Well, they ARE weevils; we usually use pesticides on these critters. The bigger problem would be mass-breeding schemes gone awry and all the crops these things live on being wiped out as a result....
This is exactly the point. Publishing is not being crowdsourced; editing is. The resulting work is publicly available for ANYONE to take and print under their own ISBN; in this case, it is the person who originated the project who decided to monetize it through publication. Hopefully he'll roll the profits back into the site to help foster future such projects -- but that's his choice. He could just as easily pocket the profits. If he does this, the rest of his team is within their rights to fork the project and produce their own in-print copy (with edits if desired).
4) In order to easier manipulate them, it will try to weaken the members by severing their ties with their families and friends. If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters--yes, even his own life--he cannot be my disciple. Luke 14:26
If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" [...] do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone him to death, because he tried to turn you away from the LORD your God... Deuteronomy 13:6-10 Just for clarification (I was thinking of these references too):
The first one is said by Jesus to the crowds that were following him after he had just finished a parable about the hypocrisy of the Jewish religious leaders; the next two verses state:
And anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple. "Suppose one of you wants to build a tower. Will he not first sit down and estimate the cost to see if he has enough money to complete it?"
It is generally interpreted as a section instructing people to be responsible for their own actions and not to do things just because others tell them to.
The second reference is from the fifth of the Jewish Mosaic books, in which Moses is telling the people of Israel the instructions of God to do with religious practices.
In the previous section, Moses instructs the Israelites to kill all the peoples who lived in the land they were about to invade and who worshiped those other gods; he is now expanding on that and explaining that this applies not only to foreigners, but to their closest friends and relatives as well.
This isn't really about ostracizing people; it is about genocide and deicide. Still not nice, but unfortunately it doesn't prove your point. The hallmark of almost all major religions is that they have had a time in their history of using extreme force to wipe out the opposition.
You raise a good point... how are students going to "tag" eBooks? I used to love reading the names and years of all the people who had used my books before me. It was one of the things that made eading the textbooks interesting!
What're kids going to do now? Scratch their names into the PC case/screen itself?
Although, until I split the FSes up for the various directories I was unable to get a Linux install to run longer than one boot. I've had this problem too... no matter what I do, I've never been able to get to the end of that first boot before installing a new version!
This is definitely something that should be stressed. What I provide my customers is a front end with standard queries, PLUS the ability to trigger a backup (either daily snapshot or cumulative snapshot... which takes some time to transfer; our databases are generally around 2-8GB of data) of the database that they can then access and manipulate to their heart's content. At no point do they gain access to live data, but they can take snapshots whenever they want.
I have been toying with the idea of a shadow database that they can have live access to but which is only updated, never queried, by the main system. This is another possibility for your customer, and provides fresh income for you and your team as you develop this "new product".
There are a number of companies that provide the source for you to READ, but you have no permission to MODIFY or DISTRIBUTE. I think by "open" he means "free" as in speech.
However, I was wondering how legal his database is; it might skate awfully close to the edge of the licenses he had to sign to get access to some of that code.
This is a very simplified argument: copyright isn't just about making money. It is possible someone has produced something they don't want anyone else to see/hear.
Copyright is about protecting the artist against exploitation in exchange for enriching society. I think what is causing problems now is that many people feel that the artists are all being exploited anyway and society isn't being enriched.
Copyright is not about allowing the creator of a work to force scarcity on a market thereby creating larger profit margins for the limited copies sold. This is how copyright is being *abused*.
For example, I doubt I could make money or profit off of this post, but I still hold copyright on it, and reproduction anywhere else still breaks the law in the USA. This includes reproduction on your computer screen, by the way. Slashdot makes a profit off of it by the ads they post on the page, and they reproduce it for anyone interested in reading it. Kinda like artists and recording/production studios and "consumers". Sure there are fine lines and distinctions, but that just proves the point that things aren't as simple as you make them appear.
Everyone's judging this scheme without finding out what the quiz actually *is*.
Maybe it's the following:
1) Do you, or any of your family members or acquaintences work for the RIAA or associated companies or organizations?
