If we are to believe Noam Chomsky or Steven Pinker (not saying I necessarily do), the study of linguistics shows that language is innately human and at present no mathematical formula can interpret its meaning.
The Sparse Binary Polynomial Hash is a generalization of the Bayesian filter and as such cannot detect "spam" any more than any group of people can all have the same interpretation of Shakespeare or Milton.
As Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said about pornography in "Jacobellis v. Ohio" (1964) -- "I know it when I see it." Neither humans or computers can define spam any more than they can define pornography.
If VOIP evolves on the wave of decentralized P2P.
And if wireless Internet projects like SFLAN
become the predominant medium for these networks there will be no "VOIP Providers" to regulate.
Ahhh yes, well said. The reductionism of physics is an ascetic and noble pursuit for simplicity. Computing is fundamentally all about logic gates, flip-flops, half-adders, full-adders, etc.. I can empathise with your father. I never understood the point and click mentality myself. Icons and menus are like the pictographic system of ancient Mesopotamia (or the Chinese character set) where there's one symbol for everything you want to express. If you can't click on it, it can't be done. How unfortunate. A much better idea came with the invention of the alphabet, a finite number of characters and the possibility of an infinite number of words (as Noam Chomsky so succinctly pointed out). The command line is like this. When you learn Perl, or Bash, or 'c', you learn an alphabert and a grammar. And from this you can assemble an infinite number of combinations to do whatever you want. Those who use the desktop/icon/menu environment are limited. If there's no icon or menu selection, it can't be done.
Those of us who know something as trivial as Bash (for example) can combine various words in an infinite number of ways to produce any result.
-- You can't begin to design even a coax cable unless you have a fundamental understanding of Maxwell's equations.
Go here, click this, check that box, reboot, login, open "My Computer", delete this file, reboot, go start menu-->programs-->start server. Now you're certified.
Good points made all round here. But let's not get off track. Wether the FBI is necessary or essential is besides the point (I probably shouldn't have said that as it obfuscates the issue). What irks me is that the entertainment industry, after spending millions on lobbying (both parties) to get their DMCA passed is now able to solicit the FBI to help them prop up their archaic and dying business model.
The entertainment industry has enough resources to fund their own enforcement without calling on taxpayers to help them.
There are currently dozens of unsolved serious crimes that the FBI needs to be working on. And going after P2P users is not one of them. I think we can all at least agree our tax money could be put to better use.
The FBI is an essential and necessary part of the U.S. government. To give them credit, they have done a great deal in investigating and prosecuting government corruption, organized crime, child abductions, and many other serious crimes.
Unfortunately the FBI, through no fault of their own, are being coerced by politicians at the behest of the entertainment industry (whose multi million dollar campaign contributions have had an undue influence on public policy) to become more and more a private law enforcement agency for powerful and wealthy organizations, propping up archaic and inefficient business models, who should be financing their own investigations. (I doubt the FBI would pursue GPL violations.)
I encourage all taxpayers to lobby their respective representatives with the aim of curtailing this waste of our important resources.
The downloading of copyrighted videos and music is now largely done via P2P networks. Unless it concerns national security, espionage, terrorism, or organized crime, etc., the FBI should not be spending its resources on prosecuting Internet file sharers.
There's hardly any data in this report. The only graph is Proposed Exhibit 1-8 (Attachemt A) which claims to show the average surface temparature of the Northern Hemisphere for the past 1000 years. We've only been able to measure temperature with any accuracy for about the past 50 years (not enough of a time span to draw much of a conclusion).
If I remember correctly, the volume of Earth's atmosphere is ~ 2-3 x 10^19(m^3) and by current measurements CO2 accounts for less than.03% of this. And considering the CO2 emissions from all the naturally occuring forest fires that have been raging every since the dawn of trees, it's difficult to believe humans can have much of an influence here.
It's taken decades to build the Internet, we're not going to "rebuild" it just so the government can censor it. Besides, who would fund such a project? And is it even possible? If nodes A and B can communicate and they can encrypt their conversation, how can you censor them? Interesting corollary: Communities of computers have secret handshakes just like humans.
I have an IPAQ (by Compaq) and the best dirsto I found is
familiar.
When I first installed Linux I posted some screen shots, running the web
server from the IPAQ directly connected to the Internet and firewalled
with iptables. I have a dual PCMCIA sleeve,
and with 2 nics it can be used as a router/firewall with NAT.
The foldable keyboard works great and is very sleek. I have a 5G PCMCIA hard drive so I can
watch movies on the bus. You can also use Sprint as a wireless ISP as there's now a
Linux driver for the Sprint wireless modem.
