Parents have every right to know the activities of their children.
You're absolutely right. Of course, the usual way of finding out what someone is doing is to spend time with them, not spy on them from a distance.
If you use this system you are a spineless coward and a lousy parent. And having a job isn't a good excuse for not parenting, it's confirmation that you don't spend enough time with your kid(s).
Anyone given any thought to putting together an organizational hierarchy down under? I think the common beliefs and doctrines are pretty obvious... at least obvious enough to anyone who's seen The Trilogy enough times:)
Any takers? Anyone humble enough to be on the Council? Should we hold elections?
Yoda was played by Frank Oz. There are no coincidences...
OK. First, the Los Alamos/NSA connection. If you worked at any of these places, you would know that you could get fired for publicly posting information about what systems they use. It's in your clearance paperwork, that part about not divulging sensitive material. Which means you probably don't work there, so who did you get fired to get this information?
Second, I do agree with you that most Linux installations are insecure out-of-the-box. That's because most Linux installations are Red Hat. Comparing RH7.1 to RH7.0 and saying it's more secure doesn't impress me. Furthermore, UNIX != Linux. Last I checked, OpenBSD kicked ass right out of the box. I do agree that there is a shortage of good UNIX admins out there.
Lastly, computer security is about a lot more than locking down ports. Yes, that's a part of it, and probably the most visible part, but there's a whole lot more to it. Just one instance: Mandrake does a fair job of setting up permissions in the various directories (the security term is "DAC", discretionary access controls). Red Hat's FS permissions have been, and continue to be, abysmal.
In this sense, open source software based on the GPL mirrors the.com business models that proved the least
successful during the past year. They ask software developers to give away for free the very thing they create that
is of greatest value in the hope that somehow they'll make money selling something else.
Ah hah! But there are some things more important than $$$, Mr. Mundie. The respect of your peers, for instance. By giving away software, you gain that respect, and the value to you may be worth more than the corresponding $$$ you could have made. (Not to mention that companies out there gobble up high-profile software donors for jobs.)
As long as there's someone out there who thinks your prized (and expen$ive) software product wouldn't be that hard to implement, who has the talent, and who believes in Open/Free Software enough to give away their valuable IP for free, you will lose.
We have no dillusions that we are better than the cultures before
Maybe you don't have delusions. Try working for the government sometime.
...that is just as ignorant as saying that the US is tuck on itself.
Try travelling overseas sometime. Correct me if I'm wrong, O great overseas brethren, but the rest of the world pretty much sees the US as a conservative, religious, isolationist State (with a capital S), governed by radicals, where everyone is uptight all the time. Yeah, our standard of living is pretty high, but that doesn't give us the right to tell China to buzz off or to have our rights stolen away from us whenever big corps want to.
Your argument works great, except for one thing: there will always be enough people, in the right circles, who won't buy it. The new audio hardware, that is. All that will happen is that the old audio hardware will continue to be made, status quo. Maybe the price will increase a little.
We already have an established market for non-SAP-compliant audio hardware. It won't go away as long as people are willing to pay for it. Heck, I know nothing about audio hardware, but if every manufacturer produces only SAP-compliant equipment, I will go into business producing non-compliant equipment (overseas if need be), and make a killing.
Unless, of course, they make it illegal to have anything but SAP hardware. At which point, I will stop taking their shit and overthrow the government. Who's with me?
It is Hotmail's policy to respect the privacy of its users.
Policies change.
Therefore, Hotmail will not monitor, edit, or disclose the contents of
a user's private communications unless required to do so by law or in the good faith belief that such action is necessary to:
(1) conform to the edicts of the law or comply with legal process served on Hotmail; (2) protect and defend the rights or
property of Hotmail; or (3) act under exigent circumstances to protect the personal safety of its users or the public.
International treaties are words on a piece of paper. When one co-signer decides they don't like the terms of the treaty, those words aren't worth the paper they're written on. These words from Hotmail don't even live on paper.
This is a difficult issue, but as a practical matter some reasonable measures inside libraries and their ilk should be applied. It makes no sense to filter the content for a 30 year old. But it does make sense to filter, even imperfectly, for a 10 year old.
<sarcasm>Glad someone had the balls to volunteer themselves to be the moral authority for the whole US.</sarcasm>
Who has broken the law? Taco, the server owner or me? The RIAA has gone after the server owner, but that's largely pragmatics (not to mention PR).
