No offense, but I think you must be an idiot. I'm not a lawyer, but I think there are other laws in effect when you beat someone to death. The charge of murder comes to mind. Just because I say I wish someone would beat you to death, doesn't make you fall to the ground dead. If I pick up a crow bar and swing it at you, I am now in violation of assault laws. You're crying foul before anything has happened to you. That reminds me of an interesting thing I saw on a "Donahue" show many years ago when he was on regular TV. The subject was whether one of the southern states that had a Confederate flag on it, should be forced to remove it from the flag. Most of the audience was white, and Phil was asking their opinion. He stopped at an older jewish lady and asked her thoughts. She said "I think it is a historical element, over a hundred years old, and the black people, although I know it is offensive to them, it is just a flag and not an attack." So Phil says, "What if someone wanted to put a Swastika on the New York State flag?" "Well now you're being rediculous." was her answer. Everone's idea of hate and offensive is different. I don't know you, but I guarantee I could find many things that you don't find offensive that other groups would. You ever watch porno? There are a lot of people who consider that hate. You not a christian? There are some that would see you as evil. You not a Catholic? There are some who would see you as a cancer on society and honestly believe the country would be better without you. You are all for stopping ideas you don't like as long as you're side is in power, but if the shoe was on the other foot you would cry like a baby? I'm equally disturbed that you got 5 points for wanting to take our rights away. Seriously, there are other countries you would be happier in.
Woah, chill out dude. Even though the EU countries are not as free as us, they are still democracies and they could change the laws if they wanted, but obviously they don't want to. Think of them as a private club. They are allowed to do whatever they want. They can make whatever rules they want, it doesn't effect you.
Regardless of the First amendment, the US population would never allow these restrictions because we are historically very distrustful of our politicians. I guarantee if this were made a law here, some jackass in office would start putting in his own ideas of what is "true history", what group is OK to hate and which is not within a few short years. This distrust is the same reason for the 2nd amendment: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." You can't trust anyone to keep you free except yourself. The premise is that a politician surrounded by an armed constituancy pays closer attention to them. Thomas Jefferson says "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants."
By the way, would it be legal for me to say "We should get together and kill all Nazi's" in Europe? Does the law distinguish between groups, or is it overlooked if it is an unpallatable group?
The actual contents of the Bill of Rights bothers some people?
Keeping "Top Secrets" are not infringing on free speech. They are like intellectual property. You are using someone elses property without their permission. An example would be, I can say "There is a US spy in Husseins bedroom that will kill him tonight." I can say this, it may be true, it may not, but since I am a nobody, it has very little or no value. But if I know this to be a fact because I work for the CIA, I am now saying the same thing, but it has incredible value because it has the weight of the CIA behind it. The words are the same, but the value is different. If I have Top Secret clearance, I have taken an oath saying I will not reveal it. I would be breaking a contract. Now, if I am in a restaraunt in the US, and the head of the CIA sitting behind me says this out loud and I hear it, I am free to tell whoever I want. I can walk down to the New York Times and blab my head off. The only restriction on free speech, (as in the spoken word) in the US is if your words will have an immediate dangerous effect like shouting "Fire" in a crowded theater if there isn't a fire. But any idea, no matter how nutty or full of crap it is, you can still express it. There are other restrictions on non-verbal speech, like child porn, but that is a different argument. I understand and sympathize with the Europeans history that has caused these laws to be created, even if I disagree with them.
Can anyone out there give a good user story about freenet? You use it often, have gotten something of value off of it, etc? I spent another half hour installing freenet and a GUI called frost. I have done this now 4 times over the past several years. Thats 15 minutes longer than any common user would spend. Guess what? Nothing. I have yet to get this thing to "work" for me. I know it is running, but it's not doing anything for me. Call me at 1.0.
Ah, the sympathy for other people I'm seeing here is so heart warming. It is fun and easy to make judgements about people you have never met. Yes, everyon that has lost ther jobs in the IT sector in the past several years is one of those people that learned html, etc whatever. All 400,000 of them make me sick! Plus, we've got ours, right? I make 150K a year so leave me out of any thoughts of bad things. Fuck everyone below me. Wait this sounds more like baby boomers than Gen-X's. Show me your birth certificate! I think you shall be removed from our generation.
