And then MS Frontpage will begin importing pictures as default to the new format when making web pages, and suddenly people will need IE to fully see the site. Competing browsers will not be licensed to render the new DRMed format.
We've been down similar roads before (ActiveX, WMV etc)
try http://www.fairtax.org/ for a different method of taxation that would not care what state you earned the money in or from
Amazing. A national federal sales tax is supposed to eliminate State (i.e. non-federal) income taxes? The issue in TFA is double taxation by two different States, not the Federal government taxing someone twice.
The Supreme Court held in Smith v. Maryland (1978) that government collection of phone numbers called does not violate the Fourth Amendment. The Court reasoned that callers cannot have a "reasonable expectation of privacy" in the numbers they dial
In 1978, the US CODE did not contain the following:
Section 222. Privacy of customer information
(a) In general
Every telecommunications carrier has a duty to protect the
confidentiality of proprietary information of, and relating to,
other telecommunication carriers, equipment manufacturers, and
customers, including telecommunication carriers reselling
telecommunications services provided by a telecommunications
carrier.
IMHO the existance of such a legal statement in US law creates a "reasonable expectation of privacy", and therefore the situation is not the same as it was when Smith v Maryland was ruled on. Time marches on, and technological progress has amplified the privacy impact of such monitoring. Its time to re-evaluate this ruling.
Next time you are in court, how would you like evidence against you made public against the judge's orders, before the jury has made their decision?
Actually I think you have the question inverted. A closer fit to reality would be:
"Next time you are in court, how would you like evidence against you taken out of the normal public record (which allows the public to track how the government administers justice), before the jury has made their decision?"
I'm waiting for the obligatory clueless slashdot replies-
1. Who needs tape? I can get a couple 200GB IDE drive at Newegg and use the cool RAID controller on my motherboard!
2. Who needs tape? I can get a $50 DVD writer at Newegg and backup to DVD!!!!
3. Who needs tape? I keep my backups on a $30 USB flash stick that I bought at Newegg!
4. Who needs tape? In 4 years my GMail account will be up to 1TB and I can backup via email!
For those that say "search and siezure", your phone calls are already someone else's business (the phone companies).
Except by that logic, telephone taps would have historically been fair game starting with day 1 that the first phone company.
But SCOTUS case law has interpreted the Consitution so that calls are covered by the Fourth Ammendment.
For example
Berger V New York
So its not like this sort of question hasn't come up before. It has, and SCOTUS has ruled on it, and they ruled that our telephone calls are our own personal effects in light of the 4th ammendment, even if a third party is involved with making those calls.
it's a hop skip and a jump to a prosecutor saying "we have records showing you called your mother on such and such date prompting her to call her hair dresser who has been forwarding money to his family living in Mexico that has ties to Islamic Extremist groups!"
Then the government would have to explain why it has not captured the mastermind who lies at the heart of this six degreed web of terror:
Not always simple trespassing. (IANAL) Trespassing can involve the attractive nuisance doctrine.
Now if one argues diminished capacity (and that does not seem a much of a stretch in this case), and includes '70 years in federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison' in the definition of harm, then I could see where the attractive nuisance doctrine might apply.
So it was a liberal who changed from 'We invaded Iraq because they had WMD that was a threat to the U.S.' and 'Iraq has ties with Al Qaeda' to 'We invaded Iraq to bring them the blessings of Democracy' and 'Human Rights', and then to 'It was an intellegence failure'? It was a liberal who moved the goal post from 'Mission Accomplished 5/2/03' to "it will require decades of patient effort"?
Stuff like that shouldn't be counted as 'found' (as in validating WMD casus belli claims) because it wasn't lost until the monitor agencies were forced out of Iraq by the opening of hostilities. But that doesn't seem to stop Richard Miniter from doing it.
In 2003 Saddam didn't say "I have a bunch of missiles loaded with chemical weapons hidden, but after a few more years of neglect, they won't be as affective as they used to be."
Not by Saddam, but the public was told, before 2003:
"Well, look: As of December 1998 we had accounted for 90 to 95 percent of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capability -- "we" being the weapons inspectors. We destroyed all the factories, all of the means of production and we couldn't account for some of the weaponry, but chemical weapons have a shelf-life of five years."
"But the US military said the agent was so deteriorated it posed no threat."
"But the US military said that while two of the rockets tested positive for sarin, traces of the agent were so small and deteriorated as to be virtually harmless."