My take (and IANAL, yadda yadda): depends on how much security was placed on the system. If Taco knowingly made the file available for download, he broke the law, and if the server owner could plausibly be shown to have known that the MP3 was there, he did too. Furthermore, it's easy to tell who uploaded what, and when, because of system auditing. You broke the law because in a file copy, there are two parties involved. The only way you might get off is if you received the file at no instigation of your own (mass mailing, etc). On the other hand, if you cracked system security to do get the music, and the system operator didn't want you to, then you definitely broke the law and they/may/ have (because of negligence, under the banner of vicarious infringement).
P2P solutions remove all the auditing about who uploaded what, and when, and even to where. All you can say is that someone, somewhere has broken the law by uploading this copyrighted content that's plainly available, but you don't know who, when, or where. The law has clearly been broken; the difference is that it's no longer auditable. In order to prosecute, you need a suspect.
The real dangerous issue is that with P2P networks,/everyone/ is a potential suspect. If you run a P2P server, you may be guilty of vicarious infringement, since it's obvious that illegally copied works will be passing through your system, even if you don't know exactly what they are. In fact, under some systems you have no way of excluding them. That's their defense, that you have no control, and that's also gonna be the charge in the lawsuits.
Grovelling thru the assembly listing of the code generated by egcs-2.91.66 running on Slackware 7.1 w/2.2.16 kernel, I think I have discovered why 10 = 9.
The difference between the two expressions is that one is a constant expression and can be evaluated at compile-time (as is done by cc1), while the other is a variable expression and must be done at run-time. The compiler expanded the second expression in assembly code and got (at run-time) the result $9 (due to rounding error) in the %eax register, which was then pushed onto the stack. Then it evaluated the constant expression (at compile time) and got the constant result $10, which was pushed directly onto the stack. Then the string, then the call to printf.
The discrepancy is apparently due to the floating-point code in cc1 not having the same round-off errors as the code it generates. Maybe someone over at GCC HQ should take a look.
That's not it at all. The point is that record companies can attack fair use all they like, but at the end of the day (if this article is correct), they aren't gonna have anyone making music for them. Then they're out of business.
No one's said it yet, so I might as well...
on
Racism At Microsoft?
·
· Score: 1
Apparently seven former and current black employees want $5 billion
So how many of these guys were formerly black?
Re:Peer-to-Peer will never make it
on
Scour is Dead
·
· Score: 1
I believe that anything like Scour, Napster, or Usenet is largely doomed because the majority of the leeches and non-leeches are so dang stupid, that any content out there is likely to be 95% worthless because it is so banal.
BMG will begin distributing their artists' work on pay-Napster. They will collect income (sounds like monthly subscription). OK, no problems here.
Napster will still have a free service, all right. It'll have unwatermarked mp3s on it, all right. I dare you to get anything other than 15- to 30-second clips of "popular" tracks from it though. All inspired, of course, by fair use.
Look people, voting isn't just a right, it's a civic duty. Anyone here remember what that means? Voting is what differentiates us from a dictatorship. We, the people of the US, and only we, have the power to say what government should and should not be in this country. Remember the Founding Fathers? They gave us this power, and the responsibility that goes along with it. That means the responsibility of voting.
The Founding Fathers set up this country like a corporation, with a President, Vice President, an elected "board of directors" (Congress), articles (the Constitution), bylaws (the US code) and voting shareholders (that would be you). Just like any other corporation, the real power lies in the voters. What happened in this country is that cliques have formed among the voters, and they give themselves names, such as "Democrat" and "Republican", "Green", "Reform", and "Libertarian", "American Independent" and "Natural Law". These cliques pool their voting share to try to get their choice elected.
Not voting for someone just because you think your primary choice has no chance of winning is like saying you're a Democrat when you're really a Libertarian. You're voting for someone other than who you think should be in office. It's not what the Founding Fathers had in mind.
Four words explain the avoidance: the algorithm is classified.
I'm sure Mr. Perritt can't talk about it. He probably can't even say who the experts are, because knowing them tells everyone their skillset, which in turn tells everyone what kind of knowledge is necessary to analyze the Carnivore system, which in turn tells everyone about the guts of the system. This kind of thinking is common in government work.
