No, he's doing it to make a point. There is exactly zero chance that disclosing this particular information (which bugs in the filesystem he fixed) would result in him being sued, as it does not injure any party (since it *could* be used for rights management, but is not currently), and thus no one would have interest in prosecuting the case. Plus it's quite low-profile. He's just being overzealous to make a point - he believes releasing it would be against the letter of the US law, even if he wasn't going to get sued (which he wasn't).
I disagree - the cable modem providers are still being given a government-granted monopoly on a certain method of internet access, which also happens to be superior to the dialup method. When the government grants such a competitive advantage, the company cannot consider itself a "normal" private company.
The ISP market is not nearly as free as you indicate, especially as dialup service fades away and is replaced by broadband. In any given area, there are generally a handful of internet providers, depending on infrastructure available. Especially in areas where there is no DSL available (a large percentage) essentially the only choices are DirecPC satellite service or cablemodem through a government-granted cable monopoly. It would be my opinion that cablemodem companies should not be allowed to use things like MAPS, as their status as a government-granted monopoly prevents them from being able to claim they are private businesses free to do as they please.
It's not voluntary if the ISP is a government-granted monopoly, like the cable company. And with the way things are going lately, most people only have a handful of ISP choices available to them; if they all have the same policies, there is no choice.
It's like saying AMD and Intel implementing some sort of filtering in their processors wouldn't be wrong, because hey, you can always make your own processor.
No, it's like the government telling you that you can't live in a gated community. After all, the roads and driveways in that community(paid for and maintained by your money) were built to be drived upon and you can't delegate the policing of those roads and driveways to another entity(the landlord of the gated community, the homeowner's association, etc). If you want your driveway policed and you don't want undesireable people to park there, then you'll just have to police it your own damn self.
But the government does restrict this, through zoning ordinances. Despite owning my property, I cannot build a fence around it to keep out undesirables, as that would be illegal.
Well, my college at the very least has a mail-room that distributes mail - the postal service dumps it off in big bags, and student employees sort and put it in students' boxes. It's still illegal to interfere with the delivery of mail, despite the school bearing the cost to do it (through paying the students' salaries).
Uh, you seem to have no idea what numerical matrix operations are useful for. Maths professors rarely need to do such work, as they're more interested in theoretical aspects of maths (there are some exceptions where large numerical simulations are useful in getting an idea of how systems should behave). The vast majority of such problems are done by people who use the computer as a tool - meteorologists, engineers, etc.
Depends on what you mean by "Linux." If you mean the traditional Linux CLI setup with perhaps X and a windowmanager, it's not easy at all. While in Win2k a newbie might poke around a bit, in Linux they'd just sit there with no idea what to do, as there isn't even a Start menu with all the programs in it. Hell at least in Windows you can click on the "Help" icon in the Start menu; in Linux you have to know what a manpage is, which is not obvious to a newbie.
If you mean an already-set-up GNOME or KDE installation, then Linux is far easier to use now than it used to be, but I'd still argue it's harder than Windows, especially for someone who doesn't use the CLI to supplement their GUI use (for example, the file managers are pretty crappy).
I'm guessing a clearer rephrasing of that sentence would be:
They don't send only one light wave through the fiber, but two orthogonal ones.
If only one light wave is being sent, the term "orthogonal" is completely meaningless; the innovation here is the ability to send two light waves simultaneously through the fiber, taking advantage of the fact that making them orthogonal will allow you to reconstruct both of the original waves at the other end, effectively doubling your capacity.
Didn't the Supreme Court rule against this over the summer, forcing the INS to release several thousand non-deportable (because their home country won't take them back) detainees who had completed their sentences but were being held indefinitely?
I'm not questioning what evidence we have, but what evidence Afghanistan has. AFAIK all this "conclusive" evidence that has convinced everyone we've shown has not been shared with Afghanistan. One can hardly expect them to turn over one of their countrymen based on the trust that evidence they haven't seen really does exist.
Again, I don't think the US would hand over someone with the amount of evidence Afghanistan has seen - we would require to at least have enough evidence shared with us to convince us of a case, just to just be told "Britain saw the evidence and agrees it's pretty conclusive."
Most of the opium coming from Afghanistan these days comes from the opposition-controlled areas. Yes, the same opposition the US now wants to support in its fight against the Taliban.
The Taliban also offered to hand over bin Laden for trial in a 3rd country with an Islamic judicial system, perhaps his home country of Saudi Arabia, if given proof of his guilt. They were not provided with any evidence of his guilt, just asked to believe the US that this evidence existed.
Think about it, would the US extradite one of its own citizens without conclusive proof being offered?
I disagree - the Taliban was much more compromising than they usually are, but the US repeatedly and unequivocably stated that "our demands are not negotiable." It was the US that was unwilling to cooperate even in the slightest.
