What about phone lines? Surely I'm not the only one old enough to ask whether people can dial out to international dial-up lines. It'd only take a relative abroad to hook up their broadband-connected PC to their old phone modem and unless your line is tapped it'd be just another phone call to the family.
The existence of Pirate Bay raises some serious issues. I don't know the answers.
But the situation makes me laugh.
Wow thanks for that insightful comment. Without knowing your opinion - or lack of one - I don't know how any of us could have dealt with this news in a rational way. You've brought light were there was only darkness.:P
As a scientist, he should have known better than to not wear a helmet....
As a fucking primate he should have known better than to not wear a helmet...
That being said, good luck to the guy. Balls, money and heart where his mouth is and all that.
I doubt if they would even try to boot off a virgin customer disk do to liability and privacy issues.
That'd be nice if privacy was still respected in the UK. I recalled stories of techies from the same chain (PC World) browsing through customer hard drives and a quick google turned up this:
http://www.jpoc.net/opinion/2000/garyglitter.html
Yup.
[Why...] only closed source applications? I don't think most people read the entire sources of open source applications that they use.
And not everyone will use a tool to check what their closed source application is actually doing either. When using popular open source software there's a good chance that someone has already scanned the entire source and therefore a good chance that mischief would have been uncovered.
With closed source the chance that someone will uncover mischief, which they can only do by analysing the application's actual operation, is therefore much slimmer.
In summary, it's not that you can always trust open source above and beyond the equivalent closed source - it's just that it's generally much easier to do so.:)
Nicole R. Nason, of Virginia, was nominated January 17, 2006, by President George W. Bush to be Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in the Department of Transportation.
At the time of her nomination, Nason was serving "as Assistant Secretary of Transportation for Governmental Affairs. Prior to this, she served as Assistant Commissioner for the Office of Congressional Affairs for the United States Customs Service. Ms. Nason also served as Communications Director and Counsel to Representative Porter J. Goss. Earlier in her career, she served as Governmental Affairs Counsel at Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. Ms. Nason received her bachelor's degree from the American University and her JD from Case Western Reserve."
XP is fine now (when they're not breaking it remotely), Vista was delayed and Vista sucks. If Vista didn't suck then I wouldn't still be reading horror stories about DRM, HD-crippling, driver issues, kernel vulnerabilities etc. etc. etc. long after it has been released. Barely a week goes by without a handful of things like this or this cropping up.
Are all of these kinds of stories just trolls with spin skills worthy of Karl Rove? If the answer is no then Vista sucks. If the answer is yes then there are lot of people angry at MS - probably, at least in part, because Vista sucks so very much:
http://slashdot.org/search.pl?query=vista
I've been part of several discussions trying to ascertain what advantages Vista actually offers to outweigh the drawbacks and it ain't pretty. The bottom line for us, and I daresay hundreds of thousands of other organisations, is that XP works, is mostly stable and is well supported. Vista can't compete with that - and they're calling it an upgrade?
So if you need Microsoft - and unfortunately we still need to develop with DirectX - then XP will do fine. Vista has to bring something really worthwhile to make us want to go through the hassle of the upgrade and to put up with all the unwanted baggage that Redmond seems to think we all need.
And of course if you don't need Microsoft then you're already laughing. Whatever OS you're using will be just as secure as Vista (if not more so), fully extensible, support all sorts of open formats and not try to wrestle with you for control of your own computer.
I really am glad that Vista's working out for you but unfortunately for most of us the "nifty new features and new look" just aren't enough to justify a broad OS upgrade - certainly for anything other than a home or hobby rig. And my home'n'hobby rigs all run XP or Linux and serve me just fine. =D
Way to spin it, Slashdot. Making the "mistake" of underestimating how well a product is going to sell: not a bad mistake to make.
I think it's more a matter of making the mistake of underestimating how many people are still going to be buying your old product line (XP) instead of your brand spanking new all-singing and all-dancing product line (Vista). And actually that is a bad mistake to make.:p
Whatever you make of MM, the point he makes in this movie is both a profound and necessary wake-up call. It's the kind of movie you don't even need to have an open mind to appreciate. If you're still dubious about state-funded healthcare then this should open your mind for you.
