That may be, but one may feel (as I do) that perhaps if it is such a big deal, the police ought to be the ones taking action, not vigilantes from the MPAA, and that perhaps a year of jail time does not fit the offense. So MPAA lost a couple hundred dollars in profit. Boo-hoo. Mayhaps a fine would work just as well, then? As it is, this strikes me as another minor crime that lawmakers have overinflated, filling our prisions at taxpayer's expense. Look at the cost of keeping someone in prision for a year, and compare that to the amount that MPAA might have lost from this offense.
Now, note that I'm not defending this guy, but rather making the point that there's a serious problem with scale here. If things like this really mattered to lawmakers, wouldn't Ken Lay be in jail? He hasn't seen a day of jail time from the Enron scandals. I guess the moral is, then, only screw those people without the money to defend themselves. That was this guy's big mistake...
They make an exception for the blind. You may, if you have purchased one copy, make unlimited copies for the blind provided that you limit access to those additional copies. Read more.
This is the sort of thing that makes me just feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Open source format, using public domain works, eventually releasing under CC, and making money! No DRM needed or used, and proving that if you let people, they'll be perfectly willing to abide by such terms. /me runs off to buy "The Kiss."
An open-source social protocol already exists... not a site, but an XML protocol for marking links as having a social significance. The recently announced Nvu supports links with XFN information. I would love to see if this network supports XFN, so that it could tie into other XFN-compliant networks and sites.
I agree. IRC may not be fully P2P, but it is very reliable and complete. There's a client for every known OS, and its name is X-Chat. Only one big problem: seizure of the server can reveal who connected, which isn't good for sharing files. For chatting, though... it works wonders.
Well, a $20M increase would be substantial, and would require that to be explained to be plausible. Thus, by Occam's Razor, though both X + $10M and X + $20M - $10M are plausible, there is no reason for me to assume the second scenario. The $10M is easier to attribute to inflation, normal fluxations of the market and to marketing than $20M is.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that the post said that file sharing is helping sales. OTOH, it does suggest that file sharing can't be hurting sales that much. Like the white crow, this proves nothing, but disproves (or at least weakens) the ARIA's arguements.
Does it matter if MS is innovating or not? They still get the 10% in the form of the "Microsoft Tax" whether they innovate or not. When I bought my Dell (which I won't do again, now that I've learned how to build my own from scratch), it came with Windows XP. I then upgraded to Red Hat Linux 9 (OK, technically I changed...), but MS had already got their bucks out of me for WinXPH. Mayhaps FTC should get involved in this (again)?
Problem is, would this lead to a tyranny of the majority? If something like Wikipedia were around in Gallileo's time, would it ever say that the earth is round?
Now, Wikipedia may very well have a method of dealing with this problem, but I am not aware of it. Can someone offer insights?
I think that this is kind of sad... I like upgradable firmware- witness the iRiver line of products- and hate to see it misused to sell cables. If we could come up with a standard cable scheme for portable device to PC interfacing... oh, wait... it's called USB A to USB Mini-B. Now, if only more manufacturers would implement it.
Besides that the one passenger with the name they were worried about fled?
That means nothing. They can say someone is a "terrorist" just to satisfy this type of pseudologic. Just as nothing keeps the gov't from making up the threat in the first place, nothing keeps them from specifying that the threat is some particular Joe Schmo that happens to fit some profile that they can use.
It happened because people are determined to attack us. The 'incompetance' wasn't due to stupidity, it was due to lack of information. Could TIA have helped it? I don't really know. I don't have a strong opinion either way at the moment. I do know, though, that something has to be done. So if you've got an alternative suggestion, I'm all ears.
Hm... as I recall Bush had information. And he ignored it. And he got lots of good publicity and political capital from ignoring it. Mayhaps he had no incentive to prevent it, as the fallout gave him a stupendous amount of power? Then I would make, as such an alternate suggestion, that we keep criminals from entering the White House (AWOL, stole an election, DWI) and create a system that doesn't reward incompetence.
You are missing my point, methinks. I apologize if I misworded it, however. In short, what I'm getting at is not that the number of deaths justifies or not the war, but rather that the scope of our fear is misplaced. Even if a million people were killed, that does not mean that we should be afraid that a million more will be as well. In fact, when we take some simple, small, prudent measures, like putting in better cockpit doors, we do a world of good. When we let fear drive us, and give unnessesary power to the gov't, we have completed the goal of "those who hate freedom." Remember the days when America held true to the ideal that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself? Let me get this through clearly: There are not a dozen terrorists around every street corner. Yes, there are terrorists. Yes, they want us dead. No, they can't bring this country to its knees that easily. No, we can't make a "War on Terror."
