Or, simply follow the long established rules of the gTLD process. Brazil and Peru didn't file an application for "amazon," Amazon the company is the only entity which did. Now those countries are trying to get out of playing by the rules. Their objection simply doesn't fall into one of the categories allowed.
of course not. 0.0.0.0/32 refers to a specific host, (self-referential, meaning this host, on this network). 0.0.0.0/0 refers to any host on any network.
No, that makes no sense at all. The name Amazon long pre-dates the river, being the name of a mythological tribe of warrier women who removed a breast so they could better shoot a bow. "Amazon" comes from the Greek a-mazos, "without a breast." The countries in the Amazon River basin have a no more legitimate claim to the domain than does the company. Let them use.amazonriver and/or.amazonrainforest, if they wish.
You can get your own domain for a few bucks a year. You can buy hosting for a few bucks a month. From that, you can effectively have your own server, for maybe $100/year. You don't pay for electricity, maintenance, upgrades, etc., and the bandwidth it uses is free and doesn't interfere with your own use.
"Daylight Savings Time does exactly what it says - saves LIGHT for the DAY."
Since DAY is when the sun is up, how does changing the way you number the hours change the amount of LIGHT in the DAY? (and do you somehow think that shouting your argument makes it true?)
There's a long human history of noon being when the sun is highest. Standard time quantizes that to time zones. I can't see any reasonable justification for trying to change thousands of years of human history, development, and expectation by making 1 PM the time the sun is highest.
Not really. Many jurisdictions (including the US) define UTC to be the legal time scale. Although it ticks at the same rate as TAI, it is different. Based on the widespread popular and legal use of UTC, it's more correct to say that TAI is UTC without leap seconds than to say that UTC is TAI with them. Physical realizations are generally referenced as UTC, not TAI (e.g. UTC(NIST), UTC(NPL)).
If you use TAI or UTC, you can never know what time is is right now, because it's only known after the fact - being based on the weighted average of an international collection of Cs clocks. "After the fact," meaning it may be up to a month before knowing what time it was, using BIPM Circular T. They are experimenting with a rapid update process (UTCr).
Then there's UT0, UT1 and UT2, which have no relationship with TAI at all, along with some national lab atomic time scales which are independent of TAI (e.g. TA(NIST), TA(CH) ).
Those aren't single addresses - they're shorthand for "all addresses."
With a bit of local cooperation, Wordpress could actually do that - they just need someone nearby to set up a script to try and open those sites from every available (legitimate) IP address ("spoofing," possible for IPv4, no so much for IPv6). Then Wordpress would actually have every address in their logs.
Using fewer candles may save money, but DST doesn't. If you want to save candles/electricity, get up when the sun comes up, and go to bed when it goes down - DST has nothing to do with it, it certainly doesn't give you any more daylight. What's your point?
Just stop DST alltogether, don't go on it "permanently." That's just plain stupid. Businesses can have hours of 8-4 instead of 9-5, (or whatever) if they wish - but the government should just be out of it. DST doesn't save anything - it just screws with people's sleep patterns and causes missed appointments a couple of days each year
Dear Prenda Law, Our records indicate that the IP address range of 0.0.0.0/0 (and::/0 for IPv6) covers all hosts which have ever connected to any Wordpress site. Sincerely, Wordpress.
Good luck making a law "abridging the freedom of speech."
This attack on 1st Amendment civil rights isn't something I would expect to be coming out of Berkeley. OTOH, the Berkeley government has attacked 2nd Amendment civil rights, so kudos for consistency.
"at what point does someone wake up and develop a system that can be trusted out of the box to be secure?"
Today. Just don't connect to a network or use writable, removable media.
It's all a matter of trust vs. risk. How much do you trust that some software officially signed through Microsoft is really OK? Or that SSL keys signed by a CA provide any security?
It's easy to complain - you're saying it's "fundamentally flawed," but not offering any examples of what isn't. People have broken into bank vaults, too.
Whoosh. You obviously don't understand what you wrote, which was clearly a tautological argument. You simply have no clue.
The LoC isn't an executive department. As I said, and you ignored, it was created as a service to Congress, under the necessary and proper clause. The Librarian of Congress reports to a joint congressional committee, not the President. The position isn't much different than that of a Sergeant at Arms or the Architect of the Capital, which are answerable only to Congress.
I'm done - I see no point in wasting further time explaining things to a Googletard, which are easily researched, and obviously apparent.
Saying that executive offices are executive offices is a tautology. The term appears nowhere in the Constitution, ITYM "executive Departments," which is to say - Departments which are part of the executive branch.
