Exactly how would my ISP manage to crawl down my line and grab the routing information off of every static IP that I currently pay them for? Exactly how would they determine how many boxen might be using my in-house AP? If they can do that and can do it legally then we have bigger problems than brain dead politicians.
This isn't just about software. It is about hardware also. If enough large chains will not sell hardware unless it is Microsoft XP certified then Microsoft gets to dictate what that hardware does and does not support if the manufacturer doesn't want to go out of business. Among other wonderful things this could mean Palladium compatiblity in all/most hardware even if the customer is not using XP or any Microsoft cruft. It is a possible way that "the market" will force DRM and other not so nice things on all of us.
Excuse me, but if the government was going to listen to any argument based on our rights and on reasonable access to information the DMCA would never have become law in the first place. As it stands today, post 9/11, they are even less interested in arguments based on rights, freedom and progress. It is very legitimate to note this and see these proceedings and an irrelevant fop thrown to the sheeple. But then that should lead to something a bit stronger as a followup than apathy.
What in the ***# does how you dress have to do with delivering a cogent point? I don't see that dressing like a lawyer, veep or someone in marketing (apologies to folks in each of these categories where appropriate) makes your view one bit more likely to be heard and considered. Politicians are used to suits. But this makes suits really irrelevant. Something different might even be more advantageous. Go with what makes you comfortable, confident and strong. If suits aren't your normal thing then suits probably aren't it.
The original GPL predated the use of components such as in Java, CORBA, COM, SOAP and so on. A claim that use of a GPL'd component requires the client program to be GPL'd is bogus. Why is it ok to call a GPL piece of code running in a GPL'd shell program using SOAP remotely but not ok to link that same bit of code or call it as an inline component? It would greatly harm the cause of Free Software to make such a claim. If this was true then no one doing commercial software or working within a company doing commercial software would be able to make use of free and open components. The LGPL was created for similar cases in "libraries". The software world of today is more sophisticated than just "programs" and "libraries" wheter static or dynamic. The GPL must keep up with the times if it is truly to be a boon to free software.
We can't afford to be so given by Fear that we stop living, stop growing, stop sharing and learning from one another. Yes, knowledge can be used for bad purposes as well as good. Exactly what is the news in that? Does that mean we are to stop learning and sharing what we learn?
Being seen as anti-terrorist has become trendy and an easy set of brownie points in some circles. We need to end that. We need to point out that there are things worse than terrorism. Things like grabbing meaningless points that in effect do nothing but make life harder and poorer. We can lose both freedom and ability to grow into our dreams by being so given by fear and in reaction. We can increase the terrorism in the world by acting in reaction.
I don't fear terrorism. I fear our own fear and stupidity ripping us and this world apart.
It is simply not possible to keep the entire system in mind in any way but by considering as a set of components with no characteristics externally (i.e., as "black box"). Anything else is incomprehensible beyond relatively small systems.
As far as I can tell, it wouldn't be difficult to build systems running say, Win XP, with the hashes marking the trusted OS keeping any other OS from being loaded and successfully booted on the machine. Of course this is more like with a Palladium based machine. But this spec also allows it from what I got out of the paper.
Also, regardless of the author's opinion, a chip that enables DRM even sub-optimally is not the friend of the people.
It sure seems that the RIAA is opening themselves up to class action suits and civil and criminal actions. Would someone who is a lawyer give an opinion? This is also classed as "cyber-terrorism" afaik.
No one in a supposedly free country should ever be imprisoned without due process and a trial by jury. In this country if the jury finds the law or circumstances absurd they have the right to acquit although most lawyers and judges won't tell you about that. The category of "cyber-terrorism" has been painted so broadly that I am sure at least one third of/. readers could be charged in one trumped up way or another. Before it can be called "terrorism" specific terrorist intent must be shown. Otherwise we are making excuses to rip off freedom. It is also cruel and unusual punishment to not only jail a cracker but prohibit them from using computers for some period *after* they have served their time. This should be patently illegal.
