Another rightwing nutjob who thinks the US is the epitomy of freedom in human history.
As for one quick example of the US abridging free speech, just off the top of my head, I seem to recall someone named Wilhem Reich.
Besides, this is entirely a RED HERRING. Whether the US regularly abridges free speech in this country NOW is irrelevant to the point - it could do so much more heavily in the (possibly very near) future.
By the way, traveling to Afghanistan and training in Taliban camps should not be illegal anyway - doing something with those skills in the US which is specifically against the law and does actual harm to a US citizen might be.
All you have to do to get spyware is take IE over to some lame commercial site selling Nike shoes or other sports related crap. That's it - you're toast. I've had clients get hundreds of spyware and dozens of trojans from such sites.
Even porn sites don't load down as much spyware as commercial sites. They don't have to - they know what you're there to see. You might get a dialer from one of the foreign sites, but porn sites aren't as bad as sleazy commercial sites.
And if you use Firefox, as I do, you can hit porn sites all night every night and still not get spyware.
Another Windows shill who thinks everybody on/. is so stupid they would actually believe someone claiming that IE and ActiveX isn't DIRECTLY responsible for the success of spyware everywhere.
In other words, another Windows shill who's even dumber than the average/. fanboy.
"I am off to buy a spyware firm & an anti spyware firm and get filthy rich from Vista."
Bill's already done that. (Well, he's HOPING that's how it will turn out.)
So I guess the Windows shills will be proclaiming you a loser because you didn't see the opportunity before he did. That's how Windows shills think - anything Bill does is perfect.
My question is What good is a market share if your going to stangnate the technology instead of progressing it? Partial support of PNG, no build in support for SVG and pathetic complaince to CCS2 standard. Microsoft could have used its dominant market share to push new technologies out the door, instead it sat on it for years to come. In the mean time Mozilla/opera/safari/konquerer filled in the gap.
Chris Wilson lead program manager for the web platform in IE in his blog entry said
"With every subsequent major release of IE, we have expanded and improved our implementation of web standards, particularly CSS and HTML. When we shipped IE 6.0, we finally fully supported CSS 1, and had some pieces of CSS2 implemented as well. Since IE 6.0 shipped, we have focused on one of our other key problems enhancing the security of the Internet Explorer platform. This has taken tremendous effort on our part, and was IS an important place for us to focus but it will not be our only area of improvement in our engine. We know we have a lot more work to do in addressing our consistency issues with CSS and furthering our coverage of these standards. Expect to see more detail on our plans in IE7 in the future."
So what he is saying is that finally with IE6 they fully supported CSS1. CSS1 was standardized year 1996 and IE6 was released in 2001. It took Microsft 5 years to fully implement CSS1. Really remarkable progress I might say. He also says that they have only implemented some of CSS2 in IE6. and were concentrating on security of Internet Explorer. My question to Chris is sarcastic remark "You have been working on security fixes for IE6 since 2001 and you still have 30% unpatched vulnerabilities. What were you doing exactly. comeon you can tell me. I promise not to tell anyone. How many security holes were there originally that after 5 years you brought it down to 30% unpatched.
Because of Microsofts blatant disregard for Standards, developer's standard code doesn't work under Internet Explorer forcing the developers to hack (position is Everything) their code so it works under Internet Explorer.
Chris wilson again in his IEblog regarding Standards and CSS in IE says:
"We fully recognize that IE is behind the game today in CSS support. We've dug through the Acid 2 Test and analyzed IE's problems with the test in some great detail, and we've made sure the bugs and features are on our list - however, there are some fairly large and difficult features to implement, and they will not all sort to the top of the stack in IE7. I believe we are doing a much better service to web developers out there in IE7 by fixing our known bang-your-head-on-the-desk bugs and usability problems first, and prioritizing the most commonly-requested features based on all the feedback we've had"
Finally we can see they recognize that they had some extremely annoying (aka bang-your-head-on-the-desk ) bugs. This should shutup all of those people who claim Internet Explorer to be secure and bug free Browser. However, It is good to see that IE7 will fix lot of CSS bugs(list is available here) that has made Developers and users lives miserable.
It is suffice to say that IE's lack of CSS2 support is one problem, even Firefox or any other browser for that matter do not fully support CSS2. Although Mozilla based browsers and Opera/Safari/Konqueror come close, much better than IE's compliance.
