..... for the march of protective legislation......
And the attendant march of lost personal responsibility into the lawsuit courtroom. Everybody wants to be "secure" from many, what used to be generally accepted risks. In earlier generation most people tended to take the initiative towards their own security. With passing time, more and more people are looking to other entities, most notably government and to an increasing degree, big business, to provide income and security.
For example: Instead of taking care and effort to reduce a hazard, the attitude is "It's insured", so don't worry. If we rely on others to provide our security and safety, we must also accept the side effect of increased control and supervision by the external security providers.
.....The things we used to do as kids would likely get us arrested these days........
Many of us who were children of that age group that first viewed Sesame Street and also those who lived earlier have survived, now to tell our grandchildren how we lived:
First, we survived being born to mothers who smoked and/or drank while they were pregnant. They took aspirin, ate blue cheese dressing, tuna from a can, and didn't get tested for diabetes. Then after that trauma, we were put to sleep on our tummies in baby cribs covered with bright colored lead-based paints. We had no childproof lids on medicine bottles, doors or cabinets and when we rode our bikes, we had no helmets, not to mention, the risks we took hitchhiking.
As infants & children, we would ride in cars with no car seats, booster seats, seat belts or air bags. Riding in the back of a pickup on a warm day was always a special treat.
Many of us drank water from the garden hose, not from a bottle. We shared one soft drink with four friends, from one bottle and no one actually died from this. We ate cupcakes, white bread, real butter, ice-cream actually made with real cream, and drank Kool-aid made with sugar, but we weren't overweight because we were always playing outside, even in winter.
Except when in school, we would leave home in the morning and play outside all day, as long as we were back when the streetlights came on. We didn't mind if no one was able to reach us all day. We would spend hours building our go-carts out of scraps and then ride down the hill, only to find out we forgot the brakes. After running into the bushes a few times, we learned to solve the problem.
We did not have Playstations, Nintendo's, X-boxes, no video games at all, no 150 channels on cable, no video movies or DVD's, no surround-sound or CD's, no cell phones, no personal computer, no Internet or chat rooms, but we had friends. We went outside and found them! Going to the movie show with friends and family was a special event.
We fell out of trees, got cut, broke bones and teeth and there were no lawsuits from these accidents. We ate worms and mud pies made from dirt, and the worms did not live in us forever. We were given BB guns and slingshots for our 10th birthdays. A few broken windows were the major consequences. We made up games with sticks and tennis balls and, although we were told it would happen, we did not put out very many eyes.
We rode bikes or walked to a friend's house and knocked on the door or rang the bell, or just walked in and talked to them. On rainy days we played board games such as checkers or monopoly. Little League had tryouts and not everyone made the team. Those who didn't had to learn to deal with disappointment. The idea of a parent bailing us out if we broke the law was unheard of. They actually sided with the law!
Members of these generations went to the Moon and have produced some of the best risk-takers, problem solvers and inventors ever. For you younger./ers, ask your grandparents, if you have any, how they lived and spent their days when they were kids and young adults.
It seems we largely agree with the concept of corporation. It is the implementation and the rules that need improving. The basic idea is to isolate people's money and responsibility in business from their private lives. Isolation doesn't mean an impenetrable wall however.
.....For instance, the menu bar only displays in the primary monitor.....
I suppose it all depends on what you are doing and how the program you are doing it with is set up. If most of the action is done with the menus, then having to do a lot of mousing is wasted motion. In such a use, having the menu on each monitor would certainly be preferable.
I was using CAD and illustration programs which have multiple tool palettes that can be placed on any of the monitors. I would open several drawing sheets an place them on the monitors with the palettes conveniently close to all sheets. For that, I did not have to take many trips to the menu bar.
Sometimes I also had to have a wide spreadsheet open, one with many columns. For that the biggest advantage of several monitors was that I could see the entire sheet in a large window at once, without scrolling sideways.
....No, they arose to raise large amounts of capital.....
You are telling me that if I made a compelling invention (say antigravity or true cold fusion) as an individual I couldn't raise enough capital to develop it unless I incorporated first? I suspect that I would get a lot of people who would give me money to build a factory to build products making use of the invention or idea. Aside from legal structures in place, an individual could raise just as much money, if those with money thought they could make even more money by giving money for a promise to share in the promised riches.
