There's tons of case law dealing with the bill of rights, the 2nd amendment in particular - I think it makes it even more important who gets elected to the position that will be picking the next few SC justices. The Cruikshank decision interprets the 2nd amendment as only effecting the federal govt, but in the same breath it acknowledges the right the amendment protects predates the constitution and does not depend on it for its existence.
There are lots of issues that are better decided at levels below the federal gov't. In fact, most issues are better left to the states. I think the better way to accomplish this is for the federal gov't to just stay out of it, rather than deciding that the constitution does not apply to the states. If they weren't passing laws about everything they could think to legislate about, matters would naturally fall to the states to determine on their own. However, there are some areas, specifically with respect to rights considered so basic that enough support was available to pass an amendment to the constitution protecting them, that I feel states should not have the power to restrict their citizens in.
(This not withstanding the fact that most state constitutions contains clauses quite similar to the 2nd amendment - in the case of illinois it's prefaced with "subject only to the police power" rather than anything about a militia, which is open to its own set of interpretations.)
(and anyway, this is all a long way from the point I was originally trying to make, that a) I dislike obama's stance on gun control but b) I'd take him over clinton, as he's actually demonstrated reasonable competence at something other than grandstanding and moving to whatever state he thinks he can win in)
A record of supporting gun control at any level shows he doesn't agree with the belief which I and others hold that most forms of it are proscribed by the bill of rights. If he doesn't think it applies at the city level, it's a slippery slope to expand it. Quite simply if you make the argument it's ok to ban guns in Chicago because of x (be a high profile shooting, population density, or any other host of factors), what keeps that from occurring everywhere else as soon as enough people are born?
A right is a right. It doesn't go away when you move across municipal boundaries. I know firearms ownership is very unpopular with a large number of people but I don't get how the 2nd amendment gets downtrodden so much even as we support the broadest interpretations of the rights protected by the others. (well, except the 4th, lately, but that's another rant)
(I'll keep this as an aside since this is the Dem thread, but Giuliani is far from innocent on this sort of "oh, the constitution says x, but this city should be an exception" crap as well - not that he seems to have any shot at a nomination)
I suppose that was poorly worded. He hasn't said it *clearly*. Check his record on gun control in illinois for a pretty clear picture of his stance. He's never gone against it, but now that he's on the national stage he makes sure to wrap everything in saying he "respects the second amendment" (so long as you don't interpret the 2nd amendment as protecting an individual right to bear functioning, loaded firearms in the sizes and shapes commonly available in the marketplace today.)
I don't think either of them would make a good president. Hillary's a name and nothing else. She's done nothing to convince me she'd be a competent leader, even compared to the likes of GWB. I still never regained any trust for her after she magically became a new yorker.
Obama seems to have a better head on his shoulders and actually have some principles, but he's got dreams of disarming the populace, and doesn't even have the balls to come right out and say it.
To me, surcharges are a great solution. Let the poor people get up early. I try and avoid the worst routes but for the few times I have to take them, I'd gladly pay $5-10 to zip along at the speed limit. Hell, I might even pay on off hours if it meant I could do 90.
Scrabulous isn't an imitation so much as the exact same game save the name, and having the writing on the colored squares explaining which is which. (I always end up GIS'ing up a real scrabble board for reference) Same scoring, same play, same word lists used in scrabble tournaments.
That said, how fucking old is scrabble? In a rational world any IP protection it had save for the trademark would have gone by the wayside long ago.
Speaking of google, firefox, and the search bar, it actually makes the calculator example they beat you over the head with in the enso video somewhat moot. All I do when I want to calculate something is start typing it in the search box, and the "suggestion" that comes up is the google calculator result. It's a hell of a lot more functional than just a four function calc with the way it handles units, too. Plenty of times I've typed something like "9GB / 1500KB/s" to see how long a download will take, or maybe "9GB/ 1.5hr in Mbps" to see how much streaming something over a wireless net is going to be pushing it on bandwidth.
I mean, if technology was making one of the content industries irrelevant, they'd send off their lobbyists to make the tech illegal. I fear the extras have no such power - not even a union!
And since I failed to address your two unrelated examples....
If my ISP, or anyone else for that matter, pings my IP, they don't pretend to be me.
If a construction company cuts down phone lines, unless they've started wearing masks of my face (have yet to encounter this), they're not pretending to be me.