Comparison of layout engines (CSS) is a good comparison of CSS1,2,3 support of various browser engines ---
And here I violate the next part:
---
Lastly i would like to say that please don't use this report to rub it on the faces of IE users. This report is meant to open eyes of Internet Explorer users not to degrade them or laugh at them.
This report cannot be copied in any form what so ever. ---
Feel free to substitute any other failed Al Qaeda operation you might prefer.
Point remains - Al Qaeda has done very little that is significant in terms of damaging its enemies - except in its ability to provoke those enemies into damaging themselves, the classic case being the US and Iraq. And since those enemies are essentially doing this damage to themselves in pursuit of their own nefarious objectives, it could be argued that Al Qaeda is little more than the state's usual "loyal adversary".
It is. Look at the respect I get on/. from smartasses who don't have a fucking clue themselves about any particular topic on the site - they just like to mouth off, like anybody here actually cares.
Ah, I see, we have a Zionist shill amongst the Windows shills on/.
You are so fucking full of shit, dude.
I've READ the Zionist literature and statements from the people RUNNING Israel for the last fifty years, nutjob.
I KNOW what their motivations are. I KNOW how many innocent Palestinians, including children, have been deliberately gunned down by Israely troops. I KNOW that foreign protesters have been deliberately run over by bulldozers. I KNOW how many Israeli Jews THEMSELVES denounce the treatment of Palestinians.
"I think any website that actively exorts its readers to commit sectarian violence against everyone dissimilar to them and provides some sort of way of organizing groups for that purpose is a pretty good target of our security forces."
Okay - let's see now, that takes care of AIPAC (oh, wait, two of their people are already being investigated), Rush Limbaugh, Anne Coulter, Michael Savage, Michael Reagan, Fox News, most of the Christian fundie sites...
"say that mainline Christianity and Judaism are just as bad as Islam because of things that happened several hundred years ago and that were sponsored by secular governments"
Well, if you want to call the Catholic Church a "secular government", but I'd say that is stretching it a bit...
Actually the best thing that could have happened for Europe would have been the extermination of the Christian religion in Rome two thousand years ago.
As Aleister Crowley used to say, "The Christians to the lions!"
But don't worry - we Transhumanists will contrive a second chance: "The Christians to the disassemblers!"
"is used by Open Source Community members to anonymously post hate speech, death threats, threats to murder and promotes and advocates acts of domestic terrorism within the United States."
Nah - that isn't Slashdot! That's just one guy on Slashdot - me! And only against Windows trolls!
"through the use of OSS and Linux software and computer technology developed and purloined by Linux and OSS members"
Hmmm, how does one both develop AND purloin open source software? How do you "purloin" something that is freely available? Does one purloin from oneself? What's wrong with this picture?
I thought of calling it "Terrorism From the Terrorist's View".
The articles would be reviews of weapons, explosives, tradecraft technigues, media technigues, brainstorming tactics and strategy, the theory of terrorism, "constructive criticism" of terrorist incidents, terrorism news, etc.
The idea was like the 2600 hacker mag - while probably few terrorists would actually read it, most of the subscribers would be counter-intelligence people and it amused me to think I would be making a living from the subscriptions of people who hated everything I stood for.
Today of course it would be a quick way to see Quantanomo up close, so I think I'll put that one on the back burner.
Not even close. EVERY country and religion has terrorists - including Christianity and the good ole US of A.
The first terrorists were the Sicarii two thousand years ago. They were part of Jesus's followers. They were named after the short-bladed weapon they used to commit assassinations of Jewish collaborators with the Romans.
Your connection of Islamic terrorism with "the invasion of Iraq" is short-sighted bullshit. Nobody is saying it's because of Iraq - we're saying it's because of the Western world's Mid-Eastern political policies going back seventy-five to a hundred years. And today, specifically those policies related to supporting dictatorial regimes in the "pro-Western" states and especially the support of the Israeli oppression of the Palestinians in the name of Zionist fanatics who want Israel to rule the entire Middle East.
Iraq has merely aggravated the situation by turning a controlled (if dictatorial) country into a chaos land where terrorists have a free hand to attack Americans and get training and equipment to eventually attack Americans anywhere.
Al Qaeda and most of its adherents are old-style "shoot 'em and blow 'em up" terrorists - no different and less sophisticated than most other groups thirty years ago.
The idea that they have some sort of advanced biochem/nuke weaponry is horseshit. They jack off to that stuff - they don't actually have any.
