notice especially how many different languages it's in. now who could possibly have the funding and interest to make all those translations? hmmmmmm...
it's partisan. bringing politics into software like this is more than a little annoying. at least leave your partisan biases out of the official release.
using openbsd as partisan propaganda just sucks
(...no longer considers using or supporting the openbsd [socialist/communist?] propaganda machine)
People who don't care enough to vote don't care enough to be informed.
case in point: Australia started compulsory voting several years ago and "a study found that Australian politicians whose names start with a letter near the beginning of the alphabet have won a slightly disproportionate amount of races."
no disrespect, but people are making a big deal out of spam because it is a big deal. i mean, some people have serious objections (moral, etc.) to being exposed to pornographic content, either pictures or just email titles.
"jenna jameson raped by a horse!!!!!!!"
am i advocating the censorship of horses raping women? yes, i am.
also, "just deleting it" costs at least time for the individual, and money for commercial entities. i won't bother to go into that.
AOL probably wouldn't be able to sue you if their "official" client didn't work on your system. i believe it's perfectly legal to modify/adapt something (in this case, the protocol) to work on your system if the "official" one doesn't. the DeCSS affair comes to mind.
i wonder if previous settlements can be overturned if it's proven that RIAA used illegal means to track offenders. after all, incriminating evidence is regularly thrown out of the criminal courts if it was obtained by unlawful search and seizure, through illegal wire taps, botched confessions, etc.
the first amendment does not apply here. they're bothering people in their homes, and outsiders do not have the right to say whatever they want in an individual's home. the individual has the authority to control what comes into their home...blah blah blah, in other words, telemarketers have no first amendment rights in a private home. i cite the banning of pornographic junk mail, the "do not mail" lists, etc.
and these touchscreens can have marquee screensavers saying, "This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane."
If the DMCA does in fact prohibit speech like this, there's no way the DMCA is constitutional.
In 1993, Lawrence Horn hired James Edward Perry to kill his son, so that he could collect the $1.7 million medical malpractice settlement. Perry not only killed the son, but he killed the boy's mother and a nurse as well. Perry was sentenced to death, and Horn to life in prison. In Perry's apartment, police found a copy of Hit Man: A Technical Manual for Independent Contractors published by Paladin Press. The manual, marketed as a work of fact, describes methods of committing murders in detail. Relatives of the victims sue Paladin for "aiding and abetting" the murders.
The District Court ruled that the First Amendment protected the manual and barred the lawsuit. The Circuit Court overturned the decision saying that the speech is not protected by the First Amendment.
The Supreme Court upholds the Circuit Court's decision in a split decision.
Sort of. Several people I know have commented that if they had the option of downloading quality recordings at a reasonable price, they would abandon music piracy because it would be (is now, with iTunes) easier to "do the right thing."
1.) The only way I was able to download RedHat 9 CD1 was via a Gnutella link posted here on/.
2.) I can't upload *.zip files larger than 1MB to my website, so when I want to make a project I'm working on available to the world, I just post a Gnutella link.
3.) Same goes for mp3's of ME playing PUBLIC DOMAIN music.
4.) And I'm sure others here can expand this list significantly.
You might be allowed to read it, but you certainly can't tell anyone what the article is about.
All men are created equal...
on
The Law and P2P
·
· Score: 1
...but some are more equal than others:
Of course, resorting to such extreme measures would almost certainly inflame public opinion. And, as George Washington University Law School Professor Orin Kerr has argued, it might even land a few record company executives in jail, absent Congressional immunity for such tactics, which (believe it or not) has been proposed.
I guess it goes without saying, but this is a load of crap. Am I the only one that sees an "equal protection under the law" problem here?
Slashdot Mirror
notice especially how many different languages it's in. now who could possibly have the funding and interest to make all those translations? hmmmmmm...
using openbsd as partisan propaganda just sucks
(...no longer considers using or supporting the openbsd [socialist/communist?] propaganda machine)but when you export to PDF, hyperlinks are lost. it'd be nice to see that feature come along soon.
...since i just installed rc5 yesterday...
People who don't care enough to vote don't care enough to be informed.
case in point: Australia started compulsory voting several years ago and "a study found that Australian politicians whose names start with a letter near the beginning of the alphabet have won a slightly disproportionate amount of races."
commercial data mining, that's the purpose
and we know for a fact that sunlight enable the body to produce vitamin D.