With good and thorough use of encryption there is no reason we can't have all the high tech devices and conveniences imaginable and even more privacy than we had decades ago. Of course there is the small matter of the US ignoring the Fourth and other Amendments in the name of "fighting terrorism". Many other countries have their own supposed rights of much less importance than Big Brother government knowing all and controlling all also. Personally I will take freedom from government intrusion and take my chances with terrorists - as if such snooping is actually at all effective.
The Feds are now claiming that communications per se are terrorism or tools terrorists can use. Well, yes, terrorists as well as everyone else can use the telephone, the mails, wired networks and wireless networks. So what? It is the interest of all of us that the ease of communication and the ability to communicate without Sammy peering into our thoughts as we do so, be preserved and increased. That some will communicate what we would rather did not exist does not mean that you threaten communication channels as such or invite Sammy to examine and control each and every packet.
Here we have Homeland [In]Security showing their true colors. "If you don't do what we want then we will regulate you (i.e. use the force of arms) you into non-existence or until we don't feel at all uneasy, or until or corporate sponsors don't feel you are a threat to their monopolies." Thanks, Sammy, for being so clear.
Of course the "telecomm" industry was represented. These positions came straight out of and are in the interest of big telecomm. They have at last found a toe-hold to get the State (Heil Bush) to kill off or threaten free-range competitors.
Isn't it interesting that Homeland Security is threatening WiFi, especially the relatively free and open networks, but not threatening known ultra-vulnerable OSes like those of MicroSloth?
If someone cracks your home network then exactly how is that a threat to national security per se? Exactly what are they going to do with the average homeowner machine and set-up? DDOS attacks are about it. But those machines are easy enough to attack when wired. Ask the FBI. They brag of the ability to install key-loggers on most any machine on the Net today.
This is such a canard. Everyone with a bit of sense knows that almost the entire infrastructure of predominantly Microsoft running machines is quite vulnerable. Whether it is conneced wirelessly or not changes little. The only purposes of this threat are to float a trial baloon giving Homeland Security larger powers and authority than it ever should have, to test the level of the opposition to such moves and to increase the monopoly powers of Big Telecomm.
I really did not like this show at all. For all the hype it had nothing particularly interesting to offer. There was certainly nothing for hard science fiction folks. It was mainly a very human drama type flick with a few "aliens", a bit of hardware and the common assumptions and assertions thrown in. Afterwards I wished I at finished configuring the new house network instead.
Generally I am considerably underwhelmed by the so-called "SciFi" channel. They will put any piece of B (or worse) trash on, give a lot of time to "Crossing Over" and other psychic hokum and pad with way too many and too many of the same low-grade commercials (this show was an exception on the commercials). If you want to see just how braindead our culture is, watch the SciFi channel.
Batteries that last decades? Ultra-small? Only beta decay? Wonderful! Where can I order mine? I won't wait for the manufacturers to include them. I have several uses for them now. Afraid of the radioactivity? About as afraid as I am of the K-40 in my (and all human) blood.
Are they kidding? Someone born in 66 is only 36 now. Most geek types in the software world earn more money in their mid-30s to mid-40s by far than in their earlier career. This article has the stupid ageist myth that really young coders are the most productive. It has the even more egregious myth that young coders get bigger salaries commensurate with the huge hours they might be more willing to work. Really good hackers usually improve with age. A virtuoso hacker takes many years to fully flower.
While it is true I burned more hours and wrote much more code when I was 11 years younger, it is also true that arguably my best work was developed after 10 years in this business and continues today as I am pushing 22 years.
More generally, most people don't mature where financial matters are concerned until their mid-30s.
It is utterly and completely wrong. Politics overruling science is wrong in exactly the same way that religion overruling science is. Worse still, politicians have the use of force at their disposal. Politicians are also a lot easier to buy. They are more interested in votes and power than in science. Having them oversee scientific research and review and filter for business and political reasons effectively ends free scinetific enquiry as it impinges on national policy. It allows them to not only hide what they are doing but also overrule any objective facts they find inconvenient.
We don't like the fact of global warming so we will just put our people on the evaluation committee. We don't like evolution so we will put a "fair" number of creationist on board. Our drilling policy will not pass a fair environmental review so we'll stack that one too.
