The difference is that I've heard of Charles Manson and the Star Wars kid, whereas this Slashdot article is the first time I (and, going by the other comments here, most slashdotters) have heard of any of these three people in question.
1) I guess you don't read the New York Times. 2) If you had been paying attention to previous slashdot articles, like the one about data retention to catch the kiddi pornographers, you would have heard about him. 3) There are thousands, if not tens of thousands of people with biographies on wikipedia that you and most dotheads have not heard of.
I must agree. Due to slashdotting I was only able to see the Justin Berry bio, and it sure as hell does not belong in an encyclopedia. Some kid starts his own kiddie porn page, recruits other kids to do it, then gets pressed by the FBI, and turns witness. Now everyone that paid him to view the kiddie porn might get reported to the FBI, and they are all very worried. Well it sucks for them, but it still does not make this info really that important.
Hello? McFly? This guy is probably now the most famous case of self-generated kiddie-porn in the world. That makes him extremely interesting to all kinds of sciences - socialogy, psychology, etc. We've got wikipedia pages on all kinds of other criminals like Charles Manson. We've got wikipedia articles on all kinds of celebrities like the star wars kid.
Surely a guy who testified before the US congress about his role in a rather new kind of crime deserves mention in an encyclopedia if all those other less important people do too.
1080i content encoded with MPEG-2 to a single layer HD DVD would indeed be a disaster.. two times the space for 4 times the amount of pixels - you do the math.
That is not necessarily true. Single-Layer HD-DVD is 15GB. 1 hour of full-bitrate broadcast HDTV is roughly 8.5GB (19.2Mbps) . So a 100 minute movie would be about 14GB. That leaves 1GB for menus and all the lame standard-def extras.
Some will argue that 19.2Mbps is not quite sufficient for 1080i, but modern MPEG-2 encoders are greatly improved over just a few years ago and HD-DVD has the advantage of being able to exceed 19.2Mbps when needed, while broadcast HDTV is fixed-rate.
That said, I will not touch either format as the DRM is above and beyond reasonable. I will stick to the terabytes of recorded HDTV I have made from cable and mini-dish.
Telco and cable company at each other's throats? I can hardly wait.
Not going to happen.
So we move from a monopoly market to a duopoly market. The duopoly will learn real quick that it is in their best interest and our WORST interest to cooperate. Of course since cooperation is illegal, it will come through regulation as the telecom industry is already rife with regulatory capture.
The reality is that (I think) people want recent media whether it is movies, music, pr0n, whatever. I don't see anything obvious that would make kiddie pr0n different in this regard.
A major difference is that movies, music, regular pr0n, books, etc are all heavily marketed. In fact, a vast majority of such content is pure marketing and cross-promotion. Without the incessent beating-into-the-subconscious of marketing, there would be much less demand (this I hold to be self-evident, it would not be cost-effective to pay for the amount of marketing we have today if it wasn't necessary to maintain the level of new sales).
My point is about pedophilia, and that another poster suggested that the problem be ignored.
NOBODY has said that the problem be ignored. What I have said is that we do not need to criminalize behaviours that are not directly harmful. The act of making child porn is where the harm occurs so that is where the crime should be defined.
1) ok, virtual porn. Well, we have virtual kiddie porn and it is legal. Guess what? The real kiddie porn is still being manufactured.
Is it? Got proof? Compare the rates of creation before and after digital manipulation became easy enough to make the fake stuff. You wave your hands an AWFUL lot when it comes to supporting your beliefs.
2) That is a ridiculous example. You know that the internet thrives on new content. Just look at the outcry here when a dupe article is posted. A lifelong pedophile won't be happy with the same thousand pictures, and you know it.
"The Internet" is NOT the same thing as online market for kiddie porn. Again you are waving your hands and making all kinds of specious conclusions.
When you start advocating for the criminilization of what amounts to a thought crime, you really, really need to have your ducks in a row. Especially since these laws are really the first widespread thought crimes in the history of the USA.