2) Is P2P filesharying synonymous with copyright infringement?
3) Are there exemptions under copyright law for educational use of data?
4) Is "making available" punishable under copyright law?
4) Please select from the list below the name of a college lawyer who would defend you against a frivolous RIAA lawsuit should you or the college recieve an RIAA nastygram....
Ahah... you've added another ingredient... reproduction rights.
Actually, it is perfectly legal to reproduce photographs that you don't have reproduction rights for; it is, however, illegal to make them available for public viewing (such as putting them in your front window).
By putting something in your front window, you are violating the "public performance of a copyrighted work" law. The equivalent with music would be playing the music out your window so that others could record it.
What is happening with p2p music is akin to putting a sign in your window telling people where they can go to take a picture of your original (or copied) photo. The actual work has not been broadcast, only instructions on how to get a copy.
How many protests were there in the US last year? Then compare population/population density.
The fact that there were over 85,000 protests shows that a LOT of people are not afraid to protest in China. They feel that it is worth it to protest their causes. If interviewed, I bet you would find that a lot of the protestors aren't all that upset with the government, just with specific policies. Protests are being used as a way to let the government know that change is requested for those policies, not necessarily as an attack on the government itself.
That said, if any of these protests involve incitement to violence or rebellion, I am sure these machines will be used. I believe that the bullhorn will still be used to combat most of them however, and it will probably be very effective.
Previous popes had a better grasp of relativity -- they just postulated that the universe moved around the Vatican, which is a perfectly valid argument.
Well, look at it this way: any being inheriting original sin would either be human or a half-breed (like the [angel/demon]/human offspring wiped out by the flood). Any true alien would have to have its own sin.
All the Catholic church is saying is that there is nothing revealed from God that says other intelligent life doesn't exist -- and Angels/Demons are proof that SOME other intelligent life DOES exist. The catholic clergy is stating "facts" based on their knowledge. They can't provide an answer other than "I don't know" to the issue of how God would relate to non-humans, as He never told them that.
For some interesting reading in this area (from an Anglican perspective), try CS Lewis' trilogy foray in to SciFi. He explores the ramifications of all these questions.
As a simple example answer for you: angels are depicted as not God and not Human. Some angels rebelled against God and are doomed to hell with no chance of redemption. Angels are also depicted as not having free will in the same way Humans do -- which makes the "rebel" situation kind of hard to fathom. However, the angels are also portrayed as without sin (except for the demonized ones), so those ones need no redeeming. The Bible implies that humans can be more holy than angels because they have a choice in the matter; thus you have to define more precisely what you mean by "closer to the catholic god".
Oh, and be careful: "catholic" and "Catholic" have different meanings (to a non-Catholic): "catholic" is synonymous with "universal".
Think about this statement as being the religious equivalent of "yeah, gravity doesn't contradict the laws of thermodynamics." Stating this doesn't require the speaker to explore all the ramifications of the laws of thermodynamics, just how gravity relates to those laws.
People will never use Linux if the experience keeps being inconsistent. I don't see why not... they use Windows even though the experience between distros keeps being inconsistent.
Then comes installation processes... some apps can be dragged into place and double clicked to run. Some of them need an installer. The installer may or may not put an icon in the quickstart bar, on the desktop, in the start menu, in the programs menu, and may or may not also install other software that you don't want/need. Also, the software may or may not depend on other software (such as.Net libraries, DLLs, etc.) being pre-installed to work correctly.
Once you've installed it all, you might find that it doesn't play nicely with some other piece of software you have installed, or you might find that it won't install at all because you have something else installed (beta software from MSDN really messes up installs of release products).
Then comes UNinstalling... you never can remove all the bits and pieces a Windows installer injects into the OS.
Compared to this, OS X installs usually comprise of downloading a DMG that auto-mounts and has an app inside you drag to your Applications folder. Some that have multiple parts include an installer app to add those parts.
Compared to these, Linux involves you browsing the complete software repository and selecting the apps you want, then clicking install. The package manager takes care of the rest for you. It has the update service built-in (unlike Windows and OS X systems, where updating is even more of a mess than (un)installing), so you always know you've got the latest fully tested versions of your software.
