I don't know about you guys, but this whole "sue anything that moves" culture is really starting to piss me off.
I love it. The only problem is we need a revised system, something based on "loser pays," with reasonable limits. Then you have a check on the absurd lawsuits which should not make it into a court of law, since there is an incentive to make sure you can win the lawsuit.
I'm not saying that legally they don't have a legitimate case, but is it really necessary to persue an organisation such as the Internet Archive over something so passive as this?
Passive? Don't get me wrong, I often find the IA very useful, but it gives me an uneasy feeling, just as the Google cache does. I think it should be opt-in. By creating a site, you are giving people the right to view your publicly available content. You are, IMO, even giving people a right to save your content to their system for later viewing.
However, I really don't see that you are giving anyone the right to save your content and re-distribute it from their servers.
It was only a matter of time, and inevitibly, IA will have to go to an opt-in system once they start getting sued due to this disregard for copyright. The author of an original work should be able to retain distribution rights.
I ask people not to make copies elsewhere and technically that "request" is enforceable under copyright law
You do not even have to make the request. You are granted copyright as soon as you create an original work. You must actually RELEASE people from the copyright explicitly if you want them to be able to distribute it to others.
In the meantime, gamers have been offically told to uninstall Battlefield 2 and play without the patch
How would they play the game after the uninstall it? Oh, this sentence (and the title) is wrong. Their official statement says to REINSTALL Battlefield 2, and not to install the patch until they release a new one.
And why? So you know there are exploits being run against you? And this helps how?
Sorry, I guess I have to spell it out for you. The firewall scans for known exploits, and if found, shuns the host sending them for X amount of time, thereby thwarting their planned attack 99% of the time.
They also specifically took this approach because it allows them to connect with business partners and also allow their end users, visitors and contractors to use their laptops more freely without compromising security by treating EVERYBODY as if they were a potential script kiddie - which is how security should be since most hacks occur from INSIDE the network.
Wow, thanks for the newsflash! We have the same advantages and security practices in effect, with the added security of an outer firewall!
Re:Firewalls are needed only for leaky systems
on
Tear Down the Firewall
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
There is no way to attack bare kernel (ok, ping of death)
OK, so then why did you mention that point if you are going to subsequently shoot it down with one example?
firewalls do nothing to protect services which are already visible to the network
Yes, higher-end firewalls can also scan the traffic on those open ports looking for exploits (ala IDS firewalls).
And if you want to use the firewall to block off unneeded services, why in the hell are you running them in the first place?
Are you serious? I have tons of services running on various servers that I do not want made available to the public, yet need to be available to (a) the other servers behind the firewall, and (b) trusted users that connect over our VPN... which, incidentally, is another function of a good firewall.
The article and your post are pure lunacy. It is not that hard to maintain a firewall, and as long as you plan your internal networking with the assumption that the firewall will not stop a really good hacker, it is just one more layer of security.
After that, they cannot ever contact you again about that debt, and no, it will not effect your credit one way or another. (WIRED basically lost that right when they agreed to let a collection agency try to get the money for them... oversimplifying it.)
They really shot themselves in the foot, because up until that time, I would buy the magazine off the newsstand even when I let my subscription lapse. Since I got that letter, I've never bought a copy of WIRED again.
And if people complained about the sex/violence contradiction more often, maybe something would change. So why don't you find something more poductive to do with your time than merely bitching about people who bitch?
Ha. I am probably one of the VERY FEW people on Slashdot that actually writes my Senators and Congressman about issues like this. And letters to the editor.
Slashdot is a geek site. It is NOT a cross-section of America. Beating a dead horse on Slashdot will not change anything. The people that read Slashdot, by and large, recognize this strange dichotomy in America between sex and violence. This is also why it is re-hashed here every time one of these articles comes up. I could live with one such post being moderated highly, but jesus christ I read 5 posts saying the exact same thing, and yeah, I decided to bitch about it. Guess I hit a nerve since I went to +5 on that post immediately.
Hmmm, I just checked the preferences page and I do see what you mean, they apparantly have taken that feature away (or hidden it pretty well) for some reason (probably performance reasons). You used to be able to select topics to ignore.
Oh, come on. You have to admit this is one of the most extreme examples of "sex and violence are one thing, but nudity crosses the line" ever.
No, it isn't. It's the same-old, same-old. And even if it were "the most extreme example," how exactly would that make your dead, beaten horse comments any more interesting?
YES, WE GET IT, AMERICA IS FUCKED UP WHEN IT COMES TO SEX AND VIOLENCE.