It's trivial to bring a city to its knees with some guns and some hand grenades - you just have to pick your targets and, most importantly, KEEP DOING IT. This business of pulling off one attack, then either not doing anything else for three years, or screwing up a second attack, just makes the first attack worthless.
Terrorism does not work unless it is CHRONIC. Look at Italy and Turkey in the 1970's - THAT was chronic terrorism and it nearly brought down the governments of those countries. Or the IRA in Northern Ireland.
The stuff done in Europe and the UK, let alone the one significant attack in the US, simply isn't on anybody's radar screen on a day-to-day basis.
Everybody's dancing around now because four bombs went off in London. Three months from now, nobody except the relatives of the injured and killed will remember it happened (and those relatives probably will get screwed out of any compensation they have coming by the bureaucrats in charge.)
Meanwhile, though, it will be used as an excuse to ramrod more laws giving the UK government control of everything. And the US will follow suit.
Look at the idiocy of starting random searches on the New York subway. Totally braindead. Nothing but CYA for the idiots running New York.
Anybody can walk into any crowded transit vehicle in the US with two hand grenades in jacket pockets, pull them out, pull the pins, flip the levers, say "Imshallah!" and toss them - and twenty people within twelve feet of him will die or be seriously injured. Get five guys to do that in New York - totally bypassing the cops (unless these guys really LOOK wacko) - and there will be no New York subway the next day. Do it on San Francisco's BART and cripple the city's transportation system for months.
As Rutger Hauer, portraying a "Carlos" type terrorist in "Nighthawks", said: "Remember - there is no security!"
There are only TWO ways to stop terrorism: 1) Find them and kill them BEFORE they act (only works for small, geographically concentrated groups.) 2) Remove the social and political reasons for their acts.
"Tens of similar sites, some offering detailed information on how to build and use biological weapons"
I call bullshit on that one.
The last I heard, Al Qaeda was so technologically backward vis-a-vis bio weapons they were checking out seventy-five year old books on WWI from the library to read up on it. Hell, they'd have done better to simply run a Google search or order the Loompanics catalog for $10.
"How to Strike a European City gave full technical instructions."
Yeah, right. You can order fifty books from Paladin Press or Loompanics that will give you "full technical instructions" on how to do exactly what any military manual will tell you (which is what most of those books are.)
In planning for my little terrorist spree, I just read perfectly legal books about what was done up to that point - books on the Italian Red Brigades, the PLO, the IRA, Baader-Meinhoff, etc. Then I extrapolated and used my imagination. If I had done even a tenth of the stuff I came up with, you'd have martial law and National Guard tanks parked on every street corner in the US by now, instead of a couple of towers getting knocked over three freakin' years ago - and not a single incident since.
This is media bombast and hype. It's fear-mongering to justify shutting down anybody who can in any way be connected to advocating violent overthrow of any government.
If Al Qaeda COULD do this stuff - other than just making bombs that don't work properly - they WOULD be doing this stuff - not making Web sites about it.
Actually we have "capitalism", what we DON'T have is a "free market". You're right, it's corporate welfarism or what should be called "state capitalism," i.e. a marriage of the state and the rich (maybe we should just go back to calling it "feudalism" since the rest of us are as much peons as anybody ever was; we just have more toys to distract us from our condition - that was the only advance made in the "industrial revolution", socially, anyways.)
In other words, what we don't have is "freedom" at all, despite all of Bush's bombast about it.
from back when Microsoft bought a license from SCO:
"Asked to comment on the news of the licensing deal at a news conference today, Oracle Chairman and CEO Larry Ellison seemed to have no compunction about drawing a link between the agreement and SCO's litigation. "Bill [Gates] is innovating. Microsoft has always had incredible innovation. You've had advanced bundling, and what you see now is extreme litigation. They have a lot of experience with extreme litigation, actually," he said."
What's the connection between this and TFA?
I'll tell you.
First of all, PJ at Groklaw wants the discovery in the Novell vrs SCO suit to take a deep long look at exactly WHAT "patents and IP" that Microsoft allegedly licensed from SCO for "millions of dollars."
Secondly, this is likely to prove that Microsoft doesn't need to litigate open source based on their patents - up until now, anyway. They'd been able to pay other people to litigate FOR THEM.
"if this is about enough cash to either bancrupt SCO or even cause significant damage"
So we're talking about $1.95 here?
Okay, the next poster says they have $18m - and owe Novell $24m.
