Are all these illegal immigrants sure they want to be in this country?
They didn't come to live in the "Land of the Free". They want to live in the "Land of Opportunity". It has always been about the money. Many of them are part of that group of people who believe we have too many freedoms.
Why don't the democrats propose a constitutional right to privacy?
Because, contrary to what some Americans will tell you, they are exactly the same as the Republicans. The revocation of our rights is a bi-partisan effort. Some democrats co-authored the patriot act. All but a very few voted for it. These aforementioned Americans will deny to the death that they are really under a one party system. Which is really due to the fact that they refuse to vote for the available alternatives and discourage others from doing so.
The auto industry didn't collapse due to unions, though that remains the ongoing FUD. It collapsed because their customers went elsewhere. Management refused to adapt to a different type of market that was growing very quickly. The quality of their product was horrible, not because of unions, but management refused to take any advice from the men in the field. The Ford Pinto's exploding gas tank is a prime example of management arrogance. It was management's decision to use low quality parts, not the union's. I do think that a corporation should be required to answer to the community it operates in. If they want to profit from that community, then they should share some responsibility in supporting it. I do agree with the rest of your post, however. All people should what they can to make their own security. But here again, a real community of people will naturally support each other as it benefits both the individual and the community at large. They shouldn't believe the words of a pirate any more than those of your regular politician. We need to be ready for anything.
Europeans sticking to horses & wind sailing (until a whole new country, America, invented the steam-boat, the steam-engine/railroads, the radio, the light-buld, and the airplane...
Say whaaat? steam engine railroad airplane...Ok, I'll grant that to a point. It still required lots of prior art. radio light bulb...Maybe you meant this: "Thomas A. Edison of the United States invented the first commercially successful incandescent lamp around 1879" emphasis mine.
It's a fine line between "insightful" and "funny". Which one were you trying for?
Now, if her case actually goes to court, you'll see a very significant difference between the US and China. The court will be open and she will be well represented. But I suspect that it will not even come to that. I suspect that the charges will be dropped and this will pass on.
Such is the great power of public relations. This is why China will ultimately "soften up" while we head the other direction, away from freedom.
Too bad you don't want to keep this going. I'm enjoying the discussion. I'm merely trying to show that all our intentions are the same. The only difference is the method involved. We all share the same animal instincts. Of that there can be no doubt. I'm not sure if you have ever lived in China. I have never been there. But if you haven't lived there, like a regular Chinese, I don't believe you're any more qualified to say what is really happening there than I am. So look for a Chinese person to discuss this with, and feel free to discuss this thread. The ones I meet and party with act just like we do (should I be surprised?). We both know better than to discuss work, religion, and politics at the bar.
You're picking nits. We are simply using different, possibly less harsh(for now) methods to do the exact same thing they do. In most cases, IP law is still an effective way to silence people without jail time. If it fails, they will use the same law with harsher penalties. The reasons we arrest protesters are quite palatable to you evidently. You talk about violation of press privileges, etc. and that we should expect harsh consequences for exercising our rights. Well, that sounds just as authoritarian as they do. We pay taxes to protect those rights, not to be penalized for using them. From the Chinese POV, their reasons could be just as valid. Already, I'm hear middle class Chinese defending their methods. Of course they do. Why rock the boat just when things are getting good? It's no different from the Americans who defend the patriot act. China has political prisoners(doesn't everybody?). We have "enemy combatants".
While she claims that she was only committing civil disobedience, not a crime, she seems to not realize that the one can lead to the other.
There was a person who posted here who said he was from China. I thought I book marked it. I guess not. His comment was something to the effect that the pro-democracy element can be quite dangerous. Pretty much what you just posted. So exercising your essential freedoms can lead to crime? "I did not know that." On who's part? The protester's or the cop's?
In fact, she misused her press credentials.
That's precisely what I'm talking about. You're using specious reasoning to do what we accuse the Chinese of doing. In fact, I'm sure they can deny a person's rights just as eloquently. Sorry, that doesn't wash. She was arrested to appease the Chinese President. Nothing more. If Castro or Chavez was the guest, Bush would have given her the stage.
And, for the record, if what Dr. Wang (and others) say is true, then I agree with what she says. But not with the venue that she chose.
So arrest and possible deportation for speaking "out of place" is ok? Shame. If we didn't have a law that prohibits that kind of thing, I would still disagree, but I could understand. But we do have that law, and it was violated when they placed her under arrest. All that was necessary was to escort her out of the room. Like they have done for other hecklers. And the issue would be dead as far as I'm concerned. As it was, we have demonstrated that we are birds of a feather, and as always, it's really about money anyway.