The lure of easy riches has nothing to do with corporations, but simply human nature. That's why the gambling industry is raking in so much money. Almost everybody KNOWS that the odds of the lottery are against them, yet lotteries rake in billions.
(.....less vulnerable to being thrown into chaos if 'the owner' dies or something......)
An individual owner could hire a super good manager. In such a case, the death of the owner wouldn't affect the business that much either. Maybe the owner did not even participate much in the business before.
Even for corporations, if the one running it dies, can mean large loss. I suspect that if Steve Jobs suddenly died, it would have a much larger effect on Apple than Bill Gates' demise would have on Microsoft. Both own a large chunk of their respective businesses. Maybe if Ballmer croaked, MS stock might even go up somewhat:-) !
(....I agree, but the shield from liability should ONLY cover honest debt, not criminal activity....)
Of course should all criminal activity be punished. Put the guilty persons involved in prison, but don't punish their families by making them destitute welfare cases. Separating honest debts from crookedness isn't always a clear-cut affair.
....Second, re-design corporations - make directors accountable personally, make ceos accountable personally......
Doing that is basically the same as abolishing them. Corporations arose precisely to insulate those who work and run an enterprise from personal liability. Directors, CEOs etc. are basically employees of the owners. Employees can be fired for doing a poor job, but you cannot take away their personal possessions and those of their families.
If you start a business and get into debt, you are personally liable for that debt, even to the extent that the creditors can sell your house out from under you and put you in the street to satisfy the debt. If you incorporate you business, you become in effect an employee with a share in the assets and debts of the business. If the debt exceeds the assets you lose those, but you personal property is untouched. The creditors are left holding the bag. This system has been severely abused by the likes of Worldcom and Enron but should not therefore be entirely abolished. Don't throw the baby out with the bath-water.
......Why not just make the laptop bigger, include all needed features......
The computer you are describing is the 24 in iMac. You get a BIG monitor/system unit and a keyboard/mouse. Other than putting in specialized PCI cards, it will do everything any PC box will, including running your favorite flavor of Windows if needed. It's not exactly portable, but it could be called luggable, such as carrying it to another room in your house. It has wireless networking and blue tooth standard. If you hate wires, get an extra blue tooth mouse/keyboard.
If you already have a nice monitor/keyboard/mouse, check out the Mac mini. It's so small you may forget it is even there. Don't expect to play the latest fancy games on any Mac though, except possibly the very expensive, powerful and big Macpro towers. All Macs will run Windows very well. My Macbook pro even runs VISTA acceptably well although XP does much better.
.......Neither Windows or OS X seem to really handle very large or multiple monitors well......
BS. Macs have always worked well with multiple monitors. I had an external 19 in. monitor for my SE/30 way back in 1989. The later MacIIci also worked well out of the box with two monitors. A Macbook pro laptop will also run another screen. The G5 did run 30" screens, if you could afford one at the time.
.....the windows machine is much better for development work than the Macbook........
You are comparing Apples to Microsoft. Take your Windows machine with you on an airplane or to your local Starbucks shop. Laptops and desktops are not competitors, but complementary, for entirely different situations and use. You have both and are therefore enjoying the best of both worlds.
.......Linux was the first OS I used multiple monitors on and that was about a decade ago.......
Back in 1989, I used an external 19" monitor with my SE30 Mac. It was great for doing drawings with Macdraft and later Claris CAD. The Macbook Pro is a laptop that will support two monitors.
Laptops are for on the go people. Computer costs for professionals are low enough now, so many can own a fully accessorized desktop and also a powerful laptop for travel. Laptops of necessity have to make certain compromises. Synchronization software can keep the user data up to date.
.....nobody will believe you and you'll get subpoena'd for the combo.....
So the rule about being innocent until proven guilty no longer applies? In the US so far at least, the accused does not have to supply evidence that could be used to convict. If the cops suspect that the safe contains evidence against a suspect, they can confiscate the safe and try to crack it open an find out. The encrypted HD is like a safe which the cops are free to haul away and crack, if they are able. If the safe contains the main or only evidence they have, they will have a hard time getting a conviction. Most often that will not be the case. usually there is other evidence that will tend one way or another. Apparently, in GB there is no law against forced testifying against oneself.
......I don't see why encrypted files should be any different than hardcopy or anything else that could be seized under sub poena.......