Yes. This is the stupidest premise I've heard in a while. First off, only the people who send mail can switch to email, and why would someone sending antrax want to switch? Secondly, how would switching help unless companies say they will only accept email, and no more snail mail. That sounds like a business ending decision. There is a large amount of stuff sent between businesses that is much more conveniently done through snail mail. Every business is going to buy scanners, have everyone get their electronic signature, purchase and instruct everyone in encryption, etc? All this because four, count em, four companies have received antrax email? How many companies have received mail bombs before this? And they still use mail? Wow!
My last question is why was this article posted to begin with?
Except the soft porn. I agree, they should have gotten a Vulcan with real tits.
I was reminded of several ST episodes as well as Aliens and other movies. I think we should give it time to find its feet. What series isn't weak the first season?
If this is supposed to happen a century before the first ST, why is it more diverse?
Isn't it amazing how many inventions and new people, procedures, etc. all happen in such a small period of time?
Can someone (who really knows) explain to me about what legally constitutes bias by judges?
I understand that before or during the trial if the judge says, "Damn that OJ is as guilty as hell," that that would indicate he has already made a decision before all the evidence is in.
But from what I read, the MS judge first made his findings of fact and law showing that MS is a dirty, cheating, soulless, money grubbing whore, and then in an interview later said that MS was a dirty, cheating, soulless, money grubbing whore.
Are you not allowed to say stuff like this out loud as a judge ever, or did I miss a statement he made before the trial, or did he say something different in the interveiw than what he has said in court?
But if it's free and easy, why wouldn't they spy? I think you are assuming it is a sweat shop of 1000 cryptologist reading every email. Thousands of emails pass through my server everyday. I could write a simple search algorithm to search through them without a problem. A couple thousand computers could do some interesting things without any effort.
Computers is fast.
Why do people continue to pay any attention to this troll. All he does is write articles to pull in traffic./. should know better.
Sample previous articles:
I'm going to have to go back and read it again. Maybe I have become jaded, or maybe I just didn't like the answers.
I felt as though I heard absolutely nothing I haven't read in MS press releases before, or BG's sh*t-eating-grinned presentations.
"Our super products are designed to give our customers a powerful, integrated, exciting user experience."
You felt like you got an answer to #3?
"We have always made an effort to provide highly functional software that makes the user experience as intuitive as possible. At the same time, we are sensitive to the growing security threats to our customers, and providing enhanced security has been and continues to be one of our top priorities."
What a steamy pile of nothing. I see words there, but I don't see any meaning. Blah blah blah, buy our product blah blah buy product...
Here is an honest answer:
Yes, some of a products do have glaring security holes that we should have anticipated, but security is at the bottom of our priority list. Getting a product out onto the market to get the cash stream coming in is the main goal. And then once it is sold, we have little to no interest in it, unless you pay us for support. The only reason we do bug fixes, is for those who haven't yet bought the product, the fixes for current users is just a side bonus.
I came in to say how interesting I thought this question is. He's putting the horse a few (hundred/thousand) years ahead of the cart, but it is a very good philisophical/moral question, whether it has any relavance to reality.
Obviously, it would not be a citizen of any country, and would not be a human. There are really no, non-human laws except something like cruelty to animals.
The other interesting thing is that since it is assumed that the two cultures that meet, are going to be at different development stages, one far more advanced than the other, are they going to have equal rights?
Suppose a being can memorize all of our world history, art and literature in one day, has the computing power of a PC in it's head, is 100 times stronger than humans, etc. Does this being deserve only one vote in a democracy or more?
As a matter of business fact, humans would become obsolete. Who would hire a human over this other being?
Let alone getting girls.
I have heard Clarke talk about this thing for a year + and I have yet to see it do anything. Can someone who has used it for anything give us an update?
Whats the difference between the two? Sounds like it's illegal to repost copyrighted material without express written permission. And since the tide at this time seems to be turning towards websites being responsible for all content, internally or from their viewers, they have to pull it.
Just saying, "I'm going to do it anyway." is not neccessarily a good way to win a war. It is a good way to start a fight when you have your ducks in a row, but just getting serially sued is not like a battle of attrition.
Whats the difference between the two? Sounds like it's illegal to repost copyrighted material without express written permission. And since the tide at this time seems to be turning towards websites being responsible for all content, internally or from their viewers, they have to pull it.
Just saying, "I'm going to do it anyway." is not neccessarily a good way to win a war. It is a good way to start a fight when you have your ducks in a row, but just getting serially sued is not like a battle of attrition.
That is part of the reform.
It sounds like your suggestion is to do nothing and throw your hands up in exasperation because another problem may appear.
That's not a very solid plan.
I didn't say anything about checks.
America provides laws, incentives, and business environment that made all these rich people.