My point is that American citizens are being encouraged to inform on each other also. There is no need to single China out. The U.S. and Europe are rapidly heading in that direction(not informant related, but the idea is the same). Don't even try to deny it. The details that seperate us are very few and quite minor indeed.
Considering the subsidies and massive tax breaks(same thing) the oil companies receive, and let's not forget the military support they get overseas, I would say the citizens are paying are paying for that infrastructure also.
Interesting (but not at all a shock) that students are recruited to rat out their peers.
Hmmm... Something about cleaning one's own house comes to mind.
FTL: Without any public hearing or debate, NEWSWEEK has learned, Defense officials recently slipped a provision into a bill before Congress that could vastly expand the Pentagon's ability to gather intelligence inside the United States, including recruiting citizens as informants. Emphasis mine
Only to a degree. In the U.S., a subpeona is issued. The reporter must turn over all info needed for an "investigation". Or the reporter revealed "state secrets"(also a favorite in China), and must turn over their sources or...what is that?...go to prison. And since 9/11, the government gave itself secret powers of arrest. So how do you know how many people are in prison right now? Sadly, to many people are perfectly willing to throw the constitution right out the window because enforcing it now only helps the terrorists. So we haven't reached the level of fascism that other countries suffer from. Why would you let us even head in that direction?
that this isn't just about money. It seems like this will work to control "undesirables" also. So civil rights and smaller blogs site will suffer the consequences of this. So, it's only natural that the government will go along. Saves having to write a bunch of laws like China has to do at the present time. There will be no solution until we can cut the wire and get away from established providers altogether. And that solution is at hand. It's only a matter of time.
Sometimes the lab performs tests remotely, taking control of unprotected computers inside the censoring country without permission. This poses an ethical controversy, but Deibert says it's for the greater good: "We don't worry about that too much."
I'm sure they don't, but I do! The moment I hear "greater good", I become very suspicious. China is censoring the internet for the greater good...of China. We always hear the belligerents in a conflict claim "self defense". "Greater Good" is a no-good term to define the force to make people do something against their will for the benefit of others(who might not be so good). I don't care how great your "good" is. Leave me and mine alone. The choice of what is good or bad is mine to make, and nobody else's. Good comes from within, not some outside authority. You have a right to advise, not dictate.
Once again, folks, this isn't about defeating pirates. In fact the methods being used are protecting the street vendors who usually only sell ??AA content. As been said ad nauseum, it's to keep "non-aligned"(independent) creators out of public view.
They've turned an honest, paying customer into someone willing to download and use illegal cracks.
That's the idea. To make you a criminal. To put you at risk of arrest and have your equipement siezed at any moment. My advice to all is to put some kind of self destruct mechanism on your machines. Or at least keep any "questionable" material off site. If they're going to hang you anyway, don't provide the rope.
My laptop is 8 years old. It can't run many new apps no matter what. Oh, it probably could, if I don't mind 5 minute boot times or application launch. 133MHz. RAM is maxed out at 144mb. Hard drive, 4gig. I'm not going to try to run XP or Office 2003 on it. Photoshop CS? don't think so. Premeire? Yeah, if I got 50 years to render a 10 second clip. What new apps are you going to run on a perfectly functional MMX or 486? A lot of new software requires new hardware. They're getting just as bloated as the kernel. There's nobody out there trying to make their latest and greatest work on all hardware, old and new. Linux is the only one trying, and it's doing pretty well considering what it's trying to do. I'm just not sure it's a good strategy. There will have to be a point where you can only go so far back before you start losing control. It seems we are reaching that point. Hey, I would love to try to run OSX on my old Mac IIx(if I still had it), but it ain't gonna happen. It'll just have to live with "buggy" old OS9(and I'm not sure if that would run on a 68K) and Office 4.3. All those new features you want look great on a 2GHz P4. I would love to see how well they work on a 300MHz PII. You need the patience of a monk to launch Mozilla. Open Office gives me time to make a three course dinner before it's ready. Slight exaggeration, but I hope you see my point. Quick question, what's "old" hardware? PII? MMX? 486? To me, I would guess anything before P3. This ssems to be the minimum for today's stuff. So for 2.6, why don't drop support for anything older than the P3 and go from there? Why does a new kernel need to support a 386? What new programs will run on it? Then I don't have to work so hard whittling it down to make a boot floppy. We could probably cut support for the floppy now that we can boot from USB sticks. My first kernel source was a little over 5 meg (2.0.34) Now it's 48 meg. I would think it's time for a new direction.
