This has nothing to do with privacy. There is nothing "private" about a number used as a unique identifier in government databases. This is a security matter, and what she is doing is no different than posting an exploit.
Wrong. This is not just posting an exploit. This is like using an exploit, getting people's passwords and and posting them.
As for your comments about discrimination, what form of discrimination protection are you referring to that is inappropriate?
My memory is a bit blurry, but I saw a newsflash on TV about obese people protesting against being called "fat" and threatening to sue various people for psychological damages (go figure), because they couldn't change their fat condition. What shocked me was that a woman in the group kept saying that fat people should be comfortable with their fatness because it was part of who they were, or some bull**** like that.
Perhaps not individually, but as a mass, they are. Surely obsese people don't like being called "fat tub of lard" but in the end they do nothing to improve their condition....
Score:5 Insightful? You must be kidding. Clearly this posting is flamebait (and I'm taking it). "In the end they do nothing..." Not one single obese person does anything about being obese?
In my statement I'm obviously overlooking the exceptions. That's why I said "as a mass". Actually, I was paraphrasing Kay from MiB when he said "A person is smart, but the masses are stupid". After all, obesity isn't called an epidemic "just because". What I'm talking about, is that people fail to realize that it's their eating and sedentary habits that make them fat. And that the bad way of eating is inherited from their parents. Right from eating all those extra bread slices at the restaurant, to consuming lots of high fructose sodas, to eating everything on the plate, to eating twice the quantity of snacks because they're "lite".
And don't get me started on the "lose weight fast!" infomercials. I'm still amazed that people fall for that "no diets, no exercise" garbage. But well, if people STILL believe the Earth is 6,000 years old, I shouldn't be surprised about that. But I still am.
More than that, it's essentially meaningless. Americans are not "oblivious" to obesity, and do not "tolerate" drunk-driving deaths.
Perhaps not individually, but as a mass, they are. Surely obsese people don't like being called "fat tub of lard" but in the end they do nothing to improve their condition. They keep eating the same quantities of junk / high-carb food, do from little to no exercise, and even ask not to be "discriminated" for their "condition". See, it's not a problem, it's a disease, and since it's a disease, there's nothing they can do about it. They feel better with themselves, and problem solved.... right? RIGHT?
If you happen to have a blog or website and google it, you'll probably find it placed in a search-magnet - you know, those sites that collect text from the most random webpages and contain no links at all, but later become frontends for sales websites.
I hate those. Hopefully I can mod them down with this new google feature.
More importantly, he lacks the "sarcasm" tag at the end of his post when his tone makes him look completely serious.
Yes, the GGGP post left off this tag. Is that a requirement of sarcasm?
When your writing looks serious, and given the abundance of trolls in slashdot, yes, it is necessary. Why do you think emoticons were invented in the first place?
See, now i viewed the GP as being nonsensical, and somewhat funny. But not nearly as funny as how seriously you took it!
I wouldn't have replied that way if the GGP hadn't been modded INFORMATIVE!:-/ More importantly, he lacks the "sarcasm" tag at the end of his post when his tone makes him look completely serious.
From your answer, I conclude that the term "pop culture" isn't quite the right term. I'd use "scientists' preconceived ideas". Among such ideas are:
* Dinosaurs were like today's lizards. This was a common belief 2 centuries ago. * T-Rex was the king of dinosaurs, a terrible hunter. New evidence suggest it was more like the king of scavengers. * Stomach ulcers could not possibly be caused by a bacteria. The discovery of the H. Pilori set them wrong. * There couldn't be anything like black holes. And it was Einstein who believed this. * There are 9 planets orbiting the sun. Turns out Pluto isn't even a planet.
See, precisely the point of science is that new theories can replace old theories (and even beliefs). But calling preconceived ideas "pop culture" is stretching it a bit too much. Unless you want to start a debate about Pirates vs. Ninjas:)
In the first place, we don't have the proof that the Neanderthals gave away their technology so that the Homo Sapiens could improve it.