Put Bill Gates in a garage in any other country in 99% of the rest of the world in the 80's and he would still be in that garage.
Put him in any other country in that last 1% of the world (Europe) and he'd be paying 50% of his income to taxes.
Success isn't "magical" and Americans certainly don't have any exceptional intelligence. It is the US government that created and maintains this country from extortion, corruption, outside invaders, and even from itself. Try to get a business license in India and your product will be two years obsolete by time your allowed to sell it.
You are making some huge assumptions from a one sentence jab.
There is nothing in the Republican platform that is not based on selfishness, punishment, or fear. I would be happy to discuss any plank of that platform that you feel does not match this statement.
Libertarianism shares at least one aspect of the Republicans that is best summarized by "every man for himself." I respect the libertarian reason for this, but not the republican. Libertarians live by this because that is the basic philosophy around their party and not subject to any exceptions. I just feel like it can be a little cold to someone who is really at a disadvantage of some kind. (Correct me if this is not an accurate assesment of the Libertarian philosophy.)
I do not respect the republicans who believe in this only when they are powerful and at the top of the society where they then saw, "OK, everythings even. Every man for himself." Clarence Thomas is a good example.
On what do you base this statement? My understanding is that the heads of NASA are chosen much like any corporation with a board of directors. They are not appointed by the president or congress.
The highest uppety up is Dan Goldin who worked at TRW Space and Technology group before starting at NASA in the early 90's. That doesn't sound like a very political job to me.
Oh, Tom. It is cool to follow the rules isn't it? I wish we all could lead our lives like you. What a great world it would be.
"Hiddidly Ho neighborino Tom!"
"Top o the Mornin' to you too Tom."
Yes, but doesn't also make sense that the US is providing the rich with a better way of life than the poor, and therefore they should pay more? Taxes are a lot lower in Ecuador. If Gates was born there, how do you think he'd be doing today?
Also, I think $10,000 to someone that makes a million a year means less than $10 to someone that makes $10,000. Like in engineering, your can't scale up linearly, it has to be exponential.
Slashdot Mirror
No offense, but I think you must be an idiot. I'm not a lawyer, but I think there are other laws in effect when you beat someone to death. The charge of murder comes to mind. Just because I say I wish someone would beat you to death, doesn't make you fall to the ground dead. If I pick up a crow bar and swing it at you, I am now in violation of assault laws. You're crying foul before anything has happened to you.
That reminds me of an interesting thing I saw on a "Donahue" show many years ago when he was on regular TV. The subject was whether one of the southern states that had a Confederate flag on it, should be forced to remove it from the flag. Most of the audience was white, and Phil was asking their opinion. He stopped at an older jewish lady and asked her thoughts. She said "I think it is a historical element, over a hundred years old, and the black people, although I know it is offensive to them, it is just a flag and not an attack." So Phil says, "What if someone wanted to put a Swastika on the New York State flag?" "Well now you're being rediculous." was her answer.
Everone's idea of hate and offensive is different. I don't know you, but I guarantee I could find many things that you don't find offensive that other groups would. You ever watch porno? There are a lot of people who consider that hate. You not a christian? There are some that would see you as evil. You not a Catholic? There are some who would see you as a cancer on society and honestly believe the country would be better without you. You are all for stopping ideas you don't like as long as you're side is in power, but if the shoe was on the other foot you would cry like a baby?
I'm equally disturbed that you got 5 points for wanting to take our rights away. Seriously, there are other countries you would be happier in.
But I'm not all hate. Check my sig.
Is it the whole EU vs Ditka?
I would have to go with the Ditka Rights.
Woah, chill out dude. Even though the EU countries are not as free as us, they are still democracies and they could change the laws if they wanted, but obviously they don't want to. Think of them as a private club. They are allowed to do whatever they want. They can make whatever rules they want, it doesn't effect you.
Regardless of the First amendment, the US population would never allow these restrictions because we are historically very distrustful of our politicians. I guarantee if this were made a law here, some jackass in office would start putting in his own ideas of what is "true history", what group is OK to hate and which is not within a few short years.
This distrust is the same reason for the 2nd amendment: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
You can't trust anyone to keep you free except yourself. The premise is that a politician surrounded by an armed constituancy pays closer attention to them. Thomas Jefferson says "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants."
By the way, would it be legal for me to say "We should get together and kill all Nazi's" in Europe? Does the law distinguish between groups, or is it overlooked if it is an unpallatable group?
The actual contents of the Bill of Rights bothers some people?