Suppose I buy a new laptop. Now I have to wait "6 months to a year" before starting to use it?
No, of course not. It's a suggestion to help minimize hardware support problems. When something new like USB or firewire or wireless networking comes out, it takes a while for the kernel to catch up. What good is buying a machine with SATA drives if the kernel can't support it? Obviously, for developers and hackers and experimenters, it's a completely different story. To me, that's what Linux is still about. It's the experimenters who got it this far, and I want to see that spirit stay alive, [OT rant] but now it's getting bogged down in business with all the inherent BS. [/OT rant]
Now you got my curiousity up. I gotta see how long it takes to compile and boot a 2.6 kermel on the laptop, and play with Open Office 2.0.2. and Cinerella. I wonder if I'll live long enough to see the results:-)
We still have garbage, but imagine if you will if there were no garbagemen...er, sanitary workers(hope that's PC enough) to come and clean it up everyday.
IMPORTANT: Please do not interpret this comment to be pro-RIAA or DEA in any way, fashion, shape, or form. It is merely a train(line?) of thought. Remember, they don't want to eliminate these "crimes". They just want to control it to a "reasonable" level. Eliminating them would eliminate their jobs and a whole infrastructure of goodies paid for by the feds(you and me). The (AOL)key word here is "control". It's the controlled(and you can't spell "controlled" without troll) substances act. Not the "banned" or "prohibited" substances act.
...but Linux just isn't the lean, reliable operating system it used to be.
Got that right. I just looked at the kernel archives. It has grown over 10 times the size of 2.0. I've heard of fat binaries, but jeeze... boot times are as bad as Windows. To me there is no reason for it to take more than five seconds for the machine to be ready to use after I hit the switch. Way to much stuff on disk that belongs on a ROM chip. This almost as bad as HP forcing me to install 400 meg of junk just to use the printer. It slows my machine down almost as bad as the Norton products.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't see why running a server should be any different.
Because it didn't fall from the rack and injure anybody.
Looks like they finally pulled it off.
Oops
Can you hear me now?
We don't care. We don't have to. We're the Phone Company.
Are all these illegal immigrants sure they want to be in this country?
They didn't come to live in the "Land of the Free". They want to live in the "Land of Opportunity". It has always been about the money. Many of them are part of that group of people who believe we have too many freedoms.
Why don't the democrats propose a constitutional right to privacy?
Because, contrary to what some Americans will tell you, they are exactly the same as the Republicans. The revocation of our rights is a bi-partisan effort. Some democrats co-authored the patriot act. All but a very few voted for it. These aforementioned Americans will deny to the death that they are really under a one party system. Which is really due to the fact that they refuse to vote for the available alternatives and discourage others from doing so.
The old joke went:
"Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free..."
"Void where prohibited by law."
A bit more concise, no?
The auto industry didn't collapse due to unions, though that remains the ongoing FUD. It collapsed because their customers went elsewhere. Management refused to adapt to a different type of market that was growing very quickly. The quality of their product was horrible, not because of unions, but management refused to take any advice from the men in the field. The Ford Pinto's exploding gas tank is a prime example of management arrogance. It was management's decision to use low quality parts, not the union's. I do think that a corporation should be required to answer to the community it operates in. If they want to profit from that community, then they should share some responsibility in supporting it. I do agree with the rest of your post, however. All people should what they can to make their own security. But here again, a real community of people will naturally support each other as it benefits both the individual and the community at large. They shouldn't believe the words of a pirate any more than those of your regular politician. We need to be ready for anything.
Europeans sticking to horses & wind sailing (until a whole new country, America, invented the steam-boat, the steam-engine/railroads, the radio, the light-buld, and the airplane...
Say whaaat?
steam engine
railroad
airplane...Ok, I'll grant that to a point. It still required lots of prior art.
radio
light bulb...Maybe you meant this: "Thomas A. Edison of the United States invented the first commercially successful incandescent lamp around 1879" emphasis mine.
It's a fine line between "insightful" and "funny". Which one were you trying for?
So can we call it Vista CE?
Now, if her case actually goes to court, you'll see a very significant difference between the US and China. The court will be open and she will be well represented. But I suspect that it will not even come to that. I suspect that the charges will be dropped and this will pass on.
Such is the great power of public relations. This is why China will ultimately "soften up" while we head the other direction, away from freedom.
