...However, right there is a huge flaw. It seems like a $1,000,000 investment in terrorists bombing isreal could potentially be a good enough reason for someone to bomb isreal...
To correct that problems, they could just set it up like horse races. The more money people invest in a horse to win, the better the odds which results in lower payouts. Now if I was to see odds of 40 to 1 on Isreal getting bombed, then invested $1M and the odds changed 1 to 2, then I barely have an incentive to place my wag...um...invest in that event.
You are right, I did not understand the copyright law correctly. Now I do. Thanks for the explanation.
Ok, how about this scenario. Your purchased CD gets destroyed(Dog ate it, melted in the card, etc.) and you have no backup. Would it then be legal under copyright laws to then download/copy the cd frome somewhere/someone else?
...Yes, but how about if you make 2,000,000 copies of it and leave them at 2,000,000 of your "buddies" houses and see if nobody cares...
Let say 8M people by CDs and 50% of them make a backup copy. Then of that 50%, another 50% forget the backup copy at there buddies house. Hmmm... thats 2M unpurchased copies in circulation, that the RIAA can't collect money from. It truly amazes me. People have been duping and sharing music for decades. Now that you can distribute it via the Internet, people want to make it a crime!
...As long as you are not offering them on a peer-to-peer network for/others/ to use, you'll be fine...
Let me ask you this, why can't I offer them to someone else for use? How about the non technical people out their that do not know how (or are to lazy) to rip songs from a CD. Why can't someone download a song from someone else if they have already purchased the music? If I already own the music where is the harm in downloading it from a P2P network? Maybe I do not understand the copyright laws, but the way I see it, it is perfectly legal under those circumstances. It's kind of like you bought the same CD as me. Now you want a backup copy and don't have a burner/cd burners broken/you don't own a computer/place you execuse here. So I now burn my purchased copy and give it to you.
IMHO, If the RIAA wants to try and stop P2P, I would rather see them take a page from Micro$oft and include a EULA with the CD. Somewhere in the EULA state that you can not upload the tracks to P2P. Then if you wish to violate the EULA, then it is a civil matter (IMHO, which is what it should be, not criminal).
I know what we should do. Everytime any person submitts an article, regardles of the topic, just add a little bit of M$ flame bait to it. Eventually michael will get so inundated with M$ bashing comments, that eventually the comments will lose the appeal. Who's with me!!!
Nobody is responsible for anything they do. Anybody who wants to hold them responsible is an authoritarian crypto-fascist bastard to be flamed into oblivion.
You forgot the most important part of that statement
...why not some minor courses on basic security...
I bet if the broadband providers were to offer security training for free (wink,wink;) ) to their customers, they most likely could save a bundle in bandwidth and troubleshooting costs by having educated users.
Unfortunatelly I tried the do's and don't list here at work. It trully amazes me on how dense people can be. Litterally I had people read the list, sign a document that they read it and understood it, and still I saw mail virii showing up in logs, people having spyware installed, hard drives filling up with crap, etc. You can create all of the lists and provide all of the training in the world, but as long as people think that stupid desktop purple gorilla is cute or they might get to see a pair of t*ts for free, they will ignore everything they have been taught or read.
......but these days, computer users should have some basic training on "what attachments are likely to contain pictures from grandma - and what aren't!". Otherwise they might end up hosting some illegal warez server in their own house - without their knowledge...
Training is a good idea, but unfortunately it doesn't always work. I have a l-user here at work that has been trained on how to use email securely. Then everyday, I get phone calls about pr0n email that she has received. She takes great delight in explicitlly describing the contents of the message, and then pretending to be offended. Then I get the "Why don't you do something about this" statement. I do have filters on the email server, but unfortunately they only pickup about 85% of the spam. The other 15% get sent to the users and then opened. Luckly I have AV pushed to everyone and configured it so that it can not be turned off or messed with, and every one gets updated nightly. Just based on the AV logs, I can tell you exactly which l-users do not apply the security training.
Bin Laden does not want to kill people, what he wants is to destroy any threat to Islamic beliefs that he may perceive. Since he sees the USA (and other nations)as a threat to Islam, he has declared jihad against this country. The Islamic faith is against killing just like any other religion, but also like any other religion, killing can/is rationalized for the perceived greater good of the religous community and beliefs. So when you make an assinine statement like Bin Laden wants to KILL PEOPLE, you just make yourself sound like an idiot. As for the "hacker terroist", where does the Washington post article say anything about hacking? I do recall another section of the Washington post article that states:
He can drill into a cable trench between Kansas and Colorado and determine how to create the most havoc with a hedge clipper.