The LoC is not an executive Department, it was created as a service to Congress ("for the purchase of such books as may be necessary for the use of Congress... and for putting up a suitable apartment for containing them therein."), and the Librarian of Congress is not part of the President's cabinet (i.e. not a "principal officers in [an] executive department...",).
I agree that people can group together, and enjoy free speech rights as a group. I disagree, however, that corporations should have those rights.
A corporation is an artificial, legal construct. It is much more than "an organized group of people," as you claim. It has special legal status, and provides advantages to the owners, such as limiting liability and special tax treatment. Since it's an artificial construct, the same law which allows corporations to be formed has every right to limit the uses to which they can be put, and that includes speech.
That in no way limits the ability of people to group together for free speech, it just means you can't have your cake, and eat it too, by doing so as part of a corporation. If you want the special tax and liability treatment offered by incorporation, there's a cost which comes with that.
The Librarian of Congress reports to the Joint Committee on the Library, composed of 5 Senators and 5 Representatives. The Executive branch has nothing to do with the operation of the Library of Congress, as if the name itself doesn't provide a clue.
The President appoints judges, too. That doesn't mean they answer to the President in any way. The LoC was created by Congress. It's part of the Legislative branch, not the Executive one.
There is no "they." The GP is wrong. The decision is made by the Librarian of Congress, in accordance with Section 1201(a)(1) title 17, United States Code. Any "they" would have to be referring to the Register of Copyrights and the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information of the Department of Commerce, who work in an advisory role.
But, the statement issued by the Library of Congress says about as little as is possible with so many words. I certainly don't get the feeling that the LoC will revisit the decision, and I don't see where the law provides a mechanism for that, even if they wanted to. The statement refers to a benefit to "review and resolution" in the context of telecommunications policy, says the rulemaking "was not intended to be a substitute for deliberations of broader public policy," and ends with a door slam - "The most recent rulemaking has served this purpose."
Of course, it depends on how one defines "road tax." If you accept Wikipedia, registration fees paid to US states are a road tax. There are taxes on motor vehicle fuels, which are a primary source of funding road construction and maintenance. There are toll roads and bridges. I'd call all of those "road taxes."
What's your definition of "road tax," where none of them are?
Slashdot Mirror
VR, when RR (Real Reality) isn't good enough! It's a Brave New World we're living in!
Google isn't tracking me when I VPN into my employer's network. Facebook isn't gathering personal data when I ssh to my server.
As has been said, TANSTAAFL, so don't expect "free" service to not track you.
Besides which, I thought phrenology was a disreputable pseudoscience.
Or, simply follow the long established rules of the gTLD process. Brazil and Peru didn't file an application for "amazon," Amazon the company is the only entity which did. Now those countries are trying to get out of playing by the rules. Their objection simply doesn't fall into one of the categories allowed.
By that logic, the Greeks have an even better claim, since they originated the word.
of course not. 0.0.0.0/32 refers to a specific host, (self-referential, meaning this host, on this network). 0.0.0.0/0 refers to any host on any network.
No, that makes no sense at all. The name Amazon long pre-dates the river, being the name of a mythological tribe of warrier women who removed a breast so they could better shoot a bow. "Amazon" comes from the Greek a-mazos, "without a breast." The countries in the Amazon River basin have a no more legitimate claim to the domain than does the company. Let them use .amazonriver and/or .amazonrainforest, if they wish.
You can get your own domain for a few bucks a year. You can buy hosting for a few bucks a month. From that, you can effectively have your own server, for maybe $100/year. You don't pay for electricity, maintenance, upgrades, etc., and the bandwidth it uses is free and doesn't interfere with your own use.
"Daylight Savings Time does exactly what it says - saves LIGHT for the DAY."
Since DAY is when the sun is up, how does changing the way you number the hours change the amount of LIGHT in the DAY? (and do you somehow think that shouting your argument makes it true?)
There's a long human history of noon being when the sun is highest. Standard time quantizes that to time zones. I can't see any reasonable justification for trying to change thousands of years of human history, development, and expectation by making 1 PM the time the sun is highest.
Not really. Many jurisdictions (including the US) define UTC to be the legal time scale. Although it ticks at the same rate as TAI, it is different. Based on the widespread popular and legal use of UTC, it's more correct to say that TAI is UTC without leap seconds than to say that UTC is TAI with them. Physical realizations are generally referenced as UTC, not TAI (e.g. UTC(NIST), UTC(NPL)).
If you use TAI or UTC, you can never know what time is is right now, because it's only known after the fact - being based on the weighted average of an international collection of Cs clocks. "After the fact," meaning it may be up to a month before knowing what time it was, using BIPM Circular T. They are experimenting with a rapid update process (UTCr).
Then there's UT0, UT1 and UT2, which have no relationship with TAI at all, along with some national lab atomic time scales which are independent of TAI (e.g. TA(NIST), TA(CH) ).
