Specifically, your chain of logic fails on its first link: "And, by extension, when state law and federal law conflict, the state's duty is to its citizens, not to some federal community"
There is no "federal community". There is a federal government. And in some matters the state is subordinate to the federal government as spelled out in the US Constitution. And local municipalities are subordinate to states as spelled out in their constitutions. And so on. So your argument is not well thought out.
Additionally, the relationship between state and federal is *not* the same as US and the international community. In the US the relationship between states and the federal govnerment are determined by the US Constitution (well, the interpretation of the Constitution by the Judicial Branch). Our relationship with other countries and the international community as whole are bound by Alliances, Treaties, and Agreements. However, such relationships are superseded by the US Constitution. If a treaty violates or nullifies a portion of the Constitution, that treaty is void in the US.
For the record, I don't support the war, I think our erosion of civil liberties is a crime against the US, and Bush is the biggest moron to sit in the White House since Carter. Nice ad hominem. I've noticed people fall back on that when they can't really support their argument.
I'm sorry I'm not as easily persuaded as you are by a random clip on YouTube. As an engineer I require evidence that's a bit more concrete than that to which you linked. Until then, Occam's Razor and all that.
But don't let that get in the way of your knee jerk reactions and condemnation of anyone who has a different opinion than yourself. This is why I hate the left as well as the right. The right scares me with all the power mongering and attempts to place themselves above the law. But the left scares me at least as much with their intellectual fascism.
You sure found some smoking gun evidence. I mean, who needs paper trails, flight logs, *credible* eyewitnesses or anything when we have a politician misspeaking.
Moron. Next you'll probably say that WTC building 7 was brought down via controlled demolition.
I remember back on my 2MB 386-SX (and well before '95) running a non-windowing non-GUI multi-tasking environment that worked quite well. In functionality it felt sorta similar to virtual terminals on a linux console box but with DOS, where you could flip between various shells and have each running its own task simultaneously. What was the name of that software, do you remember? It was very good IIRC -- I used it in conjunction with BBS software, where of course multi-tasking was very useful. Also I'm certain it required a 386.
...I see no reason to make it so hard that hardly anybody can pass (Cisco are you listening?)
You're kidding right? Not to take away from your accomplishment, but most certifications are not worth the paper they're printed on. Your first paragraph pretty much illustrates that. All these certifications prove is how well someone can memorize and regurgitate facts. Basically, Certification bodies are nothing more than a way to make money by convincing clueless management types that they actually mean something. And CompTIA is at the head of the list for that.
There are very few of these professional certifications that are actually a valuable gauge of ability. Cisco's CCIE comes to mind, along with GIAC Gold-Level certifications. To get these you actually have to demonstrate a deep understanding and an ability to creatively apply your knowledge. But for the most part, most certificates are a scam.
And before someone tries to say I'm sour grapes because I don't have any... I have a few of these. Some Cisco certs, CISSP, and a few GIAC silver level (working on a gold at the moment). The primary reason for them? Well, in the case of the CISSP, my department (InfoSec) has decreed we all need them. Whatever... hasn't changed anyone's abilities or performance. The others? Well, they're for C.V. fodder. It just makes it that much easier to get an interview where I can demonstrate what I really know and can do.
I followed the developer link from Apple. Has anyone actually gone there? It looks like this is a hoax created to "scare" people into not pirating his program. He admits that it has backfired and actually driven away legit users. Here is the statement from his site Reversecode.com
Public Letter:
I hope the public will read this entire letter.
There has been alot of confusion regarding the copy protection of the program called Display Eater.
It is described here in:
There exists two illegal cd-keys that can be used to register the program without paying for it. When Display Eater detects these keys, it would delete your home directory.
However, this is not the case in reality. The whole purpose was to create a scare campaign. You can download, the file linked from the main page, which is now down(the link is still intact here), and check it for yourself. It has been this way since 2/7/07.
It was my hope that by creating a scare campaign, I could stop wasting time writing copy protection routines to be broken over and over. But, I was wrong, it backfired.
People started buying multiple keys, which I never intended, and in the beginning when the protection was in place, people who did not even know they had committed piracy or what piracy was were left in the dark. Legitimate users started fearing the program, which I never imagined.