What fun!
First they refuse to honor FOIA. Then they override normal checks and balances. Then they ignore congressional requests for information. Now they want to put a gag on science itself? People, wake up! It doesn't get much more blatant than this.
If India wants to continue to develop technologically as it is already doing and if it wants to bring its poor into some semblance of plenty then India should be perfectly happy to give normal and full open Internet to its citizens as quickly as possible. Putting roadblocks in the way is only likely to slow down India's progress. It is also a really bad precedent. The Indian government does not own its people's freedom to participate on the WEB and so cannot dole it out.
Add in some video input with filters to note whether the person you are talking to seems interested or not. You know, pupil dilation, skin temperature, pulse rate...
Exactly why is a peer-to-peer file sharing service making available the IP address of the poster? This is broken if it is the case. It is also extremely dangerous in the case of things like political dissent.
If I pay for X amount of bandwidth it is no one's business if I then may some subset of it available to someone else as long as I don't use more than I contracted for. The claim of the cable companies is bogus.
When will advertising get it that pushing ads in all available space is a waste of time in the Internet age where customers are much more willing and capable of looking for you? With an OSS app there is no way to enforce having an ad-enabled version. Anyone who wants can (and probably will) yank the ad. I certainly would not run an ad-infested version of X or any app without at least considering yanking the annoyance out.
I would try doing the books first and see if I could find a math brain friend or two who would be willing to help me over the rough spots. I've done this before. Between hs and college I took 7 years to "find myself". When I decided to to college I brought my math back up to speed and taught myself two semesters of calculus to boot. I started with second semester calculus in college (and a linear algebra course also) and aced both of them. But then I've always been a math nut. YMMV
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly how would my ISP manage to crawl down my line and grab the routing information off of every static IP that I currently pay them for? Exactly how would they determine how many boxen might be using my in-house AP? If they can do that and can do it legally then we have bigger problems than brain dead politicians.
This isn't just about software. It is about hardware also. If enough large chains will not sell hardware unless it is Microsoft XP certified then Microsoft gets to dictate what that hardware does and does not support if the manufacturer doesn't want to go out of business. Among other wonderful things this could mean Palladium compatiblity in all/most hardware even if the customer is not using XP or any Microsoft cruft. It is a possible way that "the market" will force DRM and other not so nice things on all of us.
This deserves to be paid attention to.
Excuse me, but if the government was going to listen to any argument based on our rights and on reasonable access to information the DMCA would never have become law in the first place. As it stands today, post 9/11, they are even less interested in arguments based on rights, freedom and progress. It is very legitimate to note this and see these proceedings and an irrelevant fop thrown to the sheeple. But then that should lead to something a bit stronger as a followup than apathy.
What in the ***# does how you dress have to do with delivering a cogent point? I don't see that dressing like a lawyer, veep or someone in marketing (apologies to folks in each of these categories where appropriate) makes your view one bit more likely to be heard and considered. Politicians are used to suits. But this makes suits really irrelevant. Something different might even be more advantageous. Go with what makes you comfortable, confident and strong. If suits aren't your normal thing then suits probably aren't it.
The original GPL predated the use of components such as in Java, CORBA, COM, SOAP and so on. A claim that use of a GPL'd component requires the client program to be GPL'd is bogus. Why is it ok to call a GPL piece of code running in a GPL'd shell program using SOAP remotely but not ok to link that same bit of code or call it as an inline component? It would greatly harm the cause of Free Software to make such a claim. If this was true then no one doing commercial software or working within a company doing commercial software would be able to make use of free and open components. The LGPL was created for similar cases in "libraries". The software world of today is more sophisticated than just "programs" and "libraries" wheter static or dynamic. The GPL must keep up with the times if it is truly to be a boon to free software.
We can't afford to be so given by Fear that we stop living, stop growing, stop sharing and learning from one another. Yes, knowledge can be used for bad purposes as well as good. Exactly what is the news in that? Does that mean we are to stop learning and sharing what we learn?