Gee I need to dump all of my electronic equipment and go out and get me one of those new hi-tech hedge clippers. Boy can I do some seriuos hacking then. I'll be the envy of all the l33t haX0rs everywhere. His disertation has nothing to do with hacking and anyone who reads that into it, needs to get out of their mommy and daddy's basement a little more often. It is all about finding weak points in the various infrastructures, and what the economic impacts would be if they were to be exploited. The reasons people are concerned are also stated in the article. Even your reply hinted at it:
he real motives are hinted at in the news story -- executives want the fragility of their systems kept secret because it's embarrassing.
Not only is it embarassing, but imagine how much it will cost to fix, or even how much it will cost if somebody (like a terrorist or even a competitor) were to take advantage of that vulnerablity. Now multiply that by every single organization that utilizes all of the different infrastructures. Now you might begin to understand the chaos it may create. That is in all probability why the Feds want to classify it. If Terrorist or religous zealots were to be able to have access to all of this data in a nice neat package then they would have a hell of a war plan. One of the most important rules of warfare is to attack economic centers. To oversimplify it, No money = No threat. So in response to your statement:
He doesn't care about interrupting your porn download, or even bank transactions
In actuality Bin Laden does care. The Pr0n industry is a multi-billion dollar industry that feeds many other industries, especially in the banking and Credit Card transaction areas. Any business, bank, or finacial organization that process Pr0n transactions would be effected if Bin Laden was to knock out any portion of that industry (or any multi-billion dollar industry that requires electronic banking and CC transactions). It's called a domino effect. So now if Bin Laden can knock down other industries on top of the Pr0n industry, then the dominos will fall faster. The faster you can take the money away, the faster you will win the war. Why do you think the Federal government has been working deligently to shutdown the "money" network of Al-Quada? Don't get me wrong, I do not believe the disertation should be classified. I mean if it was all built from legally obtained public information, then there is nothing stopping someone else (Especially well funded religous zealots that know how to take better advantage of the government beuarcracies than most Americans do) from doing the same. That would then lead to the next question, what other information should be classified? Should we classify everything? Where do you draw the line? I hope he gets to publish, and make a boat load of cash going to companies and the government to point out their weak spots so they can be fixed. If this doesn't scare the sh*t out of the companies and government to fix the problems, then nothing will ever convince them to corret them.
They have taken this information and made maps of it. WOW! Whoopee!
So apparently you missed the part in the Washington Post that states...
Using mathematical formulas, he probes for critical links, trying to answer the question "If I were Osama bin Laden, where would I want to attack?"
What he has done is to probe and test the layers of infrastructure for weakness and try to determine the econominc impact if those weaknesses were to be exploited. Any boob can use GIS software to layer all of the different infrastructures on a pretty map. To analyze all of the layers and then tie them together so as to come up with the mathmatical formulas to determine what would happen if.... Now that sounds like it would take some smarts.
Time for a rant! Evertime I go to submit a story, I search/. to make sure that it has not been submitted. Rarely do I find a story that has not been posted. The very few times that it actually seems to be an orginal submission it always gets rejected. What do I have to do to get a story submitted? Apparently duplicates are acceptable submissions. Maybe I will just stop searching/. to see if my submission is actually orginal and it will get posted! Geez who do you have to bl*w around here to get into the club. Feel free to Mod this down at will, because now I feel better:0
If they classify a document that is nothing more than a compilation of public information, then who is to say that the public information that was used should not be classified as well. Where do you draw the line? If a Grad student did this, the next assumption will be that a terroist can as well. Now do you classify all of that information, even though it has other beneficial uses?