There is a difference though. In the US, the police can get the possible evidence, ie. the hard drive. However you cannot be forced to reveal to them how that drive could possibly be used testify against you, or even if it contains the evidence against you they are seeking. Until it is decrypted, they cannot even KNOW whether it even contains any evidence at all. Just because they suspect that it may, doesn't mean they can force you to supply the key to enable them to determine whether it really does. Suppose the accused writes things down on paper in an unknown language. Could she/he be forced to translate that?
If testifying against yourself means giving evidence toward your conviction, that is not allowed in the US by the 5th amendment. Shredding the hardcopy just before the cops show up is not the same as using encryption as a matter of course all the time. The cops are free to try to brute force the encryption and they may also try to reassemble the shredded paper. However, deliberately shredding paper is different than using encryption for all data at all times.
As in many things, the why, the motive matters. Abortion done to preserve the life of the mother is quite different than when an abortion is done for selfish reasons. Most abortions, especially the late term ones are done for selfish reasons that have nothing to do with any danger to the life of the mother.
There are many questions we still have about the physical development of a human being. Neither medicine nor the Bible gives us a satisfying, clear answer as to exactly WHEN that mass of cells becomes a person, eligible to be protected as such. Both medicine and the Bible give clear indications that in the third trimester the life growing in the womb becomes quite aware of things inside and outside of the mother.
Any abortion that is done, other than to clearly protect the life of the mother, during that time, is definitely extinguishing the life of a person that has just as much right to life as you and I.
You must have written down the wrong Bible reference, as nothing germane to this appears in Exodus 12:22
.....Show me where in your bible he defines a human being as a clump of non-sentient cells......
Read a section in Luke 1:41-44 for example. Look at Psalm 22:10, 127:3, 139:13, Isaiah 44:24, Jeremiah 1:5 for what God has to say.
Any pregnant woman will tell you that babies in the womb respond to sounds and other stimuli and even to the emotions of the mother.
It has always been standard procedure to declare a particular class of humans as something less than fully human, in order to rationalize the practice of treating them as inferior and/or doing away with them.
You accuse those of a different religion of treason for refusing to worship Caesar and feed them to the lions. You declare a human as property, because of a different skin color and make him/her a slave. You declare a certain group as 'Untermenschen' (subhuman) because of their nationality or ethnicity and gas them in concentration camps. You declare the elderly to be a burden on society, no longer "productive" and come up with ways to get them out of the way. As late as the third trimester, you declare the unborn as "tissue", crush their little heads and flush them down the drain.
You are pissed now, but God is surely and greatly pissed at the likes of you who advocate the murder of the helpless. He will have His final word to you on judgment day. (Matthew 25:41) You better ask Him for mercy, before it is too late for you forever.
.......However, if I put it on a remote, password protected server.......
Only as long as the password holds. On its way to that server, it is on the open Internet. Unless encrypted, anyone can read it. Paper analogy: You put some papers in the garbage, to be picked up by the garbage truck on its way to the municipal incinerator. Unless you shred the papers first, they can be read by anyone who fishes them out of the truck. They are in no way protected by the constitution from any such fishing. Effects, papers, etc. are protected, while in your possession. Putting anything of yours on the Internet or dumpster, means that you have given up possession and it is up for grabs by anyone who happens along. It would be nice if all people refrained from snooping on each other. Unfortunately, we don't live in a nice world. According to some at least, survival of the fittest is still the rule.
......all they want is a computer that works without them having to know too much about it......
Isn't Apple advertising that Macs "just work"? Macs don't have this autorun "feature", so maybe because of that, they should be sued for false advertising.
.......as they will without fear of punitive judgement, as long as they don't break any laws.......
Governments pile law upon law, yet nobody is able to keep the ten that were handed down personally by God, way back there on Mt. Sinai.
If everyone would know what another person's thoughts were, it would certainly put a crimp into law breaking. Many here on/. make it seem as if government is some special collective entity, rather than being composed of fallible people. The problem is that these people in government want to know what the citizens are thinking, but don't want the citizens to know what they are thinking. I wouldn't mind if these governmental people would know all I am thinking, if I could also know all of their thoughts.
........since I consider matters of reproduction an inalienable right).......
"Who gave you THAT right? The writers of the Declaration of Independence expressed therein that the Creator God is the originator of human rights. AFAIK, he takes a dim view of and has decreed the most harsh penalty for those who deliberately extinguish a human being.