From another slashdotter: "In 1999, I worked as a contract engineer for a Linux consulting company. We delivered kernel enhancements for the Linux kernel on the Alpha processor to the NSA. The enhancements we to reduce TLB miss overhead when doing comparisons and searches on large amounts of data.
This tweaked my BS-detector.
The TLB is the Translation Lookaside Buffer - not too meaningful a name, but what it does is cache the mapping between virtual pages of memory to physical pages of memory. If you take a TLB miss, it means you have out to main memory and look at the full list of mappings which is slow, so avoiding TLB misses is a good thing in general.
Off the top of my head, the only thing I can think of that would reduce TLB misses would be to use larger page sizes. The default page size on linux is usually just 4K. So a TLB with, say 128 entries, is only good for half a megabyte or so. But, if you bump the page size up to 1MB then its good for 128 megabytes. Take your page sizes up to 64MB and that's 8GB.
The thing is, such an improvement is not unique to text search algorithms. It helps out any application that works with large datasets. So, while it is certainly possible that the NSA wanted such an improvement for a text search application, it is much more likely that anyone of the thousands of Alpha users doing "technical computing" (number crunching) wanted it. I am too lazy to check the kernel history to find the actual checkin, but whatever it says, I think it is highly improbable that the NSA was responsible for it.
If you just talking about the freaks who wack off to pics of little girls, then think of this: People searching for pics of little kids creates a demand for pics of little kids. If the demand is there, then someone posts pics of little kids. Where do you think this pics come from? People sexually absuing and exploiting little kids and posting pictures of them online.
Images are non-rivalarous - you can make as many copies as you want. Thus if a kiddie-porn-pervert is, on average, satisified with 1000 photos and videos, then all it takes is the SAME 1000 photos and videos to satisfy 1 or 1,000,000 kiddie-porn-perverts. No new demand is created.
Pure freedom is nice and all in theory, but when people are still too uncivilized to handle it, then it's unrealistic.
What you claim about people trolling is true, but trivial. Sure, for ANY point of view you can point to a couple of knuckleheads. But that's a pretty weak way to attack science in general, and claim that evolution is a "faith" that people are mad about anyone criticizing.
why are open source proponents turning a blind eye to how Red Hat's actions and nonconducive to the open source ideal?
Name one.
Seriously and with no hand-waving, name one action where Red Hat's actions were "nonconducive to the open source ideal." Back it up with WHY it is what you claim it is. You are going to have a tough time.
What the Republicans are doing here is exactly what Republicans ought to be doing, by their charter. They are blocking the Federal government from enacting regulation that would seriously impede the actions of private companies.
Hey guy, BAD ANALOGY. You know why? Because these are NOT simply private companies - they are public utilities. They enjoy government granted monopoly markets.
Thus they are not operating in a free market and have no fucking business trying to claim the right to operate in an unregulated free market. They want their monopoly with none of the responsibilities that go with it.
I'm looking for a real stealth type of backpack/holster case.
Something that just carries the notebook and not much else. Kind of like those neoprene "slipcases." But I'm looking for one that straps to my back and can be worn under a jacket or coat and would do a pretty good job of hiding the fact that I was carrying a notebook with me at all.
Of course this would only be useful for an ultra-thin notebook, the kind that only ways a couple of pounds and has a screen 13" or less.
Anyone know where I can find such a holster-style notebook backpack?
Exactly the ignorant elitist attitude that will place you near the top of the list when it's time to lay a few people off. Fact of the matter is that management needs tech and tech needs management, but neither needs arrogant know-it-alls like you.
And if he really is a know-it-all and not just a poser then he doesn't care because there will always be high-paying jobs for the guys who do know it all in their niches. Getting laid off from one job just means it is time to move on to another one. The real know-it-alls internalize this, and become contractors where beacoup bucks and temporary employment is just how business is done.
The content protection scheme used for both HD-DVD and BluRay is the same (ie: neither is easier to crack than the other).