This Luddite should recuse himself and allow the state to pick, at the very least, somebody who once hooked a modem up to a ZX Spectrum, if nobody more modern is available.
Well OK then since you asked for me specifically, all these looney dudes should go free and be ridiculed by mainstream Islam as lunatic fringe. All the Imams can point and laugh saying, "See how these unfortunate misguided infidels have twisted the great faith."
Then I'd declare that web sites that don't execute code on external computers should never be considered weapons of terror and that we must hold true to the ideal of convicting real perpetrators of real crimes, of which there are plenty. It's easy to lock up the lunatic fringe that shouts about tearing down society. It's much harder to lock up people like Osama et al, who are not only intent on actually doing so, but also have real weapons at their disposal.
I'm not saying these folk are scapegoats - they may well be genuinely dangerous. I know little to nothing about the case and... I am not a judge.:P Judges know about law and stuff so they really should make these kinds of decisions. But in 2007 if a judge doesn't know what a website is then he should certainly adjourn the case, hand it over to another judge and/or come and ask me - or any other former Prism VTX 5000 owner - exactly what's happened in the last quarter of a century.
Thinking about it, this probably is a timeless concern. If a judge stopped similar proceedings in the early 20th century because he didn't understand how the murderer had got away so fast in a carriage without horses, I'd like to think he'd have been similarly ridiculed. Judges aren't required to keep up with modern technology but surely they should be required to keep up with the everday tools of mainstream society? I would have thought any conviction handed down by a judge that was ignorant of the contemporary infrastructural context of the case would be unsound. Yeesh. Who'd be a judge?;)
I'd venture to suggest that most of us/. nerds come under the IANAL category and some of us are even foreign!
With that in mind, is it really too much to ask that submitters and editors (ha!) edit and insert full length descriptions of acronyms when they are first presented in a story? e.g. RICO, Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
Thanks for your time; this has been a public service whine.
...so that you, too, can try, convict and punish on less than complete evidence.
Sheesh. Leave it to the lawyers and courts, please.
A fine sentiment but it's worth noting that a tirade of angry e-mails is hardly comparable to an unsound trial, unjust conviction and a custodial sentence during the prime of one's life.
I don't know, or care, what you think you mean by paedophilia. I know what paedophilia is: a noun used to describe a sexual attraction to children.
I understand the difference between the thought and the act. However, unlike bestiality, necrophilia or frankly any other form of sexual attraction, which are none of anybody's business unless/until a crime is committed, paedophilia is fundamentally abhorrent in nature. Both the act itself and anything that does not vehemently discourage the act is harmful, damaging and detrimental to our species. Eroticising children in any way is fucking wrong. If you still don't grasp that notion then you're on the wrong side of the damn fence and frankly, a turd in the gene pool.
Let me put it simply. If you're a paedophile then that's your problem. Keep it in your fucking head and don't admit it to your closest friend. If you act upon it then the mob will tear you to pieces. Even if you simply try to discuss it openly and without shame, the same reaction is just as likely. Society will never tolerate anything else and no amount of tarnishing the noble cause of "civil rights" will change that.
Women had to fight for civil rights. The descendants of slaves had to fight for civil rights. Homosexuals had to fight for civil rights. All of those groups and countless others have justifiable causes to campaign for. Paedophiles - thought or deed - have never, do not, and will never belong to the same category.
My branch of civil rights activism is highly controversial and generally misinterpreted,
No shit.
A blog about paedophilia, what paedophilia is and why many assumptions about paedophilia are incorrect
I'm quite satisfied with my own misinterpretation of the merits of that particular branch of "civil rights" activism. There is no moral ambiguity about paedophilia.