There are camera and phone attachments but I don't know how they work with Linux.
This "familiar" distro has a good mailing list, moderated and mailed daily.
The software for handhelds and all new electronic devices should be open sourced
because, although competition is good (Windows vs Palm, etc.), there are too many diverging
standards at the moment. Open sourcing will force development around practical functionality
rather than marketing strategies.
A point well made. It's natural to share information and should be a fundamental human right. The Entertainment Industry is under no obligation to record, produce, or distribute
anything.
Except where it concerns public safety or national security, goverments should make no law abridging the right of anyone to parse, manipulate, or disseminate any digital information.
During 1994, before the DMCA bill was introduced to Congress, the top campaign contributions of the top 20 donors in the entertainment industry was 9.3 million dollars. In 1996, a year before the DMCA bill was introduced, the contributions increased to 19.3 million dollars.
Take a look at who's funding the "Fraudulent Online Identity Sanctions Act". Testifying before a Congressional Committee is only for big campaign contributers. You can be sure they won't be asking for our opinions.
Except where it concerns public safety or national security, I say congress should make no law abridging the right of anyone to parse, manipulate, or disseminate any digital information.
The US government needs to embed anti-counterfeiting measures into its currency (as the Europeans do).
HP should not be spending its R&D funds on this. The counterfeiters will just buy non HP products anyway. And HP will eventually pass its R&D costs to the consumer.
I always share my wireless bandwith. I reserve 90% for myself. But all of this frees up to other users when I'm not using it. I encourage everyone to do this. Internet access is way overpriced. The ISPs our gouging us.
I wonder if a court could close down such wireless networks as happened with Napster?
Slashdot Mirror
Does this mean I won't be able to read any more Edgar Allen Poe online?
If we are to believe Noam Chomsky or Steven Pinker (not saying I necessarily do), the study of linguistics shows that language is innately human and at present no mathematical formula can interpret its meaning.
The Sparse Binary Polynomial Hash is a generalization of the Bayesian filter and as such cannot detect "spam" any more than any group of people can all have the same interpretation of Shakespeare or Milton.
As Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said about pornography in "Jacobellis v. Ohio" (1964) -- "I know it when I see it." Neither humans or computers can define spam any more than they can define pornography.
If VOIP evolves on the wave of decentralized P2P. And if wireless Internet projects like SFLAN become the predominant medium for these networks there will be no "VOIP Providers" to regulate.
Ahhh yes, well said. The reductionism of physics is an ascetic and noble pursuit for simplicity. Computing is fundamentally all about logic gates, flip-flops, half-adders, full-adders, etc.. I can empathise with your father. I never understood the point and click mentality myself. Icons and menus are like the pictographic system of ancient Mesopotamia (or the Chinese character set) where
there's one symbol for everything you want to express. If you can't click on it, it can't be done. How unfortunate. A much better idea came with the invention of the alphabet, a finite number of characters and the possibility of an infinite number of words (as Noam Chomsky so succinctly pointed out). The command line is like this. When you learn Perl, or Bash, or 'c', you learn an alphabert and a grammar. And from this you can assemble an infinite number of combinations to do whatever you want. Those who use the desktop/icon/menu environment are limited. If there's no icon or menu selection, it can't be done.
Those of us who know something as trivial as Bash (for example) can combine various words in an infinite number of ways to produce any result.
--
You can't begin to design even a coax cable unless you have a fundamental understanding of Maxwell's equations.
Go here, click this, check that box, reboot, login, open "My Computer", delete this file, reboot, go start menu-->programs-->start server. Now you're certified.
Never mind that you don't know what you did.
Good points made all round here. But let's not get off track. Wether the FBI is necessary or essential is besides the point (I probably shouldn't have said that as it obfuscates the issue). What irks me is that the entertainment industry, after spending millions on lobbying (both parties) to get their DMCA passed is now able to solicit the FBI to help them prop up their archaic and dying business model.
The entertainment industry has enough resources to fund their own enforcement without calling on taxpayers to help them.
There are currently dozens of unsolved serious crimes that the FBI needs to be working on. And going after P2P users is not one of them. I think we can all at least agree our tax money could be put to better use.
Thanks for your comments.
Assuming the IP address was reversed mapped to a host name they probably looked in the whois database.
The FBI is an essential and necessary part of the U.S. government. To give them credit, they have done a great deal in investigating and prosecuting government corruption, organized crime, child abductions, and many other serious crimes.