It's still peanuts. SCO is on the verge of bankruptcy NOW as far as I can tell. They're never going to survive another year at least until this case comes to actual trial, and they aren't likely to survive financially to survive the trial once IBM's "Nazgul" bury them in court.
I suppose the issue is whether Novell can bury them BEFORE IBM does. I wouldn't expect this to happen on court order, either, but what this filing DOES do is make it CLEAR that SCO will not survive unless they win in every particular in every case before the courts - especially since Red Hat has a Lanham Act case against them if they lose, and IBM will probably sue them some more as well. The attorneys fees alone (which will no longer be capped if they lose the current cases, presumably) will bury them.
These are guys hanging from a very thin rope (hell, string - maybe even thread) over a very deep abyss.
Seems to me the only reason SCO still exists at all is that a few people are still drawing a paycheck there - mostly the lawyers and management - and they intend to milk it until the end - then run.
Slashdot Mirror
Another rightwing nutjob who thinks the US is the epitomy of freedom in human history.
As for one quick example of the US abridging free speech, just off the top of my head, I seem to recall someone named Wilhem Reich.
Besides, this is entirely a RED HERRING. Whether the US regularly abridges free speech in this country NOW is irrelevant to the point - it could do so much more heavily in the (possibly very near) future.
By the way, traveling to Afghanistan and training in Taliban camps should not be illegal anyway - doing something with those skills in the US which is specifically against the law and does actual harm to a US citizen might be.
So your entire point is fucking worthless.
Take your rightwing bullshit down the road.
Uhm, do note the phrasing:
"our INTENT"...
Which doesn't mean Bill and Steve will actually LET them.
In fact, the odds that IE7 will be (more) standards compliant WITHOUT adding in some more non-standard crap that is IE ONLY is just about nil.
Remember, Chris Wilson works for Microsoft and is allowed to make public pronouncements. That means he is a paid LIAR. Period.
And if HE isn't a liar, Bill and Steve ARE. And they tell him what to do and when to do it.
God, are you out to lunch...
All you have to do to get spyware is take IE over to some lame commercial site selling Nike shoes or other sports related crap. That's it - you're toast. I've had clients get hundreds of spyware and dozens of trojans from such sites.
Even porn sites don't load down as much spyware as commercial sites. They don't have to - they know what you're there to see. You might get a dialer from one of the foreign sites, but porn sites aren't as bad as sleazy commercial sites.
And if you use Firefox, as I do, you can hit porn sites all night every night and still not get spyware.
Another Windows shill who thinks everybody on
In other words, another Windows shill who's even dumber than the average
Dude.
"I am off to buy a spyware firm & an anti spyware firm and get filthy rich from Vista."
Bill's already done that. (Well, he's HOPING that's how it will turn out.)
So I guess the Windows shills will be proclaiming you a loser because you didn't see the opportunity before he did. That's how Windows shills think - anything Bill does is perfect.
I like this part in particular:
---
My question is What good is a market share if your going to stangnate the technology instead of progressing it? Partial support of PNG, no build in support for SVG and pathetic complaince to CCS2 standard. Microsoft could have used its dominant market share to push new technologies out the door, instead it sat on it for years to come. In the mean time Mozilla/opera/safari/konquerer filled in the gap.
Chris Wilson lead program manager for the web platform in IE in his blog entry said
"With every subsequent major release of IE, we have expanded and improved our implementation of web standards, particularly CSS and HTML. When we shipped IE 6.0, we finally fully supported CSS 1, and had some pieces of CSS2 implemented as well. Since IE 6.0 shipped, we have focused on one of our other key problems enhancing the security of the Internet Explorer platform. This has taken tremendous effort on our part, and was IS an important place for us to focus but it will not be our only area of improvement in our engine. We know we have a lot more work to do in addressing our consistency issues with CSS and furthering our coverage of these standards. Expect to see more detail on our plans in IE7 in the future."
So what he is saying is that finally with IE6 they fully supported CSS1. CSS1 was standardized year 1996 and IE6 was released in 2001. It took Microsft 5 years to fully implement CSS1. Really remarkable progress I might say. He also says that they have only implemented some of CSS2 in IE6. and were concentrating on security of Internet Explorer. My question to Chris is sarcastic remark "You have been working on security fixes for IE6 since 2001 and you still have 30% unpatched vulnerabilities. What were you doing exactly. comeon you can tell me. I promise not to tell anyone. How many security holes were there originally that after 5 years you brought it down to 30% unpatched.