Too bad you don't want to keep this going. I'm enjoying the discussion. I'm merely trying to show that all our intentions are the same. The only difference is the method involved. We all share the same animal instincts. Of that there can be no doubt. I'm not sure if you have ever lived in China. I have never been there. But if you haven't lived there, like a regular Chinese, I don't believe you're any more qualified to say what is really happening there than I am. So look for a Chinese person to discuss this with, and feel free to discuss this thread. The ones I meet and party with act just like we do (should I be surprised?). We both know better than to discuss work, religion, and politics at the bar.
You're picking nits. We are simply using different, possibly less harsh(for now) methods to do the exact same thing they do. In most cases, IP law is still an effective way to silence people without jail time. If it fails, they will use the same law with harsher penalties. The reasons we arrest protesters are quite palatable to you evidently. You talk about violation of press privileges, etc. and that we should expect harsh consequences for exercising our rights. Well, that sounds just as authoritarian as they do. We pay taxes to protect those rights, not to be penalized for using them. From the Chinese POV, their reasons could be just as valid. Already, I'm hear middle class Chinese defending their methods. Of course they do. Why rock the boat just when things are getting good? It's no different from the Americans who defend the patriot act. China has political prisoners(doesn't everybody?). We have "enemy combatants".
While she claims that she was only committing civil disobedience, not a crime, she seems to not realize that the one can lead to the other.
There was a person who posted here who said he was from China. I thought I book marked it. I guess not. His comment was something to the effect that the pro-democracy element can be quite dangerous. Pretty much what you just posted. So exercising your essential freedoms can lead to crime? "I did not know that." On who's part? The protester's or the cop's?
In fact, she misused her press credentials.
That's precisely what I'm talking about. You're using specious reasoning to do what we accuse the Chinese of doing. In fact, I'm sure they can deny a person's rights just as eloquently. Sorry, that doesn't wash. She was arrested to appease the Chinese President. Nothing more. If Castro or Chavez was the guest, Bush would have given her the stage.
And, for the record, if what Dr. Wang (and others) say is true, then I agree with what she says. But not with the venue that she chose.
So arrest and possible deportation for speaking "out of place" is ok? Shame. If we didn't have a law that prohibits that kind of thing, I would still disagree, but I could understand. But we do have that law, and it was violated when they placed her under arrest. All that was necessary was to escort her out of the room. Like they have done for other hecklers. And the issue would be dead as far as I'm concerned. As it was, we have demonstrated that we are birds of a feather, and as always, it's really about money anyway.
This only end up producing cancer resistant mouse resistant cancer.
My point is that American citizens are being encouraged to inform on each other also. There is no need to single China out. The U.S. and Europe are rapidly heading in that direction(not informant related, but the idea is the same). Don't even try to deny it. The details that seperate us are very few and quite minor indeed.
Considering the subsidies and massive tax breaks(same thing) the oil companies receive, and let's not forget the military support they get overseas, I would say the citizens are paying are paying for that infrastructure also.
Chilling? Very. But the last quote is very inspiring. The bad guys will only win if we let them.
Interesting (but not at all a shock) that students are recruited to rat out their peers.
Hmmm... Something about cleaning one's own house comes to mind.
FTL: Without any public hearing or debate, NEWSWEEK has learned, Defense officials recently slipped a provision into a bill before Congress that could vastly expand the Pentagon's ability to gather intelligence inside the United States, including recruiting citizens as informants. Emphasis mine
Only to a degree. In the U.S., a subpeona is issued. The reporter must turn over all info needed for an "investigation". Or the reporter revealed "state secrets"(also a favorite in China), and must turn over their sources or...what is that?...go to prison. And since 9/11, the government gave itself secret powers of arrest. So how do you know how many people are in prison right now? Sadly, to many people are perfectly willing to throw the constitution right out the window because enforcing it now only helps the terrorists. So we haven't reached the level of fascism that other countries suffer from. Why would you let us even head in that direction?
that this isn't just about money. It seems like this will work to control "undesirables" also. So civil rights and smaller blogs site will suffer the consequences of this. So, it's only natural that the government will go along. Saves having to write a bunch of laws like China has to do at the present time. There will be no solution until we can cut the wire and get away from established providers altogether. And that solution is at hand. It's only a matter of time.
Sometimes the lab performs tests remotely, taking control of unprotected computers inside the censoring country without permission. This poses an ethical controversy, but Deibert says it's for the greater good: "We don't worry about that too much."