Plus, you still generally have the option of doing a simple make;make install and tweak the source code if something doesn't work quite right for you.
Remember: grouping "linux" as one OS is like grouping "windows" as one OS -- Win3.1.1 is not the same experience as Vista or Server2xxx.
The US government has problems, but can somebody explain to me why stories that have absolutely nothing to do with the US government still attract US gov flames? This story is about China's oppression and mentions the fact that it may have an impact on a couple of US businesses. How is the US government involved any more than Holland's or France's? Simple: Google is a US company for starters, so at the end of the day it is held to US laws, no matter where else it operates in the world.
Secondly, no matter whether the world likes it or not, ANY international politics have to do with the US government. With great power comes great responsibility. Pair this up with the laws some politicians have been trying to pass in the US (the ones that make it illegal for US-based international corporations to break US law in other countries of operation), and it has everything to do with the US government.
All of this was already conflated in the original topic; if it had just been about nameless companies needing a license to post maps of Chinese-held territories in order for them to operate in China, THEN this would have nothing (or not much) to do with the US government.
You seem to have missed the point... everything you state is obvious; the trick is that different OSes use different "random" port ranges, use a different random number generator, have different systime drift etc. If you examine all the extra packet information over time when someone is running, say, a torrent client (or even a Tor router or Freenet node), they affect your sequence number patterns. An ISP knows what standard traffic looks like on their network; if they see any signs of shift (including encrypted ACKs), they can adjust priority based on that data, and have a pretty good idea of what network software you're running (as well as what OS you're running it on). This is an issue that the current FreeNet project is trying to overcome; they've made strides, but still haven't achieved true "stealth" mode.
As stated, there's no way they can DPI encrypted traffic, but they can usually tell what software was used to encrypt the traffic based on a short TCP packet inspection.
Of course, tunneling should be completely secure as most of that info is wrapped inside the tunnel. Since they can't really throttle SSH or IPSec, this provides a means to push any data through the network. Of course, p2p apps still need to access the Internet SOMEWHERE. All you do with a tunnel is shift that point to some other location.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, they ARE weevils; we usually use pesticides on these critters. The bigger problem would be mass-breeding schemes gone awry and all the crops these things live on being wiped out as a result....
I can see you never used a Fidonet enabled BBS. Or AOL for that matter. AOL started as a country-wide BBS.
I was thinking: Hey... unmoderated LORD and Food Fight!
This is exactly the point. Publishing is not being crowdsourced; editing is. The resulting work is publicly available for ANYONE to take and print under their own ISBN; in this case, it is the person who originated the project who decided to monetize it through publication. Hopefully he'll roll the profits back into the site to help foster future such projects -- but that's his choice. He could just as easily pocket the profits. If he does this, the rest of his team is within their rights to fork the project and produce their own in-print copy (with edits if desired).
If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters--yes, even his own life--he cannot be my disciple. Luke 14:26
If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" [...] do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone him to death, because he tried to turn you away from the LORD your God
The first one is said by Jesus to the crowds that were following him after he had just finished a parable about the hypocrisy of the Jewish religious leaders; the next two verses state:
And anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple. "Suppose one of you wants to build a tower. Will he not first sit down and estimate the cost to see if he has enough money to complete it?"
It is generally interpreted as a section instructing people to be responsible for their own actions and not to do things just because others tell them to.
The second reference is from the fifth of the Jewish Mosaic books, in which Moses is telling the people of Israel the instructions of God to do with religious practices.
In the previous section, Moses instructs the Israelites to kill all the peoples who lived in the land they were about to invade and who worshiped those other gods; he is now expanding on that and explaining that this applies not only to foreigners, but to their closest friends and relatives as well.
This isn't really about ostracizing people; it is about genocide and deicide. Still not nice, but unfortunately it doesn't prove your point. The hallmark of almost all major religions is that they have had a time in their history of using extreme force to wipe out the opposition.
Sorry, I think you're in the wrong thread; abuse is one thread down.