I recognized this a long time ago. Each one of my children have a computer. I round robin the machines based on age and game HW requirements. The oldest child gets daddies hand me down so he can play the more advanced games. The middle child is now ready for the games the oldest child was playing, so I give her his old one. The youngest then receives the middle childs PC since he is now old enough to play the pre-school games. All of my children have been playing games since they were old enough to move a mouse. The 2 school age children have scored off of the charts in the Math areas on their report cards. They have also scored extremely high (My son scored a perfect score:) ) in the math and logic areas of the standardized test that they take. It has to be the video games, because it can't be from my genetic contribution:)
If I buy a license for the music, then where is it. I would like to see the licenses explaining to me all of my rights under that license. If I am not informed of those rights, how can I be expected to know what they are and abide by them. Since I bought the mysterious license that I have not seen, then who says the RIAA can't make it up as they go. Don't try and say that the license is the copyright law. I know what that is, and do my best to abide by it and all the laws of this country. So once again, where is my license. I don't remeber seeing track 1 on my CD say listen here first--Eula, or having an actual printed agreement with the artist/recording studio inside of the jewel case. So lets say that my entire CD collection has been ripped to MP3's. According to copyright law I am OK in doing so. Now all of my CDs get destroyed or stollen. Does the lack of ownership of these CD's negate the copyright law. The way I understand it, no, I paid for the music and own the right to use my purchased copy of the music. Now my HD dies. I get a new HD and download the MP3's of the music artists that I had orginally purchased. Am I in violation of the law? The way I understand it, no. I already paid for the music. The person distributing it maybe in violation if they have never purchased it, but how are you going to prove they didn't. So if I have not violated copyright laws, and never seen a license, what harm is their in using P2P. Give me a license stating that I will not rip or download, then I will gladly buy a nother copy, or not listen to the artist except for on the radio.
Yes, pre Outlook XP had netfolders that would let you share multiple calendars. Outlook XP has since removed the Net Folders feature, and if you need to share multiple folders then you must buy Exchange. You can however publish your free/busy time, but it only works with one calendar. The problem I have is that before Outlook XP my organization used Net Folders. It did act flaky, but once it started working, it worked. my lusers would have 3,4, and sometimes 5 different calendars in Outlook. 1 for each person that had their schedule maintained or tracked by a secretary/supervisor. Now what ever solution I can come up with needs to be able to have multiple calendars displayed and shared, "because thats the way it used to work". God forbid people change.
Slashdot Mirror
...However, right there is a huge flaw. It seems like a $1,000,000 investment in terrorists bombing isreal could potentially be a good enough reason for someone to bomb isreal...
To correct that problems, they could just set it up like horse races. The more money people invest in a horse to win, the better the odds which results in lower payouts. Now if I was to see odds of 40 to 1 on Isreal getting bombed, then invested $1M and the odds changed 1 to 2, then I barely have an incentive to place my wag...um...invest in that event.
I prefer Archie :)
You are right, I did not understand the copyright law correctly. Now I do. Thanks for the explanation.
Ok, how about this scenario. Your purchased CD gets destroyed(Dog ate it, melted in the card, etc.) and you have no backup. Would it then be legal under copyright laws to then download/copy the cd frome somewhere/someone else?
...Yes, but how about if you make 2,000,000 copies of it and leave them at 2,000,000 of your "buddies" houses and see if nobody cares...
Let say 8M people by CDs and 50% of them make a backup copy. Then of that 50%, another 50% forget the backup copy at there buddies house. Hmmm... thats 2M unpurchased copies in circulation, that the RIAA can't collect money from. It truly amazes me. People have been duping and sharing music for decades. Now that you can distribute it via the Internet, people want to make it a crime!
...As long as you are not offering them on a peer-to-peer network for /others/ to use, you'll be fine...
Let me ask you this, why can't I offer them to someone else for use? How about the non technical people out their that do not know how (or are to lazy) to rip songs from a CD. Why can't someone download a song from someone else if they have already purchased the music? If I already own the music where is the harm in downloading it from a P2P network? Maybe I do not understand the copyright laws, but the way I see it, it is perfectly legal under those circumstances. It's kind of like you bought the same CD as me. Now you want a backup copy and don't have a burner/cd burners broken/you don't own a computer/place you execuse here. So I now burn my purchased copy and give it to you.
IMHO, If the RIAA wants to try and stop P2P, I would rather see them take a page from Micro$oft and include a EULA with the CD. Somewhere in the EULA state that you can not upload the tracks to P2P. Then if you wish to violate the EULA, then it is a civil matter (IMHO, which is what it should be, not criminal).
I could do that, but then I would be expected do do that for all of the l-users. It could then become a full time job.
But would you hit it?
:)
Hell no, not even with your D*ck and CmdrTaco pushin'
EWWW!!!, she is fugly!!! Hence why she seems to like pr0n
I know what we should do. Everytime any person submitts an article, regardles of the topic, just add a little bit of M$ flame bait to it. Eventually michael will get so inundated with M$ bashing comments, that eventually the comments will lose the appeal. Who's with me!!!
