Well, perhaps you might be surprised that a good many geek gods don't have $$$ because they've been doing geeky things instead of amassing $$$.
I am by no means a geeky god (but I occasionally play one in my neighborhood) I do geeky things for a living and for fun, but I am not ammasing $$$. I just happen to run a small ISP that pays for the T1's to my place. It is more of a hobby really. And this hobby lets me do (what I consider) fun geeky things. I also sleep well at night, not having to compromse my morals to amass oodles of $$$
You are now looking at a globe that for all practical purposes is painted blue.
Sarcasm aside, you are correct about the globe being covered by water. However I doubt that most of the people here (/.) live on the ocean, bay, lake, etc. Most people, in general, have access of some sort or another to a local telco monopoly. If not satellite is you next best bet.
The local telco may charge so much for it that it ends up in their annual profit report, but they have to provide it.
They can charge as much as they want, but they have to use the same formula to determine a rate for everyone in that LATA. A T1 is a tarrifed service which has to pass the local PUC sniff test (not that it is difficult to do...)
I have multiple T1s to my place, and the local data loop guys that installed them remind me every time they are on a service call to my place, "You know that you are over 22000 ft from the CO? We have 2 repeaters on each T1 to get here."
I just smile and tell them that I know. For the most part the lines are rock solid too.
The geekiest people may well be the people with the worst internet service.
If you have the $$$ there is nothing stopping you from getting a T1. You can get a T1 just about anywhere. The local telco may not like it, but they have to provide it.
If it said that Internet users eat fewer beans, sleep later, and mow the lawn more often, would people think it was saying that sleeping was a kind of lawn-mowing?
I guess that depends on what you mean by "mowing the lawn"...
No, beer is one of the fundamental building blocks of the universe, like gravity and duct tape.
There are more fundamental building blocks then beer. As sub-atomic partilces are to atoms, Beer is to hops, grains, and yeast. Combine these elements with water, and Viola! You can name many differnt types of Beer!
Hmmm, I'm going home and pulling a homebrew stout from the beer fridge!
Well, that is incredebly obvious to you and me, but it is not the great unwashed masses. To them just having a personal email address at all is an unbelievably complex ordeal. My mom would not have her own domain name if I did not set it up for her (much less an webmail server, with spam filtering, a web site... etc)
I, for one, wouldn't want to make decisions by polling random people on the street.
I would not either, but the Pres will since these "random people on the street" are more likly to vote. They are not home sitting on the sofa in front of the TV like most of the population when the question is posed to them.
My first real long term girlfriend gave me a HP11C. It may not be a _real_ computer, but I have fond memories of it. I kept the calulator, and use it to this day, but the girlfriend dumped me (wow, over 16 years ago). At least I got to keep the calulator, and my wife does not question me about it:-)
Freenet doesn't let you push, though.
The way Freenet works is that you tell your server- "I have file X, with Hash XX on my computer."
Then, if anyone comes looking for a file with hash XX, you respond "Hey, I have that!"
I don't believe this is correct. In order to preserve antinimity(sp?) when you add content into freenet, the content is not stored on your machine, it is immediatly pushed out to other servers where it is pushed though to yet other servers, where it is stored. That way when the Narcs break down your door and confiscate your hard drive, they cannot find that you are the source of some content. Plausible deniability.
This has been a sore point for the protocol, because sometimes publishing data on freenet can take an eternity. You have to be relativly well connected (bandwidth wise) and you have to leave your node up to get "established" on the net for a while before you can get any reasonable speed out of it.
So yes -- encryption is amoral, but that just means that the forces of good need to be that much better at it. The problem is that evil is almost always better motivated because in our society no good deed goes unpunished...
My point is that you cannot legislate evil away by taking the tools that evil uses away from everyone. If Encryption is a tool, and it is used for evil, and you take it away, you expose good, to more abuses from evil. You also prevent natural innovation(tm) from happening.