The US has strange attitudes about sex and violence.
Ho hum. Yes, we know. This point is made a million times every time a sex/violence topic is brought up re: movies or video games.
Yes, it is stupid. Yes we know about it. No, there's nothing you can do about it except keep pushing the envelope, minding your own business, writing your congressman to complain when they try to take on the role of guardian of your children, and voting for representatives that will pledge not to do so if elected.
Complaining about this strange idiosyncracy on Slashdot will not change a goddamn thing.
However, it will bore the shit out of me and anyone else that has read 2+ articles about this topic, which I would wager is 90% of the Slashdot viewers.
This is a question I seem to have to pose more often on Slashdot. I see so many knee-jerk reactions like this (and also to "privacy issues" that really aren't issues).
If you wanted to buy the book, what harm would it cause to buy it using the link provided? The price is the same to you. Someone makes some money: Either the person that took the time to review the book, or Slashdot. (In this case I happen to know it is Slashdot.)
If you don't trust the reviewer and you think they are biased, then you wouldn't want to buy the book whether or not you use the link provided, right?
So really, aside from sticking it to the man, what exactly is your reasoning behind your statement.
Sorry, this is the second person I've seen complain about this in this one article, but there is one in every book review article.
I swear, it seems like sometimes you guys are scared you won't be able to resist buying something, and therefore don't want slashdot to put it in front of your faces.
I think the thing that is more annoying to me is that I can easily filter out Google stories if I didn't want to read them, yet I have no way of filtering out the inevitable "Too many Google stories" comments that flood Google stories.
SHUT UP ALREADY AND FILTER OUT THE GOOGLE TOPIC IF YOU ARE SICK OF IT!
I don't believe Bin Laden is one of them. If he was, how could he have worked with the CIA in the russian war in afghanistan?
The same way enemies have worked together for millenium to defeat more-hated enemies.
I also think that any of us who claim to know what motivates Bin Laden is a little too confidant. All I meant to say with my post is that we don't know that what he says is true, and to accept it cart blanche is foolish as best, and dangerous at worst.
All I need to know about islamofascists like bin Laden is that they want to kill innocent people, and they do kill innocent people, for their religious reasons. As much as anyone may hate Bush and the current administration, I really doubt anyone believes we (America in general) want to kill innocent people. Yes, innocent people died in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, and will continue to do so. But compare it to past wars, and you will see the military has tried to (and succeeded at) limit civilian casualties as they attack enemies.
I also beleive that Al Queda can not function without at least some support from broad Muslum communities, this support is rarly based on hatred of everthing western, but rather a desire to have western nations change thier foreign policy. If this support evaporates, then the movment looses it's ability to oporate...
Sadly, it only takes a very few set of radicals to fund and carry out extreme terrorism. As weapons become more dangerous and easy to get, the only thing you can do is try to locate terrorists and kill them, as well as to promote freedom in the countries that spawn terrorists, to give what would be future terrorists, some hope.
The fact is the islamofascists are brainwashed by religion, and it is easier to brainwash people with religion when they have no hope and live in horrible conditions. Religion prays on the ignorant. (Pun intended.;)
(I too am non-religous, and I used to consider myself a centerest, but I feel the center has shifted very far to the right lately)
Ummm. The center hasn't shifted at all, that's why they call it the center.;-) However, you may find that the administration and its opponents have shifted to the edges. Sadly, I agree. However, I also feel that the majority in America are in the center. But as fucked up as our political/voting system is in this country, they won't come out to vote in large numbers until major, radical changes are made to improve our system.
Propaganda, and true modivation are seldom the same...
And what motivates someone has no direct relationship with what someone's goals are.
It may have been that non-Muslims in Saudi Arabia inspired bin Laden, but his stated goal is to destroy non-Muslims and bring an Islamic state to the world, and that is the same thing other islamofascists preach.
What would be the propaganda value in telling another group there is nothing they can do to stop the war, because they are going to continue to try and kill us wherever we are?
That is illogical.
It would be propaganda if islamofascists said, "If you just leave all the 'Muslim countries,' we will stop trying to kill you," with the desired aim of having us leave, MEANWHILE they have no intentions of stopping their war against the infidels.
Your claims are also not tied to reality, in that I have read countless times that these islamofascists claim everything they do is backed by the Qur'an. These people get pissed off if a non-muslim TOUCHES this book. Do you really think they are lying about what they feel it contains? (That God has blessed them to kill infidels and if they martyr they'll get 70 virgins in heaven.)
No, it is not propaganda, these islamofascists actually are insane.