Nobody is responsible for anything they do. Anybody who wants to hold them responsible is an authoritarian crypto-fascist bastard to be flamed into oblivion.
,besides it's Microsfts' fault!
You forgot the most important part of that statement
...why not some minor courses on basic security...
;) ) to their customers, they most likely could save a bundle in bandwidth and troubleshooting costs by having educated users.
I bet if the broadband providers were to offer security training for free (wink,wink
Cool! Thanks for the tip. That's one less place that will sell my personal inf, and flood my inbox with spam.
I always thought it was implied that Slashdot was "News For Linux, Nothing Else Matters" Just not stated anywhere officially on the site
No, no, you have it all wrong. It's "News about bashing M$, Linux is the only thing that matters"
Unfortunatelly I tried the do's and don't list here at work. It trully amazes me on how dense people can be. Litterally I had people read the list, sign a document that they read it and understood it, and still I saw mail virii showing up in logs, people having spyware installed, hard drives filling up with crap, etc. You can create all of the lists and provide all of the training in the world, but as long as people think that stupid desktop purple gorilla is cute or they might get to see a pair of t*ts for free, they will ignore everything they have been taught or read.
......but these days, computer users should have some basic training on "what attachments are likely to contain pictures from grandma - and what aren't!". Otherwise they might end up hosting some illegal warez server in their own house - without their knowledge...
Training is a good idea, but unfortunately it doesn't always work. I have a l-user here at work that has been trained on how to use email securely. Then everyday, I get phone calls about pr0n email that she has received. She takes great delight in explicitlly describing the contents of the message, and then pretending to be offended. Then I get the "Why don't you do something about this" statement. I do have filters on the email server, but unfortunately they only pickup about 85% of the spam. The other 15% get sent to the users and then opened. Luckly I have AV pushed to everyone and configured it so that it can not be turned off or messed with, and every one gets updated nightly. Just based on the AV logs, I can tell you exactly which l-users do not apply the security training.
Bin Laden wants to KILL PEOPLE
Bin Laden does not want to kill people, what he wants is to destroy any threat to Islamic beliefs that he may perceive. Since he sees the USA (and other nations)as a threat to Islam, he has declared jihad against this country. The Islamic faith is against killing just like any other religion, but also like any other religion, killing can/is rationalized for the perceived greater good of the religous community and beliefs. So when you make an assinine statement like Bin Laden wants to KILL PEOPLE, you just make yourself sound like an idiot. As for the "hacker terroist", where does the Washington post article say anything about hacking? I do recall another section of the Washington post article that states:
He can drill into a cable trench between Kansas and Colorado and determine how to create the most havoc with a hedge clipper.
Gee I need to dump all of my electronic equipment and go out and get me one of those new hi-tech hedge clippers. Boy can I do some seriuos hacking then. I'll be the envy of all the l33t haX0rs everywhere. His disertation has nothing to do with hacking and anyone who reads that into it, needs to get out of their mommy and daddy's basement a little more often. It is all about finding weak points in the various infrastructures, and what the economic impacts would be if they were to be exploited. The reasons people are concerned are also stated in the article. Even your reply hinted at it:
he real motives are hinted at in the news story -- executives want the fragility of their systems kept secret because it's embarrassing.
Not only is it embarassing, but imagine how much it will cost to fix, or even how much it will cost if somebody (like a terrorist or even a competitor) were to take advantage of that vulnerablity. Now multiply that by every single organization that utilizes all of the different infrastructures. Now you might begin to understand the chaos it may create. That is in all probability why the Feds want to classify it. If Terrorist or religous zealots were to be able to have access to all of this data in a nice neat package then they would have a hell of a war plan. One of the most important rules of warfare is to attack economic centers. To oversimplify it, No money = No threat. So in response to your statement:
He doesn't care about interrupting your porn download, or even bank transactions
In actuality Bin Laden does care. The Pr0n industry is a multi-billion dollar industry that feeds many other industries, especially in the banking and Credit Card transaction areas. Any business, bank, or finacial organization that process Pr0n transactions would be effected if Bin Laden was to knock out any portion of that industry (or any multi-billion dollar industry that requires electronic banking and CC transactions). It's called a domino effect. So now if Bin Laden can knock down other industries on top of the Pr0n industry, then the dominos will fall faster. The faster you can take the money away, the faster you will win the war. Why do you think the Federal government has been working deligently to shutdown the "money" network of Al-Quada? Don't get me wrong, I do not believe the disertation should be classified. I mean if it was all built from legally obtained public information, then there is nothing stopping someone else (Especially well funded religous zealots that know how to take better advantage of the government beuarcracies than most Americans do) from doing the same. That would then lead to the next question, what other information should be classified? Should we classify everything? Where do you draw the line? I hope he gets to publish, and make a boat load of cash going to companies and the government to point out their weak spots so they can be fixed. If this doesn't scare the sh*t out of the companies and government to fix the problems, then nothing will ever convince them to corret them.