No you're not! EVERYBODY has an important job to do in life. However, EVERYBODY is always wanting SOMEBODY else do it. ANYBODY could do it, but NOBODY did. SOMEBODY got very angry about it, because it was EVERYBODY'S job. EVERYBODY thought that ANYBODY could do it, but NOBODY realized that EVERYBODY would not do it. Thus it ended up that EVERYBODY blamed SOMEBODY, when NOBODY did what ANYBODY could have done.
They still have to get a warrant to look at you papers if they are in your HOUSE. Even if they want you HD from your computer, they have to get a warrant and then come and take it. As written the getting of a warrant ONLY applies to you house, not the dumpster or garbage can. You home is your castle, still in a sense.
You might as well get used to the fact, that the Internet is a public highway and anything that litters that highway can be picked up by anyone, including government. If you have a deep dark secret, keep it to yourself. As soon as another person knows it, it is no longer a secret. If you want to convey some special private information that is limited to one or a few individuals, encrypt it, before releasing it onto the public Internet.
......to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects.......
I suppose it can be debated whether some ephemeral electronic impulses in some distant computer apply to the above. In the days this was written, any government agent who did want these, had to physically come to the subject persons house or office and take such persons or items with him/her.
It seems that in this day, the only way to keep anything truly secret, is to not tell anyone, anywhere, by any means and make sure it isn't recorded anywhere it is possible for another person to discover said secret(s). Sending a secret out by any electronic device is likely not much different than shouting it from your roof-top.
Maybe Jesus had this in mind what is recorded in Luke 12:3?
"For there is nothing covered that shall not be revealed, nor anything hidden that shall not be known. Therefore whatever you have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light. And that which you have spoken in the ear in secret rooms shall be proclaimed on the housetops."
This was written long before mankind had our modern means of eavesdropping.
.....you'd know that Dvorak actually recommends that people buy Macs for home use when they ask him.......
So do I. Since I deal with Windows as well, I have turned a number of Windows user into Mac users and they are all delighted with their shiny new Macs. The top question usually is' "What is the advantage of using Macs? I hear the cost a lot more.
The answer I give is the that Macs are not very likely to get infected with all sorts of malware. This starts with the manufacturer. Apple doesn't clutter up the HD with adware and demo-ware. There has never been any malware that would infect an out of the box Mac, merely because it was plugged into the Internet. Often I am asked to come and help them set up their new Mac. I always make at least three accounts. The first an administrator account. a regular user and a guest account. The guest account is very minimal and the normal users do not have admin rights.
At our business and at home the administrator password is not given out to users. This prevents the installation of system wide contagion. With the new OSX10.5, I will also encourage them to buy an inexpensive external drive, to use with the new time machine backup solution. It appears that except for large corporations, Apple is light years ahead of MS with their integrated hardware/software solutions.
Cleaning up infected, often barely useable Windows machines makes me money, but gives me no pleasure. It actually makes me sad that so many clueless computer users have to pay some outsider like me and anti-virus program makers money, just to keep their computers working properly.
.......about not able to read web content on phones is really just a problem of people not generating format for phone use.....
Maybe building a device that can work with the millions of existing web pages rather than forcing everyone to make two sets of content is the better way to go. Apple seems to have done exactly that with their iphone. These are selling like hot-cakes despite of their rather high cost, likely because they are the first pocketable device to be able to browse ordinary web pages designed for computers, without the users needing to use a magnifying glass. Having the ability to play music the same way as the popular iPod is a boon to all users of that device, since they now only have to carry one gadget if the also use a cell phone.
.....These so called "Computers" are able to process a large amount of data. Using various algorithms, they can flag certain traffic they deem interesting.....
It seems that the only way to put spying, spam and malware to rest forever, is to implement an easy to use encryption system/method that encrypts ALL data in every computer. No unencrypted data exists anywhere. Maybe, someday, everybody will have a quantum computer which can generate unbreakable encryption. That is unlikely to happen, because if somebody did come up with an easy to use encryption system, it would probably be declared illegal anyway.
Meanwhile then, anyone who doesn't want to have their deep dark secrets to become known, must never tell them to anyone else by any means whatsoever, and especially not by way of the Internet. Write those secrets down on paper and then burn that in a hot fire.
Slashdot Mirror
..... for the march of protective legislation......