Okay, that makes it go down just a bit easier, but still... I thought that in order to achieve a "cult" status, a movie/book/TV show/whatever had to have some or most of the following:
* A loyal fan base willing to spread it to firends and strangers alike, and willing to spend more than the usual amount of time on promoting it (e.g. "Star Trek" during the 1970's).
I like the criteria. I thought I'd answer them if I may. I am a loyal fan of Children of Men. I've mentioned it to several friends and family members as a movie that both surprised and delighted me.
* Obscurity, or at least relative obscurity (see also "Rocky Horror Picture Show", before some jackass company released it on tape/DVD and ruined the whole thing forever).
Few if any friends/family members had heard of Children of Men before I introduced them to it.
* Independence in birth, thought, and/or most aspects of the film/book/etc that makes it stand away from the 'Mainstream' (e.g. "Night of the Living Dead").
It's a highly original plot, a fantastic story presented in a bleak, yet credible, near-future alternative history. I don't think anyone that has watched it could argue about its originality in style. Much like some of the movies it has been compared to - Twelve Monkeys springs to mind - it is pretty unforgettable to those reached by it.
* Longevity - it has to age a bit like fine wine before it can actually have a cult to follow it (e.g. "Equilibrium", which still kicks more ass than Chuck Norris IMHO, but has been out for years now).
For what it's worth, I'll be making posts like this in twenty years if I'm still around and I'm sure I'm not alone.
IMHO, calling this flick a "cult" film kinda smacks of exploitation by marketing... but then again, maybe my semantics are just off? (I'm sincerely hoping not, but...)
I could say the same thing about Equlibrium. We just belong to different cults I guess.;)
"they reserve the right to take down or remove programmes that have run on their channels which might damage relationships"
And ones that show how they were involved in the 9/11 conspiracy!
That's a joke, BTW:)
Critisize, v. - to make something appear important that is otherwise unimportant, adj. - as small as a critter.
Some of us on this "technology news site" are proud pedants and we do therefore give a damn. Don't take offense when someone draws attention to incorrect spelling or grammar - as any offense is very, very rarely intended. It just helps spread the good spelling memes and defeat the bad spelling memes, which over time helps clean the meme pool.
When I lived in California I was amazed that people actually got to vote on medical marijuana. In the UK such a concept would be considered outrageous. I mean, a county in England, unlike a US state, couldn't even vote to extend pub opening hours.
Won't disagree with much of what you've said but I feel I should point out the scale and population levels involved. Those English counties you mention are a wee bit smaller than their trans-atlantic counterparts. California has a population of nearly 35 million I believe - spread over 400,000 km^2. And Surrey, for example, has a populations closer to one million spread over 1,500 km^2.:)
IANAE but there's a crucial difference with other pertinent indices. Bic Macs as are consumed. Oil, by way of another example, is also consumed. Apple's portable music players (ffs) are sold (or given away) and then just used like any other non-consumable, non-disposable commodity. I really can't see how this is anything other than a gimmick.
I am the marketer at TubesNow.com and my name is Steve.
Hi Steve. We here at/. have no problem with innovations and new technologies. We love the stuff. We're not good with "marketers" though. You were innocent/ignorant/brave enough to come here so I'll try to be kind even though I know some of us would probaly like to eat your brain with a spoon.
So if you have some "news for nerds" or "stuff that matters", by all means share it with us. We'll want to know all the gory technical details that the mainstream press gets turned off by. If we think it rocks, you'll hear no end of it. We'll be bragging to everyone about how we know about this cool new thing that's really clever and is going to be huge. I should imagine that scenario to be a marketer's wet dream.
However on a more cautionary note, if you should ever try to use or misuse us, or this site, purely as a marketing tool, we'll tear your product to pieces. It'll be mocked by us mercilessly and swiftly forgotten. The overall marketing effort would be starkly hindered by the historic mauling that we gave it in its infancy. That sounds a lot like a marketer's worst nightmare.
So please, tell your marketer friends our message. Bring us genuine, interesting news and we'll do your job for you better than you could have ever hoped. Bring us tired, overhyped, nothing new to see here slashvertisements and we'll get mad. Then we'll get even. Then we'll go back to being odd.
