[The bill] would require the National Institute of Standards and Technology to establish "measurable and auditable cybersecurity standards" that would apply to private companies as well as the government. It also would require licensing and certification of cybersecurity professionals. "
And any of us who went public with information on illegal/un-ethical wiretapping or gross incompetence would lose their license.
That'll shut up those pesky security professional/privacy advocates.
There probably needs to be made a ruckus for each law-maker that needs to be disconnected, but after a few successful stories in the media, they'll either write exceptions for themselves into law (and that can easily be used against them next elections) or the law is dropped.
They're not making possession or use of music, films or movies a crime
Actually, they are.
Thanks to the vague definition of 'significant infringement', it'll allow random seizures of music players on the street. "Prove ownership of these songs, or spend years in jail".
If the Australian government were forbidding discussion of certain key political figures, or of certain religions, the claim world hold
Aren't they? How do you know? They may claim they're not filtering that, but how do you know for sure? Since Connors is already comparing his critics to child pornography supporters, the step to block his critics is a very small one indeed.
So you gave money to a company that trust you so little it protected a demo video? They trust you so little they assumed you would steal their sales pitch about the product?
How much do you think they will trust you when you try to contact them for, say, a support issue, or an upgrade?
I've made it a policy to trust a vendor with my money at most in the same way they seem to trust me. In this case, that would translate as "not at all" and I would never give them my money.
No, it's there for the right reasons. Because if you list it for any other reason at all, Apple and their bank account may very well start hoping for a lot of similar disappointments in the future.
It is possible - and I think Walt Brown may have it right on this one - that Saturn's rings are from the Earth - believe it or not, I know it sounds crazy - let me explain. He says when the fountains of the deep broke open - Genesis Chapter 7 - the pressure of 10 or 15 miles of rock [...] the pressure 10 or 15 miles down is phenomenal [...] So if there was water in the crust of the Earth like the Bible says there was [...] then this water would come shooting up to the surface when the "fountains of the deep" broke open and the Earth busted up like an eggshell. That water shooting up would have enough pressure - according to Walt Brown - to eject things into space. They would drift around for awhile - who knows for a couple of hundred years - and run into something like Saturn and make the rings. Truth Radio 6 June 2006 @ 26:30 (Tape 2)
(click the link for more great examples of Kevin Hovind's logic and reasoning)
Slashdot Mirror
So you say only ventriloquists should enter politics?
"And who's to say 20-30 years from now we're not projecting stereo images directly onto your retina, or even your optic nerve?
Please don't tell this to any advertisers...
[The bill] would require the National Institute of Standards and Technology to establish "measurable and auditable cybersecurity standards" that would apply to private companies as well as the government. It also would require licensing and certification of cybersecurity professionals. "
And any of us who went public with information on illegal/un-ethical wiretapping or gross incompetence would lose their license.
That'll shut up those pesky security professional/privacy advocates.
cool!
Yeah, that's a problem.
Now if only there were some disgruntled low level techs, angry at this law, working at an ISP or two that could assist with something like that.
Naah, that'll never happen.
Simple. Accuse prominent law-makers of copyright violations.
Three times.
Except for the french president, he only needs two more.
There probably needs to be made a ruckus for each law-maker that needs to be disconnected, but after a few successful stories in the media, they'll either write exceptions for themselves into law (and that can easily be used against them next elections) or the law is dropped.
They're not making possession or use of music, films or movies a crime
Actually, they are.
Thanks to the vague definition of 'significant infringement', it'll allow random seizures of music players on the street. "Prove ownership of these songs, or spend years in jail".
That's just the rendering engine they're testing. My browser is called "AdBlock".
If the Australian government were forbidding discussion of certain key political figures, or of certain religions, the claim world hold
Aren't they? How do you know? They may claim they're not filtering that, but how do you know for sure? Since Connors is already comparing his critics to child pornography supporters, the step to block his critics is a very small one indeed.
And that's by not having it at all.
I don't buy products with DRM, no matter how much they've tried to make it non-intrusive for me.
And backed by Sony? That puts it on my personal blacklist right away.
I'm disappointed.
Except for the Zune.
Establishing a society more friendly to US interests in the middle of the Mideast
Yep - that worked very well with the regime by the shah in Iran.
And Iraq didn't threaten the well-being of the US.
You're making it too easy: from what you're describing the iraq war falls in the 80% category.
Excellent. Let's do the same with the Iraq war.
I wonder how much Slashdot was paid for this post.
Practise Safe Government: Use a Kingdom!
I avoid e-mail whenever possible, so that when the shit hits the fan they can't even prove I was in the office.
George W., is that you?
You mean we can mount a frikking laser on them?
Amazing. I'll sigh with you....
We buy product (sigh).
So you gave money to a company that trust you so little it protected a demo video? They trust you so little they assumed you would steal their sales pitch about the product?
How much do you think they will trust you when you try to contact them for, say, a support issue, or an upgrade?
I've made it a policy to trust a vendor with my money at most in the same way they seem to trust me. In this case, that would translate as "not at all" and I would never give them my money.
surveillance
You misspelled "re-election campaign fund".
No, it's there for the right reasons. Because if you list it for any other reason at all, Apple and their bank account may very well start hoping for a lot of similar disappointments in the future.
thank you :-)
(click the link for more great examples of Kevin Hovind's logic and reasoning)