This whole article is a sick read. Con never claimed SD was perfect. And he argued with people who said his argument and ideas were flawed (Ingo, etc), who denied there were scheduling problems with their p4 3ghz 2gb RAM machines, and incidentally those very same people turned around and practically copied the whole concept.
Anybody who subscribed to the -ck mailing list will be very aware how receptive Con was to bug reports and it's quite disgusting to see Linus make such sweeping statements to the contrary. Sadly, since Linus' word is gospel - even if he is speaking utter shit - then Con will get publicly slammed by people like you who think it's fine to comment on what they don't know about.
Linus is trolling with that email and now people who don't know the situation will simply take his word for it. This is exactly why Con gave up.
The LKML has failed to acknowledge it's problems yet again....
The uninformed user knows Cisco as "the network company that the Internet is connected with." Being able to put that logo on consumer-grade broadband and networking products would/will continue to be a huge boon for marketing. Had someone told me 10 years ago that I could own *my very own* full-featured Cisco router for under $100, I would've given a finger to sign up.
I support surveillance by law enforcement agencies. I also believe in fairly stiff penalties for breaking the law (though I would add that I feel that harsher penalties for real crimes should be balanced with reducing the breadth of behavior that the government restricts). However, I am opposed to the use of spyware on the suspect's property for such surveillance. Why this conundrum?
The problem is that technology is getting closer to us all the time. The barrier between man and machine is becoming much narrower. And that is a good thing. At the far end of the spectrum people have long been getting artificial hearing enhancers, and now we are starting on intelligent artificial eyes and limbs. People with epilepsy are getting electronics embedded in their brains. At the nearer end of the spectrum, a large percentage of the population now carries a small computer with them everywhere (their cell phone). The man/machine split is disappearing.
So what? Well, we have a problem developing if the government assumes that anything that does not have your genome is fair game for them to crack. Today it is the suspect's computer. This already poses a problem if the suspect is, for example, engaged in legitimate contracting for some corporation - should the government have the right to compromise the security of that corporation because one of their employees is breaking the law?
But what of the more tightly coupled technology? Should the government be allowed to plant a bug in my hearing aid? Should they be allowed to tap the signals coming from my artificial eyes? Should they be allowed to monitor the same brain activity patterns that my seizure mitigating device monitors?
The problem is that we are becoming more closely coupled with technology, and that is a good thing. We are the first species in history to actively engage in our own evolution. But if we can't trust our technology, it creates a barrier to that evolutionary step. I have the right not to self-incriminate. But if a computer is part of me, where does the line get drawn?
The Feds would have the $$$ and be able to hire the skilled labor to build some pretty sophisticated spyware tools. On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised to find out Microsoft included a back door in Windows. That rumor has surfaced before.
The problem with either of those options is if they get out in the wild. How many people have access to those tools and how is their deployment managed? Who wouldn't be tempted to do a little sideline testing if they had those goodies in their tool chest.
the FBI (and some if-it-will-save-one-child-it-is-worth-it legislators) demand all the OS vendors to install backdoors so that it can come in and install whatever spyware it wants to be installed?
You must be new to the game. There's nothing unprecedented about Ubuntu's growth or popularity, there's one of these every year. This year it's Ubuntu. The year before it was Gentoo. The year before that it was Libranet. Every year presents the next "going to be huge and stay mainstream forever" distribution. Next year it will be something different.
Plus, it's not as if the cable company or telcos offering VOIP service have that much more control over the quality of their service either. Actually, they do. Cable companies like Comcast use segmented sections of their network for VoIP traffic, all the way down to the modem, which has two interfaces on the external side. You can download or upload all the porn you want, but it won't be touching your VoIP traffic. And since the connections to the PSTN are all within Comcast's network upstream, it really is a winner for quality.
While everyone can agree that it's wrong for the RIAA to prosecute people who do not have the means to commit copyright infringement, let's not forget that it's still against the law when it happens, and it does happen, especially in university network settings. Slashdot is, in general, a technical and smart crowd, let's not pull the wool over our own eyes. It just makes us look foolish.
Apple owns the copyright to the CUPS code, they can license it as they wish. There's no gentleman's agreement here, he was merely stating that at the current time, CUPS is GPL2/LGPL2.
Unless MediaDefender or the MPAA has become a law enforcement official in the past week without me noticing, there's not much difficult about denying entrapment claims. In fact, it's impossible not to.
Read the linked article. They aren't hosting child pornography, they're hosting a discussion site. Big difference between action and discussion, chief. Same goes for your murder anecdote.
There is no more expectation of privacy in a plaintext email than there is in an open-face postcard. If you want privacy, take steps to encrypt it, not unlike putting a letter in a sealed envelope (as it pertains to the law, not ease of circumvention). This will be overturned, and with good reason.
The 'files shared = sales lost' formula has never been proven by the RIAA, Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG, or anyone else.
I stopped reading there. While everyone can agree that it's wrong for the RIAA to prosecute people who do not have the means to commit copyright infringement, let's not forget that it's still against the law when it does happen. Slashdot is, in general, a technical and smart crowd, let's not pull the wool over our own eyes. It just makes us look foolish.
This is false. The Cartoon Network, via the NY ad agency, told the two guys involved to lay low and not say anything when the events happened. Multiple hours later, the story came out when their blog was found.
Slashdot Mirror
Nothing for you to see here. Please move along.
Seems I just can't win with searches anywhere today.
Windows 2000 will receive security support until 2010.
Checking the logs from my domain last night...