A reporter called me today, and suggested that I make it free, and then have users pay for support. Or open source the program. I will consider all of these. -Reza
Well, the way I see it is that most people, regardless of their liability in these cases, would find the cost of defending themselves prohibitive. It is far less expensive for them to settle than to pursue the issue in court. The RIAA counts on this. If all of a sudden the option to recover legal costs becomes viable, I think we may begin to see less settlements and more fighting.
4) Customs official's station broadcasts the security key.
I was with you until number 4. All I can say is, HUH? Why would it broadcast the security key. The RFID chip has no use for the key since it cannot use it. Where does this RFID chip store, oh I don't know, the RAM and CPU required to decrypt data.
The key phrase here is *reader*. The passport system reads the data off the RFID and then applies the key in the computer system. The only way the key is "transmitted" in the clear is via photons to the OCR.
Here's a revised list that I think will more accurately reflect reality:
1) The customs official asks you for your passport.
2) You pull it out of your tinfoil sleeve and hand it over.
3) Customs official opens the front cover and scans the front page so his computer has all of the information for the security key. (It's not used for encryption. It's just a plaintext password.) (kind of missing your point here) 4) The RFID tag in your passport broadcasts your passport data.
5) The customs officical's system decrypts the data received using the non-transmitted key.
For a thief to clone a passport, he will need to know the plain text in addition to nabbing the RFID data. Both are fairly trivial, esp. if there's a team working it. A pickpocket to lift/read/copy and replace. And another to "listen" for the OTA data. Of course you're only going to get targeted victims, not the wholesale copying people are claiming.
This is simply security theater. The problem is not cloned or forged passports. The problem is people getting valid passports for false IDs. This tries to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
Good thing everyone on the sex offender list participates in kidfuckery, and not getting drunk and pissing in a bush or mooning your principal, or various other "sexual" offenses.
Wha?
Unless something has changed in the last 10 years, public urination is *not* a sex offense. Back in my early 20s I got drunk and pissed in a an alley right as a cop drove by (good timing, huh?). It's a misdemeanor and $150 fine. In fact I got supervision/probation (with the proviso I don't do it again) and it was wiped from my record six months later.
I'd like to see some evidence of people actually labeled "sex offenders" by a court in the US for peeing in public or "mooning" someone (now waving your wang around I can understand), because, frankly, I don't believe you.
Actually, I think you may have that reversed. I parsed the sentence as this:
When that one person says "I need to call someone about what you're doing" we are caught out 90% of the time.
I take that to mean that the other 10% of the time they are confronted, they manage to bluff their way out of trouble. I saw that statement as simply relating to times when they are confronted. Not an overall statistic of how they are usually caught.
It's not so amazing, actually. Those charges coming to trial would allow the presentation of evidence that would show the complicity of the US government in those actions. At that time, the US was playing a very active role in helping to ensure that Iraq did not lose the war with Iran.
You do realize there's to be a second trial? And it covers the genocide?
You know, if you actually read the news articles instead of "The Knee-Jerk Talking Points Weekly" you might have known this
From the link:
Before then, however, he will continue to stand trial for genocide against the Kurds. He is due back in court on Tuesday.
...or that you don't know the real theory of intelligent design?
There is no "theory of intelligent design" (for valid definitions of theory). There is a faith-based intellectual exercise called "intelligent design", however.
What most people do is listen to the few new songs they like and update those every so often as new stuff comes out and they get tired of the old stuff and it falls off the list never to be listened to again. And typically, there'll be a few hundred "old standbys" that they go to whenever they feel like it.
Yeah!
And 640K should be enough for anyone.
Seriously, being able to take my entire music collection with me is great. I don't have to periodically hook it up to the computer when I want to listen to different stuff. In fact, I only hook it up when I get new music and to get new episodes of Eureka. I charge it about 2 or 3 times a week with a FW-to-wall plug charger (weird, FW won't work for connecting to the computer but my old mini-firewire wall plug still charges it) that I have at work.
The Sun rotates around the Earth.
It's true.
(someone back me up on this;)
Well, duh.
It's obviously supportable by casual observation. Just stand outside. I can clearly see that while I'm standing still the sun is travelling across the sky. Ergo: The sun moves around the earth.
I've read your other comments (which are bascially minor variations on a theme) and have come to the conclusion that you really don't know how to use Gmail.
