"What's the basis of your conclusion? Do you expect an entire economy to make a U-turn in a few months? What would qualify as a "fixing" the economy in your mind?"
Well, one thing that leads credibility to his statement is that war/defence spending doesn't comprise nearly as much of the U.S. GDP as it used to. If I'm remembering stats that I heard on NPR properly, during WWII, the war spending portion of GDP was something like 22%. Granted, it was spending that went nowhere in a sense, since there was no return on the 'investment' that war bought, but it stimulated market aspects back into production that found something to do after the war ended. It didn't hurt that tensions between the U.S.S.R. and the U.S.A. escalated as well, generating R&D, assembly, testing, and materials jobs to build the infrastructure that carried us into the fifties and sixties. Once the government didn't have one single active enemy to be able to propaganda the country into paying to "fight" against, matters toward defence didn't get what they had.
Contrast that to the modern state, where GDP impact of a war is more like 4%, which can almost be written off as statistical noise, and you end up with a war not helping the economy as a whole. We don't build hundreds of planes a day for our "police actions", we don't crank out the carpet bombs, the tanks, the rifles. We have most of the war materiel stockpiled already, with personnel already trained in its use, and actively being paid already. We move them to the area affected, pay them more for combat duty, go through more ammunition, and put a little more wear and tear on the big items like tanks and planes, but we don't ramp up production. Things remain nice and stable. The fact that no additional money appears to be necessary to pay for the rest of the expenses from the Iraq invasion should be proof enough for that.
I personally am glad that our "problem" is mild enough that we don't even have 7% unemployment. 5% is considered regular, healthy unemployment, and if this is the worst that it gets, we're going to be just fine. I'm glad that we shouldn't need another multi-million casualty war in order to feed people.
I've noticed that lots of people who were highly paid during the dotcom boom are not recovering well, despite the existence of jobs, only requiring a little bit of creativity to find them. I wouldn't say that things are in the overinflated state they were, with people being paid $100K for basic system administration, but jobs can be found. I think that the problem is that most of the people who were making the insane dollars they were don't want to take on a $30K-$40K job, even if basic administration or technician work will pay the bills. They can't forget the lavish lifestyles that they lived.
I was affected by it too, for I managed to get out of field techin' to start doing Quality Assurance Engineering. That job lasted a year. When it ended, I looked for other QA jobs, basic IS admin jobs, and the like, and I ended having to go back to what I knew very well, which was field tech. It's not the most fun, the most glamourous, but it does pay the rent, gets me away from a desk all day, and doesn't leave me sitting at home feeling dejected for myself for being unemployed for months and months.
If the market picks up, and QA positions become available in the money and stability that I want, I may leave my current job for one. Until that time arrives, I'm going to be happy where I am. It's not perfect, but life isn't fair, and those that get off their asses and try to make something for themselves will be a lot happier than those who give up.
"Surviving Slashdot" Illstrates how to build a corporate network that accepts large numbers of incoming connections from stories posted at Slashdot.org, while still allowing employees to make network connections that they need. Techniques covered include round-robin DNS with different servers in different geographical locations, multiple HTTP servers with load balancing, and smooth transition over to a volume web host. like Conxion or cNet at a moment's notice without significant downtime. Other Anti-Slashdotting tactics also discussed.
This could force state level corporation comissions to treat broadband service the same way they do telephone service and electricity, as a regulated service. This could go toward requiring service availability if others in the same geographical area can get service, instead of hiding behind "bad cable" or "pair-gain" (for DSL folks). It would also possibly allow for more grounds for suits against poor providers, legitmizing the entire industry yet slapping it around a bit.
Don't you get it? It's never going to come out! That's the joke! Naming it Duke Nukem' Forever is the entire thing as a one-liner! They never intended it to be released!
If release dates are touted and pushed and touted and pushed, would that constitute vaporware? I know of one company in particular that was guilty of that severely until August 24, 1995...
When one person owes you {money,stuff,etc}, it's bad for them. When you feel that millions of people owe you {money,stuff,etc} it's bad for you.