Second, you're mixing up military knowledge with copyright laws, which make both closed source and open source possible. No copyright and anybody can hack your software, improve on it and resell it. Therefore, your analogy does not apply.
Third, open source is completely OFF TOPIC in this discussion!!
We have known for a long time that Neanderthal had a larger brain than modern human and a sophisticated culture, including burial rites. There was no scientific consensus that Neandethal was stupid.
Define "a long time", please. 100 years? 50 years? 30 years? 20 years?
Here's an idea: Instead of wasting money, time, and medical work on chipping the rich, how about fixing the poverty crisis in Mexico?
You fail to see the problem. It's not just the rich families which are abducted. It's middle class families, for only a few thousands of dollars. Things have really gotten bad in here. It's no use "fighting poverty" where corruption reaches nearly all judges.
Anathem: (1) In Proto- Orth, a poetic or musical invocation of Our Mother Hylaea, which since the time of Adrakhones has been the climax of the daily liturgy (hence the Fluccish word Anthem meaning a song of great emotional resonance, esp. one that inspires listeners to sing along). Note: this sense is archaic, and used only in a ritual context where it is unlikely to be confused with the much more commonly used sense 2. (2) In New Orth, an aut by which an incorrigible fraa or suur is ejected from the math and his or her work sequestered (hence the Fluccish word Anathema meaning intolerable statements or ideas). See Throwback. â"the dictionary, 4th edition, A.R. 3000
Extramuros: (1) In Old Orth, literally âoeoutside the walls.â Often used in reference to the walled city- states of that age. (2) In Middle Orth, the non- mathic world; the turbulent and violent state of aff airs that prevailed after the Fall of Baz. (3) In Praxic Orth, geo graph i cal regions or social classes not yet enlightened by the resurgent wisdom of the mathic world. (4) In New Orth, similar to sense 2 above, but often used to denote those settlements immediately surrounding the walls of a math, implying comparative prosperity, stability, etc. â"the dictionary, 4th edition, A.R. 3000
Saunt: (1) In New Orth, a term of veneration applied to great thinkers, almost always posthumously. Note: this word was accepted only in the Millennial Orth Convox of A.R. 3000. Prior to then it was considered a misspelling of Savant. In stone, where only upper- case letters are used, this is rendered SAVANT (or ST. if the stonecarver is running out of space). During the decline of standards in the decades that followed the Third Sack, a confusion between the letters U and V grew commonplace (the âoelazy stonecarver problemâ), and many began to mistake the word for SAUANT. This soon degenerated to saunt (now accepted) and even sant (still deprecated). In written form, St. may be used as an abbreviation for any of these. Within some traditional orders it is still pronounced âoeSavantâ and obviously the same is probably true among Millenarians. â"the dictionary, 4th edition, A.R. 3000
Bulshytt: (1) In Fluccish of the late Praxic Age and early Reconstitution, a derogatory term for false speech in general, esp. knowing and deliberate falsehood or obfuscation. (2) In Orth, a more technical and clinical term denoting speech (typically but not necessarily commercial or po liti cal) that employs euphemism, con ve nient vagueness, numbing repetition, and other such rhetorical subterfuges to create the impression that something has been said. (3) According to the Knights of Saunt Halikaarn, a radical order of the 2nd Millennium A.R., all speech and writings of the ancient Sphenics; the Mystagogues of the Old Mathic Age; Praxic Age commercial and po liti cal institutions; and, since the Reconstitution, anyone they deemed to have been infected by Procian thinking. Their frequent and loud use of this word to interrupt lectures, dialogs, private conversations, etc., exacerbated the divide between Procian and Halikaarnian orders that characterized the mathic world in the years leading up to the Third Sack. Shortly before the Third Sack, all of the Knights of Saunt Halikaarn were Thrown Back, so little more is known about them (their frequent appearance in Sæcular entertainments results from confusion between them and the Incanters).
