Police offiers need a warrant to search someone's property because of the fourth amendment. The fourth amendment applies specifically to police officers.
Lets see some documented cases where police officers have been charged with trespass for not having a warrant. Generally the 'penalty' for not having a warrant is that evidence is disallowed in a case.
What sorts of problems? Like knowing where the fucking toner cartridges are stored?
Admins are the janitors of IT. If they're lucky they're allowed to write a few perl scripts and run them in a 'production' setting. If they're unlucky, the best they are allowed is to push around little users for power trips. Kinda like the janitor and his floor sweeper. You'd better get out of the way when he goes through with that floor sweeper at 7PM each night...
When you get down to it, policemen (and women) are just people.
Wrong. You missed the whole point. Policemen are agents appointed to investigate and enforce the law. Journalists are people who couldn't get into the English department so they switched to J-School. They have no authority to dig in people's garbage. There's an established process for police abuse to be corrected. And, well, there's one for journalists, too, and I hope they're put through the wringer for this one.
That really isn't important. The thing that matters is, can we publish it in a pretigeous journal and continue to get our funding, and hang around long enough to get tenure? With a sociology degree, there aren't many other options.
As everybody here is so contented to say: customers can switch away from ISPs that don't provide the service they pay for. Perhaps ISPs should be required to disclose their list of blocked IPs. With a good consumer-education program in place, people would figure out which ISPs to avoid. Those who want a Net-Nanny type operation could pick the ISP that blocks content and email.
It's rather amusing that a person can get leaped upon as if they are a spam advocate for just talking some commmon sense about freedom in discussions like this. That's how it goes when zealots start ranting about their chosen ire-of-the-moment.
It's rather telling that you chose to tack on a quote from a fictional work on the end of your comment.
Your parodies of 'profit' and 'corporations', etc. etc. gets tiresome. When will you people stop fighting the 'villans' you conjure up in your mind and join the rest of us in the real world? It's a lot bigger, and more complicated a place than you can imagine. Certainly the problems of life are large enough that a few slogans and selected dogmas can resolve.
I would assert that most spammers engage in their dubious activity for raw commercial reasons. Many anti-spam zealots, on the other hand, seem to have a lacking in their life. Something to get angry about is needed, a conquest to fight, and spam is rather annoying.
Said 'honest users' can also become quite alienated from the anti-spam-zealot community. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing (zealots need something to give them an ego boost) but that's not really what the anti-spam-zealot community wants. (nobody really knows what they want, though some of them actually are just opposed to spam).
Face it. Out of the box, Linux has considerably more power for 'remote access' usage than any of the Windows OSes. Thus it's a more powerful target to take control of.
It's silly that people go into a denial mode when this basic fact is stated. One of the things that makes a Linux machine much more useful is all the power available by remote access, which obviously also makes it more useful for troublemakers.
And lay off the attack on 'old Unix hacker' for not having a clenched sphinchter about security. People like Richard Stallman and the old-school hackers at MIT made a big point in the early days of refusing to have passwords on their accounts.
Yes, the 'cult of Tolkein' is rather a disappointing thing. Hell, I have paperbacks of 'The Hobbit' and the trilogy that I read back in about 1974, and other than the Simarillion, there isn't much else actually written by Tolkein that's been published. That doesn't stop there from being countless new 'editions' and all that stuff by 'Tolkein' that's by a son or what-not.
Right now the average person considers the people who go all-caps and start sputtering when the topic of spam comes up to be harmless nuts.
Start attacking that average person directly and your little problem will go away. You'll be relabeled as non-harmless and dealt with properly.
Or wasn't the intent to resolve your problem with spam.
Virulent, raving spam-hating is kind of the ugly side of the geek personae. It's not a pretty thing to see.
I almost feel like I have to put a disclaimer at the end of this comment saying I am not pro spam just to keep a few kamikaze nuts from going after me for entering this comment. Which really is dismaying.
I read the headline with some interest, but then I saw that you're talking about a low-performance x86 based machine. They're all, even the 'fastest', between 66 and 233 MHz, you know. Unless you're running tiny apps that live inside the cache.
I even had hope, as you talked about high speed I/O, but then I didn't see any mention of even 64 bit PCI slots.
The thing people seem to forget is that Schneier is just a crypto hacker. That means: he has done a lot of experimenting and hacking of crypto code.
That makes him a cryptography hacker. It does not make him a security expert. His outspokeness makes him a security pundit but that's really just the hacker community's equivalent of the 'foreign policy pundits' with the bad hairpieces on the Sunday Morning talk shows.
This is not any Fortune 500 company, but a high-visibility one.
This is not only a high-visibility Fortune 500 company, but one with a bad enough history.
This is also a mean, high-profile big company that happens to be in direct, ruthless, dishonest competition with the main public of Slashdot, that is, free software hackers, users and friends
Microsoft didn't 'bundle' Stac's software. They reimplemented the algorhythm themselves, without permission. You know: kind of like the 'Software Patent' stuff that we all rant and rave about unless it involves Microsoft in a bad light.
I thought Spyglass got screwed mostly by Netscape. Didn't Netscape run off with the source code for Mosaic, close it tight as a drum, and extend/embrace it loudly?
I've been looking at your comment for several minutes now, and I still don't see what whining about GNU/Free Software has to do with 'News for Nerds' or 'Stuff That Matters.'
Slashdot Mirror
Police offiers need a warrant to search someone's property because of the fourth amendment. The fourth amendment applies specifically to police officers.
Lets see some documented cases where police officers have been charged with trespass for not having a warrant. Generally the 'penalty' for not having a warrant is that evidence is disallowed in a case.
What sorts of problems? Like knowing where the fucking toner cartridges are stored?