So, the RIAA, and the MPAA to a lesser extent are in the second category. While I don't like the MPAA's practices with DeCSS, at least thy have taken to pricing their products in a range that I as a consumer don't feel bad about paying. I'll gladly buy DVDs from the bargain bin for $6.00.
The RIAA on the other hand isn't playing so nice. When a CD is $17.00, the musician might see a few pennies, and discounts on the products aren't forthcoming, it's understandable why people copy music and don't feel bad about it. The soundtrack for many movies on CD costs more than the movie on DVD itself. There is something very wrong with the world when this is the case.
The MPAA has been lucky, since movies are large enough that copying them isn't nearly as big a no-brainer as CDs/mp3s are, but at the same time, if they keep movies cheap, we'll be more inclined to buy them instead of copying them. The RIAA's problem has been around much longer, is much deeper entrenched, and does not appear stoppable by legislation, threats, civil suits, or any other means that they have come up with. If they don't significantly change their business model it'll only get worse, to a point where artists find new labels that don't play by the RIAA's rules, and the RIAA as an organization will cease to be. If they aren't willing to change, they'll get what they deserve.
"Gathering of private information by the government when no crime is known can in essence be a presumption of guilt, and this can be extremely dangerous."
It'll be interesting to see if a defense uses this in an argument for exclusion of all evidence gathered before a crime is committed, which if timed correctly could completely blow a prosecution's case out of the water. It could, in theory, even set a precedent of this being used in other cases, to allow individuals to destroy any leads generated after an actual event, if those leads were based on prior information gathering...
"this is something that I've been trying to figure out myself, ever since I first read about TIA--What would help? Or is there even a problem?"
I don't believe that this will yield a solution to the 'problem' of terrorism. It's kind of like doorlocks on automobiles, it keeps the honest people honest. Does anyone think for a minute though, that this information will be given to local law enforcement for small-time crime? Does anyone think that it will ever be shown except maybe after an attack has occurred, and even then, will it prevent the wrong people from being suspected, like in the case of the bombing at the Olympics in Atlanta in 1996? Remember, the government was VERY sure that Richard Jewell did it, but he was later cleared, after a lengthy, real investigation. Will such a gumshoe investigation occur at the federal level now, or will they go back and start looking at files and convict without using a single bit of new information?
I don't want to trust the government that far. I don't want them to know when I've purchased a double-double at In'n'Out. I don't want them to know what kind of computer I use. I don't want them to know what kind of car I drive, or even how many speeding tickets I have. The latter is only the business of the state that I live in, since they are the ones who issued the license. If I step out of line, then they can come and look at me. I don't want them looking at the sum of the information that they've gathered on me to determine that I may commit a crime sometime, especially when I don't even know. I just don't like anyone or anything having information on me that I don't make available on purpose.
Under the terms of the GPL, Linksys must either ship the source code with the product or accompany the product with a 3-year written offer to disclose the source on demand at duplication cost.
Finally, Linksys must also of course include the GPL with their product and declare that the software is distributed under the terms of the GPL.
So, I assume that distributing a Linux install CD, as long as it includes the same version of the kernel and whatever tools are present would constitute a good-faith effort, along with the GPL being printed inside of the cover of the manual?
Gathering information on people before they have done anything wrong is always a problem, especially if these people know that it is being collected. It makes poisioning the data pool attractive, even if it's only something as stupid as magazine subscriptions, email account names, aliases (which are legal as long as they're not used to deceive for nefarious purposes), and credit transactions.
The government is most likely to be able to track transactions that occur digitally, or require storage of information on computers that are not under the control of the individual whose data is being collected. Do you think that it's likely that terrorists will use these means, now that it's been announced that the government is collecting it? I'd think that they're more likely to buy guns from someone who has switched from running drugs into the country to running guns, to contact their fellow agents through 'chance' encounters, and to transact whatever seemingly legitimate business they use either with cash or through legitimate electronic transactions, which will make them blend into the electronic noise just like everyone else. How is this going to help matters?
The government already knows when one buys a new handgun through legitimate channels, through the Brady Law. They already should know about most of those who have explosives experience, since that is usually military training based to begin with, and demolitions companies, mining companies, and anyone else legitimately using explosives has to get their employees licensed. "Cyberterrorism" is an absolute joke of a term as long as easily broken-into OSes like anything Microsoft has ever put out is still in the mainstream and is still being used as a server, and there are probably dozens, if not hundreds of other examples like these.