1. I'd need to be a comcast customer to do that.
2(a,b) They're using forging packets using the customer's IP address (which is their "name" for all intents and purposes on an IP network) for their benefit (reduced traffic on their network, allowing them to have more customers with less infrasctructure.
I don't need to say it's an invasion of privacy, the tort does.
Torts 652C: "One who appropriates to his own use or benefit the name or likeness of another is subject to liability to the other for invasion of his privacy."
Why has no one sued comcast for their forged RST's under this yet?
This summary could have conveyed all the necessary information quite easily and been just as valid by replacing "TraceSecurity" with the more generic "penetration testing company". Enjoy your plug guys!
I never understood the incredible animosity towards cell phone users, especially from such a tech friendly crowd.
Is it just the societally reinforced image that talking on a cell phone == bad?
Is it leftover class envy from when they used to cost more than a landline?
Are you jealous they're talking to someone and seeming happy while you're walking down the street or eating dinner by yourself?
If you're in a public place, you're going to be surrounded by the sounds of people talking. I don't understand how hearing a person talking on a cell phone is any more disruptive than hearing them talk to the person next to them.
If they're loud and obnoxious, ok, they're loud and obnoxious, but these are the type of people who would be loud and obnoxious talking to their friend who was two feet away. You'd probably sit there thinking....what a jerk/bitch, but you'd never file it away under "something I can prevent" because its just talking.
Cell phones have just become a scapegoat for being annoyed by....annoying people.
I've used my GF's brand new WM-based EDGE-underpinned smartphone side by side with my 2-year old Samsung (regular)phone running J2ME on EVDO. My antiquated handset blew it out of the water.
This guy's on Frickin crack. He's a fanboy. That's all. The comparison might, *might* be valid in very specific areas, but wholly because of how fucked AT&T's 3g network is in the few places it exists. Get on a proper 3g net (like the ones in other countries, or the CDMA based ones in the US) and there's no comparison.
As someone who lives inside the beltway, I can assure you that not only are marches easy to ignore, they're obnoxious, ineffective, and serve only to piss off the people whose commute gets ruined by them - people who are then embittered a little towards your cause.
Letters are a little better. At least the rep might notice the increased volume of crap, but it, just like marches, is an annoyance that they'll get their underlings to help shield them from.
You want to make a difference? Give money to an appropriate (thoroughly-researched) advocacy group, that will hire lobbyists who make a living knowing what politicians *do* listen to and delivering your message through those channels.
Think I'm full of it? Look at how much success antiwar protesters have vs say, verizon, or the movie studios with their high-priced representation.
Yes, there are things that are much worse. Like failing at basic grammar. Sometimes I think slashdot should change "Use the Preview Button! Check those URLs!" to a simple explanation of the difference between the word "lose" and the word "loose"
Smart companies realize this. I've got 5 monitors on my desk right now and in a given 3 minute period I probably look at all of them. It's so much easier to dart your eyes back and forth than having to alt-tab and wait for things to switch around on a potentially overloaded system.
I'd only buy this if it was water(by which I mean spill-) proof. My keyboard tray at home is below my desk and I go through more keyboards than I'd like to admit. For a few hundred bucks they can engineer a gasket in there if they want me to buy it.
Just thought I'd throw in that I did pretty much what was asked, though I'll leave you with one missing link if you want an all-linux solution. I had several mythtv frontends all pulling movie files (a mix of downloaded and ripped) off a central nfs store. The nice thing many people don't realize about xine is that there is no need to mount images, deal with loop, cloop etc or anything like that. a simple "xine image.iso" will play the movie just as if it was in a drive. Unfortunately, I have yet to find a linux solution that takes the place of dvd decrypter for the dvd->iso step. MythDVD rips video only. My old protocol was: Rip to iso with dvd decrypter. Copy to file server. Fire up mythvideo and add the iso file. that's it. The ISO will be indexed just like any random avi you have, and you can set the association for.iso's to open in xine, at which point you'll have all your menus and what not just as they came on the dvd. I did this with a number of dvd's from blockbuster's mail rental service and it worked quite well. Only problem, as others have noted, is the size. Not much help for you there until someone comes up with a real snazzy way to recode the video to mpeg-4 and still have the menus work.
Slashdot Mirror
There's tons of case law dealing with the bill of rights, the 2nd amendment in particular - I think it makes it even more important who gets elected to the position that will be picking the next few SC justices. The Cruikshank decision interprets the 2nd amendment as only effecting the federal govt, but in the same breath it acknowledges the right the amendment protects predates the constitution and does not depend on it for its existence.