Being seen as anti-terrorist has become trendy and an easy set of brownie points in some circles. We need to end that. We need to point out that there are things worse than terrorism. Things like grabbing meaningless points that in effect do nothing but make life harder and poorer. We can lose both freedom and ability to grow into our dreams by being so given by fear and in reaction. We can increase the terrorism in the world by acting in reaction.
I don't fear terrorism. I fear our own fear and stupidity ripping us and this world apart.
It is simply not possible to keep the entire system in mind in any way but by considering as a set of components with no characteristics externally (i.e., as "black box"). Anything else is incomprehensible beyond relatively small systems.
As far as I can tell, it wouldn't be difficult to build systems running say, Win XP, with the hashes marking the trusted OS keeping any other OS from being loaded and successfully booted on the machine. Of course this is more like with a Palladium based machine. But this spec also allows it from what I got out of the paper.
Also, regardless of the author's opinion, a chip that enables DRM even sub-optimally is not the friend of the people.
It sure seems that the RIAA is opening themselves up to class action suits and civil and criminal actions. Would someone who is a lawyer give an opinion? This is also classed as "cyber-terrorism" afaik.
(4) There is no way in hell that SCO or any other entity could ever find all the people running Linux.
also...
(5) We have the source. There is no way to stop us from loading and running it.
and...
(6) Unless SCO backs off, disclaims and/or apologizes profusely it is DOA.
No one in a supposedly free country should ever be imprisoned without due process and a trial by jury. In this country if the jury finds the law or circumstances absurd they have the right to acquit although most lawyers and judges won't tell you about that. The category of "cyber-terrorism" has been painted so broadly that I am sure at least one third of /. readers could be charged in one trumped up way or another. Before it can be called "terrorism" specific terrorist intent must be shown. Otherwise we are making excuses to rip off freedom. It is also cruel and unusual punishment to not only jail a cracker but prohibit them from using computers for some period *after* they have served their time. This should be patently illegal.
With good and thorough use of encryption there is no reason we can't have all the high tech devices and conveniences imaginable and even more privacy than we had decades ago. Of course there is the small matter of the US ignoring the Fourth and other Amendments in the name of "fighting terrorism". Many other countries have their own supposed rights of much less importance than Big Brother government knowing all and controlling all also. Personally I will take freedom from government intrusion and take my chances with terrorists - as if such snooping is actually at all effective.
The Feds are now claiming that communications per se are terrorism or tools terrorists can use. Well, yes, terrorists as well as everyone else can use the telephone, the mails, wired networks and wireless networks. So what? It is the interest of all of us that the ease of communication and the ability to communicate without Sammy peering into our thoughts as we do so, be preserved and increased. That some will communicate what we would rather did not exist does not mean that you threaten communication channels as such or invite Sammy to examine and control each and every packet.
Here we have Homeland [In]Security showing their true colors. "If you don't do what we want then we will regulate you (i.e. use the force of arms) you into non-existence or until we don't feel at all uneasy, or until or corporate sponsors don't feel you are a threat to their monopolies." Thanks, Sammy, for being so clear.
Of course the "telecomm" industry was represented. These positions came straight out of and are in the interest of big telecomm. They have at last found a toe-hold to get the State (Heil Bush) to kill off or threaten free-range competitors.
Isn't it interesting that Homeland Security is threatening WiFi, especially the relatively free and open networks, but not threatening known ultra-vulnerable OSes like those of MicroSloth?
If someone cracks your home network then exactly how is that a threat to national security per se? Exactly what are they going to do with the average homeowner machine and set-up? DDOS attacks are about it. But those machines are easy enough to attack when wired. Ask the FBI. They brag of the ability to install key-loggers on most any machine on the Net today.
This is such a canard. Everyone with a bit of sense knows that almost the entire infrastructure of predominantly Microsoft running machines is quite vulnerable. Whether it is conneced wirelessly or not changes little. The only purposes of this threat are to float a trial baloon giving Homeland Security larger powers and authority than it ever should have, to test the level of the opposition to such moves and to increase the monopoly powers of Big Telecomm.
