That's a fair point. To me the line is somewhere in the vicinity of revealing phone numbers and street addresses. Posting "Joe Bloggs is an activist in Sydney" is one thing, but posting "Joe Bloggs is an activist who lives at 1 Smith St, Sydney and his phone number is 1234 5678" is another.
From the article, "The blog posts photographs and full names of anti-racism activists from Australia and New Zealand, in effect making this information available to those who wish to do these activists physical harm." Hmmmm, I sure hope that is not the justification for banning the blog. If that is the case, then they need to block The Sydney Herald and/., because I just saw a photo of "online vigilante Brian Stokes".
The Sydney Morning Herald would never post the street address or phone number of Brian Stokes as one of the blogs has done.
It makes me uncomfortable when people do it here on slashdot (eg with spam kings) and it makes me uncomfortable when racist organisations do it on their website. There's a line and that sort of action comes close to crossing it.
As far as something that might be illegal in some jurisdiction, common sense tells you that the best route is to prosecute the person or people who did something illegal, not the medium carrying the message.
I don't see anything in the article that indicates that the anti-racism group is is prosecuting Google. This appears to be a public relations, not a legal, campaign.
If Google is willing to bear any criticism that results from their decision to host the blogs, then that becomes their business decision. Is it fair that such criticism is directed at them? Maybe, maybe not. But then, they're roundly criticised for their business decision to censor search results in China.
I don't necessarily see this as a free speech issue; after all, there's no such thing as free speech on private property, and their servers are their property. This could just as easily be seen as a business-cum-marketing/PR issue: Google is making a choice about the sorts of people it transacts with.
and secondly, they may also be illegal under Australian law:
Perhaps, but Google's a US company.
Jurisdiction issues become tricky in this connected age. The fascist groups in question are based in Australia or New Zealand and their message intended for antipodean audiences. Google may be headquartered in the US, but has a Sydney office (and data centre, I think) and - for operations in Australia (or NZ) - must operate under local laws. Whether or not the blogs that are the issue are "in Australia" becomes the tricky question.
In principle I agree, however the situation can get murky.
For instance, from the article:
The blog posts photographs and full names of anti-racism activists from Australia and New Zealand, in effect making this information available to those who wish to do these activists physical harm.
and a different site contains:
numerous posts that include photos, street addresses and even phone numbers of various [anti racism] activists.
Not quite crossing the line perhaps... but if not, then getting dangerously close.
And it's not like Stokes, the anti-racism activist, doesn't see the opposing view:
"I think what Google intends is not to restrict people's freedom of speech," Mr Stokes said. "But we're talking about bashing up brown people and defaming them. This isn't politics, this is terrorism."
And, finally two points also worth mentioning. Firstly the blogs may be in contravention of the blog providers' terms of service:
Both blogs appear to violate Blogger's user agreement, particularly Red Watch NZ.
and secondly, they may also be illegal under Australian law:
"The Racial Discrimination Act [federal legislation] and Anti-Discrimination Act [state legislation] both prohibit racial vilification. It doesn't make that a criminal offence, but it does make it unlawful for a person to do an act which is reasonably likely to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or group. As long as that act is done because of the person's race..."
So at what point does the expression of a "different perspective" become an incitement to violence or intimidation?
More than 30,000 laptops were used within the department's 15 operating units since 2001, the department said, and a total of 1,137 were stolen or missing.
Let's assume that at any given time there were about 20,000 laptops in use at the Commerce Dept in the five years since 2001. (30K laptops were used in that period, but some would have been swapped out during that time.)
1,137 missing over this period is a bit over 200 per year, or about 1% attrition per year.
Given the scope of the operation, are these losses to be expected?
I'd say yes. We're talking mobile pieces of equipment, easily hidden in a suitcase or even in coat these days.
The level of data compromise, as opposed to physical asset loss, is another matter, but then the article doesn't quantify that.
The idea is a good one (though I wouldn't be surprised if there were similar projects out there already) but IMO the site is some way from having made even "a good start".
For instance there are only 83 titles in the database. And while this deficiency can be addressed by people contributing data there are design choices which I find puzzling. For instance, How is Bill Gates' height relevant to the purpose of the project? And would it not be an idea to associate names with titles via a "role", rather than just a credit? Ie, I'd be interested to know of the 200 people who worked on, say, Starcraft, who was the producer, the artist, the game designer, the beta tester etc. As far as I can tell there is no way of identifying this at present.
Just make sure that you're clear that if there is a technical issue to be resolved, you are the final word. Also make sure that you understand that a Finance Major should have the final word on financial matters.
What isn't a financial matter though?
"We should get solution X and not solution Y". "Sorry, but X costs more than Y."
"We should spend more time getting Z right before it gets released." "Sorry but that'll mean extra costs and less revenue."
The reverse applies as well of course - in a tech company arguably everything has a technical element or implication.
Herb Lehr has no regrets, which is his right. On the other hand Einstein said
"I made one great mistake in my life... when I signed the letter to President Roosevelt recommending that atom bombs be made."
and
"The release of atom power has changed everything except our way of thinking...the solution to this problem lies in the heart of mankind. If only I had known, I should have become a watchmaker."