Admins are the janitors of IT. If they're lucky they're allowed to write a few perl scripts and run them in a 'production' setting. If they're unlucky, the best they are allowed is to push around little users for power trips. Kinda like the janitor and his floor sweeper. You'd better get out of the way when he goes through with that floor sweeper at 7PM each night...
When you get down to it, policemen (and women) are just people.
Wrong. You missed the whole point. Policemen are agents appointed to investigate and enforce the law. Journalists are people who couldn't get into the English department so they switched to J-School. They have no authority to dig in people's garbage. There's an established process for police abuse to be corrected. And, well, there's one for journalists, too, and I hope they're put through the wringer for this one.
That really isn't important. The thing that matters is, can we publish it in a pretigeous journal and continue to get our funding, and hang around long enough to get tenure? With a sociology degree, there aren't many other options.
As everybody here is so contented to say: customers can switch away from ISPs that don't provide the service they pay for. Perhaps ISPs should be required to disclose their list of blocked IPs. With a good consumer-education program in place, people would figure out which ISPs to avoid. Those who want a Net-Nanny type operation could pick the ISP that blocks content and email.
It's rather amusing that a person can get leaped upon as if they are a spam advocate for just talking some commmon sense about freedom in discussions like this. That's how it goes when zealots start ranting about their chosen ire-of-the-moment.
It's rather telling that you chose to tack on a quote from a fictional work on the end of your comment.
Your parodies of 'profit' and 'corporations', etc. etc. gets tiresome. When will you people stop fighting the 'villans' you conjure up in your mind and join the rest of us in the real world? It's a lot bigger, and more complicated a place than you can imagine. Certainly the problems of life are large enough that a few slogans and selected dogmas can resolve.
I would assert that most spammers engage in their dubious activity for raw commercial reasons. Many anti-spam zealots, on the other hand, seem to have a lacking in their life. Something to get angry about is needed, a conquest to fight, and spam is rather annoying.
Said 'honest users' can also become quite alienated from the anti-spam-zealot community. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing (zealots need something to give them an ego boost) but that's not really what the anti-spam-zealot community wants. (nobody really knows what they want, though some of them actually are just opposed to spam).
Whoops! There go all the mailing list servers. Oh well, I guess the Linux kernal developers can all congregate in IRC....
Home users don't run mail servers.
I mean, whap yourself on the head with the cluebat, dude. You don't fit the profile.
Face it. Out of the box, Linux has considerably more power for 'remote access' usage than any of the Windows OSes. Thus it's a more powerful target to take control of.
It's silly that people go into a denial mode when this basic fact is stated. One of the things that makes a Linux machine much more useful is all the power available by remote access, which obviously also makes it more useful for troublemakers.
And lay off the attack on 'old Unix hacker' for not having a clenched sphinchter about security. People like Richard Stallman and the old-school hackers at MIT made a big point in the early days of refusing to have passwords on their accounts.
You mean all those telephone sanitizers they sent off on the first ship really were essential??
Yes, the 'cult of Tolkein' is rather a disappointing thing. Hell, I have paperbacks of 'The Hobbit' and the trilogy that I read back in about 1974, and other than the Simarillion, there isn't much else actually written by Tolkein that's been published. That doesn't stop there from being countless new 'editions' and all that stuff by 'Tolkein' that's by a son or what-not.
rominent anti-spammers have received death threats, this shows the level of hatred that some spammers have.
Oh, puhlease.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Poof the Linux Kernal Developers List Server goes out of business.
Line up here to buy your New Windows YP.
You know, that's the perfect solution.
Right now the average person considers the people who go all-caps and start sputtering when the topic of spam comes up to be harmless nuts.
Start attacking that average person directly and your little problem will go away. You'll be relabeled as non-harmless and dealt with properly.
Or wasn't the intent to resolve your problem with spam.
Virulent, raving spam-hating is kind of the ugly side of the geek personae. It's not a pretty thing to see.
I almost feel like I have to put a disclaimer at the end of this comment saying I am not pro spam just to keep a few kamikaze nuts from going after me for entering this comment. Which really is dismaying.
I read the headline with some interest, but then I saw that you're talking about a low-performance x86 based machine. They're all, even the 'fastest', between 66 and 233 MHz, you know. Unless you're running tiny apps that live inside the cache.
I even had hope, as you talked about high speed I/O, but then I didn't see any mention of even 64 bit PCI slots.
Oh well.
Bruce Schneier writes a lot of articles.
The thing people seem to forget is that Schneier is just a crypto hacker. That means: he has done a lot of experimenting and hacking of crypto code.
That makes him a cryptography hacker. It does not make him a security expert. His outspokeness makes him a security pundit but that's really just the hacker community's equivalent of the 'foreign policy pundits' with the bad hairpieces on the Sunday Morning talk shows.
And I am worried that they know 'Mister Smith' always buys that particular candy bar for what reason?
Seriously, you fellows have far too much time on your hands if this is the kind of thing you spend your life fretting about.
You're talking about Oracle?
Microsoft didn't 'bundle' Stac's software. They reimplemented the algorhythm themselves, without permission. You know: kind of like the 'Software Patent' stuff that we all rant and rave about unless it involves Microsoft in a bad light.
I thought Spyglass got screwed mostly by Netscape. Didn't Netscape run off with the source code for Mosaic, close it tight as a drum, and extend/embrace it loudly?
Yeah, but you win the dicksize competition at the coffeehouse.
It would have to come with a big noticible 'Dual Processor' sticker on the outside of the case, of course.
I've been looking at your comment for several minutes now, and I still don't see what whining about GNU/Free Software has to do with 'News for Nerds' or 'Stuff That Matters.'
Imagine writing a few hundred thousand lines of code on one of these puppies!
Don't be redundant. This is Slashdot.
Everyone here is expert at imagining writing code.