Keeping "Top Secrets" are not infringing on free speech. They are like intellectual property. You are using someone elses property without their permission. An example would be, I can say "There is a US spy in Husseins bedroom that will kill him tonight." I can say this, it may be true, it may not, but since I am a nobody, it has very little or no value. But if I know this to be a fact because I work for the CIA, I am now saying the same thing, but it has incredible value because it has the weight of the CIA behind it. The words are the same, but the value is different. If I have Top Secret clearance, I have taken an oath saying I will not reveal it. I would be breaking a contract.
Now, if I am in a restaraunt in the US, and the head of the CIA sitting behind me says this out loud and I hear it, I am free to tell whoever I want. I can walk down to the New York Times and blab my head off.
The only restriction on free speech, (as in the spoken word) in the US is if your words will have an immediate dangerous effect like shouting "Fire" in a crowded theater if there isn't a fire. But any idea, no matter how nutty or full of crap it is, you can still express it.
There are other restrictions on non-verbal speech, like child porn, but that is a different argument.
I understand and sympathize with the Europeans history that has caused these laws to be created, even if I disagree with them.
Can anyone out there give a good user story about freenet? You use it often, have gotten something of value off of it, etc?
I spent another half hour installing freenet and a GUI called frost. I have done this now 4 times over the past several years. Thats 15 minutes longer than any common user would spend.
Guess what? Nothing. I have yet to get this thing to "work" for me. I know it is running, but it's not doing anything for me.
Call me at 1.0.
Ah, the sympathy for other people I'm seeing here is so heart warming.
It is fun and easy to make judgements about people you have never met.
Yes, everyon that has lost ther jobs in the IT sector in the past several years is one of those people that learned html, etc whatever. All 400,000 of them make me sick!
Plus, we've got ours, right? I make 150K a year so leave me out of any thoughts of bad things. Fuck everyone below me.
Wait this sounds more like baby boomers than Gen-X's. Show me your birth certificate! I think you shall be removed from our generation.
Yes. This is the stupidest premise I've heard in a while. First off, only the people who send mail can switch to email, and why would someone sending antrax want to switch? Secondly, how would switching help unless companies say they will only accept email, and no more snail mail. That sounds like a business ending decision. There is a large amount of stuff sent between businesses that is much more conveniently done through snail mail. Every business is going to buy scanners, have everyone get their electronic signature, purchase and instruct everyone in encryption, etc? All this because four, count em, four companies have received antrax email? How many companies have received mail bombs before this? And they still use mail? Wow!
My last question is why was this article posted to begin with?
Except the soft porn. I agree, they should have gotten a Vulcan with real tits.
I was reminded of several ST episodes as well as Aliens and other movies. I think we should give it time to find its feet. What series isn't weak the first season?
If this is supposed to happen a century before the first ST, why is it more diverse?
Isn't it amazing how many inventions and new people, procedures, etc. all happen in such a small period of time?
Can someone (who really knows) explain to me about what legally constitutes bias by judges?
I understand that before or during the trial if the judge says, "Damn that OJ is as guilty as hell," that that would indicate he has already made a decision before all the evidence is in.
But from what I read, the MS judge first made his findings of fact and law showing that MS is a dirty, cheating, soulless, money grubbing whore, and then in an interview later said that MS was a dirty, cheating, soulless, money grubbing whore.
Are you not allowed to say stuff like this out loud as a judge ever, or did I miss a statement he made before the trial, or did he say something different in the interveiw than what he has said in court?
Thanks
But if it's free and easy, why wouldn't they spy? I think you are assuming it is a sweat shop of 1000 cryptologist reading every email. Thousands of emails pass through my server everyday. I could write a simple search algorithm to search through them without a problem. A couple thousand computers could do some interesting things without any effort.
Computers is fast.
Why do people continue to pay any attention to this troll. All he does is write articles to pull in traffic. /. should know better.
Sample previous articles:
Linux is no good cause it's free!
Why are nerds such crooks?
Microsoft is just doing good clean business.
Please just ignore him people.
I'm going to have to go back and read it again. Maybe I have become jaded, or maybe I just didn't like the answers.
I felt as though I heard absolutely nothing I haven't read in MS press releases before, or BG's sh*t-eating-grinned presentations.
"Our super products are designed to give our customers a powerful, integrated, exciting user experience."
You felt like you got an answer to #3?
"We have always made an effort to provide highly functional software that makes the user experience as intuitive as possible. At the same time, we are sensitive to the growing security threats to our customers, and providing enhanced security has been and continues to be one of our top priorities."