'Ya know, that's wonderful, but let's be rational about this. 3,000 deaths... a staggering number, right? However, it is hardly the most tragic thing ever to happen: "In 2002, an estimated 17,419 people died in alcohol-related traffic crashes--an average of one every 30 minutes. These deaths constitute 41 percent of the 42,815 total traffic fatalities. (NHTSA, 2003)" [from MADD.] Don't get me wrong... 9/11 was no doubt a significant event. I just mean to say that the threat posed by it pales in comparison to so many of the threats that surround us every day and which go largely unnoticed.
Even if we assume that 9/11 represented such a grave threat as to cause us to consider the radical restructuring of the very nature of our rights, then we must ask if that is a productive course of action. Remember when TIME magazine ran the cover article claiming that not enough was done to prevent 9/11, even with the Phoenix memo and other warnings? So, please, remind me again how TIA will prevent a "second 9/11?"
While you may be ready to give up your rights in response to a vauge threat (color scale of doom, anyone?) and to passively take hook, line and sinker, there remain those of us who still value the lives lost back in the late 1700s... the lives which won us this freedom in the first place.
Unforturnately, people tend to miss the point: leaked source of closed source products is a bad thing, since they rely on security through obscurity. OTOH, Linux et. al. do not, and thus are able to take advantage of community audit and potentially build stronger code. Thus, were MS to rely on community audit rather than security through obscurity, a source "leak" would be a positive thing.
Only so much carbon...
on
Space Burial
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Call me crazy, mod me -1, Wrong, whatever. I just wonder about launching stuff into space for no good reason. There's only so much mass on Earth, and what happens if the mass we throw off doesn't come back? I understand what we gain by launching satellites and all, but what does this gain us? I suppose it does have some advantages over the problem of finite room to bury people, but still...
Well, privacy, like encryption, should be based on the knowledge that a highly motivated individual can and will break the system, but that the goal is to make the cost (money, time, resources, personal risk...) involved is high enough that 1) it cannot be done en masse, and 2) the value obtained from such a violation is by far overshadowed by the expediture. This is the basic idea behind security, too, both information security and physical security.
Slashdot Mirror
That may be, but one may feel (as I do) that perhaps if it is such a big deal, the police ought to be the ones taking action, not vigilantes from the MPAA, and that perhaps a year of jail time does not fit the offense. So MPAA lost a couple hundred dollars in profit. Boo-hoo. Mayhaps a fine would work just as well, then? As it is, this strikes me as another minor crime that lawmakers have overinflated, filling our prisions at taxpayer's expense. Look at the cost of keeping someone in prision for a year, and compare that to the amount that MPAA might have lost from this offense.
Now, note that I'm not defending this guy, but rather making the point that there's a serious problem with scale here. If things like this really mattered to lawmakers, wouldn't Ken Lay be in jail? He hasn't seen a day of jail time from the Enron scandals. I guess the moral is, then, only screw those people without the money to defend themselves. That was this guy's big mistake...
They make an exception for the blind. You may, if you have purchased one copy, make unlimited copies for the blind provided that you limit access to those additional copies.
Read more.
This is the sort of thing that makes me just feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Open source format, using public domain works, eventually releasing under CC, and making money! No DRM needed or used, and proving that if you let people, they'll be perfectly willing to abide by such terms.
/me runs off to buy "The Kiss."
Not really... the wood gives you sound... and not just in Soviet Russia, either.
Not in my time zone!
I'm in Alaska, you insensitive clod!
An open-source social protocol already exists... not a site, but an XML protocol for marking links as having a social significance. The recently announced Nvu supports links with XFN information. I would love to see if this network supports XFN, so that it could tie into other XFN-compliant networks and sites.
I agree. IRC may not be fully P2P, but it is very reliable and complete. There's a client for every known OS, and its name is X-Chat. Only one big problem: seizure of the server can reveal who connected, which isn't good for sharing files. For chatting, though... it works wonders.
Well, a $20M increase would be substantial, and would require that to be explained to be plausible. Thus, by Occam's Razor, though both X + $10M and X + $20M - $10M are plausible, there is no reason for me to assume the second scenario. The $10M is easier to attribute to inflation, normal fluxations of the market and to marketing than $20M is.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that the post said that file sharing is helping sales. OTOH, it does suggest that file sharing can't be hurting sales that much. Like the white crow, this proves nothing, but disproves (or at least weakens) the ARIA's arguements.
Online Porn is lending a hand to the rest of the industry...
Yes. Yours.
Well, seeing as how I use POPFile on a daily basis, and how it is a wonderful tool, I think you should submit a story.