How much of a 'MASS' could one hurt with these 'WMDs'? Makes me suspect Minter's book is self-descriptively titled.
The idea that an article about Wal*Mart must contain the frothy-mouthed babblings of the Far Left to be "neutral" shows a real bias on the part of the author.
Oops, you seem to have omitted a key word here. Let me fix it for you:
The idea that [a WIKIPEDIA article] about Wal*Mart must contain the frothy-mouthed babblings of the Far Left to be "neutral" shows a real bias on the part of the author.
Since you presenting yourself as an objectivist, let me explain to you in objectivist cant why the word you omitted is important.
Objectivists make a big deal about ownership. And while Wikipedia is run as if it is a 'common', actually it is owned by people, who have guidelines on how it should be used.
One of those guidelines is "Improve pages wherever you can, and don't worry about leaving them imperfect.However, avoid deleting information wherever possible".
Now regardless of your opinion of Walmart, there are people out there with opinions critical of Walmart. It is a FACT that those opinions exist. It is the kind of data some people wish to be informed of when they visit that Wikipedia article.
Now a person who thinks those critical opinions is welcome to ADD to the article why they think those opinions are 'frothy-mouthed [Far Left babble]'. But to remove things, so as to hide that such opinions exist is counter to the quoted guideline.
If you respect property so much, why can't you respect the effort to keep Wikipedia operating the way its OWNERS envisioned, by ADDING information, not censoring information out?
It seems that there evident "real bias" exhibited here. One side follows the guidelines, such as putting up a standard flag that something is under dispute (a fact because the flagger did dispute it). The other side just vanishes things and orders others not to participate.
Which side is biased to using Wikipedia the way its OWNERS intended is clear.
One ID3 tag (type CRA) can specify encrypted audio. But it also specifies that part of the stream can be a unencrypted sample.
So satisfy the law. Use DRM. Use MP3 with embedded CRA tags. Make 99.9% of the stream a free preview. Encrypt a millisecond ocasionally. Pick a moment of silence.
Then they better also ensure that the power supply for the TV and set-top box are hardwired into the wall, and that the mains fusebox is protected by a combination code. Otherwise, some knucklehead customers are going to switch off the entire setup at whatever access point is available, just out of principle.
It had better be out of principle, because if its trying to use the power reset to bypass the lock, it might be a wash when it comes to saving time.
I have a directTV set top box, and if you power reset it it takes a couple of minutes before programs show up. It takes time to lock on the sat signal, then it has to load the program directory. Most commercials would be gone before that completed.
Many people on unemployment have to meet a quota of job applications in order to qualify for compensation. This leads many people to apply for jobs without real interest in these jobs.
Other times there are many more applicants than would be expected for jobs. Factors like these lead to having very many applications for a limited number of jobs.
Even if the company's investment in human time was just a few minutes per applicant, it is a significant manount of time in total.
Rather than spead a human's time on the large ammount applications, many places use a computer to collect the applications.
Rather like going through a phone tree before you get to talk to a human calling some places on the phone, the machine takes the initial brunt, hoping to reduce the load on the humans behind the robo-wall.
Funny how the editors for that magazine warned you not to jump to that conclusion.
See the note at the end:
*EDITOR'S NOTE: This consensus in this on-line magazine story represents the views of some NOAA hurricane researchers and forecasters, but does not necessarily represent the views of all NOAA scientists. It was not the intention of this article to discount the presence of a human-induced global warming element or to attempt to claim that such an element is not present. There is a robust, on-going discussion on hurricanes and climate change within NOAA and the scientific community.
Re:One Point For Gmail
on
Gmail vs Pine
·
· Score: 1
Ah. I see. It seems that the general thrust of the replies to my comment regarding "It can be used anywhere, without needing to install anything" is that I install something.
Point proven, it seems.
BTW, as recently as the Debian Woody release, ssl in lynx was supported by the lynx-ssl package. lynx-ssl was not in the standard US release. You had to obtain it from a non-US source. Everyone running standard U.S. version debian/woody did not have ssl in lynx.
Re:One Point For Gmail
on
Gmail vs Pine
·
· Score: 0, Troll
It can be used anywhere, without needing to install anything.
Cool!
Now tell me how I can use it with from my shell account with the lynx browser that doesn't support https much less javascript.
To broadcast over a wide range of frequencies would cost millions.