If you think there's something truly new or special about your product, double-check with some really hardcore geek friends. If they say things like "so it's just a file sharing app?" or "and?" then it's probably best not to bring the hype to our door. IMHO you should only bring it here if they say things like: "Holy crap - why didn't I think of that?" or "Damn that's smart. I thought I knew what I was talking about but your guys must really know their shit!" or even "You're shitting me! When did that happen?"
star trek had an episode similar to this, altho they didn't kill the life form. someone else will have to help with the details...
I believe that's the "Devil in the Dark" episode. Miners accidentally destroy some alien eggs thinking they're just rocks. Silicon-based mummy alien gets mad and starts harrassing the mining operation until Spock works out that they're dealing with sentient life and the apologies start flowing.
I'd say that's a pretty good indicator. And for what it's worth the big bad media is far from my only source of information about the United States.
So I think it's fair to say that the American people are largely at odds with the government. If you don't like the Newsweek poll go take a look at Bush's approval ratings.
You wrapped up your reply with: "So please, dispense with the secondhand platitudes and start hating us as individual people as well."
I'm sure "secondhand platitudes" sounded great in your mind at the time of writing but the problem is I really didn't dispense any. And if you want me to hate Americans that support the current US administration - no problem at all! I'm more than happy to oblige on that score - and I daresay you'll find a couple of billion people that will even join in. But just because a vocal minority are still supporting America's current government and its actions I'm not going to start distributing hate around quite so readily or liberally as you seem to think appropriate. I know it's a difficult concept to grasp but we overseas are still quite capable of distinguishing between those Americans that are normal, decent human beings (whatever part of the political landscape they occupy - if any) and the vociferous, quasi-militant nationalists that inexplicably seem to support Bush et al whatever the price. And frankly, for the sake of all Americans, it really is just as well that we can.
I have a great many American friends, colleagues and acquaintances. Not a one of them is broadly in favour of Bush or America's foreign policy and overseas actions during the last few years. So I refuse to suddenly start hating any of them "as individual people" despite the fact that, at present, I bitterly resent their parent nation.
In summary; your US government really sucks and our UK government royally sucks. In my humble opinion anyone, on either side of the pond, that still supports either administration deserves even more derision and disdain than they already get.
Amen and thank you. I get tired of the US bashing especially from the UK with their under the microscope approach to privacy.
Funnily enough "the UK" consists of more than one person. And much like the majority of Americans are actually far from being Bush'n'Cheney fans, few Brits are content with Blair's Britain. In case you missed the million people marching in protest through London over the Iraq invasion, we're quite content to bash our own Big Brother government too. Usually because of its submissive compliance with your government in fact. Yes we bash the US. We bash its corrupt, self-interested and corporate damn-near fascist authorities. But note that we bash the nation and not its citizens who we assume to be largely at odds with their government, much as we are here in the UK. We have a saying over here: "We love France. It's such a pity that it's full of French people."* I think a new saying is being born as we speak: "We hate America. It's such a pity that all our wonderful American friends live there."
* Ne me mal comprenez pas - en fait j'ai habité à Paris et aime les français.;)
Slashdot Mirror
What about phone lines? Surely I'm not the only one old enough to ask whether people can dial out to international dial-up lines. It'd only take a relative abroad to hook up their broadband-connected PC to their old phone modem and unless your line is tapped it'd be just another phone call to the family.
That being said, good luck to the guy. Balls, money and heart where his mouth is and all that.
With closed source the chance that someone will uncover mischief, which they can only do by analysing the application's actual operation, is therefore much slimmer.
In summary, it's not that you can always trust open source above and beyond the equivalent closed source - it's just that it's generally much easier to do so.
XP is fine now (when they're not breaking it remotely), Vista was delayed and Vista sucks. If Vista didn't suck then I wouldn't still be reading horror stories about DRM, HD-crippling, driver issues, kernel vulnerabilities etc. etc. etc. long after it has been released. Barely a week goes by without a handful of things like this or this cropping up.