So no
They have taken this information and made maps of it. WOW! Whoopee!
So apparently you missed the part in the Washington Post that states...
Using mathematical formulas, he probes for critical links, trying to answer the question "If I were Osama bin Laden, where would I want to attack?"
What he has done is to probe and test the layers of infrastructure for weakness and try to determine the econominc impact if those weaknesses were to be exploited. Any boob can use GIS software to layer all of the different infrastructures on a pretty map. To analyze all of the layers and then tie them together so as to come up with the mathmatical formulas to determine what would happen if.... Now that sounds like it would take some smarts.
Time for a rant! Evertime I go to submit a story, I search /. to make sure that it has not been submitted. Rarely do I find a story that has not been posted. The very few times that it actually seems to be an orginal submission it always gets rejected. What do I have to do to get a story submitted? Apparently duplicates are acceptable submissions. Maybe I will just stop searching /. to see if my submission is actually orginal and it will get posted! Geez who do you have to bl*w around here to get into the club. Feel free to Mod this down at will, because now I feel better :0
If they classify a document that is nothing more than a compilation of public information, then who is to say that the public information that was used should not be classified as well. Where do you draw the line? If a Grad student did this, the next assumption will be that a terroist can as well. Now do you classify all of that information, even though it has other beneficial uses?
True, but that security should not be gained at the cost of freedom or you are no longer free.
RTFA!!!
I recognized this a long time ago. Each one of my children have a computer. I round robin the machines based on age and game HW requirements. The oldest child gets daddies hand me down so he can play the more advanced games. The middle child is now ready for the games the oldest child was playing, so I give her his old one. The youngest then receives the middle childs PC since he is now old enough to play the pre-school games. All of my children have been playing games since they were old enough to move a mouse. The 2 school age children have scored off of the charts in the Math areas on their report cards. They have also scored extremely high (My son scored a perfect score :) ) in the math and logic areas of the standardized test that they take. It has to be the video games, because it can't be from my genetic contribution :)
That's the point of the sig, jeez. Go troll somewhere else.
If I buy a license for the music, then where is it. I would like to see the licenses explaining to me all of my rights under that license. If I am not informed of those rights, how can I be expected to know what they are and abide by them. Since I bought the mysterious license that I have not seen, then who says the RIAA can't make it up as they go. Don't try and say that the license is the copyright law. I know what that is, and do my best to abide by it and all the laws of this country. So once again, where is my license. I don't remeber seeing track 1 on my CD say listen here first--Eula, or having an actual printed agreement with the artist/recording studio inside of the jewel case. So lets say that my entire CD collection has been ripped to MP3's. According to copyright law I am OK in doing so. Now all of my CDs get destroyed or stollen. Does the lack of ownership of these CD's negate the copyright law. The way I understand it, no, I paid for the music and own the right to use my purchased copy of the music. Now my HD dies. I get a new HD and download the MP3's of the music artists that I had orginally purchased. Am I in violation of the law? The way I understand it, no. I already paid for the music. The person distributing it maybe in violation if they have never purchased it, but how are you going to prove they didn't. So if I have not violated copyright laws, and never seen a license, what harm is their in using P2P. Give me a license stating that I will not rip or download, then I will gladly buy a nother copy, or not listen to the artist except for on the radio.
...there's a reason communism fell, ya know...
;)
Yeah, they used Linux
Yes, pre Outlook XP had netfolders that would let you share multiple calendars. Outlook XP has since removed the Net Folders feature, and if you need to share multiple folders then you must buy Exchange. You can however publish your free/busy time, but it only works with one calendar. The problem I have is that before Outlook XP my organization used Net Folders. It did act flaky, but once it started working, it worked. my lusers would have 3,4, and sometimes 5 different calendars in Outlook. 1 for each person that had their schedule maintained or tracked by a secretary/supervisor. Now what ever solution I can come up with needs to be able to have multiple calendars displayed and shared, "because thats the way it used to work". God forbid people change.