However, implementations will differ from manufacturer to manufacturer and maybe even from model to model of player. So we may find that a certain player has an exploitable weakness that others do not.
Theirs is unreasonable, becuase they do have the means to know and choose not to use them.
Didn't you already admit that you have no idea what they know and what they choose? (c.f. "I can't know" and "I would bet") I'll give you one thing, you are dogmatic about your dogma.
The key difference is I actually can't know the premise that I am postulating,
So, since by your own words, it is impossible for you to have a clue about what you are talking about, but it is possible for those you criticize to know what they are talking about, you somehow have the intellectual and moral high ground?
You have got to be joking.
War is Peace. Slavery is Freedom. Ignorance is Strength. --- Bada Bing!!
I just realized one issue, though. In that old setup, on a local machine, once you were root, you could su to another user and then have access to their files on the file-server.
Yep - as long as you give access to accounts with the privilege to su, you've got that problem. But, it is not NFS specific - as long as the file-server trusts a user on the machine to be themselves, you've got that concern.
This includes most of the posters bitching in the thread about transparency, without even using the transparency they have to read the act. Nor, I would bet, have any of them any actual desire to challenge the meeting closures.
What hypocrisy.
First you accuse people of bitching out of ignorance and then you ADMIT (c.f. "I would bet") that you yourself are bitching out of ignorance about them.
Their ignorance is rationalized by their need to rage against the machine. Shame on the editors for enabling this behavior.
Sounds like your ignorance is rationalized by your need to worship the machine. Could you be any more hypocritical?
Personally, I've started drinking during lunch, not the best thing, but it seems to help.
Start hiring hookers during lunch with petty cash instead. Getting your pipes cleaned will make you a lot more productive that afternoon than getting drunk.
Slashdot Mirror
The difference is that I've heard of Charles Manson and the Star Wars kid, whereas this Slashdot article is the first time I (and, going by the other comments here, most slashdotters) have heard of any of these three people in question.
1) I guess you don't read the New York Times.
2) If you had been paying attention to previous slashdot articles, like the one about data retention to catch the kiddi pornographers, you would have heard about him.
3) There are thousands, if not tens of thousands of people with biographies on wikipedia that you and most dotheads have not heard of.
I must agree. Due to slashdotting I was only able to see the Justin Berry bio, and it sure as hell does not belong in an encyclopedia. Some kid starts his own kiddie porn page, recruits other kids to do it, then gets pressed by the FBI, and turns witness. Now everyone that paid him to view the kiddie porn might get reported to the FBI, and they are all very worried. Well it sucks for them, but it still does not make this info really that important.
Hello? McFly? This guy is probably now the most famous case of self-generated kiddie-porn in the world. That makes him extremely interesting to all kinds of sciences - socialogy, psychology, etc. We've got wikipedia pages on all kinds of other criminals like Charles Manson. We've got wikipedia articles on all kinds of celebrities like the star wars kid.
Surely a guy who testified before the US congress about his role in a rather new kind of crime deserves mention in an encyclopedia if all those other less important people do too.
This african fish is no match for the cleverest species of them all...
The Landshark!!!
1080i content encoded with MPEG-2 to a single layer HD DVD would indeed be a disaster.. two times the space for 4 times the amount of pixels - you do the math.
That is not necessarily true. Single-Layer HD-DVD is 15GB. 1 hour of full-bitrate broadcast HDTV is roughly 8.5GB (19.2Mbps) . So a 100 minute movie would be about 14GB. That leaves 1GB for menus and all the lame standard-def extras.
Some will argue that 19.2Mbps is not quite sufficient for 1080i, but modern MPEG-2 encoders are greatly improved over just a few years ago and HD-DVD has the advantage of being able to exceed 19.2Mbps when needed, while broadcast HDTV is fixed-rate.
That said, I will not touch either format as the DRM is above and beyond reasonable. I will stick to the terabytes of recorded HDTV I have made from cable and mini-dish.