I don't see how collecting all of this data is going to help.
If only we could castrate him for being a dingus, to prevent him from breeding (assuming he hasn't already bred), and somehow deport him to a third world country that could use him for labor or meat (if he won't work), we'd be good off.
I hope that the bankruptcy court leaves him with the lifestyle of a crackfiend. I've known people whose business practices are like this guy's, and I have no sympathy.
If they're not rewriting the source code, using it in a form that they themselves obtained it in (pre-compiling), they might not have to provide source if they disclose their source location. Also, if they were smart enough to create independent kernel modules for the rest of the device, they wouldn't have to release those anyway.
It would be nice if they included at least a copy of the GPL and a linux installation CD in the back of their manual though, since that would be a way of distributing the code, if not more than the code, and would probably make them in compliance.
Hell, TurboLinux install CDs came with hardware that Linux couldn't even use, for a while...
I think that it's a bad idea if one has to pay for it at all, since we're already being bombarded by advertising that should pay for the infrastructure. Why would I pay for receiving more commercials?
Of course, this is probably why I don't even have a TV antenna or cable/satellite, so I don't have to receive whatever mindless drivel the media companies come up with in order to sell commercials.
is to post what we feel about Mr. Max and Ms. Johnson on our own weblogs, right? expressing our opinions on the veracity of the information that Tucker Max posted?
We should also comment on the "Free Speech" banner on Katy Johnson's page, and I personally feel she is a huge hypocrite.
I can get a decent used laptop on eBay for less than the cost of the device, and I can also then do word processing, war driving, mild gaming, etc, and STILL do everything that this device can. Why should I buy it? Size? Size does matter, but cost matters more to me.
The IBM Thinkpad 240 series, the tiny sharps, the tiny Sonys, all available, of decent quality, and inexpensive.
It's not as easy as media/cartoons show it to be, blowing up a dam. They're incredibly thick at the bottom, and if designed right, are able to take things like higher pressure from a heavy rain upriver. Yes, one could probably breech the dam at the top, where it's thinnest, and that would cause a lot of water to rush through, but it probably wouldn't destroy the dam too far down where the dam thickens, and once the breech occurs, the control facility opens the side flows to let water out rather than waiting for it to all drain through the breech, so the breech isn't extended further. It would be messy, but the chances of someone destroying the whole dam while it still had maximum capacity behind it are slim at best.
... and send the comet crashing into the earth, Lori Petty will rescue Naomi Watts, and they will fight against Malcolm McDowell and save us all from Water and Power!
I think I need to turn off the TV and go outside now...
This is the kind of thing that as a fifteen year old, I only dreamed about.
I can understand players getting mad at this, but at the same time, it's just a game, and if individual users themselves are considering legal action, they really need to shut down the computer and go outside for a while.
We need standards. There are far too many existing computers and a market that sells too many computers, regardless of size, to allow for standards to lapse. We do also need technological advancement, but a practice that makes sense is to take an existing standard and make use of it while working newer technologies through revisions to where they are stable enough to make for a new standard. Repeat. This allows for something like RS232 to be king for a long time, but ultimately be replaced by something like Ethernet. Ultimately, something will replace that, no matter how much speed we manage to get over it. Serial didn't start at 115200, it started in the range where someone with good hearing could interpret what a modem was doing. At this oint, except for special applications, serial is dead. Most of our modems aren't even serial anymore, and we certainly don't use it for peripherals. USB replaced that.
I don't download movies because I like nice high quality imagery. I'll acknowledge that even exceptions to the bull occur sometimes, like this example, but I want to enjoy the experience. I'd gather that most people who download movies either weren't planning on buying the movie in the first place, or have already seen it, and have given at least some money for the experience. Either way, the studio has gotten all of the money it's realistically going to get.
Slashdot Mirror
"What's the basis of your conclusion? Do you expect an entire economy to make a U-turn in a few months? What would qualify as a "fixing" the economy in your mind?"