Are all of these kinds of stories just trolls with spin skills worthy of Karl Rove? If the answer is no then Vista sucks. If the answer is yes then there are lot of people angry at MS - probably, at least in part, because Vista sucks so very much: http://slashdot.org/search.pl?query=vista
I've been part of several discussions trying to ascertain what advantages Vista actually offers to outweigh the drawbacks and it ain't pretty. The bottom line for us, and I daresay hundreds of thousands of other organisations, is that XP works, is mostly stable and is well supported. Vista can't compete with that - and they're calling it an upgrade?
So if you need Microsoft - and unfortunately we still need to develop with DirectX - then XP will do fine. Vista has to bring something really worthwhile to make us want to go through the hassle of the upgrade and to put up with all the unwanted baggage that Redmond seems to think we all need.
And of course if you don't need Microsoft then you're already laughing. Whatever OS you're using will be just as secure as Vista (if not more so), fully extensible, support all sorts of open formats and not try to wrestle with you for control of your own computer.
I really am glad that Vista's working out for you but unfortunately for most of us the "nifty new features and new look" just aren't enough to justify a broad OS upgrade - certainly for anything other than a home or hobby rig. And my home'n'hobby rigs all run XP or Linux and serve me just fine. =D
I was looking for that and you beat me to it. It seems Steorn's spin week is an annual event.
Whatever you make of MM, the point he makes in this movie is both a profound and necessary wake-up call. It's the kind of movie you don't even need to have an open mind to appreciate. If you're still dubious about state-funded healthcare then this should open your mind for you.
Then I'd declare that web sites that don't execute code on external computers should never be considered weapons of terror and that we must hold true to the ideal of convicting real perpetrators of real crimes, of which there are plenty. It's easy to lock up the lunatic fringe that shouts about tearing down society. It's much harder to lock up people like Osama et al, who are not only intent on actually doing so, but also have real weapons at their disposal.
I'm not saying these folk are scapegoats - they may well be genuinely dangerous. I know little to nothing about the case and... I am not a judge.
Thinking about it, this probably is a timeless concern. If a judge stopped similar proceedings in the early 20th century because he didn't understand how the murderer had got away so fast in a carriage without horses, I'd like to think he'd have been similarly ridiculed. Judges aren't required to keep up with modern technology but surely they should be required to keep up with the everday tools of mainstream society? I would have thought any conviction handed down by a judge that was ignorant of the contemporary infrastructural context of the case would be unsound. Yeesh. Who'd be a judge?
I'd venture to suggest that most of us /. nerds come under the IANAL category and some of us are even foreign!
With that in mind, is it really too much to ask that submitters and editors (ha!) edit and insert full length descriptions of acronyms when they are first presented in a story?
e.g. RICO, Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
Thanks for your time; this has been a public service whine.
Any nostalgic Speccy user absolutely needs to check out these videos:
http://www.ysrnry.co.uk/tvprog/index.htm
Call me soft, and old, but they brought tears to my eyes. =)
I understand the difference between the thought and the act. However, unlike bestiality, necrophilia or frankly any other form of sexual attraction, which are none of anybody's business unless/until a crime is committed, paedophilia is fundamentally abhorrent in nature. Both the act itself and anything that does not vehemently discourage the act is harmful, damaging and detrimental to our species. Eroticising children in any way is fucking wrong. If you still don't grasp that notion then you're on the wrong side of the damn fence and frankly, a turd in the gene pool.
Let me put it simply. If you're a paedophile then that's your problem. Keep it in your fucking head and don't admit it to your closest friend. If you act upon it then the mob will tear you to pieces. Even if you simply try to discuss it openly and without shame, the same reaction is just as likely. Society will never tolerate anything else and no amount of tarnishing the noble cause of "civil rights" will change that.
Women had to fight for civil rights. The descendants of slaves had to fight for civil rights. Homosexuals had to fight for civil rights. All of those groups and countless others have justifiable causes to campaign for. Paedophiles - thought or deed - have never, do not, and will never belong to the same category.