1. Use Junkbuster.
2. Use a perl LWP::UserAgent script to clickthrough as many banner ads as you want without ever looking at them. Stagger the hits right, and I'll defy an ad network to refuse to pay because the hits are faked. After all, they're right there in the log file, and they did come from an honest-to-god client, every packet.
NORTH HOLLYWOOD, CA (AP) -- Dizney.com, a business unit of gho.com, filed suit today in Hollywood district court against itself. Heartened by the success of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) in winning a lawsuit against the evil h4x0r Emmanuel Goldstein and his band of trained hooligans, the online giant and provider of happiness-at-all-costs(tm) made this stunning PR move in the hopes of bolstering its image.
While this move may come as a shock to some, sources at the company are optimistic that it will convey the appearance that Dizney isn't merely playing consumers against content providers for profit. While Dizney.com's Managing Director (who is also gho.com's Executive Vice President) couldn't be reached for comment, sources in his office gave AP this message:
We saw this opportunity when an anonymous tipster alerted us to the fact that we are
offering links to the evil DeCSS code. We immediately realized that we could turn this into a positive experience for all concerned by suing ourselves. Bottom line: we care.
The open-source community, which backs DeCSS as part of the LiViD Linux video project, was ecstatic over the news. "We have been wanting to take large corporations to court for some time over their gross negligence about our issues. I'm happy as hell they saved us the trouble" one open-source insider told us.
The gaming community is always changing due to two things: gamers growing up and getting a job, or first learning how to handle a keyboard and mouse. When gamers have kids and those kids grow up, they will probably be gamers as well. And they probably won't have played Starcraft or Myst or any of the flight sims. It'll all be new to them.
I think that there are swings in the gaming community. In five to ten years, see if a new breed of gamer doesn't wonder what happened to the industry that generated all the great war sims that he found backed up on his dad's CD-R collection.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh my God! You're kidding!
If you use this system you are a spineless coward and a lousy parent. And having a job isn't a good excuse for not parenting, it's confirmation that you don't spend enough time with your kid(s).
Any takers? Anyone humble enough to be on the Council? Should we hold elections?
Yoda was played by Frank Oz. There are no coincidences...
OK. First, the Los Alamos/NSA connection. If you worked at any of these places, you would know that you could get fired for publicly posting information about what systems they use. It's in your clearance paperwork, that part about not divulging sensitive material. Which means you probably don't work there, so who did you get fired to get this information?
Second, I do agree with you that most Linux installations are insecure out-of-the-box. That's because most Linux installations are Red Hat. Comparing RH7.1 to RH7.0 and saying it's more secure doesn't impress me. Furthermore, UNIX != Linux. Last I checked, OpenBSD kicked ass right out of the box. I do agree that there is a shortage of good UNIX admins out there.
Lastly, computer security is about a lot more than locking down ports. Yes, that's a part of it, and probably the most visible part, but there's a whole lot more to it. Just one instance: Mandrake does a fair job of setting up permissions in the various directories (the security term is "DAC", discretionary access controls). Red Hat's FS permissions have been, and continue to be, abysmal.
Well, I'd hate to be the guy below him who got the receiving end of 14 hours of beer-piss...
As long as there's someone out there who thinks your prized (and expen$ive) software product wouldn't be that hard to implement, who has the talent, and who believes in Open/Free Software enough to give away their valuable IP for free, you will lose.
We already have an established market for non-SAP-compliant audio hardware. It won't go away as long as people are willing to pay for it. Heck, I know nothing about audio hardware, but if every manufacturer produces only SAP-compliant equipment, I will go into business producing non-compliant equipment (overseas if need be), and make a killing.
Unless, of course, they make it illegal to have anything but SAP hardware. At which point, I will stop taking their shit and overthrow the government. Who's with me?
Image here.
My take (and IANAL, yadda yadda): depends on how much security was placed on the system. If Taco knowingly made the file available for download, he broke the law, and if the server owner could plausibly be shown to have known that the MP3 was there, he did too. Furthermore, it's easy to tell who uploaded what, and when, because of system auditing. You broke the law because in a file copy, there are two parties involved. The only way you might get off is if you received the file at no instigation of your own (mass mailing, etc). On the other hand, if you cracked system security to do get the music, and the system operator didn't want you to, then you definitely broke the law and they /may/ have (because of negligence, under the banner of vicarious infringement).
