be assured that within a few generations it'll be reduced to dust.
Two hundred years from now when they've perfected some sort of x-ray telemetry measurement and can 'view' tombs without doing anything at all to disturb their contents, there won't be any tombs left undisturbed.
But Johnny won't have had to go out and get a job after graduating. He's got tenure now.
Terrorists are insurgents who attack civillian populations, in order to wreck terror upon them.
Freedom fighers are insurgents who have the support of the civillian population that they fight on the behalf of. Without attacking other civilians.
It has nothing to do with what outside third parties choose to call said insurgent groups.
Less chemical and biological weapons in the posession of a madman who has used them against his own people, has committed human rights violations that should make ACLU supporters faint, etc. etc.
Don't buy into the myth that Saddam has popular support. Also don't buy into the myth that the media in any other country is less biased than the media in this country.
But then they can't distribute it at all. Not to their soldiers, spies, or anyone else, regardless of their clearance.
They can distribute it to anybody within their organization. Further, the only people who have the right to ask for the source are people they distribute it to, and third, fourth, fifth party it is distributed to.
I can release something under the GPL. If the only person I give it to is a friend of mine, and he doesn't release it to anybody else (he has the right to, mind you, but he doesn't have to) then we can keep the source between us. Even if we're not in the same organization.
The best way of saying it is: The only people an organization that uses GPL software has to distribute the source to are people they distribute binaries to. This obligation ripples through the system.
News Forge is a funny name for a site dedicated to journalsm.
Do they actually forge news there?
And it wasn't long after that we had the US Congress ruining people's careers because someone said the word "commie".
In spite of the mess created when an amateur zealot like Senator McCarthy got ahold of the microphone, there were Communists who needed to be rooted out of government. The Soviet Union has fallen, many of the Kremlin and KGB archives have been opened.
1. The Rosenbergs deserved to die for treason.
2. There was a Communist conspiracy trying to overthrow the US government in an undemocratic fashion.
3. Hell, Henry Wallace has been well documented as a Communist sympathizer, and he was a Vice President.
There's no room for a "one-man, one-vote, one-time, then one-party" regime in a democracy, and that's what Communism is about.
I thought OS X ran everything as root.
Is there user-level security in OS X similar to Unix? Does the user have to log out of his regular account and into a different account, or enter a root password, to do admin tasks like adding new software? I admit I haven't run OS X but I think from what I've heard, the answer to these questions is no. (correct me if I'm wrong, I am always willing to learn something new) It's as secure as any other Unix machine where every user runs as Root. That's not secure.
Don't some of those mod chips for cars render the car no longer street-legal?
I know there are agencies of the government who frown on people using those mod chips. Screwing with the engine's algorhythms often increases the pollution the car emits. It definitely does an end-run around the regulatory boys at the EPA.
If Algore had been inaugurated president (let's just set aside the issue of who was 'elected' president for now) I am sure that whomever his appointed henchman was would be doing the same thing.
But it's fun to slag Ashcroft, because it's partisan and all that stuff. Sorry for bringing it up.
Don't we need to do somesuch trickery with DNS, i.e. stick it in a line in the static host file on our machines, in order to do more than load the initial HTML file pointed to? Any hrefs, etc., on that initial page are gonna jump to the new IP.
I wonder when they are going to start confiscating the 'collectors item' Copy II PC hardware cards that vintage computer enthusiasts buy and sell on forums like eBay.
I don't think the Federal government could ban them across the board. The Feds work in more devious ways to circumvent the US Constitution. They'd withdraw Federal funds to states that didn't ban them, if it was enough of a priority.
*******Offtopic Drift*******
(mods please note that the above part of my comment is ON topic)
Me, I have wondered almost forever why the government doesn't develop an inexpensive 'radar-band' emitter. It could be a simple transmitter that sends aproximately the same signal as a police radar. All it would need to do is transmit a signal that triggers Radar Detectors. It would be a significantly less expensive instrument than a real police radar, so they could have ten or one hundred for ever 'real' Police Radar. They could be built into traffic signals, etc.
These emitters could be placed at strategic locations where people speed unsafely. They could be intermittantly activated, and sometimes a real police officer with a radar gun could be there instead. 'Radar Detectors' would instantly be transformed from a 'fight back against the cops' device into a benign 'slow down' warning beacon.
Don't tell me, I'll guess: The construction crew went off and got stoned and never got around to finishing the exit ramp...
Well, gee. Every website you visit knows your IP address.
You need to be paranoid about a whole lot more than Microsoft if you're going down that lane.
I didn't spend the whatever amount of money to find out what info they are claiming is 'sent back to Microsoft.' Did you?
Probably it was your eBay password, your mother's maiden name, and your SSN.
Right?
Serial numbers have been used to track individuals. It's common enough that 'marked money' is one of those cliches of crime drama cinema and television.
Serial numbers on currency aren't that useful for anti-counterfeiting. Counterfeiters make their money by passing the bills to the kind of people who don't look at S/N's, not big banks that might notice 48 twenties came through recently with the same S/N.
Many forms of speech were never intended to be protected by the First Amendment.
Now go try telling that to the ACLU.
I doubt if the bureaucrats raking in the ad revenue for the ads in the subway are the same bureaucrats as the ones do-gooding about tobacco. There's no hypocrisy there.
There are hypocrites spending lots and lots of the money earmarked for anti-tobacco campaigns that came from the lawsuits against the tobacco industry, however. Tax-and-spend politicians can't help but want to direct some of that big pile of money to their pet unrelated interests, and they certainly do. But who has ever claimed politicians aren't hypocrites?
I love how that article you linked to says that Microsoft uses SSL to transfer the small amount of info back to Microsoft. It's thought of as a bad thing, I suppose.
I would be more worried if they weren't using encryption.
What interests me is that the other ISPs weren't mentioned.
This is just the usual slag-microsoft topic, you see. There are some very anti-Microsoft people in the Seattle Times.
So does every other ISP.
What of it?
That technique works pretty well for eBay browsing. There are tools out there now that give you a GUI interface to enter eBay IDs. It presents a list of all items that person has bid on that are current. It has a 'favorites' feature so you can have 'favorite' people you track.
It finds the 'good' stuff, i.e. the things that anybody would actually bid on. By cultivating collections of people who buy the kinds of things I am interested in, I seldom anymore actually browse 'raw' ebay for items to buy.
Interestingly, when you pull up a query for an eBay account held by someone in Germany, eBay returns a message that they aren't allowed to gather and give out that information for German citizens.
Sometimes I think that the real problem some of the paranoid freaks out there have is that they're terribly afraid they aren't important enough for anybody to actually care to surveille them.
Some of the 'tracking' theories people are throwing around are just weird and inconceivable. If there are RFID tags in everything, then if a long-range pinging device is activated, it would receive so many responses that it's likely the noise would overwhelm the ability of the device to identify unique items out of the thousands in range.
Anyway, it sure seems like another 'tinfoil hat enthusiast' topic to me.
There is already a unique serial number on every piece of currency anyway, and there has been for over a hundred years.
Still, if paranoia helps you get through your day.....
The infamous Walmart PC doesn't sell in the WalMart stores. It's a website only purchase.