No, I think Tesla coils are not that expensive. And each one can broadcast plenty of energy over a wide band just fine.
Now perhaps you'll complain that that's not broadcasting data. No, its not. But it is consuming bandwidth. And radio interference regulations is one of those things that goes out the window for if the FCC were to just disappear as you seem to wish.
Lots of things become cheaper if you just don't give a flying fark about how RFI affects someone elses data transmissions. That's their problem, right?
Slashdot Mirror
We've been down similar roads before (ActiveX, WMV etc)
No thanks.
Amazing. A national federal sales tax is supposed to eliminate State (i.e. non-federal) income taxes? The issue in TFA is double taxation by two different States, not the Federal government taxing someone twice.
I just took it for granite
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/47/ chapters/5/subchapters/ii/parts/i/sections/section _222.html
IMHO the existance of such a legal statement in US law creates a "reasonable expectation of privacy", and therefore the situation is not the same as it was when Smith v Maryland was ruled on. Time marches on, and technological progress has amplified the privacy impact of such monitoring. Its time to re-evaluate this ruling.
Actually I think you have the question inverted. A closer fit to reality would be:
"Next time you are in court, how would you like evidence against you taken out of the normal public record (which allows the public to track how the government administers justice), before the jury has made their decision?"
And AT&T's apparent answer was "Hot damn! YES!!"
1. Who needs tape? I can get a couple 200GB IDE drive at Newegg and use the cool RAID controller on my motherboard!
2. Who needs tape? I can get a $50 DVD writer at Newegg and backup to DVD!!!!
3. Who needs tape? I keep my backups on a $30 USB flash stick that I bought at Newegg!
4. Who needs tape? In 4 years my GMail account will be up to 1TB and I can backup via email!
Except by that logic, telephone taps would have historically been fair game starting with day 1 that the first phone company.
But SCOTUS case law has interpreted the Consitution so that calls are covered by the Fourth Ammendment. For example Berger V New York
So its not like this sort of question hasn't come up before. It has, and SCOTUS has ruled on it, and they ruled that our telephone calls are our own personal effects in light of the 4th ammendment, even if a third party is involved with making those calls.
The first record in the data base reads
CALLER: Bell, Alexander G.
CALLEE: Watson, Thomas A
ACCESS CODE: "Come here, I need you"
Then the government would have to explain why it has not captured the mastermind who lies at the heart of this six degreed web of terror:
Kevin Bacon.
Not always simple trespassing. (IANAL) Trespassing can involve the
attractive nuisance doctrine.
Now if one argues diminished capacity (and that does not seem a much of a stretch in this case), and includes '70 years in federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison' in the definition of harm, then I could see where the attractive nuisance doctrine might apply.
"OoooOOOoooo......NASA! Shiny Pretty Spaceships!"
Actually I was thinking that a device with a name like Octarm, Marvel Comics might sue claiming that their trademark Doc Oct was being diluted.
Hey! Its no more of a stretch that their trying to trademark the word Superhero!
Hmm...
echo cats cats cats lions tiger ocelots | grep -i "feline"
It would appear that any feline aspect of that string is missing
So it was a liberal who changed from 'We invaded Iraq because they had WMD that was a threat to the U.S.' and 'Iraq has ties with Al Qaeda' to 'We invaded Iraq to bring them the blessings of Democracy' and 'Human Rights', and then to 'It was an intellegence failure'? It was a liberal who moved the goal post from 'Mission Accomplished 5/2/03' to "it will require decades of patient effort"?
Geesh, who hired THAT liberal?
To the people paying attention, it was known that there was WMD inside the borders in Iarq. We knew because they were under seal and being monitored by organizations like the IAEA and UNMOVIC. Stuff like "tons of enriched uranium" (gee, I think I saw those words come up real recently on Slashdot!, where? where?) http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/MediaAdvisory/2003/ ma_iraq_0606.shtml
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A354 04-2004Jul7.html
Stuff like that shouldn't be counted as 'found' (as in validating WMD casus belli claims) because it wasn't lost until the monitor agencies were forced out of Iraq by the opening of hostilities. But that doesn't seem to stop Richard Miniter from doing it.
Not by Saddam, but the public was told, before 2003:
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/07/17/saThe clock started ticking in 1998. And do you really that even a self-agrandizer like Saddam would describe 17 as "a bunch"?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3861197.stm
"But the US military said the agent was so deteriorated it posed no threat."
