Besides buying copies of "Mein Kampf" and "The Anarchist's Cookbook," what sort of flags could be construed as putting one's transactions over the limit?
Well, you certainly don't want to be caught with a copy of The Federalist Papers in John Ashcroft's America.
Giving up free speech to fight spam would be a terrible long term trade-off.
We've already given up free speech to fight communism, fight terrorism, protect national security, protect intellectual property, protect the children, etc. Getting rid of spam would be some small consolation.
I first set up my home wireless network with a SMC2632W PC Card adapter. It quickly became obvious that one access point (SMC2655W) wasn't going to cover my 2100 square foot house, so I set up one access point in my study at the front of the house and another in the laundry room at the rear.
Flash forward a year or so, and my employer issued me a spiffy new ThinkPad T30 with an integrated (MiniPCI actually) Cisco Aironet 350 adapter. This adapter uses an antenna that's actually built into the laptop, and what a difference!
There's no question that I could get by with a single access point now. I see 67% signal strength when the adapter is associated with the access point at the other end of the house -- 70 feet away, through four or five walls. In fact, I had a terrible time getting Windows XP to associate with my secured network; it kept associating the adapter with my neighbors unsecured network. (I've promised myself that I'll tell them about this if they ever kill the dandelions in their yard.)
This really isn't surprising when you consider that the PCMCIA adapter has to cram its antenna into the small portion of the card that sticks out of the laptop, while the integrated adapter gets to use an antenna that runs throughout the laptop.
First, it's not called Red Hat Advanced Server anymore. It's now Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), and there are three "flavors" -- WS, ES, and AS -- with varying hardware support, package selection, and maintenance options.
The major drivers for this are hardware and software vendors. It's simply not practical to test/certify/support a new Red Hat release every six monts, let alone kernel and glibc errata in the interim. RHEL (and SLES/UnitedLinux) give hardware and software vendors a stable target which will be supported for several years.
So if you want to use commercial software such as Oracle, WebLogic, SAP, etc., you're almost certainly going to have to transition to the RHEL products eventually.
Actually, if you follow that link you'll see that they may in fact be the same person (or at least the same "spirit").
I've always thought that The Silmarillion is pretty clear about the fact that elves can leave Mandos after a while. And the fall of Gondolin occurred at the end of the first age, which gives Glorfindel six or seven thousand years to get back to Middle Earth.
The fact that Frodo sees Glorfindel so clearly in the shadow world (into which he is being drawn by the Morgul blade) also argues for this. It tends to indicate that he has been in Aman, in the presence of the Valar.
I think this is taking things beyond the realm of rationality, if not the law. Encryption without some means of decryption just doesn't make too much sense. Otherwise I could just write some random characters down, and say it the encrypted version of Moby Dick.
My understanding of the DMCA is that the anticircumvention provisions only apply to copyrighted works. Once the copyright expires, it becomes legal to circumvent the copy protection (or more generally, s/copy protection/access control mechanism/).
The DMCA also criminalizes "trafficking in" any device which can be used to circumvent copyright protections. So you may have the theoretical right to decrypt material whose copyright has expired, but you'll have to re-invent the technique yourself.
Robotic libraries full of hot-swappable hard drives. It sounds bizarre, but it could happen.
Re:It's more complicated than that.
on
Linus on DRM
·
· Score: 1
AFAIK (far be it from me to actually re-read it), the GPL doesn't say anything about the ability to actually make use of (or even create) binaries. I believe that it concerns itself only with the availability of source code.
So the scenario that you describe would not be a violation of the license.
"Hiding" keys not allowed?
on
Linus on DRM
·
· Score: 1
Btw, one thing that is clearly _not_ allowed by the GPL is hiding private
keys in the binary. You can sign the binary that is a result of the build
process, but you can _not_ make a binary that is aware of certain keys
without making those keys public - because those keys will obviously have
been part of the kernel build itself.
I'm not so sure about this. I could create a GPL program that includes a "dummy" key in the source and then use a (GPL) hex editor to embed the real key into the binary. I don't see how this would violate the license. (Documents created with OpenOffice, for example, aren't automatically covered by the GPL.)
Slashdot Mirror
Besides buying copies of "Mein Kampf" and "The Anarchist's Cookbook," what sort of flags could be construed as putting one's transactions over the limit?
Well, you certainly don't want to be caught with a copy of The Federalist Papers in John Ashcroft's America.
Giving up free speech to fight spam would be a terrible long term trade-off.
We've already given up free speech to fight communism, fight terrorism, protect national security, protect intellectual property, protect the children, etc. Getting rid of spam would be some small consolation.
Primarily targeted towards Japanese families living in France...
Is this really a significant market?