You raise a good point... how are students going to "tag" eBooks? I used to love reading the names and years of all the people who had used my books before me. It was one of the things that made eading the textbooks interesting!
What're kids going to do now? Scratch their names into the PC case/screen itself?
This is definitely something that should be stressed. What I provide my customers is a front end with standard queries, PLUS the ability to trigger a backup (either daily snapshot or cumulative snapshot... which takes some time to transfer; our databases are generally around 2-8GB of data) of the database that they can then access and manipulate to their heart's content. At no point do they gain access to live data, but they can take snapshots whenever they want.
I have been toying with the idea of a shadow database that they can have live access to but which is only updated, never queried, by the main system. This is another possibility for your customer, and provides fresh income for you and your team as you develop this "new product".
It's not in code... it's Navajo for "If you can read this, you're hired!"
There are a number of companies that provide the source for you to READ, but you have no permission to MODIFY or DISTRIBUTE. I think by "open" he means "free" as in speech.
However, I was wondering how legal his database is; it might skate awfully close to the edge of the licenses he had to sign to get access to some of that code.
Mod parent up. This expanded explanation is right on the money :)
This is a very simplified argument: copyright isn't just about making money. It is possible someone has produced something they don't want anyone else to see/hear.
Copyright is about protecting the artist against exploitation in exchange for enriching society. I think what is causing problems now is that many people feel that the artists are all being exploited anyway and society isn't being enriched.
Copyright is not about allowing the creator of a work to force scarcity on a market thereby creating larger profit margins for the limited copies sold. This is how copyright is being *abused*.
For example, I doubt I could make money or profit off of this post, but I still hold copyright on it, and reproduction anywhere else still breaks the law in the USA. This includes reproduction on your computer screen, by the way. Slashdot makes a profit off of it by the ads they post on the page, and they reproduce it for anyone interested in reading it. Kinda like artists and recording/production studios and "consumers". Sure there are fine lines and distinctions, but that just proves the point that things aren't as simple as you make them appear.
Everyone's judging this scheme without finding out what the quiz actually *is*.
Maybe it's the following:
1) Do you, or any of your family members or acquaintences work for the RIAA or associated companies or organizations?
2) Is P2P filesharying synonymous with copyright infringement?
3) Are there exemptions under copyright law for educational use of data?
4) Is "making available" punishable under copyright law?
4) Please select from the list below the name of a college lawyer who would defend you against a frivolous RIAA lawsuit should you or the college recieve an RIAA nastygram....
Ahah... you've added another ingredient... reproduction rights.
Actually, it is perfectly legal to reproduce photographs that you don't have reproduction rights for; it is, however, illegal to make them available for public viewing (such as putting them in your front window).
By putting something in your front window, you are violating the "public performance of a copyrighted work" law. The equivalent with music would be playing the music out your window so that others could record it.
What is happening with p2p music is akin to putting a sign in your window telling people where they can go to take a picture of your original (or copied) photo. The actual work has not been broadcast, only instructions on how to get a copy.
How many protests were there in the US last year? Then compare population/population density.
The fact that there were over 85,000 protests shows that a LOT of people are not afraid to protest in China. They feel that it is worth it to protest their causes. If interviewed, I bet you would find that a lot of the protestors aren't all that upset with the government, just with specific policies. Protests are being used as a way to let the government know that change is requested for those policies, not necessarily as an attack on the government itself.
That said, if any of these protests involve incitement to violence or rebellion, I am sure these machines will be used. I believe that the bullhorn will still be used to combat most of them however, and it will probably be very effective.
They just perfected it; it was invented in Egypt.
Previous popes had a better grasp of relativity -- they just postulated that the universe moved around the Vatican, which is a perfectly valid argument.
Well, look at it this way: any being inheriting original sin would either be human or a half-breed (like the [angel/demon]/human offspring wiped out by the flood). Any true alien would have to have its own sin.
All the Catholic church is saying is that there is nothing revealed from God that says other intelligent life doesn't exist -- and Angels/Demons are proof that SOME other intelligent life DOES exist. The catholic clergy is stating "facts" based on their knowledge. They can't provide an answer other than "I don't know" to the issue of how God would relate to non-humans, as He never told them that.