And the attendant march of lost personal responsibility into the lawsuit courtroom. Everybody wants to be "secure" from many, what used to be generally accepted risks. In earlier generation most people tended to take the initiative towards their own security. With passing time, more and more people are looking to other entities, most notably government and to an increasing degree, big business, to provide income and security.
For example: Instead of taking care and effort to reduce a hazard, the attitude is "It's insured", so don't worry. If we rely on others to provide our security and safety, we must also accept the side effect of increased control and supervision by the external security providers.
.....The things we used to do as kids would likely get us arrested these days........
./ers, ask your grandparents, if you have any, how they lived and spent their days when they were kids and young adults.
Many of us who were children of that age group that first viewed Sesame Street and also those who lived earlier have survived, now to tell our grandchildren how we lived:
First, we survived being born to mothers who smoked and/or drank while they were pregnant. They took aspirin, ate blue cheese dressing, tuna from a can, and didn't get tested for diabetes. Then after that trauma, we were put to sleep on our tummies in baby cribs covered with bright colored lead-based paints. We had no childproof lids on medicine bottles, doors or cabinets and when we rode our bikes, we had no helmets, not to mention, the risks we took hitchhiking.
As infants & children, we would ride in cars with no car seats, booster seats, seat belts or air bags. Riding in the back of a pickup on a warm day was always a special treat.
Many of us drank water from the garden hose, not from a bottle. We shared one soft drink with four friends, from one bottle and no one actually died from this. We ate cupcakes, white bread, real butter, ice-cream actually made with real cream, and drank Kool-aid made with sugar, but we weren't overweight because we were always playing outside, even in winter.
Except when in school, we would leave home in the morning and play outside all day, as long as we were back when the streetlights came on. We didn't mind if no one was able to reach us all day. We would spend hours building our go-carts out of scraps and then ride down the hill, only to find out we forgot the brakes. After running into the bushes a few times, we learned to solve the problem.
We did not have Playstations, Nintendo's, X-boxes, no video games at all, no 150 channels on cable, no video movies or DVD's, no surround-sound or CD's, no cell phones, no personal computer, no Internet or chat rooms, but we had friends. We went outside and found them! Going to the movie show with friends and family was a special event.
We fell out of trees, got cut, broke bones and teeth and there were no lawsuits from these accidents. We ate worms and mud pies made from dirt, and the worms did not live in us forever. We were given BB guns and slingshots for our 10th birthdays. A few broken windows were the major consequences. We made up games with sticks and tennis balls and, although we were told it would happen, we did not put out very many eyes.
We rode bikes or walked to a friend's house and knocked on the door or rang the bell, or just walked in and talked to them. On rainy days we played board games such as checkers or monopoly. Little League had tryouts and not everyone made the team. Those who didn't had to learn to deal with disappointment. The idea of a parent bailing us out if we broke the law was unheard of. They actually sided with the law!
Members of these generations went to the Moon and have produced some of the best risk-takers, problem solvers and inventors ever. For you younger
...Sure, if we didn't have "corporations".....
It seems we largely agree with the concept of corporation. It is the implementation and the rules that need improving. The basic idea is to isolate people's money and responsibility in business from their private lives. Isolation doesn't mean an impenetrable wall however.
.....For instance, the menu bar only displays in the primary monitor.....
I suppose it all depends on what you are doing and how the program you are doing it with is set up. If most of the action is done with the menus, then having to do a lot of mousing is wasted motion. In such a use, having the menu on each monitor would certainly be preferable.
I was using CAD and illustration programs which have multiple tool palettes that can be placed on any of the monitors. I would open several drawing sheets an place them on the monitors with the palettes conveniently close to all sheets. For that, I did not have to take many trips to the menu bar.
Sometimes I also had to have a wide spreadsheet open, one with many columns. For that the biggest advantage of several monitors was that I could see the entire sheet in a large window at once, without scrolling sideways.
....No, they arose to raise large amounts of capital.....
:-) !
You are telling me that if I made a compelling invention (say antigravity or true cold fusion) as an individual I couldn't raise enough capital to develop it unless I incorporated first? I suspect that I would get a lot of people who would give me money to build a factory to build products making use of the invention or idea. Aside from legal structures in place, an individual could raise just as much money, if those with money thought they could make even more money by giving money for a promise to share in the promised riches.
The lure of easy riches has nothing to do with corporations, but simply human nature. That's why the gambling industry is raking in so much money. Almost everybody KNOWS that the odds of the lottery are against them, yet lotteries rake in billions.