There are lots of issues that are better decided at levels below the federal gov't. In fact, most issues are better left to the states. I think the better way to accomplish this is for the federal gov't to just stay out of it, rather than deciding that the constitution does not apply to the states. If they weren't passing laws about everything they could think to legislate about, matters would naturally fall to the states to determine on their own. However, there are some areas, specifically with respect to rights considered so basic that enough support was available to pass an amendment to the constitution protecting them, that I feel states should not have the power to restrict their citizens in.
(This not withstanding the fact that most state constitutions contains clauses quite similar to the 2nd amendment - in the case of illinois it's prefaced with "subject only to the police power" rather than anything about a militia, which is open to its own set of interpretations.)
(and anyway, this is all a long way from the point I was originally trying to make, that a) I dislike obama's stance on gun control but b) I'd take him over clinton, as he's actually demonstrated reasonable competence at something other than grandstanding and moving to whatever state he thinks he can win in)
A record of supporting gun control at any level shows he doesn't agree with the belief which I and others hold that most forms of it are proscribed by the bill of rights. If he doesn't think it applies at the city level, it's a slippery slope to expand it. Quite simply if you make the argument it's ok to ban guns in Chicago because of x (be a high profile shooting, population density, or any other host of factors), what keeps that from occurring everywhere else as soon as enough people are born? A right is a right. It doesn't go away when you move across municipal boundaries. I know firearms ownership is very unpopular with a large number of people but I don't get how the 2nd amendment gets downtrodden so much even as we support the broadest interpretations of the rights protected by the others. (well, except the 4th, lately, but that's another rant) (I'll keep this as an aside since this is the Dem thread, but Giuliani is far from innocent on this sort of "oh, the constitution says x, but this city should be an exception" crap as well - not that he seems to have any shot at a nomination)
I suppose that was poorly worded. He hasn't said it *clearly*. Check his record on gun control in illinois for a pretty clear picture of his stance. He's never gone against it, but now that he's on the national stage he makes sure to wrap everything in saying he "respects the second amendment" (so long as you don't interpret the 2nd amendment as protecting an individual right to bear functioning, loaded firearms in the sizes and shapes commonly available in the marketplace today.)
I don't think either of them would make a good president. Hillary's a name and nothing else. She's done nothing to convince me she'd be a competent leader, even compared to the likes of GWB. I still never regained any trust for her after she magically became a new yorker. Obama seems to have a better head on his shoulders and actually have some principles, but he's got dreams of disarming the populace, and doesn't even have the balls to come right out and say it.
To me, surcharges are a great solution. Let the poor people get up early. I try and avoid the worst routes but for the few times I have to take them, I'd gladly pay $5-10 to zip along at the speed limit. Hell, I might even pay on off hours if it meant I could do 90.
Scrabulous isn't an imitation so much as the exact same game save the name, and having the writing on the colored squares explaining which is which. (I always end up GIS'ing up a real scrabble board for reference) Same scoring, same play, same word lists used in scrabble tournaments.
That said, how fucking old is scrabble? In a rational world any IP protection it had save for the trademark would have gone by the wayside long ago.
Speaking of google, firefox, and the search bar, it actually makes the calculator example they beat you over the head with in the enso video somewhat moot. All I do when I want to calculate something is start typing it in the search box, and the "suggestion" that comes up is the google calculator result. It's a hell of a lot more functional than just a four function calc with the way it handles units, too. Plenty of times I've typed something like "9GB / 1500KB/s" to see how long a download will take, or maybe "9GB/ 1.5hr in Mbps" to see how much streaming something over a wireless net is going to be pushing it on bandwidth.
I mean, if technology was making one of the content industries irrelevant, they'd send off their lobbyists to make the tech illegal. I fear the extras have no such power - not even a union!
Summary: developing
Article: They're talking about it, might look into it, probably won't work.
Can we try to keep slashdot *somewhat* based in reality here?
I could be wrong, but I don't think government anti-corruption officials in South Korea pull in (legitimately) $250k+ a year.
This is unheard of. We must stop samsung before this sort of behavior spreads and becomes endemic to countries in the region.
And since I failed to address your two unrelated examples.... If my ISP, or anyone else for that matter, pings my IP, they don't pretend to be me. If a construction company cuts down phone lines, unless they've started wearing masks of my face (have yet to encounter this), they're not pretending to be me.