P2P solutions remove all the auditing about who uploaded what, and when, and even to where. All you can say is that someone, somewhere has broken the law by uploading this copyrighted content that's plainly available, but you don't know who, when, or where. The law has clearly been broken; the difference is that it's no longer auditable. In order to prosecute, you need a suspect.
The real dangerous issue is that with P2P networks, /everyone/ is a potential suspect. If you run a P2P server, you may be guilty of vicarious infringement, since it's obvious that illegally copied works will be passing through your system, even if you don't know exactly what they are. In fact, under some systems you have no way of excluding them. That's their defense, that you have no control, and that's also gonna be the charge in the lawsuits.
Linkage to the article here.
The difference between the two expressions is that one is a constant expression and can be evaluated at compile-time (as is done by cc1), while the other is a variable expression and must be done at run-time. The compiler expanded the second expression in assembly code and got (at run-time) the result $9 (due to rounding error) in the %eax register, which was then pushed onto the stack. Then it evaluated the constant expression (at compile time) and got the constant result $10, which was pushed directly onto the stack. Then the string, then the call to printf.
The discrepancy is apparently due to the floating-point code in cc1 not having the same round-off errors as the code it generates. Maybe someone over at GCC HQ should take a look.
That's not it at all. The point is that record companies can attack fair use all they like, but at the end of the day (if this article is correct), they aren't gonna have anyone making music for them. Then they're out of business.
So how many of these guys were formerly black?
Did anyone else not see this?
BMG will begin distributing their artists' work on pay-Napster. They will collect income (sounds like monthly subscription). OK, no problems here.
Napster will still have a free service, all right. It'll have unwatermarked mp3s on it, all right. I dare you to get anything other than 15- to 30-second clips of "popular" tracks from it though. All inspired, of course, by fair use.
It'll be a shame to see Napster go.
Look people, voting isn't just a right, it's a civic duty. Anyone here remember what that means? Voting is what differentiates us from a dictatorship. We, the people of the US, and only we, have the power to say what government should and should not be in this country. Remember the Founding Fathers? They gave us this power, and the responsibility that goes along with it. That means the responsibility of voting.
The Founding Fathers set up this country like a corporation, with a President, Vice President, an elected "board of directors" (Congress), articles (the Constitution), bylaws (the US code) and voting shareholders (that would be you). Just like any other corporation, the real power lies in the voters. What happened in this country is that cliques have formed among the voters, and they give themselves names, such as "Democrat" and "Republican", "Green", "Reform", and "Libertarian", "American Independent" and "Natural Law". These cliques pool their voting share to try to get their choice elected.
Not voting for someone just because you think your primary choice has no chance of winning is like saying you're a Democrat when you're really a Libertarian. You're voting for someone other than who you think should be in office. It's not what the Founding Fathers had in mind.
Don't disappoint them.
I'm sure Mr. Perritt can't talk about it. He probably can't even say who the experts are, because knowing them tells everyone their skillset, which in turn tells everyone what kind of knowledge is necessary to analyze the Carnivore system, which in turn tells everyone about the guts of the system. This kind of thinking is common in government work.
-- Dave
1. Use Junkbuster.
2. Use a perl LWP::UserAgent script to clickthrough as many banner ads as you want without ever looking at them. Stagger the hits right, and I'll defy an ad network to refuse to pay because the hits are faked. After all, they're right there in the log file, and they did come from an honest-to-god client, every packet.
-- Dave
-- Dave
While this move may come as a shock to some, sources at the company are optimistic that it will convey the appearance that Dizney isn't merely playing consumers against content providers for profit. While Dizney.com's Managing Director (who is also gho.com's Executive Vice President) couldn't be reached for comment, sources in his office gave AP this message:
The open-source community, which backs DeCSS as part of the LiViD Linux video project, was ecstatic over the news. "We have been wanting to take large corporations to court for some time over their gross negligence about our issues. I'm happy as hell they saved us the trouble" one open-source insider told us.-- Dave
The gaming community is always changing due to two things: gamers growing up and getting a job, or first learning how to handle a keyboard and mouse. When gamers have kids and those kids grow up, they will probably be gamers as well. And they probably won't have played Starcraft or Myst or any of the flight sims. It'll all be new to them.
I think that there are swings in the gaming community. In five to ten years, see if a new breed of gamer doesn't wonder what happened to the industry that generated all the great war sims that he found backed up on his dad's CD-R collection.
-- Dave