(.....less vulnerable to being thrown into chaos if 'the owner' dies or something......)
An individual owner could hire a super good manager. In such a case, the death of the owner wouldn't affect the business that much either. Maybe the owner did not even participate much in the business before.
Even for corporations, if the one running it dies, can mean large loss. I suspect that if Steve Jobs suddenly died, it would have a much larger effect on Apple than Bill Gates' demise would have on Microsoft. Both own a large chunk of their respective businesses. Maybe if Ballmer croaked, MS stock might even go up somewhat
(....I agree, but the shield from liability should ONLY cover honest debt, not criminal activity....)
Of course should all criminal activity be punished. Put the guilty persons involved in prison, but don't punish their families by making them destitute welfare cases. Separating honest debts from crookedness isn't always a clear-cut affair.
....Second, re-design corporations - make directors accountable personally, make ceos accountable personally......
Doing that is basically the same as abolishing them. Corporations arose precisely to insulate those who work and run an enterprise from personal liability. Directors, CEOs etc. are basically employees of the owners. Employees can be fired for doing a poor job, but you cannot take away their personal possessions and those of their families.
If you start a business and get into debt, you are personally liable for that debt, even to the extent that the creditors can sell your house out from under you and put you in the street to satisfy the debt. If you incorporate you business, you become in effect an employee with a share in the assets and debts of the business. If the debt exceeds the assets you lose those, but you personal property is untouched. The creditors are left holding the bag. This system has been severely abused by the likes of Worldcom and Enron but should not therefore be entirely abolished. Don't throw the baby out with the bath-water.
......Why not just make the laptop bigger, include all needed features......
The computer you are describing is the 24 in iMac. You get a BIG monitor/system unit and a keyboard/mouse. Other than putting in specialized PCI cards, it will do everything any PC box will, including running your favorite flavor of Windows if needed. It's not exactly portable, but it could be called luggable, such as carrying it to another room in your house. It has wireless networking and blue tooth standard. If you hate wires, get an extra blue tooth mouse/keyboard.
If you already have a nice monitor/keyboard/mouse, check out the Mac mini. It's so small you may forget it is even there. Don't expect to play the latest fancy games on any Mac though, except possibly the very expensive, powerful and big Macpro towers. All Macs will run Windows very well. My Macbook pro even runs VISTA acceptably well although XP does much better.
.......Neither Windows or OS X seem to really handle very large or multiple monitors well......
BS. Macs have always worked well with multiple monitors. I had an external 19 in. monitor for my SE/30 way back in 1989. The later MacIIci also worked well out of the box with two monitors. A Macbook pro laptop will also run another screen. The G5 did run 30" screens, if you could afford one at the time.
.....the windows machine is much better for development work than the Macbook........
You are comparing Apples to Microsoft. Take your Windows machine with you on an airplane or to your local Starbucks shop. Laptops and desktops are not competitors, but complementary, for entirely different situations and use. You have both and are therefore enjoying the best of both worlds.
.......Linux was the first OS I used multiple monitors on and that was about a decade ago.......
Back in 1989, I used an external 19" monitor with my SE30 Mac. It was great for doing drawings with Macdraft and later Claris CAD. The Macbook Pro is a laptop that will support two monitors.
Laptops are for on the go people. Computer costs for professionals are low enough now, so many can own a fully accessorized desktop and also a powerful laptop for travel. Laptops of necessity have to make certain compromises. Synchronization software can keep the user data up to date.
.....The Texas Memory Systems RAMSan requires 2500W of power........
It appears that one of these is NOT ready to be used in your next laptop in the near future!
.....nobody will believe you and you'll get subpoena'd for the combo.....
So the rule about being innocent until proven guilty no longer applies? In the US so far at least, the accused does not have to supply evidence that could be used to convict. If the cops suspect that the safe contains evidence against a suspect, they can confiscate the safe and try to crack it open an find out. The encrypted HD is like a safe which the cops are free to haul away and crack, if they are able. If the safe contains the main or only evidence they have, they will have a hard time getting a conviction. Most often that will not be the case. usually there is other evidence that will tend one way or another. Apparently, in GB there is no law against forced testifying against oneself.
......I don't see why encrypted files should be any different than hardcopy or anything else that could be seized under sub poena.......