1. I'd need to be a comcast customer to do that. 2(a,b) They're using forging packets using the customer's IP address (which is their "name" for all intents and purposes on an IP network) for their benefit (reduced traffic on their network, allowing them to have more customers with less infrasctructure. I don't need to say it's an invasion of privacy, the tort does.
Torts 652C: "One who appropriates to his own use or benefit the name or likeness of another is subject to liability to the other for invasion of his privacy."
Why has no one sued comcast for their forged RST's under this yet?
This summary could have conveyed all the necessary information quite easily and been just as valid by replacing "TraceSecurity" with the more generic "penetration testing company". Enjoy your plug guys!
I never understood the incredible animosity towards cell phone users, especially from such a tech friendly crowd.
Is it just the societally reinforced image that talking on a cell phone == bad?
Is it leftover class envy from when they used to cost more than a landline?
Are you jealous they're talking to someone and seeming happy while you're walking down the street or eating dinner by yourself?
If you're in a public place, you're going to be surrounded by the sounds of people talking. I don't understand how hearing a person talking on a cell phone is any more disruptive than hearing them talk to the person next to them.
If they're loud and obnoxious, ok, they're loud and obnoxious, but these are the type of people who would be loud and obnoxious talking to their friend who was two feet away. You'd probably sit there thinking....what a jerk/bitch, but you'd never file it away under "something I can prevent" because its just talking.
Cell phones have just become a scapegoat for being annoyed by....annoying people.
Where are you getting this? I got fios on July 2nd and have a cat5 run from the ONT.
Paid for themselves? Are you making money off your consoles?
Here's all I need to know:
I've used my GF's brand new WM-based EDGE-underpinned smartphone side by side with my 2-year old Samsung (regular)phone running J2ME on EVDO. My antiquated handset blew it out of the water.
This guy's on Frickin crack. He's a fanboy. That's all. The comparison might, *might* be valid in very specific areas, but wholly because of how fucked AT&T's 3g network is in the few places it exists. Get on a proper 3g net (like the ones in other countries, or the CDMA based ones in the US) and there's no comparison.
As someone who lives inside the beltway, I can assure you that not only are marches easy to ignore, they're obnoxious, ineffective, and serve only to piss off the people whose commute gets ruined by them - people who are then embittered a little towards your cause. Letters are a little better. At least the rep might notice the increased volume of crap, but it, just like marches, is an annoyance that they'll get their underlings to help shield them from. You want to make a difference? Give money to an appropriate (thoroughly-researched) advocacy group, that will hire lobbyists who make a living knowing what politicians *do* listen to and delivering your message through those channels. Think I'm full of it? Look at how much success antiwar protesters have vs say, verizon, or the movie studios with their high-priced representation.
Yes, there are things that are much worse. Like failing at basic grammar. Sometimes I think slashdot should change "Use the Preview Button! Check those URLs!" to a simple explanation of the difference between the word "lose" and the word "loose"
Smart companies realize this. I've got 5 monitors on my desk right now and in a given 3 minute period I probably look at all of them. It's so much easier to dart your eyes back and forth than having to alt-tab and wait for things to switch around on a potentially overloaded system.
Holy shit someone on slashdot didn't mix up loose/lose for once!
I'd only buy this if it was water(by which I mean spill-) proof. My keyboard tray at home is below my desk and I go through more keyboards than I'd like to admit. For a few hundred bucks they can engineer a gasket in there if they want me to buy it.
Just thought I'd throw in that I did pretty much what was asked, though I'll leave you with one missing link if you want an all-linux solution. I had several mythtv frontends all pulling movie files (a mix of downloaded and ripped) off a central nfs store. .iso's to open in xine, at which point you'll have all your menus and what not just as they came on the dvd. I did this with a number of dvd's from blockbuster's mail rental service and it worked quite well. Only problem, as others have noted, is the size. Not much help for you there until someone comes up with a real snazzy way to recode the video to mpeg-4 and still have the menus work.
The nice thing many people don't realize about xine is that there is no need to mount images, deal with loop, cloop etc or anything like that. a simple "xine image.iso" will play the movie just as if it was in a drive.
Unfortunately, I have yet to find a linux solution that takes the place of dvd decrypter for the dvd->iso step. MythDVD rips video only. My old protocol was: Rip to iso with dvd decrypter. Copy to file server. Fire up mythvideo and add the iso file.
that's it. The ISO will be indexed just like any random avi you have, and you can set the association for