BTW, if anyone reading this is an islamofascist, I just have to point out: IF YOUR GOD IS TELLING YOU ITS OK TO KILL PEOPLE, YOU MIGHT ACTUALLY BE LISTENING TO THE WRONG GOD. Just a thought.
(This comes from a non-religious, politically central person.)
There's enough blame to go round. Being an admin is a bit like being a cop. You are responable for the safety of others, and ignorance (willful or otherwise) is a crime.
Jesus. Lucky for us, your viewpoints are not legally valid, or we'd all be in jail!
Let me get this straight, an admin that forgets to patch a machine or doesn't patch it "quickly enough" is committing a crime when someone violates laws and breaks into their computer system. ok...
Local Search on google uses some crazy algorithms to find things by doing a GOOGLE SEARCH for what you entered, and then showing you addresses on a map found in the pages you referenced. (Basically.)
Yahoo Yellow Pages is actually a database of business listings, and when you search that, 99% of the time you will get all the businesses.
Example: I search for haircut near my area in Google Maps, and I get a few nearby haircut salons. I do the same thing in Yahoo Yellow Pages, and I get ALL the salons nearby, which gives me more choices, especially when there is a specific entry I am looking for. I know I will find it with YYP.
I wish Google would just hurry up and buy some Yellow Pages company's data so they can compete against that. The "Local Search" idea was interesting, but is not comparable or adequate.
I don't know what he meant, but I wouldn't have meant that. I know the current trend in society is to try and find ways to feel guilty and try not to blame someone for something they do, but the responsibility for this mess lies with the perpetrator.
Your "but she was ASKING for it!" line of thinking is flawed.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about you guys, but this whole "sue anything that moves" culture is really starting to piss me off.
I love it. The only problem is we need a revised system, something based on "loser pays," with reasonable limits. Then you have a check on the absurd lawsuits which should not make it into a court of law, since there is an incentive to make sure you can win the lawsuit.
I'm not saying that legally they don't have a legitimate case, but is it really necessary to persue an organisation such as the Internet Archive over something so passive as this?
Passive? Don't get me wrong, I often find the IA very useful, but it gives me an uneasy feeling, just as the Google cache does. I think it should be opt-in. By creating a site, you are giving people the right to view your publicly available content. You are, IMO, even giving people a right to save your content to their system for later viewing.
However, I really don't see that you are giving anyone the right to save your content and re-distribute it from their servers.
It was only a matter of time, and inevitibly, IA will have to go to an opt-in system once they start getting sued due to this disregard for copyright. The author of an original work should be able to retain distribution rights.
I ask people not to make copies elsewhere and technically that "request" is enforceable under copyright law
You do not even have to make the request. You are granted copyright as soon as you create an original work. You must actually RELEASE people from the copyright explicitly if you want them to be able to distribute it to others.
"IF YOU OWNED A DivX® Certified DVD PLAYER, YOU COULD HAVE WATCHED THIS MOVIE YESTERDAY!"
Man, there was a time when that kind of "advertising" would have sent your company to the shit-house with consumers.
No flare effect.
Ummm, this is not a nitpick, there is a huge difference in meaning.
The title of the article implies that you need to UNINSTALL the game. As if it is so fucked up you shouldn't have it on your system.
This is absolutely not the case. How is that a nitpick?
In the meantime, gamers have been offically told to uninstall Battlefield 2 and play without the patch
How would they play the game after the uninstall it? Oh, this sentence (and the title) is wrong. Their official statement says to REINSTALL Battlefield 2, and not to install the patch until they release a new one.
Nowadays, when I use Windows, I get annoyed by windows just disappearing into thin air.
Windows has had a similar minimize effect for a long time, so I don't know why that would be.
And why? So you know there are exploits being run against you? And this helps how?
Sorry, I guess I have to spell it out for you. The firewall scans for known exploits, and if found, shuns the host sending them for X amount of time, thereby thwarting their planned attack 99% of the time.
They also specifically took this approach because it allows them to connect with business partners and also allow their end users, visitors and contractors to use their laptops more freely without compromising security by treating EVERYBODY as if they were a potential script kiddie - which is how security should be since most hacks occur from INSIDE the network.
Wow, thanks for the newsflash! We have the same advantages and security practices in effect, with the added security of an outer firewall!
There is no way to attack bare kernel (ok, ping of death)
OK, so then why did you mention that point if you are going to subsequently shoot it down with one example?
firewalls do nothing to protect services which are already visible to the network
Yes, higher-end firewalls can also scan the traffic on those open ports looking for exploits (ala IDS firewalls).