Because of Microsofts blatant disregard for Standards, developer's standard code doesn't work under Internet Explorer forcing the developers to hack (position is Everything) their code so it works under Internet Explorer.
Chris wilson again in his IEblog regarding Standards and CSS in IE says:
"We fully recognize that IE is behind the game today in CSS support. We've dug through the Acid 2 Test and analyzed IE's problems with the test in some great detail, and we've made sure the bugs and features are on our list - however, there are some fairly large and difficult features to implement, and they will not all sort to the top of the stack in IE7. I believe we are doing a much better service to web developers out there in IE7 by fixing our known bang-your-head-on-the-desk bugs and usability problems first, and prioritizing the most commonly-requested features based on all the feedback we've had"
Finally we can see they recognize that they had some extremely annoying (aka bang-your-head-on-the-desk ) bugs. This should shutup all of those people who claim Internet Explorer to be secure and bug free Browser. However, It is good to see that IE7 will fix lot of CSS bugs(list is available here) that has made Developers and users lives miserable.
It is suffice to say that IE's lack of CSS2 support is one problem, even Firefox or any other browser for that matter do not fully support CSS2. Although Mozilla based browsers and Opera/Safari/Konqueror come close, much better than IE's compliance.
Comparison of layout engines (CSS) is a good comparison of CSS1,2,3 support of various browser engines
---
And here I violate the next part:
---
Lastly i would like to say that please don't use this report to rub it on the faces of IE users. This report is meant to open eyes of Internet Explorer users not to degrade them or laugh at them.
This report cannot be copied in any form what so ever.
---
Well, yes, I guess it can be.
Maybe that guy who busted into computers looking for evidence of a UFO coverup was right.
He just didn't bust into the RIGHT computers and he was sloppy about it.
Anybody ever try to hack the computers at Area 51? That might be fun.
Don't do this from home. "That's universally stupid, dude!"
Not as much as Bill Gates makes off his.
Ever read any of Kurt Saxon's stuff? I imagine he's done pretty well with his books.
Feel free to substitute any other failed Al Qaeda operation you might prefer.
Point remains - Al Qaeda has done very little that is significant in terms of damaging its enemies - except in its ability to provoke those enemies into damaging themselves, the classic case being the US and Iraq. And since those enemies are essentially doing this damage to themselves in pursuit of their own nefarious objectives, it could be argued that Al Qaeda is little more than the state's usual "loyal adversary".
That's rich - mentioning Daniel Pipes - one of the biggest neoconservative, racist assholes involved.
Pipes is a Zionist asshole who wants Israel to rule the entire Middle East and probably either exterminate or enslave the remaining Arabs.
Try reading Juan Cole's blog if you want useful commentary on the Middle East and Pipes.
Irrelevant to my basic point, but correct.
"It must be wonderful to be so smart. "
/. from smartasses who don't have a fucking clue themselves about any particular topic on the site - they just like to mouth off, like anybody here actually cares.
It is. Look at the respect I get on
Ah, I see, we have a Zionist shill amongst the Windows shills on
You are so fucking full of shit, dude.
I've READ the Zionist literature and statements from the people RUNNING Israel for the last fifty years, nutjob.
I KNOW what their motivations are. I KNOW how many innocent Palestinians, including children, have been deliberately gunned down by Israely troops. I KNOW that foreign protesters have been deliberately run over by bulldozers. I KNOW how many Israeli Jews THEMSELVES denounce the treatment of Palestinians.
Take your bullshit down the road, Zionist.
"If it is a lack of terrorist attacks, is there any time in history that would meet this definition?"
Yeah, for the US - the last three years.
Let's declare victory and stop.
"I think any website that actively exorts its readers to commit sectarian violence against everyone dissimilar to them and provides some sort of way of organizing groups for that purpose is a pretty good target of our security forces."
Okay - let's see now, that takes care of AIPAC (oh, wait, two of their people are already being investigated), Rush Limbaugh, Anne Coulter, Michael Savage, Michael Reagan, Fox News, most of the Christian fundie sites...
"say that mainline Christianity and Judaism are just as bad as Islam because of things that happened several hundred years ago and that were sponsored by secular governments"
Well, if you want to call the Catholic Church a "secular government", but I'd say that is stretching it a bit...
Actually the best thing that could have happened for Europe would have been the extermination of the Christian religion in Rome two thousand years ago.
As Aleister Crowley used to say, "The Christians to the lions!"