There is a difference though. In the US, the police can get the possible evidence, ie. the hard drive. However you cannot be forced to reveal to them how that drive could possibly be used testify against you, or even if it contains the evidence against you they are seeking. Until it is decrypted, they cannot even KNOW whether it even contains any evidence at all. Just because they suspect that it may, doesn't mean they can force you to supply the key to enable them to determine whether it really does. Suppose the accused writes things down on paper in an unknown language. Could she/he be forced to translate that?
If testifying against yourself means giving evidence toward your conviction, that is not allowed in the US by the 5th amendment. Shredding the hardcopy just before the cops show up is not the same as using encryption as a matter of course all the time. The cops are free to try to brute force the encryption and they may also try to reassemble the shredded paper. However, deliberately shredding paper is different than using encryption for all data at all times.
.....and we're back to arguing exactly when......
As in many things, the why, the motive matters. Abortion done to preserve the life of the mother is quite different than when an abortion is done for selfish reasons. Most abortions, especially the late term ones are done for selfish reasons that have nothing to do with any danger to the life of the mother.
There are many questions we still have about the physical development of a human being. Neither medicine nor the Bible gives us a satisfying, clear answer as to exactly WHEN that mass of cells becomes a person, eligible to be protected as such. Both medicine and the Bible give clear indications that in the third trimester the life growing in the womb becomes quite aware of things inside and outside of the mother.
Any abortion that is done, other than to clearly protect the life of the mother, during that time, is definitely extinguishing the life of a person that has just as much right to life as you and I.
You must have written down the wrong Bible reference, as nothing germane to this appears in Exodus 12:22
.....Show me where in your bible he defines a human being as a clump of non-sentient cells......
Read a section in Luke 1:41-44 for example. Look at Psalm 22:10, 127:3, 139:13, Isaiah 44:24, Jeremiah 1:5 for what God has to say.
Any pregnant woman will tell you that babies in the womb respond to sounds and other stimuli and even to the emotions of the mother.
It has always been standard procedure to declare a particular class of humans as something less than fully human, in order to rationalize the practice of treating them as inferior and/or doing away with them.
You accuse those of a different religion of treason for refusing to worship Caesar and feed them to the lions. You declare a human as property, because of a different skin color and make him/her a slave. You declare a certain group as 'Untermenschen' (subhuman) because of their nationality or ethnicity and gas them in concentration camps. You declare the elderly to be a burden on society, no longer "productive" and come up with ways to get them out of the way. As late as the third trimester, you declare the unborn as "tissue", crush their little heads and flush them down the drain.
You are pissed now, but God is surely and greatly pissed at the likes of you who advocate the murder of the helpless. He will have His final word to you on judgment day. (Matthew 25:41) You better ask Him for mercy, before it is too late for you forever.
.......However, if I put it on a remote, password protected server.......
Only as long as the password holds. On its way to that server, it is on the open Internet. Unless encrypted, anyone can read it. Paper analogy: You put some papers in the garbage, to be picked up by the garbage truck on its way to the municipal incinerator. Unless you shred the papers first, they can be read by anyone who fishes them out of the truck. They are in no way protected by the constitution from any such fishing. Effects, papers, etc. are protected, while in your possession. Putting anything of yours on the Internet or dumpster, means that you have given up possession and it is up for grabs by anyone who happens along. It would be nice if all people refrained from snooping on each other. Unfortunately, we don't live in a nice world. According to some at least, survival of the fittest is still the rule.
......all they want is a computer that works without them having to know too much about it......
Isn't Apple advertising that Macs "just work"? Macs don't have this autorun "feature", so maybe because of that, they should be sued for false advertising.
.......as they will without fear of punitive judgement, as long as they don't break any laws.......
/. make it seem as if government is some special collective entity, rather than being composed of fallible people. The problem is that these people in government want to know what the citizens are thinking, but don't want the citizens to know what they are thinking. I wouldn't mind if these governmental people would know all I am thinking, if I could also know all of their thoughts.
Governments pile law upon law, yet nobody is able to keep the ten that were handed down personally by God, way back there on Mt. Sinai.
If everyone would know what another person's thoughts were, it would certainly put a crimp into law breaking. Many here on
........since I consider matters of reproduction an inalienable right).......
"Who gave you THAT right? The writers of the Declaration of Independence expressed therein that the Creator God is the originator of human rights. AFAIK, he takes a dim view of and has decreed the most harsh penalty for those who deliberately extinguish a human being.