Speculation has it that the movie will take place during the Earth-Romulan war (which takes place a couple of years after the last season of Enterprise) and will feature a new cast.
That said, much will depend on what happens to Rick Berman after his contract expires in 2006.
Slashdot Mirror
That's a fair point. To me the line is somewhere in the vicinity of revealing phone numbers and street addresses. Posting "Joe Bloggs is an activist in Sydney" is one thing, but posting "Joe Bloggs is an activist who lives at 1 Smith St, Sydney and his phone number is 1234 5678" is another.
The Sydney Morning Herald would never post the street address or phone number of Brian Stokes as one of the blogs has done.
It makes me uncomfortable when people do it here on slashdot (eg with spam kings) and it makes me uncomfortable when racist organisations do it on their website. There's a line and that sort of action comes close to crossing it.
I don't see anything in the article that indicates that the anti-racism group is is prosecuting Google. This appears to be a public relations, not a legal, campaign.
If Google is willing to bear any criticism that results from their decision to host the blogs, then that becomes their business decision. Is it fair that such criticism is directed at them? Maybe, maybe not. But then, they're roundly criticised for their business decision to censor search results in China.
I don't necessarily see this as a free speech issue; after all, there's no such thing as free speech on private property, and their servers are their property. This could just as easily be seen as a business-cum-marketing/PR issue: Google is making a choice about the sorts of people it transacts with.
Jurisdiction issues become tricky in this connected age. The fascist groups in question are based in Australia or New Zealand and their message intended for antipodean audiences. Google may be headquartered in the US, but has a Sydney office (and data centre, I think) and - for operations in Australia (or NZ) - must operate under local laws. Whether or not the blogs that are the issue are "in Australia" becomes the tricky question.
For instance, from the article:
and a different site contains:
Not quite crossing the line perhaps
And it's not like Stokes, the anti-racism activist, doesn't see the opposing view:
And, finally two points also worth mentioning. Firstly the blogs may be in contravention of the blog providers' terms of service:
and secondly, they may also be illegal under Australian law:
So at what point does the expression of a "different perspective" become an incitement to violence or intimidation?
God: "Let there be light. Again."
... after dying.
The unicorns saw Noah's ark depart.
PATRIOT Act: Act patriotically. Or else.
Time is like a river. Drown.
He remembered his birth
... how Alan Moore and Darren Aronofsky/Ari Handel almost came up with exactly the same six word story!
Loved Joss Whedon's and Margaret Atwood's.
Oops. *blush*
A new version of TabMixPlus that works with FF2 will be released within the week according to the author's note here:
https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/1122/
In the meantime, you can install a pre-release version of the extension here:
http://tmp.garyr.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3515
To get rid of the close buttons on all tabs, go to about:config and set
browser.tabs.closeButtons
to 0 if you only want the close button on the active tab
or to 0 if you want the close button only at the right hand side of the tab bar.
I tend to use Wikipedia for "what is/who is?" type questions, and google for "how do I?" type questions.
first-post-irony?
Agreed - it's all about driving a wedge between what the writers (and others) get, and what they - the studios - keep, a gap that will get substantially wider as the net takes off as a distribution channel.
... video demonstration here
Let's assume that at any given time there were about 20,000 laptops in use at the Commerce Dept in the five years since 2001. (30K laptops were used in that period, but some would have been swapped out during that time.)
1,137 missing over this period is a bit over 200 per year, or about 1% attrition per year.
I'd say yes. We're talking mobile pieces of equipment, easily hidden in a suitcase or even in coat these days.
The level of data compromise, as opposed to physical asset loss, is another matter, but then the article doesn't quantify that.
About the only case the month is put before the day in my (non-US) experience is when talking about "September 11"...
Step 1: Investment
Step 2: Marketing
Step 3: ???
Step 4: Profit!
As a scientist, you're responsible for Step 3.
50% troll, 50% insightful. And all I was going for was the funny!
For instance there are only 83 titles in the database. And while this deficiency can be addressed by people contributing data there are design choices which I find puzzling. For instance, How is Bill Gates' height relevant to the purpose of the project? And would it not be an idea to associate names with titles via a "role", rather than just a credit? Ie, I'd be interested to know of the 200 people who worked on, say, Starcraft, who was the producer, the artist, the game designer, the beta tester etc. As far as I can tell there is no way of identifying this at present.
And yet, right now, that's not looking too unappealing.
What isn't a financial matter though?
"We should get solution X and not solution Y". "Sorry, but X costs more than Y."
"We should spend more time getting Z right before it gets released." "Sorry but that'll mean extra costs and less revenue."
The reverse applies as well of course - in a tech company arguably everything has a technical element or implication.
His other hand is busy.
Looks like we have a winner.
Speculation has it that the movie will take place during the Earth-Romulan war (which takes place a couple of years after the last season of Enterprise) and will feature a new cast.
That said, much will depend on what happens to Rick Berman after his contract expires in 2006.