I'm sure they don't, but I do! The moment I hear "greater good", I become very suspicious. China is censoring the internet for the greater good...of China. We always hear the belligerents in a conflict claim "self defense". "Greater Good" is a no-good term to define the force to make people do something against their will for the benefit of others(who might not be so good). I don't care how great your "good" is. Leave me and mine alone. The choice of what is good or bad is mine to make, and nobody else's. Good comes from within, not some outside authority. You have a right to advise, not dictate.
Pirates aren't defeated by DRM...
Once again, folks, this isn't about defeating pirates. In fact the methods being used are protecting the street vendors who usually only sell ??AA content. As been said ad nauseum, it's to keep "non-aligned"(independent) creators out of public view.
They've turned an honest, paying customer into someone willing to download and use illegal cracks.
That's the idea. To make you a criminal. To put you at risk of arrest and have your equipement siezed at any moment. My advice to all is to put some kind of self destruct mechanism on your machines. Or at least keep any "questionable" material off site. If they're going to hang you anyway, don't provide the rope.
My laptop is 8 years old. It can't run many new apps no matter what. Oh, it probably could, if I don't mind 5 minute boot times or application launch. 133MHz. RAM is maxed out at 144mb. Hard drive, 4gig. I'm not going to try to run XP or Office 2003 on it. Photoshop CS? don't think so. Premeire? Yeah, if I got 50 years to render a 10 second clip. What new apps are you going to run on a perfectly functional MMX or 486? A lot of new software requires new hardware. They're getting just as bloated as the kernel. There's nobody out there trying to make their latest and greatest work on all hardware, old and new. Linux is the only one trying, and it's doing pretty well considering what it's trying to do. I'm just not sure it's a good strategy. There will have to be a point where you can only go so far back before you start losing control. It seems we are reaching that point. Hey, I would love to try to run OSX on my old Mac IIx(if I still had it), but it ain't gonna happen. It'll just have to live with "buggy" old OS9(and I'm not sure if that would run on a 68K) and Office 4.3. All those new features you want look great on a 2GHz P4. I would love to see how well they work on a 300MHz PII. You need the patience of a monk to launch Mozilla. Open Office gives me time to make a three course dinner before it's ready. Slight exaggeration, but I hope you see my point. Quick question, what's "old" hardware? PII? MMX? 486? To me, I would guess anything before P3. This ssems to be the minimum for today's stuff. So for 2.6, why don't drop support for anything older than the P3 and go from there? Why does a new kernel need to support a 386? What new programs will run on it? Then I don't have to work so hard whittling it down to make a boot floppy. We could probably cut support for the floppy now that we can boot from USB sticks. My first kernel source was a little over 5 meg (2.0.34) Now it's 48 meg. I would think it's time for a new direction.
:-)
Suppose I buy a new laptop. Now I have to wait "6 months to a year" before starting to use it?
No, of course not. It's a suggestion to help minimize hardware support problems. When something new like USB or firewire or wireless networking comes out, it takes a while for the kernel to catch up. What good is buying a machine with SATA drives if the kernel can't support it? Obviously, for developers and hackers and experimenters, it's a completely different story. To me, that's what Linux is still about. It's the experimenters who got it this far, and I want to see that spirit stay alive, [OT rant] but now it's getting bogged down in business with all the inherent BS. [/OT rant]
Now you got my curiousity up. I gotta see how long it takes to compile and boot a 2.6 kermel on the laptop, and play with Open Office 2.0.2. and Cinerella. I wonder if I'll live long enough to see the results
This is the end of BearShare's "tail".
a Tail Told by an Idiot...
We still have garbage, but imagine if you will if there were no garbagemen...er, sanitary workers(hope that's PC enough) to come and clean it up everyday.
IMPORTANT: Please do not interpret this comment to be pro-RIAA or DEA in any way, fashion, shape, or form. It is merely a train(line?) of thought. Remember, they don't want to eliminate these "crimes". They just want to control it to a "reasonable" level. Eliminating them would eliminate their jobs and a whole infrastructure of goodies paid for by the feds(you and me). The (AOL)key word here is "control". It's the controlled(and you can't spell "controlled" without troll) substances act. Not the "banned" or "prohibited" substances act.
...but Linux just isn't the lean, reliable operating system it used to be.
Got that right. I just looked at the kernel archives. It has grown over 10 times the size of 2.0. I've heard of fat binaries, but jeeze... boot times are as bad as Windows. To me there is no reason for it to take more than five seconds for the machine to be ready to use after I hit the switch. Way to much stuff on disk that belongs on a ROM chip. This almost as bad as HP forcing me to install 400 meg of junk just to use the printer. It slows my machine down almost as bad as the Norton products.