In soviet Russia, the hour offs you.
Those aren't single addresses - they're shorthand for "all addresses."
With a bit of local cooperation, Wordpress could actually do that - they just need someone nearby to set up a script to try and open those sites from every available (legitimate) IP address ("spoofing," possible for IPv4, no so much for IPv6). Then Wordpress would actually have every address in their logs.
Using fewer candles may save money, but DST doesn't. If you want to save candles/electricity, get up when the sun comes up, and go to bed when it goes down - DST has nothing to do with it, it certainly doesn't give you any more daylight. What's your point?
Just stop DST alltogether, don't go on it "permanently." That's just plain stupid. Businesses can have hours of 8-4 instead of 9-5, (or whatever) if they wish - but the government should just be out of it. DST doesn't save anything - it just screws with people's sleep patterns and causes missed appointments a couple of days each year
I think they should comply.
::/0 for IPv6) covers all hosts which have ever connected to any Wordpress site.
Dear Prenda Law,
Our records indicate that the IP address range of 0.0.0.0/0 (and
Sincerely, Wordpress.
Good luck making a law "abridging the freedom of speech."
This attack on 1st Amendment civil rights isn't something I would expect to be coming out of Berkeley. OTOH, the Berkeley government has attacked 2nd Amendment civil rights, so kudos for consistency.
"at what point does someone wake up and develop a system that can be trusted out of the box to be secure?"
Today. Just don't connect to a network or use writable, removable media.
It's all a matter of trust vs. risk. How much do you trust that some software officially signed through Microsoft is really OK? Or that SSL keys signed by a CA provide any security?
It's easy to complain - you're saying it's "fundamentally flawed," but not offering any examples of what isn't. People have broken into bank vaults, too.
Whoosh. You obviously don't understand what you wrote, which was clearly a tautological argument. You simply have no clue.
The LoC isn't an executive department. As I said, and you ignored, it was created as a service to Congress, under the necessary and proper clause. The Librarian of Congress reports to a joint congressional committee, not the President. The position isn't much different than that of a Sergeant at Arms or the Architect of the Capital, which are answerable only to Congress.
I'm done - I see no point in wasting further time explaining things to a Googletard, which are easily researched, and obviously apparent.
Saying that executive offices are executive offices is a tautology. The term appears nowhere in the Constitution, ITYM "executive Departments," which is to say - Departments which are part of the executive branch.
... and for putting up a suitable apartment for containing them therein."), and the Librarian of Congress is not part of the President's cabinet (i.e. not a "principal officers in [an] executive department...",).
The LoC is not an executive Department, it was created as a service to Congress ("for the purchase of such books as may be necessary for the use of Congress
I agree that people can group together, and enjoy free speech rights as a group. I disagree, however, that corporations should have those rights.
A corporation is an artificial, legal construct. It is much more than "an organized group of people," as you claim. It has special legal status, and provides advantages to the owners, such as limiting liability and special tax treatment. Since it's an artificial construct, the same law which allows corporations to be formed has every right to limit the uses to which they can be put, and that includes speech.
That in no way limits the ability of people to group together for free speech, it just means you can't have your cake, and eat it too, by doing so as part of a corporation. If you want the special tax and liability treatment offered by incorporation, there's a cost which comes with that.
The Librarian of Congress reports to the Joint Committee on the Library, composed of 5 Senators and 5 Representatives. The Executive branch has nothing to do with the operation of the Library of Congress, as if the name itself doesn't provide a clue.
The President appoints judges, too. That doesn't mean they answer to the President in any way. The LoC was created by Congress. It's part of the Legislative branch, not the Executive one.
There is no "they." The GP is wrong. The decision is made by the Librarian of Congress, in accordance with Section 1201(a)(1) title 17, United States Code. Any "they" would have to be referring to the Register of Copyrights and the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information of the Department of Commerce, who work in an advisory role.
But, the statement issued by the Library of Congress says about as little as is possible with so many words. I certainly don't get the feeling that the LoC will revisit the decision, and I don't see where the law provides a mechanism for that, even if they wanted to. The statement refers to a benefit to "review and resolution" in the context of telecommunications policy, says the rulemaking "was not intended to be a substitute for deliberations of broader public policy," and ends with a door slam - "The most recent rulemaking has served this purpose."
The toll booth attendant disagrees with you.
Of course, it depends on how one defines "road tax." If you accept Wikipedia, registration fees paid to US states are a road tax. There are taxes on motor vehicle fuels, which are a primary source of funding road construction and maintenance. There are toll roads and bridges. I'd call all of those "road taxes."
What's your definition of "road tax," where none of them are?