Well, one thing that leads credibility to his statement is that war/defence spending doesn't comprise nearly as much of the U.S. GDP as it used to. If I'm remembering stats that I heard on NPR properly, during WWII, the war spending portion of GDP was something like 22%. Granted, it was spending that went nowhere in a sense, since there was no return on the 'investment' that war bought, but it stimulated market aspects back into production that found something to do after the war ended. It didn't hurt that tensions between the U.S.S.R. and the U.S.A. escalated as well, generating R&D, assembly, testing, and materials jobs to build the infrastructure that carried us into the fifties and sixties. Once the government didn't have one single active enemy to be able to propaganda the country into paying to "fight" against, matters toward defence didn't get what they had.
Contrast that to the modern state, where GDP impact of a war is more like 4%, which can almost be written off as statistical noise, and you end up with a war not helping the economy as a whole. We don't build hundreds of planes a day for our "police actions", we don't crank out the carpet bombs, the tanks, the rifles. We have most of the war materiel stockpiled already, with personnel already trained in its use, and actively being paid already. We move them to the area affected, pay them more for combat duty, go through more ammunition, and put a little more wear and tear on the big items like tanks and planes, but we don't ramp up production. Things remain nice and stable. The fact that no additional money appears to be necessary to pay for the rest of the expenses from the Iraq invasion should be proof enough for that.
I personally am glad that our "problem" is mild enough that we don't even have 7% unemployment. 5% is considered regular, healthy unemployment, and if this is the worst that it gets, we're going to be just fine. I'm glad that we shouldn't need another multi-million casualty war in order to feed people.
I've noticed that lots of people who were highly paid during the dotcom boom are not recovering well, despite the existence of jobs, only requiring a little bit of creativity to find them. I wouldn't say that things are in the overinflated state they were, with people being paid $100K for basic system administration, but jobs can be found. I think that the problem is that most of the people who were making the insane dollars they were don't want to take on a $30K-$40K job, even if basic administration or technician work will pay the bills. They can't forget the lavish lifestyles that they lived.
I was affected by it too, for I managed to get out of field techin' to start doing Quality Assurance Engineering. That job lasted a year. When it ended, I looked for other QA jobs, basic IS admin jobs, and the like, and I ended having to go back to what I knew very well, which was field tech. It's not the most fun, the most glamourous, but it does pay the rent, gets me away from a desk all day, and doesn't leave me sitting at home feeling dejected for myself for being unemployed for months and months.
If the market picks up, and QA positions become available in the money and stability that I want, I may leave my current job for one. Until that time arrives, I'm going to be happy where I am. It's not perfect, but life isn't fair, and those that get off their asses and try to make something for themselves will be a lot happier than those who give up.
...to not make an ass of yourself after you've had a few too many in first class...
"Surviving Slashdot" by Oliver Clozoff
"Surviving Slashdot" Illstrates how to build a corporate network that accepts large numbers of incoming connections from stories posted at Slashdot.org, while still allowing employees to make network connections that they need. Techniques covered include round-robin DNS with different servers in different geographical locations, multiple HTTP servers with load balancing, and smooth transition over to a volume web host. like Conxion or cNet at a moment's notice without significant downtime. Other Anti-Slashdotting tactics also discussed.
So, the vendors have to agree to be bound by an agreement?
BUAHAHAAAAA!!!!!!
Pardon me...
This could force state level corporation comissions to treat broadband service the same way they do telephone service and electricity, as a regulated service. This could go toward requiring service availability if others in the same geographical area can get service, instead of hiding behind "bad cable" or "pair-gain" (for DSL folks). It would also possibly allow for more grounds for suits against poor providers, legitmizing the entire industry yet slapping it around a bit.
"Claiming a current product which is actually being sold includes features which are not present is fraud"
So, all of those Microsoft splash screens during the installers for Windows 95, 98, 98SE, and Millennium could allow us to sue them?!
"Guess Duke Nukem Forever is really screwed..."
Don't you get it? It's never going to come out! That's the joke! Naming it Duke Nukem' Forever is the entire thing as a one-liner! They never intended it to be released!
If release dates are touted and pushed and touted and pushed, would that constitute vaporware? I know of one company in particular that was guilty of that severely until August 24, 1995...