Telco and cable company at each other's throats? I can hardly wait.
Not going to happen.
So we move from a monopoly market to a duopoly market. The duopoly will learn real quick that it is in their best interest and our WORST interest to cooperate. Of course since cooperation is illegal, it will come through regulation as the telecom industry is already rife with regulatory capture.
The reality is that (I think) people want recent media whether it is movies, music, pr0n, whatever. I don't see anything obvious that would make kiddie pr0n different in this regard.
A major difference is that movies, music, regular pr0n, books, etc are all heavily marketed. In fact, a vast majority of such content is pure marketing and cross-promotion. Without the incessent beating-into-the-subconscious of marketing, there would be much less demand (this I hold to be self-evident, it would not be cost-effective to pay for the amount of marketing we have today if it wasn't necessary to maintain the level of new sales).
My point is about pedophilia, and that another poster suggested that the problem be ignored.
NOBODY has said that the problem be ignored. What I have said is that we do not need to criminalize behaviours that are not directly harmful. The act of making child porn is where the harm occurs so that is where the crime should be defined.
1) ok, virtual porn. Well, we have virtual kiddie porn and it is legal. Guess what? The real kiddie porn is still being manufactured.
Is it? Got proof? Compare the rates of creation before and after digital manipulation became easy enough to make the fake stuff. You wave your hands an AWFUL lot when it comes to supporting your beliefs.
2) That is a ridiculous example. You know that the internet thrives on new content. Just look at the outcry here when a dupe article is posted. A lifelong pedophile won't be happy with the same thousand pictures, and you know it.
"The Internet" is NOT the same thing as online market for kiddie porn. Again you are waving your hands and making all kinds of specious conclusions.
When you start advocating for the criminilization of what amounts to a thought crime, you really, really need to have your ducks in a row. Especially since these laws are really the first widespread thought crimes in the history of the USA.
From another slashdotter:
"In 1999, I worked as a contract engineer for a Linux consulting company. We delivered kernel enhancements for the Linux kernel on the Alpha processor to the NSA. The enhancements we to reduce TLB miss overhead when doing comparisons and searches on large amounts of data.
This tweaked my BS-detector.
The TLB is the Translation Lookaside Buffer - not too meaningful a name, but what it does is cache the mapping between virtual pages of memory to physical pages of memory. If you take a TLB miss, it means you have out to main memory and look at the full list of mappings which is slow, so avoiding TLB misses is a good thing in general.
Off the top of my head, the only thing I can think of that would reduce TLB misses would be to use larger page sizes. The default page size on linux is usually just 4K. So a TLB with, say 128 entries, is only good for half a megabyte or so. But, if you bump the page size up to 1MB then its good for 128 megabytes. Take your page sizes up to 64MB and that's 8GB.
The thing is, such an improvement is not unique to text search algorithms. It helps out any application that works with large datasets. So, while it is certainly possible that the NSA wanted such an improvement for a text search application, it is much more likely that anyone of the thousands of Alpha users doing "technical computing" (number crunching) wanted it. I am too lazy to check the kernel history to find the actual checkin, but whatever it says, I think it is highly improbable that the NSA was responsible for it.
The problems with your little analysis are that:
Pure freedom is nice and all in theory, but when people are still too uncivilized to handle it, then it's unrealistic.
You misspelled fascist .
Read this for how it is done:
. html
http://www.csoonline.com/read/020106/caveat021706
What you claim about people trolling is true, but trivial. Sure, for ANY point of view you can point to a couple of knuckleheads. But that's a pretty weak way to attack science in general, and claim that evolution is a "faith" that people are mad about anyone criticizing.
Bingo. Give this man a +5 please, I'm all out.
why are open source proponents turning a blind eye to how Red Hat's actions and nonconducive to the open source ideal?
Name one.
Seriously and with no hand-waving, name one action where Red Hat's actions were "nonconducive to the open source ideal." Back it up with WHY it is what you claim it is. You are going to have a tough time.