I really did not like this show at all. For all the hype it had nothing particularly interesting to offer. There was certainly nothing for hard science fiction folks. It was mainly a very human drama type flick with a few "aliens", a bit of hardware and the common assumptions and assertions thrown in. Afterwards I wished I at finished configuring the new house network instead.
Generally I am considerably underwhelmed by the so-called "SciFi" channel. They will put any piece of B (or worse) trash on, give a lot of time to "Crossing Over" and other psychic hokum and pad with way too many and too many of the same low-grade commercials (this show was an exception on the commercials). If you want to see just how braindead our culture is, watch the SciFi channel.
Batteries that last decades? Ultra-small? Only beta decay? Wonderful! Where can I order mine? I won't wait for the manufacturers to include them. I have several uses for them now. Afraid of the radioactivity? About as afraid as I am of the K-40 in my (and all human) blood.
Are they kidding? Someone born in 66 is only 36 now. Most geek types in the software world earn more money in their mid-30s to mid-40s by far than in their earlier career. This article has the stupid ageist myth that really young coders are the most productive. It has the even more egregious myth that young coders get bigger salaries commensurate with the huge hours they might be more willing to work. Really good hackers usually improve with age. A virtuoso hacker takes many years to fully flower.
While it is true I burned more hours and wrote much more code when I was 11 years younger, it is also true that arguably my best work was developed after 10 years in this business and continues today as I am pushing 22 years.
More generally, most people don't mature where financial matters are concerned until their mid-30s.
It is utterly and completely wrong. Politics overruling science is wrong in exactly the same way that religion overruling science is. Worse still, politicians have the use of force at their disposal. Politicians are also a lot easier to buy. They are more interested in votes and power than in science. Having them oversee scientific research and review and filter for business and political reasons effectively ends free scinetific enquiry as it impinges on national policy. It allows them to not only hide what they are doing but also overrule any objective facts they find inconvenient.
We don't like the fact of global warming so we will just put our people on the evaluation committee. We don't like evolution so we will put a "fair" number of creationist on board. Our drilling policy will not pass a fair environmental review so we'll stack that one too.
What fun!
First they refuse to honor FOIA. Then they override normal checks and balances. Then they ignore congressional requests for information. Now they want to put a gag on science itself? People, wake up! It doesn't get much more blatant than this.
1) Their site has a bunch of advertising hype for how wonderful the DBMS is but almost zero real content;
2) It is from and controlled by SAP. I have worked with these people in the past and I deeply distrust their code and processes;
3) Life is short. I have no time for YADB that has no compelling advantages that I can see;
4) I believe in the importance of things like replication and objrect-relational features that SAP puts down as irrelevant.
If India wants to continue to develop technologically as it is already doing and if it wants to bring its poor into some semblance of plenty then India should be perfectly happy to give normal and full open Internet to its citizens as quickly as possible. Putting roadblocks in the way is only likely to slow down India's progress. It is also a really bad precedent. The Indian government does not own its people's freedom to participate on the WEB and so cannot dole it out.
Add in some video input with filters to note whether the person you are talking to seems interested or not. You know, pupil dilation,
skin temperature, pulse rate...
Exactly why is a peer-to-peer file sharing service making available the IP address of the poster? This is broken if it is the case. It is also extremely dangerous in the case of things like political dissent.
If I pay for X amount of bandwidth it is no one's business if I then may some subset of it available to someone else as long as I don't use more than I contracted for. The claim of the cable companies is bogus.
When will advertising get it that pushing ads in all available space is a waste of time in the Internet age where customers are much more willing and capable of looking for you? With an OSS app there is no way to enforce having an ad-enabled version. Anyone who wants can (and probably will) yank the ad. I certainly would not run an ad-infested version of X or any app without at least considering yanking the annoyance out.
OSS is about software done within a certain philosophical framework. You can't ask "which is more important" without forgetting that.
I would try doing the books first and see if I could find a math brain friend or two who would be willing to help me over the rough spots. I've done this before. Between hs and college I took 7 years to "find myself". When I decided to to college I brought my math back up to speed and taught myself two semesters of calculus to boot. I started with second semester calculus in college (and a linear algebra course also) and aced both of them. But then I've always been a math nut. YMMV