I have yet to experience this scambling of incoming messages and "blackhole" you keep referencing. I have two accounts. One for personal mail and the other for all the security mailing lists I subscribe to.
The organizational level is light years beyond Yahoo. I have rulesets set up to automatically label messages and get them out of the inbox (I *hate* cluttered inboxes). But the threaded nature of how it presents email is where it really shines. For example in my mailing lists I don't have to deal with a seperate message for the original topic and seperate messages for every RE: scattered willy-nilly all over the list (based on time received). Gmail groups them all into one nice little threaded message. It automatically collapses the previously read messages, but I can easily expand if I need to reference an earlier one.
If you don't like it, that's your perogative. But you keep claiming that everyone should stay away because you, personally, have had a bad experience (which I suspect is related to not learning the interface).
Seriously, one or maybe two comments to that effect is fine. But you keep cluttering up threads here to counter anyone who may have had a decent experience with Gmail. Your opinion is not that important.
How about even more simple than that? What about something akin to a portable-DVD player with the video already in the drive. Just have the "big push button", and there you go.
But then you're making the assumption that the ETs can even see in the same spectrum.
Slashdot Mirror
Specifically, your chain of logic fails on its first link: "And, by extension, when state law and federal law conflict, the state's duty is to its citizens, not to some federal community"
There is no "federal community". There is a federal government. And in some matters the state is subordinate to the federal government as spelled out in the US Constitution. And local municipalities are subordinate to states as spelled out in their constitutions. And so on. So your argument is not well thought out.
Additionally, the relationship between state and federal is *not* the same as US and the international community. In the US the relationship between states and the federal govnerment are determined by the US Constitution (well, the interpretation of the Constitution by the Judicial Branch). Our relationship with other countries and the international community as whole are bound by Alliances, Treaties, and Agreements. However, such relationships are superseded by the US Constitution. If a treaty violates or nullifies a portion of the Constitution, that treaty is void in the US.
Wow, you're just keeping the streak alive.
For the record, I don't support the war, I think our erosion of civil liberties is a crime against the US, and Bush is the biggest moron to sit in the White House since Carter. Nice ad hominem. I've noticed people fall back on that when they can't really support their argument.
I'm sorry I'm not as easily persuaded as you are by a random clip on YouTube. As an engineer I require evidence that's a bit more concrete than that to which you linked. Until then, Occam's Razor and all that.
But don't let that get in the way of your knee jerk reactions and condemnation of anyone who has a different opinion than yourself. This is why I hate the left as well as the right. The right scares me with all the power mongering and attempts to place themselves above the law. But the left scares me at least as much with their intellectual fascism.
Wow. Just wow.
You sure found some smoking gun evidence. I mean, who needs paper trails, flight logs, *credible* eyewitnesses or anything when we have a politician misspeaking.
Moron. Next you'll probably say that WTC building 7 was brought down via controlled demolition.
Ah, DESQView... I knew thee well...
You're kidding right? Not to take away from your accomplishment, but most certifications are not worth the paper they're printed on. Your first paragraph pretty much illustrates that. All these certifications prove is how well someone can memorize and regurgitate facts. Basically, Certification bodies are nothing more than a way to make money by convincing clueless management types that they actually mean something. And CompTIA is at the head of the list for that.
There are very few of these professional certifications that are actually a valuable gauge of ability. Cisco's CCIE comes to mind, along with GIAC Gold-Level certifications. To get these you actually have to demonstrate a deep understanding and an ability to creatively apply your knowledge. But for the most part, most certificates are a scam.
And before someone tries to say I'm sour grapes because I don't have any... I have a few of these. Some Cisco certs, CISSP, and a few GIAC silver level (working on a gold at the moment). The primary reason for them? Well, in the case of the CISSP, my department (InfoSec) has decreed we all need them. Whatever... hasn't changed anyone's abilities or performance. The others? Well, they're for C.V. fodder. It just makes it that much easier to get an interview where I can demonstrate what I really know and can do.
*<--Joke
/|\
O
You--> |
/ \
The article a is used with singular nouns. So no, it would not be Developers'
guest!=host
Try reading what he wrote, again.
Well, the way I see it is that most people, regardless of their liability in these cases, would find the cost of defending themselves prohibitive. It is far less expensive for them to settle than to pursue the issue in court. The RIAA counts on this. If all of a sudden the option to recover legal costs becomes viable, I think we may begin to see less settlements and more fighting.