Just when I had those memories all nice and repressed!
You've obviously never worked for a giant multinational corporation.
Do not taunt IBM's Unix license.
If the patch won't apply, you must deny!
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Aren't you thinking of Fujitsu?
Don't forget the Freemasons, Illuminati, Rosicrucians, Scientologists, Knights Templar, and Teamsters.
I'm off to read Foucault's Pendulum again.
Apparently the reporters at The Washington Post didn't feel the need to even ask why these investigations should be secret.
Woodward and Bernstein would presumably be rolling over in their graves if they were dead.
I first set up my home wireless network with a SMC2632W PC Card adapter. It quickly became obvious that one access point (SMC2655W) wasn't going to cover my 2100 square foot house, so I set up one access point in my study at the front of the house and another in the laundry room at the rear.
Flash forward a year or so, and my employer issued me a spiffy new ThinkPad T30 with an integrated (MiniPCI actually) Cisco Aironet 350 adapter. This adapter uses an antenna that's actually built into the laptop, and what a difference!
There's no question that I could get by with a single access point now. I see 67% signal strength when the adapter is associated with the access point at the other end of the house -- 70 feet away, through four or five walls. In fact, I had a terrible time getting Windows XP to associate with my secured network; it kept associating the adapter with my neighbors unsecured network. (I've promised myself that I'll tell them about this if they ever kill the dandelions in their yard.)
This really isn't surprising when you consider that the PCMCIA adapter has to cram its antenna into the small portion of the card that sticks out of the laptop, while the integrated adapter gets to use an antenna that runs throughout the laptop.
First, it's not called Red Hat Advanced Server anymore. It's now Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), and there are three "flavors" -- WS, ES, and AS -- with varying hardware support, package selection, and maintenance options.
The major drivers for this are hardware and software vendors. It's simply not practical to test/certify/support a new Red Hat release every six monts, let alone kernel and glibc errata in the interim. RHEL (and SLES/UnitedLinux) give hardware and software vendors a stable target which will be supported for several years.
So if you want to use commercial software such as Oracle, WebLogic, SAP, etc., you're almost certainly going to have to transition to the RHEL products eventually.
Before 9/11 we had Timothy McVeigh and no one was hollering that rednecks shouldn't be allowed to drive trucks.
I've been hollering that rednecks shouldn't be allowed to drive trucks (or anything else) since I moved to Texas in '96.
Actually, if you follow that link you'll see that they may in fact be the same person (or at least the same "spirit").
I've always thought that The Silmarillion is pretty clear about the fact that elves can leave Mandos after a while. And the fall of Gondolin occurred at the end of the first age, which gives Glorfindel six or seven thousand years to get back to Middle Earth.
The fact that Frodo sees Glorfindel so clearly in the shadow world (into which he is being drawn by the Morgul blade) also argues for this. It tends to indicate that he has been in Aman, in the presence of the Valar.
I think this is taking things beyond the realm of rationality, if not the law. Encryption without some means of decryption just doesn't make too much sense. Otherwise I could just write some random characters down, and say it the encrypted version of Moby Dick.
Sorry. I just patented that business model.
My understanding of the DMCA is that the anticircumvention provisions only apply to copyrighted works. Once the copyright expires, it becomes legal to circumvent the copy protection (or more generally, s/copy protection/access control mechanism/).
The DMCA also criminalizes "trafficking in" any device which can be used to circumvent copyright protections. So you may have the theoretical right to decrypt material whose copyright has expired, but you'll have to re-invent the technique yourself.
He's probably confused by the fact that Microsoft is now part of the Dow Jones Industrial Average, which used to be composed of only NYSE issues.
Don't worry. The hippie infidels will be massacred like the dogs that they are.
How?
...we have the bizarre cathedral!
Robotic libraries full of hot-swappable hard drives. It sounds bizarre, but it could happen.
AFAIK (far be it from me to actually re-read it), the GPL doesn't say anything about the ability to actually make use of (or even create) binaries. I believe that it concerns itself only with the availability of source code.
So the scenario that you describe would not be a violation of the license.
Btw, one thing that is clearly _not_ allowed by the GPL is hiding private keys in the binary. You can sign the binary that is a result of the build process, but you can _not_ make a binary that is aware of certain keys without making those keys public - because those keys will obviously have been part of the kernel build itself.
I'm not so sure about this. I could create a GPL program that includes a "dummy" key in the source and then use a (GPL) hex editor to embed the real key into the binary. I don't see how this would violate the license. (Documents created with OpenOffice, for example, aren't automatically covered by the GPL.)
And what about binary only modules?
(Not that I disagree with Linus' larger point.)
Ever heard of a Currency Transaction Report?