When one person owes you {money,stuff,etc}, it's bad for them. When you feel that millions of people owe you {money,stuff,etc} it's bad for you.
So, the RIAA, and the MPAA to a lesser extent are in the second category. While I don't like the MPAA's practices with DeCSS, at least thy have taken to pricing their products in a range that I as a consumer don't feel bad about paying. I'll gladly buy DVDs from the bargain bin for $6.00.
The RIAA on the other hand isn't playing so nice. When a CD is $17.00, the musician might see a few pennies, and discounts on the products aren't forthcoming, it's understandable why people copy music and don't feel bad about it. The soundtrack for many movies on CD costs more than the movie on DVD itself. There is something very wrong with the world when this is the case.
The MPAA has been lucky, since movies are large enough that copying them isn't nearly as big a no-brainer as CDs/mp3s are, but at the same time, if they keep movies cheap, we'll be more inclined to buy them instead of copying them. The RIAA's problem has been around much longer, is much deeper entrenched, and does not appear stoppable by legislation, threats, civil suits, or any other means that they have come up with. If they don't significantly change their business model it'll only get worse, to a point where artists find new labels that don't play by the RIAA's rules, and the RIAA as an organization will cease to be. If they aren't willing to change, they'll get what they deserve.
"Gathering of private information by the government when no crime is known can in essence be a presumption of guilt, and this can be extremely dangerous."
It'll be interesting to see if a defense uses this in an argument for exclusion of all evidence gathered before a crime is committed, which if timed correctly could completely blow a prosecution's case out of the water. It could, in theory, even set a precedent of this being used in other cases, to allow individuals to destroy any leads generated after an actual event, if those leads were based on prior information gathering...
"this is something that I've been trying to figure out myself, ever since I first read about TIA--What would help? Or is there even a problem?"
I don't believe that this will yield a solution to the 'problem' of terrorism. It's kind of like doorlocks on automobiles, it keeps the honest people honest. Does anyone think for a minute though, that this information will be given to local law enforcement for small-time crime? Does anyone think that it will ever be shown except maybe after an attack has occurred, and even then, will it prevent the wrong people from being suspected, like in the case of the bombing at the Olympics in Atlanta in 1996? Remember, the government was VERY sure that Richard Jewell did it, but he was later cleared, after a lengthy, real investigation. Will such a gumshoe investigation occur at the federal level now, or will they go back and start looking at files and convict without using a single bit of new information?
I don't want to trust the government that far. I don't want them to know when I've purchased a double-double at In'n'Out. I don't want them to know what kind of computer I use. I don't want them to know what kind of car I drive, or even how many speeding tickets I have. The latter is only the business of the state that I live in, since they are the ones who issued the license. If I step out of line, then they can come and look at me. I don't want them looking at the sum of the information that they've gathered on me to determine that I may commit a crime sometime, especially when I don't even know. I just don't like anyone or anything having information on me that I don't make available on purpose.
So, I assume that distributing a Linux install CD, as long as it includes the same version of the kernel and whatever tools are present would constitute a good-faith effort, along with the GPL being printed inside of the cover of the manual?
Gathering information on people before they have done anything wrong is always a problem, especially if these people know that it is being collected. It makes poisioning the data pool attractive, even if it's only something as stupid as magazine subscriptions, email account names, aliases (which are legal as long as they're not used to deceive for nefarious purposes), and credit transactions.
The government is most likely to be able to track transactions that occur digitally, or require storage of information on computers that are not under the control of the individual whose data is being collected. Do you think that it's likely that terrorists will use these means, now that it's been announced that the government is collecting it? I'd think that they're more likely to buy guns from someone who has switched from running drugs into the country to running guns, to contact their fellow agents through 'chance' encounters, and to transact whatever seemingly legitimate business they use either with cash or through legitimate electronic transactions, which will make them blend into the electronic noise just like everyone else. How is this going to help matters?