But don't worry - we Transhumanists will contrive a second chance: "The Christians to the disassemblers!"
"is used by Open Source Community members to anonymously post hate speech, death threats, threats to murder and promotes and advocates acts of domestic terrorism within the United States."
Nah - that isn't Slashdot! That's just one guy on Slashdot - me! And only against Windows trolls!
"through the use of OSS and Linux software and computer technology developed and purloined by Linux and OSS members"
Hmmm, how does one both develop AND purloin open source software? How do you "purloin" something that is freely available? Does one purloin from oneself? What's wrong with this picture?
Well, actually, an "academic" one.
I thought of calling it "Terrorism From the Terrorist's View".
The articles would be reviews of weapons, explosives, tradecraft technigues, media technigues, brainstorming tactics and strategy, the theory of terrorism, "constructive criticism" of terrorist incidents, terrorism news, etc.
The idea was like the 2600 hacker mag - while probably few terrorists would actually read it, most of the subscribers would be counter-intelligence people and it amused me to think I would be making a living from the subscriptions of people who hated everything I stood for.
Today of course it would be a quick way to see Quantanomo up close, so I think I'll put that one on the back burner.
The "Anarchist Cookbook" is CRAP. And obsolete since it was written from cribbed notes from some Cuban course back in the Sixties IIRC.
There are plenty of much better books available.
Most of them are early editions of good ole US of A Army/Marine/Special Forces (and some British SAS) military manuals.
Pick up the Paladin Press catalog and learn.
Your basic point is correct, however - the Web sites are utterly irrelevant in "defeating" terrorism.
Shutting them down is just CYA bureacratic bullshit.
"damn near all terrorists are Muslims"
Not even close. EVERY country and religion has terrorists - including Christianity and the good ole US of A.
The first terrorists were the Sicarii two thousand years ago. They were part of Jesus's followers. They were named after the short-bladed weapon they used to commit assassinations of Jewish collaborators with the Romans.
Your connection of Islamic terrorism with "the invasion of Iraq" is short-sighted bullshit. Nobody is saying it's because of Iraq - we're saying it's because of the Western world's Mid-Eastern political policies going back seventy-five to a hundred years. And today, specifically those policies related to supporting dictatorial regimes in the "pro-Western" states and especially the support of the Israeli oppression of the Palestinians in the name of Zionist fanatics who want Israel to rule the entire Middle East.
Iraq has merely aggravated the situation by turning a controlled (if dictatorial) country into a chaos land where terrorists have a free hand to attack Americans and get training and equipment to eventually attack Americans anywhere.
Get a fucking clue.
Exactly. Clarke is right there.
Al Qaeda and most of its adherents are old-style "shoot 'em and blow 'em up" terrorists - no different and less sophisticated than most other groups thirty years ago.
The idea that they have some sort of advanced biochem/nuke weaponry is horseshit. They jack off to that stuff - they don't actually have any.
It's trivial to bring a city to its knees with some guns and some hand grenades - you just have to pick your targets and, most importantly, KEEP DOING IT. This business of pulling off one attack, then either not doing anything else for three years, or screwing up a second attack, just makes the first attack worthless.
Terrorism does not work unless it is CHRONIC. Look at Italy and Turkey in the 1970's - THAT was chronic terrorism and it nearly brought down the governments of those countries. Or the IRA in Northern Ireland.
The stuff done in Europe and the UK, let alone the one significant attack in the US, simply isn't on anybody's radar screen on a day-to-day basis.
Everybody's dancing around now because four bombs went off in London. Three months from now, nobody except the relatives of the injured and killed will remember it happened (and those relatives probably will get screwed out of any compensation they have coming by the bureaucrats in charge.)
Meanwhile, though, it will be used as an excuse to ramrod more laws giving the UK government control of everything. And the US will follow suit.
Look at the idiocy of starting random searches on the New York subway. Totally braindead. Nothing but CYA for the idiots running New York.
Anybody can walk into any crowded transit vehicle in the US with two hand grenades in jacket pockets, pull them out, pull the pins, flip the levers, say "Imshallah!" and toss them - and twenty people within twelve feet of him will die or be seriously injured. Get five guys to do that in New York - totally bypassing the cops (unless these guys really LOOK wacko) - and there will be no New York subway the next day. Do it on San Francisco's BART and cripple the city's transportation system for months.
As Rutger Hauer, portraying a "Carlos" type terrorist in "Nighthawks", said: "Remember - there is no security!"