What the Republicans are doing here is exactly what Republicans ought to be doing, by their charter. They are blocking the Federal government from enacting regulation that would seriously impede the actions of private companies.
Hey guy, BAD ANALOGY. You know why? Because these are NOT simply private companies - they are public utilities. They enjoy government granted monopoly markets.
Thus they are not operating in a free market and have no fucking business trying to claim the right to operate in an unregulated free market. They want their monopoly with none of the responsibilities that go with it.
I'm looking for a real stealth type of backpack/holster case.
Something that just carries the notebook and not much else. Kind of like those neoprene "slipcases." But I'm looking for one that straps to my back and can be worn under a jacket or coat and would do a pretty good job of hiding the fact that I was carrying a notebook with me at all.
Of course this would only be useful for an ultra-thin notebook, the kind that only ways a couple of pounds and has a screen 13" or less.
Anyone know where I can find such a holster-style notebook backpack?
Exactly the ignorant elitist attitude that will place you near the top of the list when it's time to lay a few people off. Fact of the matter is that management needs tech and tech needs management, but neither needs arrogant know-it-alls like you.
And if he really is a know-it-all and not just a poser then he doesn't care because there will always be high-paying jobs for the guys who do know it all in their niches. Getting laid off from one job just means it is time to move on to another one. The real know-it-alls internalize this, and become contractors where beacoup bucks and temporary employment is just how business is done.
The content protection scheme used for both HD-DVD and BluRay is the same (ie: neither is easier to crack than the other).
However, implementations will differ from manufacturer to manufacturer and maybe even from model to model of player. So we may find that a certain player has an exploitable weakness that others do not.
Must Call Someone Experienced!
My main point was that they have access to the primary source (the statute) and choose not to use it.
Your main point is your hypothesis - as you have said at least twice now, you have no way of knowing whether or not they "choose not to use it."
Theirs is unreasonable, becuase they do have the means to know and choose not to use them.
Didn't you already admit that you have no idea what they know and what they choose? (c.f. "I can't know" and "I would bet") I'll give you one thing, you are dogmatic about your dogma.
The key difference is I actually can't know the premise that I am postulating,
So, since by your own words, it is impossible for you to have a clue about what you are talking about, but it is possible for those you criticize to know what they are talking about, you somehow have the intellectual and moral high ground?
You have got to be joking.
War is Peace.
Slavery is Freedom.
Ignorance is Strength. --- Bada Bing!!
I just realized one issue, though. In that old setup, on a local machine, once you were root, you could su to another user and then have access to their files on the file-server.
Yep - as long as you give access to accounts with the privilege to su, you've got that problem. But, it is not NFS specific - as long as the file-server trusts a user on the machine to be themselves, you've got that concern.
When piracy is widespread and enforcement is difficult, penalties must be disproportionately high to have a deterrant effect.
Yeah, that's really worked well to reduce illegal drug use.
This includes most of the posters bitching in the thread about transparency, without even using the transparency they have to read the act. Nor, I would bet, have any of them any actual desire to challenge the meeting closures.
What hypocrisy.
First you accuse people of bitching out of ignorance and then you ADMIT (c.f. "I would bet") that you yourself are bitching out of ignorance about them.
Their ignorance is rationalized by their need to rage against the machine. Shame on the editors for enabling this behavior.
Sounds like your ignorance is rationalized by your need to worship the machine. Could you be any more hypocritical?
Doesn't nfs have "root_squash" on by default?
You are correct. Only linux calls it "root_squash" but all the major unices have had exactly the behaviour you described for a decade or more.
This entire "ask slashdot" article is moot because of that.
What do you do when you feel burnt out at work?
Personally, I've started drinking during lunch, not the best thing, but it seems to help.
Start hiring hookers during lunch with petty cash instead. Getting your pipes cleaned will make you a lot more productive that afternoon than getting drunk.