And if you want to use the firewall to block off unneeded services, why in the hell are you running them in the first place?
Are you serious? I have tons of services running on various servers that I do not want made available to the public, yet need to be available to (a) the other servers behind the firewall, and (b) trusted users that connect over our VPN... which, incidentally, is another function of a good firewall.
The article and your post are pure lunacy. It is not that hard to maintain a firewall, and as long as you plan your internal networking with the assumption that the firewall will not stop a really good hacker, it is just one more layer of security.
About 1-2 years ago this happened to me.
As the claims were ludicrous, I immediately sent the collection agency Clark Howard's drop dead letter, by certified mail.
After that, they cannot ever contact you again about that debt, and no, it will not effect your credit one way or another. (WIRED basically lost that right when they agreed to let a collection agency try to get the money for them... oversimplifying it.)
They really shot themselves in the foot, because up until that time, I would buy the magazine off the newsstand even when I let my subscription lapse. Since I got that letter, I've never bought a copy of WIRED again.
And if people complained about the sex/violence contradiction more often, maybe something would change. So why don't you find something more poductive to do with your time than merely bitching about people who bitch?
Ha. I am probably one of the VERY FEW people on Slashdot that actually writes my Senators and Congressman about issues like this. And letters to the editor.
Slashdot is a geek site. It is NOT a cross-section of America. Beating a dead horse on Slashdot will not change anything. The people that read Slashdot, by and large, recognize this strange dichotomy in America between sex and violence. This is also why it is re-hashed here every time one of these articles comes up. I could live with one such post being moderated highly, but jesus christ I read 5 posts saying the exact same thing, and yeah, I decided to bitch about it. Guess I hit a nerve since I went to +5 on that post immediately.
Hmmm, I just checked the preferences page and I do see what you mean, they apparantly have taken that feature away (or hidden it pretty well) for some reason (probably performance reasons). You used to be able to select topics to ignore.
Oh, come on. You have to admit this is one of the most extreme examples of "sex and violence are one thing, but nudity crosses the line" ever.
No, it isn't. It's the same-old, same-old. And even if it were "the most extreme example," how exactly would that make your dead, beaten horse comments any more interesting?
YES, WE GET IT, AMERICA IS FUCKED UP WHEN IT COMES TO SEX AND VIOLENCE.
The US has strange attitudes about sex and violence.
Ho hum. Yes, we know. This point is made a million times every time a sex/violence topic is brought up re: movies or video games.
Yes, it is stupid. Yes we know about it. No, there's nothing you can do about it except keep pushing the envelope, minding your own business, writing your congressman to complain when they try to take on the role of guardian of your children, and voting for representatives that will pledge not to do so if elected.
Complaining about this strange idiosyncracy on Slashdot will not change a goddamn thing.
However, it will bore the shit out of me and anyone else that has read 2+ articles about this topic, which I would wager is 90% of the Slashdot viewers.
I don't think that real guitarists have anything to fret about
nice one
Why?
This is a question I seem to have to pose more often on Slashdot. I see so many knee-jerk reactions like this (and also to "privacy issues" that really aren't issues).
If you wanted to buy the book, what harm would it cause to buy it using the link provided? The price is the same to you. Someone makes some money: Either the person that took the time to review the book, or Slashdot. (In this case I happen to know it is Slashdot.)
If you don't trust the reviewer and you think they are biased, then you wouldn't want to buy the book whether or not you use the link provided, right?
So really, aside from sticking it to the man, what exactly is your reasoning behind your statement.
Sorry, this is the second person I've seen complain about this in this one article, but there is one in every book review article.
I swear, it seems like sometimes you guys are scared you won't be able to resist buying something, and therefore don't want slashdot to put it in front of your faces.
I dono about YOU but I dont go buying books on Slashdot that are linked with an AFFILIATE ID so someone gets a kickback.
Why?
I think the thing that is more annoying to me is that I can easily filter out Google stories if I didn't want to read them, yet I have no way of filtering out the inevitable "Too many Google stories" comments that flood Google stories.
SHUT UP ALREADY AND FILTER OUT THE GOOGLE TOPIC IF YOU ARE SICK OF IT!
I don't believe Bin Laden is one of them. If he was, how could he have worked with the CIA in the russian war in afghanistan?
;)
;-) However, you may find that the administration and its opponents have shifted to the edges. Sadly, I agree. However, I also feel that the majority in America are in the center. But as fucked up as our political/voting system is in this country, they won't come out to vote in large numbers until major, radical changes are made to improve our system.