"But the US military said that while two of the rockets tested positive for sarin, traces of the agent were so small and deteriorated as to be virtually harmless."
How much of a 'MASS' could one hurt with these 'WMDs'? Makes me suspect Minter's book is self-descriptively titled.
Oops, you seem to have omitted a key word here. Let me fix it for you:
Since you presenting yourself as an objectivist, let me explain to you in objectivist cant why the word you omitted is important.
Objectivists make a big deal about ownership. And while Wikipedia is run as if it is a 'common', actually it is owned by people, who have guidelines on how it should be used.
One of those guidelines is "Improve pages wherever you can, and don't worry about leaving them imperfect.However, avoid deleting information wherever possible".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Editing_pol icy
Now regardless of your opinion of Walmart, there are people out there with opinions critical of Walmart. It is a FACT that those opinions exist. It is the kind of data some people wish to be informed of when they visit that Wikipedia article.
Now a person who thinks those critical opinions is welcome to ADD to the article why they think those opinions are 'frothy-mouthed [Far Left babble]'. But to remove things, so as to hide that such opinions exist is counter to the quoted guideline.
If you respect property so much, why can't you respect the effort to keep Wikipedia operating the way its OWNERS envisioned, by ADDING information, not censoring information out?
It seems that there evident "real bias" exhibited here. One side follows the guidelines, such as putting up a standard flag that something is under dispute (a fact because the flagger did dispute it). The other side just vanishes things and orders others not to participate.
Which side is biased to using Wikipedia the way its OWNERS intended is clear.
MP3 players these days commonly support ID3 tags
One ID3 tag (type CRA) can specify encrypted audio. But it also specifies that part of the stream can be a unencrypted sample.
So satisfy the law. Use DRM. Use MP3 with embedded CRA tags. Make 99.9% of the stream a free preview. Encrypt a millisecond ocasionally. Pick a moment of silence.
I suggest using the 'XOR with a Zero' code.
See section 4.21. http://www.id3.org/id3v2-00.txt
It had better be out of principle, because if its trying to use the power reset to bypass the lock, it might be a wash when it comes to saving time.
I have a directTV set top box, and if you power reset it it takes a couple of minutes before programs show up. It takes time to lock on the sat signal, then it has to load the program directory. Most commercials would be gone before that completed.
Many people on unemployment have to meet a quota of job applications in order to qualify for compensation. This leads many people to apply for jobs without real interest in these jobs.
Other times there are many more applicants than would be expected for jobs. Factors like these lead to having very many applications for a limited number of jobs.
Even if the company's investment in human time was just a few minutes per applicant, it is a significant manount of time in total.
Rather than spead a human's time on the large ammount applications, many places use a computer to collect the applications.
Rather like going through a phone tree before you get to talk to a human calling some places on the phone, the machine takes the initial brunt, hoping to reduce the load on the humans behind the robo-wall.
NOAA ATTRIBUTES RECENT INCREASE IN HURRICANE ACTIVITY
TO NATURALLY OCCURRING MULTI-DECADAL CLIMATE VARIABILITY
http://www.magazine.noaa.gov/stories/mag184.htm
Wrong?
Funny how the editors for that magazine warned you not to jump to that conclusion.
See the note at the end:
Point proven, it seems.
BTW, as recently as the Debian Woody release, ssl in lynx was supported by the lynx-ssl package. lynx-ssl was not in the standard US release. You had to obtain it from a non-US source. Everyone running standard U.S. version debian/woody did not have ssl in lynx.
Cool!
Now tell me how I can use it with from my shell account with the lynx browser that doesn't support https much less javascript.
Whew!
I was dreading the day I would see a military press conference on TV and hear one of the generals say
This article inspires me to invent the Chair-Mouse (TM pending).
As you roll your desk chair around, the cursor moves likewise.
Now if I can only think of a way to keep it from clicking everytime I sit down.
No, I think Tesla coils are not that expensive. And each one can broadcast plenty of energy over a wide band just fine.
Now perhaps you'll complain that that's not broadcasting data. No, its not. But it is consuming bandwidth. And radio interference regulations is one of those things that goes out the window for if the FCC were to just disappear as you seem to wish.
Lots of things become cheaper if you just don't give a flying fark about how RFI affects someone elses data transmissions. That's their problem, right?
Apparently thats the way you want it.