Spam blocking by site:
zen.spamhaus.org: 314
dnsbl.sorbs.net: 28
bl.spamcop.net: 40
psbl.surriel.com: 24
Not bad a for a single-user domain.
Where is there an ATM that does anything in increments other than 20?
This whole article is a sick read. Con never claimed SD was perfect. And he argued with people who said his argument and ideas were flawed (Ingo, etc), who denied there were scheduling problems with their p4 3ghz 2gb RAM machines, and incidentally those very same people turned around and practically copied the whole concept.
Anybody who subscribed to the -ck mailing list will be very aware how receptive Con was to bug reports and it's quite disgusting to see Linus make such sweeping statements to the contrary. Sadly, since Linus' word is gospel - even if he is speaking utter shit - then Con will get publicly slammed by people like you who think it's fine to comment on what they don't know about.
Linus is trolling with that email and now people who don't know the situation will simply take his word for it. This is exactly why Con gave up.
The LKML has failed to acknowledge it's problems yet again....
The uninformed user knows Cisco as "the network company that the Internet is connected with." Being able to put that logo on consumer-grade broadband and networking products would/will continue to be a huge boon for marketing. Had someone told me 10 years ago that I could own *my very own* full-featured Cisco router for under $100, I would've given a finger to sign up.
I figured if the editors weren't going to take the time to post new content, there wasn't much reason for us to, either.
I support surveillance by law enforcement agencies. I also believe in fairly stiff penalties for breaking the law (though I would add that I feel that harsher penalties for real crimes should be balanced with reducing the breadth of behavior that the government restricts). However, I am opposed to the use of spyware on the suspect's property for such surveillance. Why this conundrum?
The problem is that technology is getting closer to us all the time. The barrier between man and machine is becoming much narrower. And that is a good thing. At the far end of the spectrum people have long been getting artificial hearing enhancers, and now we are starting on intelligent artificial eyes and limbs. People with epilepsy are getting electronics embedded in their brains. At the nearer end of the spectrum, a large percentage of the population now carries a small computer with them everywhere (their cell phone). The man/machine split is disappearing.
So what? Well, we have a problem developing if the government assumes that anything that does not have your genome is fair game for them to crack. Today it is the suspect's computer. This already poses a problem if the suspect is, for example, engaged in legitimate contracting for some corporation - should the government have the right to compromise the security of that corporation because one of their employees is breaking the law?
But what of the more tightly coupled technology? Should the government be allowed to plant a bug in my hearing aid? Should they be allowed to tap the signals coming from my artificial eyes? Should they be allowed to monitor the same brain activity patterns that my seizure mitigating device monitors?
The problem is that we are becoming more closely coupled with technology, and that is a good thing. We are the first species in history to actively engage in our own evolution. But if we can't trust our technology, it creates a barrier to that evolutionary step. I have the right not to self-incriminate. But if a computer is part of me, where does the line get drawn?
The Feds would have the $$$ and be able to hire the skilled labor to build some pretty sophisticated spyware tools. On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised to find out Microsoft included a back door in Windows. That rumor has surfaced before.
The problem with either of those options is if they get out in the wild. How many people have access to those tools and how is their deployment managed? Who wouldn't be tempted to do a little sideline testing if they had those goodies in their tool chest.
the FBI (and some if-it-will-save-one-child-it-is-worth-it legislators) demand all the OS vendors to install backdoors so that it can come in and install whatever spyware it wants to be installed?
You must be new to the game. There's nothing unprecedented about Ubuntu's growth or popularity, there's one of these every year. This year it's Ubuntu. The year before it was Gentoo. The year before that it was Libranet. Every year presents the next "going to be huge and stay mainstream forever" distribution. Next year it will be something different.
While everyone can agree that it's wrong for the RIAA to prosecute people who do not have the means to commit copyright infringement, let's not forget that it's still against the law when it happens, and it does happen, especially in university network settings. Slashdot is, in general, a technical and smart crowd, let's not pull the wool over our own eyes. It just makes us look foolish.
Apple owns the copyright to the CUPS code, they can license it as they wish. There's no gentleman's agreement here, he was merely stating that at the current time, CUPS is GPL2/LGPL2.
Unless MediaDefender or the MPAA has become a law enforcement official in the past week without me noticing, there's not much difficult about denying entrapment claims. In fact, it's impossible not to.
This one doesn't seem to have a problem stocking others, though.
Not quite. If you check AMD's errata, their have 4x as many "items" to be resolved in their latest chips as the Core 2 line.
Read the linked article. They aren't hosting child pornography, they're hosting a discussion site. Big difference between action and discussion, chief. Same goes for your murder anecdote.
There is no more expectation of privacy in a plaintext email than there is in an open-face postcard. If you want privacy, take steps to encrypt it, not unlike putting a letter in a sealed envelope (as it pertains to the law, not ease of circumvention). This will be overturned, and with good reason.
It's kind of amusing you should mention that. Hourly relevance FTW.
Since when is it your right to be my roommate or even enter my home?
Good times. =D
The 'files shared = sales lost' formula has never been proven by the RIAA, Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG, or anyone else.
I stopped reading there. While everyone can agree that it's wrong for the RIAA to prosecute people who do not have the means to commit copyright infringement, let's not forget that it's still against the law when it does happen. Slashdot is, in general, a technical and smart crowd, let's not pull the wool over our own eyes. It just makes us look foolish.
This is false. The Cartoon Network, via the NY ad agency, told the two guys involved to lay low and not say anything when the events happened. Multiple hours later, the story came out when their blog was found.