For some interesting reading in this area (from an Anglican perspective), try CS Lewis' trilogy foray in to SciFi. He explores the ramifications of all these questions.
As a simple example answer for you: angels are depicted as not God and not Human. Some angels rebelled against God and are doomed to hell with no chance of redemption. Angels are also depicted as not having free will in the same way Humans do -- which makes the "rebel" situation kind of hard to fathom. However, the angels are also portrayed as without sin (except for the demonized ones), so those ones need no redeeming. The Bible implies that humans can be more holy than angels because they have a choice in the matter; thus you have to define more precisely what you mean by "closer to the catholic god".
Oh, and be careful: "catholic" and "Catholic" have different meanings (to a non-Catholic): "catholic" is synonymous with "universal".
Think about this statement as being the religious equivalent of "yeah, gravity doesn't contradict the laws of thermodynamics." Stating this doesn't require the speaker to explore all the ramifications of the laws of thermodynamics, just how gravity relates to those laws.
Then comes installation processes... some apps can be dragged into place and double clicked to run. Some of them need an installer. The installer may or may not put an icon in the quickstart bar, on the desktop, in the start menu, in the programs menu, and may or may not also install other software that you don't want/need. Also, the software may or may not depend on other software (such as
Once you've installed it all, you might find that it doesn't play nicely with some other piece of software you have installed, or you might find that it won't install at all because you have something else installed (beta software from MSDN really messes up installs of release products).
Then comes UNinstalling... you never can remove all the bits and pieces a Windows installer injects into the OS.
Compared to this, OS X installs usually comprise of downloading a DMG that auto-mounts and has an app inside you drag to your Applications folder. Some that have multiple parts include an installer app to add those parts.
Compared to these, Linux involves you browsing the complete software repository and selecting the apps you want, then clicking install. The package manager takes care of the rest for you. It has the update service built-in (unlike Windows and OS X systems, where updating is even more of a mess than (un)installing), so you always know you've got the latest fully tested versions of your software.
Plus, you still generally have the option of doing a simple make;make install and tweak the source code if something doesn't work quite right for you.
Remember: grouping "linux" as one OS is like grouping "windows" as one OS -- Win3.1.1 is not the same experience as Vista or Server2xxx.
That's tangential to his argument -- he was saying that all of the "uninformed" people use Windows, not that all Windows users are uninformed.
:)
I think this difference is taught in most 1st year CS classes, even though the logical confusion tends to crop up quite often in software algorithms
Interestingly, while the horse is blurred, the people's faces aren't!
Well, I don't know... the one about blanking out maps of China sure seems to improve privacy.
Secondly, no matter whether the world likes it or not, ANY international politics have to do with the US government. With great power comes great responsibility. Pair this up with the laws some politicians have been trying to pass in the US (the ones that make it illegal for US-based international corporations to break US law in other countries of operation), and it has everything to do with the US government.
All of this was already conflated in the original topic; if it had just been about nameless companies needing a license to post maps of Chinese-held territories in order for them to operate in China, THEN this would have nothing (or not much) to do with the US government.
You seem to have missed the point... everything you state is obvious; the trick is that different OSes use different "random" port ranges, use a different random number generator, have different systime drift etc. If you examine all the extra packet information over time when someone is running, say, a torrent client (or even a Tor router or Freenet node), they affect your sequence number patterns. An ISP knows what standard traffic looks like on their network; if they see any signs of shift (including encrypted ACKs), they can adjust priority based on that data, and have a pretty good idea of what network software you're running (as well as what OS you're running it on). This is an issue that the current FreeNet project is trying to overcome; they've made strides, but still haven't achieved true "stealth" mode.
As stated, there's no way they can DPI encrypted traffic, but they can usually tell what software was used to encrypt the traffic based on a short TCP packet inspection.
Of course, tunneling should be completely secure as most of that info is wrapped inside the tunnel. Since they can't really throttle SSH or IPSec, this provides a means to push any data through the network. Of course, p2p apps still need to access the Internet SOMEWHERE. All you do with a tunnel is shift that point to some other location.