If legislation is the answer it should be in the form: "Encryption cannot be used for evil". Which, of couse, is pointless. When does evil play by the rules?
Encryption is good, as long as the people using it are good.
Encryption, like all technology, is amoral.
Good and evil come from people. This is ultimatly where most legislation fails at stopping evil. You legislate away the technology that evil uses in the hopes of stopping it. However, evil rarely follows laws. So the laws are draconian to compensate for evil not following thems. The end result is that good does not benifit from said technology while evil thumbs thier nose at good.
Encryption will be used for evil, regardless. If you do not outlaw it then the playing field will be level.
A girlfriend is an awful lot like free software, the initial purchase price can be as low as $0.... Consider the following:
* Clothing
* Dinners
* Jewelry
* Upgrades
o Breast augmentation
o Liposuction
My God, you forgot the most expensive option: Kids! Once they _need_ kids, game over. Kiss those get away weekends good by. Think of the college education, braces, toys, medical insurance, and for those restless teenage years if your really lucky: bail!
Does anyone else other than me seem to think that "Power Tools" is an ill-suited title for a book that sounds more like an introductory book, then one detailing tools for a "Power User"?
Sounds like "title inflation" to me...
Next thing you know there will be a "Linux Power tools for dummies".
even the village idiot seems to have more brains than the collective consciousness of SCO on legal/intellectual matters.
...
If you want to find the collective IQ of an assembled group, you take the IQ of the lowest person in the group and you divide it by the number of people in the group.
Problem is, with SCO, when doing the math you always get NaN...
Did you pay with a credit card? Write a letter to your card company and say that you are not getting what you ordered, and you are disputing the charge. That should get AT&Ts attention...
That's probably the reason why they left RedHat Linux - too much of support (equals skilled manpower equals lot of money) for low cost.
I find that hard to believe. They have a fixed cost to churn out patches and test them. The only cost that would scale up is bandwidth with more clients subscribing.
If they signed up more clients with RHN, they would make more money. Now that they have raised the price of using thier product by 600% it is no longer cost effective.
If they wanted more subscriptions they could have had the RHN server reject the "free" reconnections more often. I had many of my clients sign up for RHN since they wanted to get the packages as soon as they were avaiable. It was priced just right, now I can no longer recoment RedHat either.
My puny number of scubscriptions may not be worth RedHats time, but I'm sure there are many many people out there in my position.
Slashdot Mirror
I am by no means a geeky god (but I occasionally play one in my neighborhood) I do geeky things for a living and for fun, but I am not ammasing $$$. I just happen to run a small ISP that pays for the T1's to my place. It is more of a hobby really. And this hobby lets me do (what I consider) fun geeky things. I also sleep well at night, not having to compromse my morals to amass oodles of $$$
You are now looking at a globe that for all practical purposes is painted blue.
Sarcasm aside, you are correct about the globe being covered by water. However I doubt that most of the people here (/.) live on the ocean, bay, lake, etc. Most people, in general, have access of some sort or another to a local telco monopoly. If not satellite is you next best bet.
They can charge as much as they want, but they have to use the same formula to determine a rate for everyone in that LATA. A T1 is a tarrifed service which has to pass the local PUC sniff test (not that it is difficult to do...)
I have multiple T1s to my place, and the local data loop guys that installed them remind me every time they are on a service call to my place, "You know that you are over 22000 ft from the CO? We have 2 repeaters on each T1 to get here."
I just smile and tell them that I know. For the most part the lines are rock solid too.
If you have the $$$ there is nothing stopping you from getting a T1. You can get a T1 just about anywhere. The local telco may not like it, but they have to provide it.
I guess that depends on what you mean by "mowing the lawn"...
There are more fundamental building blocks then beer. As sub-atomic partilces are to atoms, Beer is to hops, grains, and yeast. Combine these elements with water, and Viola! You can name many differnt types of Beer!
Hmmm, I'm going home and pulling a homebrew stout from the beer fridge!