The same way enemies have worked together for millenium to defeat more-hated enemies.
I also think that any of us who claim to know what motivates Bin Laden is a little too confidant. All I meant to say with my post is that we don't know that what he says is true, and to accept it cart blanche is foolish as best, and dangerous at worst.
All I need to know about islamofascists like bin Laden is that they want to kill innocent people, and they do kill innocent people, for their religious reasons. As much as anyone may hate Bush and the current administration, I really doubt anyone believes we (America in general) want to kill innocent people. Yes, innocent people died in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, and will continue to do so. But compare it to past wars, and you will see the military has tried to (and succeeded at) limit civilian casualties as they attack enemies.
I also beleive that Al Queda can not function without at least some support from broad Muslum communities, this support is rarly based on hatred of everthing western, but rather a desire to have western nations change thier foreign policy. If this support evaporates, then the movment looses it's ability to oporate...
Sadly, it only takes a very few set of radicals to fund and carry out extreme terrorism. As weapons become more dangerous and easy to get, the only thing you can do is try to locate terrorists and kill them, as well as to promote freedom in the countries that spawn terrorists, to give what would be future terrorists, some hope.
The fact is the islamofascists are brainwashed by religion, and it is easier to brainwash people with religion when they have no hope and live in horrible conditions. Religion prays on the ignorant. (Pun intended.
(I too am non-religous, and I used to consider myself a centerest, but I feel the center has shifted very far to the right lately)
Ummm. The center hasn't shifted at all, that's why they call it the center.
Propaganda, and true modivation are seldom the same...
And what motivates someone has no direct relationship with what someone's goals are.
It may have been that non-Muslims in Saudi Arabia inspired bin Laden, but his stated goal is to destroy non-Muslims and bring an Islamic state to the world, and that is the same thing other islamofascists preach.
What would be the propaganda value in telling another group there is nothing they can do to stop the war, because they are going to continue to try and kill us wherever we are?
That is illogical.
It would be propaganda if islamofascists said, "If you just leave all the 'Muslim countries,' we will stop trying to kill you," with the desired aim of having us leave, MEANWHILE they have no intentions of stopping their war against the infidels.
Your claims are also not tied to reality, in that I have read countless times that these islamofascists claim everything they do is backed by the Qur'an. These people get pissed off if a non-muslim TOUCHES this book. Do you really think they are lying about what they feel it contains? (That God has blessed them to kill infidels and if they martyr they'll get 70 virgins in heaven.)
No, it is not propaganda, these islamofascists actually are insane.
BTW, if anyone reading this is an islamofascist, I just have to point out: IF YOUR GOD IS TELLING YOU ITS OK TO KILL PEOPLE, YOU MIGHT ACTUALLY BE LISTENING TO THE WRONG GOD. Just a thought.
(This comes from a non-religious, politically central person.)
After OSI compliance, it was sluggish, cantankerous, difficult, and verbose.
Bah. I say the same thing about you old-timers.
3. Buy lots of computers.
4. Pay lots of geeks to run them.
5. Create new computer software to make your visions come to life.
There's enough blame to go round. Being an admin is a bit like being a cop. You are responable for the safety of others, and ignorance (willful or otherwise) is a crime.
Jesus. Lucky for us, your viewpoints are not legally valid, or we'd all be in jail!
Let me get this straight, an admin that forgets to patch a machine or doesn't patch it "quickly enough" is committing a crime when someone violates laws and breaks into their computer system. ok...
You are, and it doesn't.
Local Search on google uses some crazy algorithms to find things by doing a GOOGLE SEARCH for what you entered, and then showing you addresses on a map found in the pages you referenced. (Basically.)
Yahoo Yellow Pages is actually a database of business listings, and when you search that, 99% of the time you will get all the businesses.
Example: I search for haircut near my area in Google Maps, and I get a few nearby haircut salons. I do the same thing in Yahoo Yellow Pages, and I get ALL the salons nearby, which gives me more choices, especially when there is a specific entry I am looking for. I know I will find it with YYP.
I wish Google would just hurry up and buy some Yellow Pages company's data so they can compete against that. The "Local Search" idea was interesting, but is not comparable or adequate.
Don't you mean "Clean up after *your* mess" ?
I don't know what he meant, but I wouldn't have meant that. I know the current trend in society is to try and find ways to feel guilty and try not to blame someone for something they do, but the responsibility for this mess lies with the perpetrator.
Your "but she was ASKING for it!" line of thinking is flawed.