"Exposure to sunlight catalyzes the production of vitamin D in the skin. In low sunlight, the skin produces significantly less vitamin D."
no disrespect, but people are making a big deal out of spam because it is a big deal. i mean, some people have serious objections (moral, etc.) to being exposed to pornographic content, either pictures or just email titles.
"jenna jameson raped by a horse!!!!!!!"
am i advocating the censorship of horses raping women? yes, i am.
also, "just deleting it" costs at least time for the individual, and money for commercial entities. i won't bother to go into that.
on second thought, it doesn't look like it's over, unless there have been more recent developments than August 25: OpenLaw.
US 2nd circuit ruled it's illegal, case is being appealed to SCOTUS
CA supreme court ruled it's protected by the 1st amendment
my bad
AOL probably wouldn't be able to sue you if their "official" client didn't work on your system. i believe it's perfectly legal to modify/adapt something (in this case, the protocol) to work on your system if the "official" one doesn't. the DeCSS affair comes to mind.
i wonder if previous settlements can be overturned if it's proven that RIAA used illegal means to track offenders. after all, incriminating evidence is regularly thrown out of the criminal courts if it was obtained by unlawful search and seizure, through illegal wire taps, botched confessions, etc.
the first amendment does not apply here. they're bothering people in their homes, and outsiders do not have the right to say whatever they want in an individual's home. the individual has the authority to control what comes into their home...blah blah blah, in other words, telemarketers have no first amendment rights in a private home. i cite the banning of pornographic junk mail, the "do not mail" lists, etc.
if it's a concern, use your knuckle (one of the interphalangeals, not a metacarpophalangeal joint) instead of finger
and these touchscreens can have marquee screensavers saying, "This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane."
After all, they want to villify the program - since capturing the hearts and minds is the only strategy that'll effectively work for them
come on, everyone knows "it's the p2p software, stupid, not the user," hasn't gun control taught us anything? ;)
on the contrary, it will not end, probably evolve into something like freenet
i'm thinking the only way they'll be able to prevent file-sharing is if they take down the internet or implement a hellishly restrictive Palladium/DRM
all your gov't are belong to us
The only way to really protect free speech is to disable others from taking it away from us.
-The Freenet Project
If the DMCA does in fact prohibit speech like this, there's no way the DMCA is constitutional.
In 1993, Lawrence Horn hired James Edward Perry to kill his son, so that he could collect the $1.7 million medical malpractice settlement. Perry not only killed the son, but he killed the boy's mother and a nurse as well. Perry was sentenced to death, and Horn to life in prison. In Perry's apartment, police found a copy of Hit Man: A Technical Manual for Independent Contractors published by Paladin Press. The manual, marketed as a work of fact, describes methods of committing murders in detail. Relatives of the victims sue Paladin for "aiding and abetting" the murders.
The District Court ruled that the First Amendment protected the manual and barred the lawsuit. The Circuit Court overturned the decision saying that the speech is not protected by the First Amendment.
The Supreme Court upholds the Circuit Court's decision in a split decision.
The Hit Man ManualSomeone please reassure me that the system works...
Sort of. Several people I know have commented that if they had the option of downloading quality recordings at a reasonable price, they would abandon music piracy because it would be (is now, with iTunes) easier to "do the right thing."
Here: Gnutella
And here: Edonkey
P2P definitely has legit uses:
1.) The only way I was able to download RedHat 9 CD1 was via a Gnutella link posted here on /.
2.) I can't upload *.zip files larger than 1MB to my website, so when I want to make a project I'm working on available to the world, I just post a Gnutella link.
3.) Same goes for mp3's of ME playing PUBLIC DOMAIN music.
4.) And I'm sure others here can expand this list significantly.
You might be allowed to read it, but you certainly can't tell anyone what the article is about.
...but some are more equal than others:
Of course, resorting to such extreme measures would almost certainly inflame public opinion. And, as George Washington University Law School Professor Orin Kerr has argued, it might even land a few record company executives in jail, absent Congressional immunity for such tactics, which (believe it or not) has been proposed.
I guess it goes without saying, but this is a load of crap. Am I the only one that sees an "equal protection under the law" problem here?