Does it matter if MS is innovating or not? They still get the 10% in the form of the "Microsoft Tax" whether they innovate or not. When I bought my Dell (which I won't do again, now that I've learned how to build my own from scratch), it came with Windows XP. I then upgraded to Red Hat Linux 9 (OK, technically I changed...), but MS had already got their bucks out of me for WinXPH. Mayhaps FTC should get involved in this (again)?
Problem is, would this lead to a tyranny of the majority? If something like Wikipedia were around in Gallileo's time, would it ever say that the earth is round?
Now, Wikipedia may very well have a method of dealing with this problem, but I am not aware of it. Can someone offer insights?
Remember, if you torture numbers long enough, they'll tell you anything you want to know.
I think that this is kind of sad... I like upgradable firmware- witness the iRiver line of products- and hate to see it misused to sell cables. If we could come up with a standard cable scheme for portable device to PC interfacing... oh, wait... it's called USB A to USB Mini-B. Now, if only more manufacturers would implement it.
Besides that the one passenger with the name they were worried about fled?
That means nothing. They can say someone is a "terrorist" just to satisfy this type of pseudologic. Just as nothing keeps the gov't from making up the threat in the first place, nothing keeps them from specifying that the threat is some particular Joe Schmo that happens to fit some profile that they can use.
It happened because people are determined to attack us. The 'incompetance' wasn't due to stupidity, it was due to lack of information. Could TIA have helped it? I don't really know. I don't have a strong opinion either way at the moment. I do know, though, that something has to be done. So if you've got an alternative suggestion, I'm all ears.
Hm... as I recall Bush had information. And he ignored it. And he got lots of good publicity and political capital from ignoring it. Mayhaps he had no incentive to prevent it, as the fallout gave him a stupendous amount of power? Then I would make, as such an alternate suggestion, that we keep criminals from entering the White House (AWOL, stole an election, DWI) and create a system that doesn't reward incompetence.
You are missing my point, methinks. I apologize if I misworded it, however. In short, what I'm getting at is not that the number of deaths justifies or not the war, but rather that the scope of our fear is misplaced. Even if a million people were killed, that does not mean that we should be afraid that a million more will be as well. In fact, when we take some simple, small, prudent measures, like putting in better cockpit doors, we do a world of good. When we let fear drive us, and give unnessesary power to the gov't, we have completed the goal of "those who hate freedom." Remember the days when America held true to the ideal that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself? Let me get this through clearly: There are not a dozen terrorists around every street corner. Yes, there are terrorists. Yes, they want us dead. No, they can't bring this country to its knees that easily. No, we can't make a "War on Terror."
'Ya know, that's wonderful, but let's be rational about this. 3,000 deaths... a staggering number, right? However, it is hardly the most tragic thing ever to happen: "In 2002, an estimated 17,419 people died in alcohol-related traffic crashes--an average of one every 30 minutes. These deaths constitute 41 percent of the 42,815 total traffic fatalities. (NHTSA, 2003)" [from MADD.] Don't get me wrong... 9/11 was no doubt a significant event. I just mean to say that the threat posed by it pales in comparison to so many of the threats that surround us every day and which go largely unnoticed.
Even if we assume that 9/11 represented such a grave threat as to cause us to consider the radical restructuring of the very nature of our rights, then we must ask if that is a productive course of action. Remember when TIME magazine ran the cover article claiming that not enough was done to prevent 9/11, even with the Phoenix memo and other warnings? So, please, remind me again how TIA will prevent a "second 9/11?"
While you may be ready to give up your rights in response to a vauge threat (color scale of doom, anyone?) and to passively take hook, line and sinker, there remain those of us who still value the lives lost back in the late 1700s... the lives which won us this freedom in the first place.
Unforturnately, people tend to miss the point: leaked source of closed source products is a bad thing, since they rely on security through obscurity. OTOH, Linux et. al. do not, and thus are able to take advantage of community audit and potentially build stronger code. Thus, were MS to rely on community audit rather than security through obscurity, a source "leak" would be a positive thing.
I think I found #6. "Sue people who make quality software for copying said shitty code."
And here I was thinking it was called Mozilla.
Call me crazy, mod me -1, Wrong, whatever. I just wonder about launching stuff into space for no good reason. There's only so much mass on Earth, and what happens if the mass we throw off doesn't come back? I understand what we gain by launching satellites and all, but what does this gain us? I suppose it does have some advantages over the problem of finite room to bury people, but still...
Perhaps one might ask what they can accomplish with our info... and ask if it is a good thing.
Well, privacy, like encryption, should be based on the knowledge that a highly motivated individual can and will break the system, but that the goal is to make the cost (money, time, resources, personal risk...) involved is high enough that 1) it cannot be done en masse, and 2) the value obtained from such a violation is by far overshadowed by the expediture. This is the basic idea behind security, too, both information security and physical security.
Yes, and the Americans have set a stellar example in this case, haven't they?