Unfortunately the FBI, through no fault of their own, are being coerced by politicians at the behest of the entertainment industry (whose multi million dollar campaign contributions have had an undue influence on public policy) to become more and more a private law enforcement agency for powerful and wealthy organizations, propping up archaic and inefficient business models, who should be financing their own investigations. (I doubt the FBI would pursue GPL violations.)
I encourage all taxpayers to lobby their respective representatives with the aim of curtailing this waste of our important resources.
The downloading of copyrighted videos and music is now largely done via P2P networks. Unless it concerns national security, espionage, terrorism, or organized crime, etc., the FBI should not be spending its resources on prosecuting Internet file sharers.
There's hardly any data in this report. The only graph is Proposed Exhibit 1-8 (Attachemt A) which claims to show the average surface temparature of the Northern Hemisphere for the past 1000 years. We've only been able to measure temperature with any accuracy for about the past 50 years (not enough of a time span to draw much of a conclusion).
.03% of this. And considering the CO2 emissions from all the naturally occuring forest fires that have been raging every since the dawn of trees, it's difficult to believe humans can have much of an influence here.
If I remember correctly, the volume of Earth's atmosphere is ~ 2-3 x 10^19(m^3) and by current measurements CO2 accounts for less than
Do the calculations. Show me the data.
It's taken decades to build the Internet, we're not going to "rebuild" it just so the government can censor it. Besides, who would fund such a project? And is it even possible? If nodes A and B can communicate and they can encrypt their conversation,
how can you censor them? Interesting corollary: Communities of computers have secret handshakes just like humans.
I have an IPAQ (by Compaq) and the best dirsto I found is familiar.
When I first installed Linux I posted some screen shots, running the web server from the IPAQ directly connected to the Internet and firewalled with iptables. I have a dual PCMCIA sleeve, and with 2 nics it can be used as a router/firewall with NAT. The foldable keyboard works great and is very sleek. I have a 5G PCMCIA hard drive so I can watch movies on the bus. You can also use Sprint as a wireless ISP as there's now a Linux driver for the Sprint wireless modem.
There are camera and phone attachments but I don't know how they work with Linux.
This "familiar" distro has a good mailing list, moderated and mailed daily.
The software for handhelds and all new electronic devices should be open sourced because, although competition is good (Windows vs Palm, etc.), there are too many diverging standards at the moment. Open sourcing will force development around practical functionality rather than marketing strategies.
A point well made. It's natural to share information and should be a fundamental human right. The Entertainment Industry is under no obligation to record, produce, or distribute anything.
Except where it concerns public safety or national security, goverments should make no law abridging the right of anyone to parse, manipulate, or disseminate any digital information.
Share today. http://www.gnutelliums.com
How do banks manage with ATM cards and pin numbers?
Not secure?
Ever tried to hack into a bank?
During 1994, before the DMCA bill was introduced to Congress, the top campaign contributions of the top 20 donors in the entertainment industry was 9.3 million dollars. In 1996, a year before the DMCA bill was introduced, the contributions increased to 19.3 million dollars.
Take a look at who's funding the "Fraudulent Online Identity Sanctions Act". Testifying before a Congressional Committee is only for big campaign contributers. You can be sure they won't be asking for our opinions.
Yet another litigious waste of society's resources.
If only Microsoft spent as many resources on fixing security holes as it does on lawsuits ....
When you can't compete -- sue.
If Newton had invented calculus in the 21st century he would have patented it.
It's human nature to share information.
Except where it concerns public safety or national security, I say congress should make no law abridging the right of anyone to parse, manipulate, or disseminate any digital information.
Long live digital freedom.
Try ogle.
You can make mpegs from dvds with transcode
Don't forget to share them on your favorite P2P network.
Abolish the copyright laws!
Why should any of us be prevented from sharing anything?
I hope I'm not given over to flippancy but if artists don't want their music shared -- they shouldn't record it. It's not our problem.
The US government needs to embed anti-counterfeiting measures into its currency (as the Europeans do).
HP should not be spending its R&D funds on this. The counterfeiters will just buy non HP products anyway. And HP will eventually pass its R&D costs to the consumer.
Don't buy HP.
Hasn't the FBI enough on their hands with kidnappings, bank robberies, terrorism ....?
Comcast has no way of knowing how many nodes are behind the ones they assign to their customers.
I always share my wireless bandwith. I reserve 90% for myself. But all of this frees up to other users when I'm not using it. I encourage everyone to do this. Internet access is way overpriced. The ISPs our gouging us.
I wonder if a court could close down such wireless networks as happened with Napster?