Not wasting any more karma on you.
FFS.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/02/par
8)
Critisize, v. - to make something appear important that is otherwise unimportant, adj. - as small as a critter.
:)
Some of us on this "technology news site" are proud pedants and we do therefore give a damn. Don't take offense when someone draws attention to incorrect spelling or grammar - as any offense is very, very rarely intended. It just helps spread the good spelling memes and defeat the bad spelling memes, which over time helps clean the meme pool.
And nobody likes a dirty meme pool.
IANAE but there's a crucial difference with other pertinent indices. Bic Macs as are consumed. Oil, by way of another example, is also consumed. Apple's portable music players (ffs) are sold (or given away) and then just used like any other non-consumable, non-disposable commodity. I really can't see how this is anything other than a gimmick.
So if you have some "news for nerds" or "stuff that matters", by all means share it with us. We'll want to know all the gory technical details that the mainstream press gets turned off by. If we think it rocks, you'll hear no end of it. We'll be bragging to everyone about how we know about this cool new thing that's really clever and is going to be huge. I should imagine that scenario to be a marketer's wet dream.
However on a more cautionary note, if you should ever try to use or misuse us, or this site, purely as a marketing tool, we'll tear your product to pieces. It'll be mocked by us mercilessly and swiftly forgotten. The overall marketing effort would be starkly hindered by the historic mauling that we gave it in its infancy. That sounds a lot like a marketer's worst nightmare.
So please, tell your marketer friends our message. Bring us genuine, interesting news and we'll do your job for you better than you could have ever hoped. Bring us tired, overhyped, nothing new to see here slashvertisements and we'll get mad. Then we'll get even. Then we'll go back to being odd.
If you think there's something truly new or special about your product, double-check with some really hardcore geek friends. If they say things like "so it's just a file sharing app?" or "and?" then it's probably best not to bring the hype to our door. IMHO you should only bring it here if they say things like: "Holy crap - why didn't I think of that?" or "Damn that's smart. I thought I knew what I was talking about but your guys must really know their shit!" or even "You're shitting me! When did that happen?"
Good luck with selling the software.
Your reply mostly takes issue with my assertion that Amercian Citizens are largely at odds with their government. I'll deal with that first: .
Newsweek poll indicates that 51% of Americans support Bush's impeachment
I'd say that's a pretty good indicator. And for what it's worth the big bad media is far from my only source of information about the United States.
So I think it's fair to say that the American people are largely at odds with the government. If you don't like the Newsweek poll go take a look at Bush's approval ratings.
You wrapped up your reply with: "So please, dispense with the secondhand platitudes and start hating us as individual people as well."
I'm sure "secondhand platitudes" sounded great in your mind at the time of writing but the problem is I really didn't dispense any. And if you want me to hate Americans that support the current US administration - no problem at all! I'm more than happy to oblige on that score - and I daresay you'll find a couple of billion people that will even join in. But just because a vocal minority are still supporting America's current government and its actions I'm not going to start distributing hate around quite so readily or liberally as you seem to think appropriate. I know it's a difficult concept to grasp but we overseas are still quite capable of distinguishing between those Americans that are normal, decent human beings (whatever part of the political landscape they occupy - if any) and the vociferous, quasi-militant nationalists that inexplicably seem to support Bush et al whatever the price. And frankly, for the sake of all Americans, it really is just as well that we can.
I have a great many American friends, colleagues and acquaintances. Not a one of them is broadly in favour of Bush or America's foreign policy and overseas actions during the last few years. So I refuse to suddenly start hating any of them "as individual people" despite the fact that, at present, I bitterly resent their parent nation.
In summary; your US government really sucks and our UK government royally sucks. In my humble opinion anyone, on either side of the pond, that still supports either administration deserves even more derision and disdain than they already get.
* Ne me mal comprenez pas - en fait j'ai habité à Paris et aime les français.