Some proposals the Taliban made:
- Hand over Osama bin Laden to a 3rd country with an Islamic judicial system (perhaps his home country of Saudi Arabia) for a fair trial by Sharia law.
- Present conclusive evidence of bin Laden's guilt to the Taliban, who would then either extradite him or try him at home in their courts. This seems like a reasonable request to me - the US would certainly never extradite its own residents without evidence being presented to them.
Because the people who perpetrated it died in the attack.
The evidence seems to indicate that even if these attacks were financed indirectly by bin Laden's organization, he did not have any role in planning the attacks - they were planned independently by the group that carried them out, with monetary support from Al-Qaeda, who are now all dead. That's why bin Laden can truthfully say he didn't know about the attacks until he saw them in the news.
I wasn't aware of the difference between a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction (I'm guessing what I said applies more to a preliminary injunction). Thanks for clearing it up.
I don't think that's what the poster was claiming. The TRO (temporary restraining order) he mentioned was issued by the court prior to this settlement. Prior restraint (such as that caused by the TRO) has been deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in cases involving protected speech (and there is a fairly high threshold for this - higher than the threshold for the final ruling). Therefore the court that issued the order presumably justified its order by including reasons that this was not prior restrain on protected speech.
You say you can't play the format back, yet you also claim that you play Diablo II a lot. Since Diablo II only runs on Windows, and Windows comes with support for WMA built-in, I think it's pretty clear that you *can* in fact play it back.
Then I don't see how your other examples follow. If you want to learn German while living in the US, it would be helpful to find a teacher who speaks German. If you want to study Literature, it would be useful to find someone knowledgeable in the subject. Sure you could just read books, but you could just read books about compiler designs too - the knowledgeable person isn't *essential* in either case.
If you just wanted to study programming, why did you go to a school that has a well-rounded education as its goal? Why not a trade school that focuses only on programming?
I didn't understand this then and I don't now. If I want to study Art, I go to a museum.
If I want to study Literature, I read a book.
If I want to learn German, I move to Germany for awhile.
If I want to study compilers,... oh yeah, I can't because I won't get any credits toward graduation.
I don't understand your point - why doesn't this follow in line with the others? If you want to study compilers, you read a book.
Slashdot Mirror
No, he's doing it to make a point. There is exactly zero chance that disclosing this particular information (which bugs in the filesystem he fixed) would result in him being sued, as it does not injure any party (since it *could* be used for rights management, but is not currently), and thus no one would have interest in prosecuting the case. Plus it's quite low-profile. He's just being overzealous to make a point - he believes releasing it would be against the letter of the US law, even if he wasn't going to get sued (which he wasn't).
I disagree - the cable modem providers are still being given a government-granted monopoly on a certain method of internet access, which also happens to be superior to the dialup method. When the government grants such a competitive advantage, the company cannot consider itself a "normal" private company.
AFAIK there's no money being made, and there likely won't be any in the near future.
The ISP market is not nearly as free as you indicate, especially as dialup service fades away and is replaced by broadband. In any given area, there are generally a handful of internet providers, depending on infrastructure available. Especially in areas where there is no DSL available (a large percentage) essentially the only choices are DirecPC satellite service or cablemodem through a government-granted cable monopoly. It would be my opinion that cablemodem companies should not be allowed to use things like MAPS, as their status as a government-granted monopoly prevents them from being able to claim they are private businesses free to do as they please.
It's not voluntary if the ISP is a government-granted monopoly, like the cable company. And with the way things are going lately, most people only have a handful of ISP choices available to them; if they all have the same policies, there is no choice.
It's like saying AMD and Intel implementing some sort of filtering in their processors wouldn't be wrong, because hey, you can always make your own processor.
No, it's like the government telling you that you can't live in a gated community. After all, the roads and driveways in that community(paid for and maintained by your money) were built to be drived upon and you can't delegate the policing of those roads and driveways to another entity(the landlord of the gated community, the homeowner's association, etc). If you want your driveway policed and you don't want undesireable people to park there, then you'll just have to police it your own damn self.
But the government does restrict this, through zoning ordinances. Despite owning my property, I cannot build a fence around it to keep out undesirables, as that would be illegal.
Well, my college at the very least has a mail-room that distributes mail - the postal service dumps it off in big bags, and student employees sort and put it in students' boxes. It's still illegal to interfere with the delivery of mail, despite the school bearing the cost to do it (through paying the students' salaries).
Uh, you seem to have no idea what numerical matrix operations are useful for. Maths professors rarely need to do such work, as they're more interested in theoretical aspects of maths (there are some exceptions where large numerical simulations are useful in getting an idea of how systems should behave). The vast majority of such problems are done by people who use the computer as a tool - meteorologists, engineers, etc.