4) Customs official's station broadcasts the security key.
I was with you until number 4. All I can say is, HUH? Why would it broadcast the security key. The RFID chip has no use for the key since it cannot use it. Where does this RFID chip store, oh I don't know, the RAM and CPU required to decrypt data.
The key phrase here is *reader*. The passport system reads the data off the RFID and then applies the key in the computer system. The only way the key is "transmitted" in the clear is via photons to the OCR.
Here's a revised list that I think will more accurately reflect reality:
1) The customs official asks you for your passport.
2) You pull it out of your tinfoil sleeve and hand it over.
3) Customs official opens the front cover and scans the front page so his computer has all of the information for the security key. (It's not used for encryption. It's just a plaintext password.) (kind of missing your point here)
4) The RFID tag in your passport broadcasts your passport data.
5) The customs officical's system decrypts the data received using the non-transmitted key.
For a thief to clone a passport, he will need to know the plain text in addition to nabbing the RFID data. Both are fairly trivial, esp. if there's a team working it. A pickpocket to lift/read/copy and replace. And another to "listen" for the OTA data. Of course you're only going to get targeted victims, not the wholesale copying people are claiming.
This is simply security theater. The problem is not cloned or forged passports. The problem is people getting valid passports for false IDs. This tries to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
Good thing everyone on the sex offender list participates in kidfuckery, and not getting drunk and pissing in a bush or mooning your principal, or various other "sexual" offenses.
Wha?
Unless something has changed in the last 10 years, public urination is *not* a sex offense. Back in my early 20s I got drunk and pissed in a an alley right as a cop drove by (good timing, huh?). It's a misdemeanor and $150 fine. In fact I got supervision/probation (with the proviso I don't do it again) and it was wiped from my record six months later.
I'd like to see some evidence of people actually labeled "sex offenders" by a court in the US for peeing in public or "mooning" someone (now waving your wang around I can understand), because, frankly, I don't believe you.
You know who else were pedantic dick-wavers? Nazis.
Well played.
Actually, I think you may have that reversed. I parsed the sentence as this:
When that one person says "I need to call someone about what you're doing" we are caught out 90% of the time.
I take that to mean that the other 10% of the time they are confronted, they manage to bluff their way out of trouble. I saw that statement as simply relating to times when they are confronted. Not an overall statistic of how they are usually caught.
You know, if you actually read the news articles instead of "The Knee-Jerk Talking Points Weekly" you might have known this
From the link:
And 640K should be enough for anyone.
Seriously, being able to take my entire music collection with me is great. I don't have to periodically hook it up to the computer when I want to listen to different stuff. In fact, I only hook it up when I get new music and to get new episodes of Eureka. I charge it about 2 or 3 times a week with a FW-to-wall plug charger (weird, FW won't work for connecting to the computer but my old mini-firewire wall plug still charges it) that I have at work.
It's obviously supportable by casual observation. Just stand outside. I can clearly see that while I'm standing still the sun is travelling across the sky. Ergo: The sun moves around the earth.
I've read your other comments (which are bascially minor variations on a theme) and have come to the conclusion that you really don't know how to use Gmail.
I have yet to experience this scambling of incoming messages and "blackhole" you keep referencing. I have two accounts. One for personal mail and the other for all the security mailing lists I subscribe to.
The organizational level is light years beyond Yahoo. I have rulesets set up to automatically label messages and get them out of the inbox (I *hate* cluttered inboxes). But the threaded nature of how it presents email is where it really shines. For example in my mailing lists I don't have to deal with a seperate message for the original topic and seperate messages for every RE: scattered willy-nilly all over the list (based on time received). Gmail groups them all into one nice little threaded message. It automatically collapses the previously read messages, but I can easily expand if I need to reference an earlier one.
If you don't like it, that's your perogative. But you keep claiming that everyone should stay away because you, personally, have had a bad experience (which I suspect is related to not learning the interface). Seriously, one or maybe two comments to that effect is fine. But you keep cluttering up threads here to counter anyone who may have had a decent experience with Gmail. Your opinion is not that important.
*checks outbox*
Yep, two+ weeks. I'm willing to cut slack for stories 2-3 days old, but this is ancient for a security alert.