The government already knows when one buys a new handgun through legitimate channels, through the Brady Law. They already should know about most of those who have explosives experience, since that is usually military training based to begin with, and demolitions companies, mining companies, and anyone else legitimately using explosives has to get their employees licensed. "Cyberterrorism" is an absolute joke of a term as long as easily broken-into OSes like anything Microsoft has ever put out is still in the mainstream and is still being used as a server, and there are probably dozens, if not hundreds of other examples like these.
I don't see how collecting all of this data is going to help.
If only we could castrate him for being a dingus, to prevent him from breeding (assuming he hasn't already bred), and somehow deport him to a third world country that could use him for labor or meat (if he won't work), we'd be good off.
I hope that the bankruptcy court leaves him with the lifestyle of a crackfiend. I've known people whose business practices are like this guy's, and I have no sympathy.
If they're not rewriting the source code, using it in a form that they themselves obtained it in (pre-compiling), they might not have to provide source if they disclose their source location. Also, if they were smart enough to create independent kernel modules for the rest of the device, they wouldn't have to release those anyway.
It would be nice if they included at least a copy of the GPL and a linux installation CD in the back of their manual though, since that would be a way of distributing the code, if not more than the code, and would probably make them in compliance.
Hell, TurboLinux install CDs came with hardware that Linux couldn't even use, for a while...
I think that it's a bad idea if one has to pay for it at all, since we're already being bombarded by advertising that should pay for the infrastructure. Why would I pay for receiving more commercials?
Of course, this is probably why I don't even have a TV antenna or cable/satellite, so I don't have to receive whatever mindless drivel the media companies come up with in order to sell commercials.
The latter-end 240X/Z series machines were up to 600 celerons at least, possibly P3. And yes, they are available for $500 if you dig a bit...
is to post what we feel about Mr. Max and Ms. Johnson on our own weblogs, right? expressing our opinions on the veracity of the information that Tucker Max posted?
We should also comment on the "Free Speech" banner on Katy Johnson's page, and I personally feel she is a huge hypocrite.
I can get a decent used laptop on eBay for less than the cost of the device, and I can also then do word processing, war driving, mild gaming, etc, and STILL do everything that this device can. Why should I buy it? Size? Size does matter, but cost matters more to me.
The IBM Thinkpad 240 series, the tiny sharps, the tiny Sonys, all available, of decent quality, and inexpensive.
It's not as easy as media/cartoons show it to be, blowing up a dam. They're incredibly thick at the bottom, and if designed right, are able to take things like higher pressure from a heavy rain upriver. Yes, one could probably breech the dam at the top, where it's thinnest, and that would cause a lot of water to rush through, but it probably wouldn't destroy the dam too far down where the dam thickens, and once the breech occurs, the control facility opens the side flows to let water out rather than waiting for it to all drain through the breech, so the breech isn't extended further. It would be messy, but the chances of someone destroying the whole dam while it still had maximum capacity behind it are slim at best.
... and send the comet crashing into the earth, Lori Petty will rescue Naomi Watts, and they will fight against Malcolm McDowell and save us all from Water and Power!
I think I need to turn off the TV and go outside now...
This is the kind of thing that as a fifteen year old, I only dreamed about.
I can understand players getting mad at this, but at the same time, it's just a game, and if individual users themselves are considering legal action, they really need to shut down the computer and go outside for a while.
We need standards. There are far too many existing computers and a market that sells too many computers, regardless of size, to allow for standards to lapse. We do also need technological advancement, but a practice that makes sense is to take an existing standard and make use of it while working newer technologies through revisions to where they are stable enough to make for a new standard. Repeat. This allows for something like RS232 to be king for a long time, but ultimately be replaced by something like Ethernet. Ultimately, something will replace that, no matter how much speed we manage to get over it. Serial didn't start at 115200, it started in the range where someone with good hearing could interpret what a modem was doing. At this oint, except for special applications, serial is dead. Most of our modems aren't even serial anymore, and we certainly don't use it for peripherals. USB replaced that.
I don't download movies because I like nice high quality imagery. I'll acknowledge that even exceptions to the bull occur sometimes, like this example, but I want to enjoy the experience. I'd gather that most people who download movies either weren't planning on buying the movie in the first place, or have already seen it, and have given at least some money for the experience. Either way, the studio has gotten all of the money it's realistically going to get.