There are only TWO ways to stop terrorism:
1) Find them and kill them BEFORE they act (only works for small, geographically concentrated groups.)
2) Remove the social and political reasons for their acts.
"Tens of similar sites, some offering detailed information on how to build and use biological weapons"
I call bullshit on that one.
The last I heard, Al Qaeda was so technologically backward vis-a-vis bio weapons they were checking out seventy-five year old books on WWI from the library to read up on it. Hell, they'd have done better to simply run a Google search or order the Loompanics catalog for $10.
"How to Strike a European City gave full technical instructions."
Yeah, right. You can order fifty books from Paladin Press or Loompanics that will give you "full technical instructions" on how to do exactly what any military manual will tell you (which is what most of those books are.)
In planning for my little terrorist spree, I just read perfectly legal books about what was done up to that point - books on the Italian Red Brigades, the PLO, the IRA, Baader-Meinhoff, etc. Then I extrapolated and used my imagination. If I had done even a tenth of the stuff I came up with, you'd have martial law and National Guard tanks parked on every street corner in the US by now, instead of a couple of towers getting knocked over three freakin' years ago - and not a single incident since.
This is media bombast and hype. It's fear-mongering to justify shutting down anybody who can in any way be connected to advocating violent overthrow of any government.
If Al Qaeda COULD do this stuff - other than just making bombs that don't work properly - they WOULD be doing this stuff - not making Web sites about it.
I call bullshit.
Actually we have "capitalism", what we DON'T have is a "free market". You're right, it's corporate welfarism or what should be called "state capitalism," i.e. a marriage of the state and the rich (maybe we should just go back to calling it "feudalism" since the rest of us are as much peons as anybody ever was; we just have more toys to distract us from our condition - that was the only advance made in the "industrial revolution", socially, anyways.)
In other words, what we don't have is "freedom" at all, despite all of Bush's bombast about it.
from back when Microsoft bought a license from SCO:
"Asked to comment on the news of the licensing deal at a news conference today, Oracle Chairman and CEO Larry Ellison seemed to have no compunction about drawing a link between the agreement and SCO's litigation. "Bill [Gates] is innovating. Microsoft has always had incredible innovation. You've had advanced bundling, and what you see now is extreme litigation. They have a lot of experience with extreme litigation, actually," he said."
What's the connection between this and TFA?
I'll tell you.
First of all, PJ at Groklaw wants the discovery in the Novell vrs SCO suit to take a deep long look at exactly WHAT "patents and IP" that Microsoft allegedly licensed from SCO for "millions of dollars."
Secondly, this is likely to prove that Microsoft doesn't need to litigate open source based on their patents - up until now, anyway. They'd been able to pay other people to litigate FOR THEM.
"if this is about enough cash to either bancrupt SCO or even cause significant damage"
So we're talking about $1.95 here?
Okay, the next poster says they have $18m - and owe Novell $24m.
It's still peanuts. SCO is on the verge of bankruptcy NOW as far as I can tell. They're never going to survive another year at least until this case comes to actual trial, and they aren't likely to survive financially to survive the trial once IBM's "Nazgul" bury them in court.
I suppose the issue is whether Novell can bury them BEFORE IBM does. I wouldn't expect this to happen on court order, either, but what this filing DOES do is make it CLEAR that SCO will not survive unless they win in every particular in every case before the courts - especially since Red Hat has a Lanham Act case against them if they lose, and IBM will probably sue them some more as well. The attorneys fees alone (which will no longer be capped if they lose the current cases, presumably) will bury them.
These are guys hanging from a very thin rope (hell, string - maybe even thread) over a very deep abyss.
Seems to me the only reason SCO still exists at all is that a few people are still drawing a paycheck there - mostly the lawyers and management - and they intend to milk it until the end - then run.
"Anyone over the age of 7 should be able to recognise this on a daily basis."
Actually, no, because humans are primates and this is how primates work. Well, actually, yes, maybe they do - they're just trained not to admit it.
Remember, 55 million people elected Bush - and if they hadn't, they would have elected Kerry.
As we anarchists say, "No matter who you vote for, the government gets into office."
I don't know if your last sentence was meant as a joke, but it was funny, since millions of gun owners couldn't act the way nation states do.
Well, they wouldn't after the first million or so died, in any event.
Uhm, Alta Vista is still around? Didn't know that.
This is why you SAY "Do a Google"...