.....I'm nobody!.....
No you're not! EVERYBODY has an important job to do in life. However, EVERYBODY is always wanting SOMEBODY else do it. ANYBODY could do it, but NOBODY did. SOMEBODY got very angry about it, because it was EVERYBODY'S job. EVERYBODY thought that ANYBODY could do it, but NOBODY realized that EVERYBODY would not do it. Thus it ended up that EVERYBODY blamed SOMEBODY, when NOBODY did what ANYBODY could have done.
.....it would have to look at your papers........
They still have to get a warrant to look at you papers if they are in your HOUSE. Even if they want you HD from your computer, they have to get a warrant and then come and take it. As written the getting of a warrant ONLY applies to you house, not the dumpster or garbage can. You home is your castle, still in a sense.
You might as well get used to the fact, that the Internet is a public highway and anything that litters that highway can be picked up by anyone, including government. If you have a deep dark secret, keep it to yourself. As soon as another person knows it, it is no longer a secret. If you want to convey some special private information that is limited to one or a few individuals, encrypt it, before releasing it onto the public Internet.
......to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects.......
I suppose it can be debated whether some ephemeral electronic impulses in some distant computer apply to the above. In the days this was written, any government agent who did want these, had to physically come to the subject persons house or office and take such persons or items with him/her.
It seems that in this day, the only way to keep anything truly secret, is to not tell anyone, anywhere, by any means and make sure it isn't recorded anywhere it is possible for another person to discover said secret(s). Sending a secret out by any electronic device is likely not much different than shouting it from your roof-top.
Maybe Jesus had this in mind what is recorded in Luke 12:3?
"For there is nothing covered that shall not be revealed, nor anything hidden that shall not be known. Therefore whatever you have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light. And that which you have spoken in the ear in secret rooms shall be proclaimed on the housetops."
This was written long before mankind had our modern means of eavesdropping.
.....you'd know that Dvorak actually recommends that people buy Macs for home use when they ask him .......
So do I. Since I deal with Windows as well, I have turned a number of Windows user into Mac users and they are all delighted with their shiny new Macs. The top question usually is' "What is the advantage of using Macs? I hear the cost a lot more.
The answer I give is the that Macs are not very likely to get infected with all sorts of malware. This starts with the manufacturer. Apple doesn't clutter up the HD with adware and demo-ware. There has never been any malware that would infect an out of the box Mac, merely because it was plugged into the Internet. Often I am asked to come and help them set up their new Mac. I always make at least three accounts. The first an administrator account. a regular user and a guest account. The guest account is very minimal and the normal users do not have admin rights.
At our business and at home the administrator password is not given out to users. This prevents the installation of system wide contagion. With the new OSX10.5, I will also encourage them to buy an inexpensive external drive, to use with the new time machine backup solution. It appears that except for large corporations, Apple is light years ahead of MS with their integrated hardware/software solutions.
Cleaning up infected, often barely useable Windows machines makes me money, but gives me no pleasure. It actually makes me sad that so many clueless computer users have to pay some outsider like me and anti-virus program makers money, just to keep their computers working properly.
.......about not able to read web content on phones is really just a problem of people not generating format for phone use.....
Maybe building a device that can work with the millions of existing web pages rather than forcing everyone to make two sets of content is the better way to go. Apple seems to have done exactly that with their iphone. These are selling like hot-cakes despite of their rather high cost, likely because they are the first pocketable device to be able to browse ordinary web pages designed for computers, without the users needing to use a magnifying glass. Having the ability to play music the same way as the popular iPod is a boon to all users of that device, since they now only have to carry one gadget if the also use a cell phone.
.....These so called "Computers" are able to process a large amount of data. Using various algorithms, they can flag certain traffic they deem interesting.....
It seems that the only way to put spying, spam and malware to rest forever, is to implement an easy to use encryption system/method that encrypts ALL data in every computer. No unencrypted data exists anywhere. Maybe, someday, everybody will have a quantum computer which can generate unbreakable encryption. That is unlikely to happen, because if somebody did come up with an easy to use encryption system, it would probably be declared illegal anyway.
Meanwhile then, anyone who doesn't want to have their deep dark secrets to become known, must never tell them to anyone else by any means whatsoever, and especially not by way of the Internet. Write those secrets down on paper and then burn that in a hot fire.