What a steamy pile of nothing. I see words there, but I don't see any meaning. Blah blah blah, buy our product blah blah buy product...
Here is an honest answer:
Yes, some of a products do have glaring security holes that we should have anticipated, but security is at the bottom of our priority list. Getting a product out onto the market to get the cash stream coming in is the main goal. And then once it is sold, we have little to no interest in it, unless you pay us for support. The only reason we do bug fixes, is for those who haven't yet bought the product, the fixes for current users is just a side bonus.
I came in to say how interesting I thought this question is. He's putting the horse a few (hundred/thousand) years ahead of the cart, but it is a very good philisophical/moral question, whether it has any relavance to reality.
Obviously, it would not be a citizen of any country, and would not be a human. There are really no, non-human laws except something like cruelty to animals.
The other interesting thing is that since it is assumed that the two cultures that meet, are going to be at different development stages, one far more advanced than the other, are they going to have equal rights?
Suppose a being can memorize all of our world history, art and literature in one day, has the computing power of a PC in it's head, is 100 times stronger than humans, etc. Does this being deserve only one vote in a democracy or more?
As a matter of business fact, humans would become obsolete. Who would hire a human over this other being?
Let alone getting girls.
San Diego Road Runner is about the same. 2.5 Mbps down and 250k up, with no guarantee.
I have heard Clarke talk about this thing for a year + and I have yet to see it do anything. Can someone who has used it for anything give us an update?
Whats the difference between the two? Sounds like it's illegal to repost copyrighted material without express written permission. And since the tide at this time seems to be turning towards websites being responsible for all content, internally or from their viewers, they have to pull it.
Just saying, "I'm going to do it anyway." is not neccessarily a good way to win a war. It is a good way to start a fight when you have your ducks in a row, but just getting serially sued is not like a battle of attrition.
Whats the difference between the two? Sounds like it's illegal to repost copyrighted material without express written permission. And since the tide at this time seems to be turning towards websites being responsible for all content, internally or from their viewers, they have to pull it.
Just saying, "I'm going to do it anyway." is not neccessarily a good way to win a war. It is a good way to start a fight when you have your ducks in a row, but just getting serially sued is not like a battle of attrition.
That is part of the reform.
It sounds like your suggestion is to do nothing and throw your hands up in exasperation because another problem may appear.
That's not a very solid plan.
I didn't say anything about checks.
America provides laws, incentives, and business environment that made all these rich people.
Put Bill Gates in a garage in any other country in 99% of the rest of the world in the 80's and he would still be in that garage.
Put him in any other country in that last 1% of the world (Europe) and he'd be paying 50% of his income to taxes.
Success isn't "magical" and Americans certainly don't have any exceptional intelligence. It is the US government that created and maintains this country from extortion, corruption, outside invaders, and even from itself. Try to get a business license in India and your product will be two years obsolete by time your allowed to sell it.
You are making some huge assumptions from a one sentence jab.
There is nothing in the Republican platform that is not based on selfishness, punishment, or fear. I would be happy to discuss any plank of that platform that you feel does not match this statement.
Libertarianism shares at least one aspect of the Republicans that is best summarized by "every man for himself." I respect the libertarian reason for this, but not the republican. Libertarians live by this because that is the basic philosophy around their party and not subject to any exceptions. I just feel like it can be a little cold to someone who is really at a disadvantage of some kind. (Correct me if this is not an accurate assesment of the Libertarian philosophy.)
I do not respect the republicans who believe in this only when they are powerful and at the top of the society where they then saw, "OK, everythings even. Every man for himself." Clarence Thomas is a good example.
On what do you base this statement? My understanding is that the heads of NASA are chosen much like any corporation with a board of directors. They are not appointed by the president or congress.
The highest uppety up is Dan Goldin who worked at TRW Space and Technology group before starting at NASA in the early 90's. That doesn't sound like a very political job to me.
Oh, Tom. It is cool to follow the rules isn't it? I wish we all could lead our lives like you. What a great world it would be.
"Hiddidly Ho neighborino Tom!"
"Top o the Mornin' to you too Tom."
It's true what they say. Republicans are the most open minded and kind hearted people. Feel the love?
Yes, but doesn't also make sense that the US is providing the rich with a better way of life than the poor, and therefore they should pay more? Taxes are a lot lower in Ecuador. If Gates was born there, how do you think he'd be doing today?
Also, I think $10,000 to someone that makes a million a year means less than $10 to someone that makes $10,000. Like in engineering, your can't scale up linearly, it has to be exponential.