Well, that is incredebly obvious to you and me, but it is not the great unwashed masses. To them just having a personal email address at all is an unbelievably complex ordeal. My mom would not have her own domain name if I did not set it up for her (much less an webmail server, with spam filtering, a web site... etc)
I would not either, but the Pres will since these "random people on the street" are more likly to vote. They are not home sitting on the sofa in front of the TV like most of the population when the question is posed to them.
That and being hog tied to thier email addresses. That is the one reason that I hear the most.
The way Freenet works is that you tell your server- "I have file X, with Hash XX on my computer."
Then, if anyone comes looking for a file with hash XX, you respond "Hey, I have that!"
I don't believe this is correct. In order to preserve antinimity(sp?) when you add content into freenet, the content is not stored on your machine, it is immediatly pushed out to other servers where it is pushed though to yet other servers, where it is stored. That way when the Narcs break down your door and confiscate your hard drive, they cannot find that you are the source of some content. Plausible deniability.
This has been a sore point for the protocol, because sometimes publishing data on freenet can take an eternity. You have to be relativly well connected (bandwidth wise) and you have to leave your node up to get "established" on the net for a while before you can get any reasonable speed out of it.
or better yet, "Give us Barabas!"
My point is that you cannot legislate evil away by taking the tools that evil uses away from everyone. If Encryption is a tool, and it is used for evil, and you take it away, you expose good, to more abuses from evil. You also prevent natural innovation(tm) from happening.
If legislation is the answer it should be in the form: "Encryption cannot be used for evil". Which, of couse, is pointless. When does evil play by the rules?
A weapon can be considered technology, and it is still amoral.
A Weapon and/or technology, can only be put to use by people for thier own purpose, good or evil.
"Outlaw guns and only outlaws will have guns", etc... Look how well outlawing guns in Washington, DC has worked.
Weaponised anthrax could be put to good use, such as using it to find an antidote to protect people from it.
Encryption, like all technology, is amoral.
Good and evil come from people. This is ultimatly where most legislation fails at stopping evil. You legislate away the technology that evil uses in the hopes of stopping it. However, evil rarely follows laws. So the laws are draconian to compensate for evil not following thems. The end result is that good does not benifit from said technology while evil thumbs thier nose at good.
Encryption will be used for evil, regardless. If you do not outlaw it then the playing field will be level.
Yeah, I could not resist the pun, but apparently the moderators could...
* Clothing
* Dinners
* Jewelry
* Upgrades
o Breast augmentation
o Liposuction
My God, you forgot the most expensive option: Kids! Once they _need_ kids, game over. Kiss those get away weekends good by. Think of the college education, braces, toys, medical insurance, and for those restless teenage years if your really lucky: bail!
Sounds like "title inflation" to me...
Next thing you know there will be a "Linux Power tools for dummies".
If you want to find the collective IQ of an assembled group, you take the IQ of the lowest person in the group and you divide it by the number of people in the group.
Problem is, with SCO, when doing the math you always get NaN...
If it stinks, its chemestry...
If it does not work, it is physics...
Did you pay with a credit card? Write a letter to your card company and say that you are not getting what you ordered, and you are disputing the charge. That should get AT&Ts attention...
Oh Wait...
you said comedy, not funny acting.
I find that hard to believe. They have a fixed cost to churn out patches and test them. The only cost that would scale up is bandwidth with more clients subscribing.
If they signed up more clients with RHN, they would make more money. Now that they have raised the price of using thier product by 600% it is no longer cost effective.
If they wanted more subscriptions they could have had the RHN server reject the "free" reconnections more often. I had many of my clients sign up for RHN since they wanted to get the packages as soon as they were avaiable. It was priced just right, now I can no longer recoment RedHat either.
My puny number of scubscriptions may not be worth RedHats time, but I'm sure there are many many people out there in my position.
isn't that "watery tarts" and not strange women?