Depends on what you mean by "Linux." If you mean the traditional Linux CLI setup with perhaps X and a windowmanager, it's not easy at all. While in Win2k a newbie might poke around a bit, in Linux they'd just sit there with no idea what to do, as there isn't even a Start menu with all the programs in it. Hell at least in Windows you can click on the "Help" icon in the Start menu; in Linux you have to know what a manpage is, which is not obvious to a newbie.
If you mean an already-set-up GNOME or KDE installation, then Linux is far easier to use now than it used to be, but I'd still argue it's harder than Windows, especially for someone who doesn't use the CLI to supplement their GUI use (for example, the file managers are pretty crappy).
I'm guessing a clearer rephrasing of that sentence would be:
They don't send only one light wave through the fiber, but two orthogonal ones.
If only one light wave is being sent, the term "orthogonal" is completely meaningless; the innovation here is the ability to send two light waves simultaneously through the fiber, taking advantage of the fact that making them orthogonal will allow you to reconstruct both of the original waves at the other end, effectively doubling your capacity.
But Windows is easy.
Granted Linux is always going to be harder than Windows to use, but it doesn't have to be *that* much harder.
Uhh, the ad disabling is built into the AOL client. Go look under preferences. They're only on by default.
Is anybody aware of the gov't actually paying for this free stuff
Somehow that sounds exactly like the sort of thing our government would do.
Didn't the Supreme Court rule against this over the summer, forcing the INS to release several thousand non-deportable (because their home country won't take them back) detainees who had completed their sentences but were being held indefinitely?
And bombing Afghanistan will?
I'm not questioning what evidence we have, but what evidence Afghanistan has. AFAIK all this "conclusive" evidence that has convinced everyone we've shown has not been shared with Afghanistan. One can hardly expect them to turn over one of their countrymen based on the trust that evidence they haven't seen really does exist.
Again, I don't think the US would hand over someone with the amount of evidence Afghanistan has seen - we would require to at least have enough evidence shared with us to convince us of a case, just to just be told "Britain saw the evidence and agrees it's pretty conclusive."
Most of the opium coming from Afghanistan these days comes from the opposition-controlled areas. Yes, the same opposition the US now wants to support in its fight against the Taliban.
The Taliban also offered to hand over bin Laden for trial in a 3rd country with an Islamic judicial system, perhaps his home country of Saudi Arabia, if given proof of his guilt. They were not provided with any evidence of his guilt, just asked to believe the US that this evidence existed.
Think about it, would the US extradite one of its own citizens without conclusive proof being offered?
I disagree - the Taliban was much more compromising than they usually are, but the US repeatedly and unequivocably stated that "our demands are not negotiable." It was the US that was unwilling to cooperate even in the slightest.
Some proposals the Taliban made:
- Hand over Osama bin Laden to a 3rd country with an Islamic judicial system (perhaps his home country of Saudi Arabia) for a fair trial by Sharia law.
- Present conclusive evidence of bin Laden's guilt to the Taliban, who would then either extradite him or try him at home in their courts. This seems like a reasonable request to me - the US would certainly never extradite its own residents without evidence being presented to them.
Because the people who perpetrated it died in the attack.
The evidence seems to indicate that even if these attacks were financed indirectly by bin Laden's organization, he did not have any role in planning the attacks - they were planned independently by the group that carried them out, with monetary support from Al-Qaeda, who are now all dead. That's why bin Laden can truthfully say he didn't know about the attacks until he saw them in the news.
I wasn't aware of the difference between a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction (I'm guessing what I said applies more to a preliminary injunction). Thanks for clearing it up.
I don't think that's what the poster was claiming. The TRO (temporary restraining order) he mentioned was issued by the court prior to this settlement. Prior restraint (such as that caused by the TRO) has been deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in cases involving protected speech (and there is a fairly high threshold for this - higher than the threshold for the final ruling). Therefore the court that issued the order presumably justified its order by including reasons that this was not prior restrain on protected speech.
You say you can't play the format back, yet you also claim that you play Diablo II a lot. Since Diablo II only runs on Windows, and Windows comes with support for WMA built-in, I think it's pretty clear that you *can* in fact play it back.
Then I don't see how your other examples follow. If you want to learn German while living in the US, it would be helpful to find a teacher who speaks German. If you want to study Literature, it would be useful to find someone knowledgeable in the subject. Sure you could just read books, but you could just read books about compiler designs too - the knowledgeable person isn't *essential* in either case.
If you just wanted to study programming, why did you go to a school that has a well-rounded education as its goal? Why not a trade school that focuses only on programming?
I didn't understand this then and I don't now. If I want to study Art, I go to a museum.
If I want to study Literature, I read a book.
If I want to learn German, I move to Germany for awhile.
If I want to study compilers,... oh yeah, I can't because I won't get any credits toward graduation.
I don't understand your point - why doesn't this follow in line with the others? If you want to study compilers, you read a book.