Usage note: In the mathic world, if the word is suddenly shouted out in a chalk hall or refectory it brings to mind the events associated with sense (3) and is therefore to be avoided. Spoken in a moderate tone of voice, it takes on sense (2), which long ago lost any vulgar connotations it may once have had. In the Sæculum it is easily confused
Perhaps if Bill Gates hadn't been fired... he wouldn't have ended up creating Microsoft.
How would a world without Microsoft be? Would we have the internet as we know it? Less viruses, probably. But now that I think about it... the internet may have not had the same popularity... Linux would still be for hobbyists... would we have a browser war? What would have happened to specs made by the W3C? Maybe Netscape would still be alive... AND buggy.
Most people are idealistic and want to believe that Bill Gates was the ONLY evil in computing - but what about the "patches welcome" attitude in programming?
Sometimes I'd like to start a contest on "how the world would have been without Microsoft". Would we have social networking sites? CSS 2? Ubuntu? And would the Mac have adopted a Freebsd-based Operating System?
How would the 80x86 computers run, for starters? Would they run Unix? CP/M? Would videogames use even worse copy protection schemes? Would the PC be an actual competitor against Nintendo and Sony? Or maybe, Atari would take the place that the XBOX has now?
I'd love to see the possibilities with my own eyes. Just to satisfy my curiosity.
Put into another way, it is a company A trying to prevent company B from releasing a piece of work , on the ground that company A still has some rights secured for the corresponding IP.
Let's replace Fox with Microsoft, Warner with the community, and IP with Linux. No wonder this case seemed so familiar...
I don't understand how Warner Bros can presumably spend millions of dollars producing a movie without first securing the rights to the work the movie is based on. Do they not have a legal department?
I was not talking about the technical aspects, but about Market Share. It doesn't matter whether your product is superior or not, existing market share is a horrible obstacle to overcome.
Sure, it's Open Source and everything. But the problem is that complex programs like this are often designed with a top-down instead of a bottom-up approach. I mean, this isn't a bazaar, it's a cathedral. Oh, and OpenSolaris is not GPL. *buzz*
There's still one company responsible and only that company will make the changes, because the codebase is so huge that it's a pain in the *** to maintain. Well, eventually many open source projects end up like that, with a huge codebase and with a company. BUT, this wasn't built by the community and it's not likely that it will get enough userbase so that a dev will become interested.
Compare this with the Linux Kernel. Linus message, which was more or less like "Hey guys, I'm making a unix-like kernel, anyone want to join?", was followed by a stampede of developers and testers like you can't imagine.
So, if we want competition, it's very improbable that a cathedral project such as OpenSolaris can compete with Linux, a 100% GPL'ed project built by the whole community.
Maybe it can compete with the bsd clones, but Linux? I don't think so.
Because if they don't, eventually the open source community will reverse engineer all their crap and put it out there for free without any involvement from them and they'll just be left sucking hind tit.
Like the Gimp, wow. Thousands of Adobe users are migrating to it. Right.</sarcasm>
We're taking over 100 gigabytes of the most popular "adult entertainment" videos from one of the largest subscription websites on the internet, and giving away access to anyone who can connect to it via IPv6. No advertising, no subscriptions, no registration. If you access the site via IPv4, you get a primer on IPv6, instructions on how to set up IPv6 through your ISP, a list of ISPs that support IPv6 natively, and a discussion forum to share tips and troubleshooting. If you access the site via IPv6 you get instant access to "the goods".
Unfortunately, that won't work, because it's not aimed to the industry. The ones who decide whether the public will use IPv6 or not are the ISPs, and better internet access is definitely NOT in their agenda (Hellooo Comcast!).
Slashdot Mirror
This has nothing to do with privacy. There is nothing "private" about a number used as a unique identifier in government databases. This is a security matter, and what she is doing is no different than posting an exploit.
Wrong. This is not just posting an exploit. This is like using an exploit, getting people's passwords and and posting them.
As for your comments about discrimination, what form of discrimination protection are you referring to that is inappropriate?
My memory is a bit blurry, but I saw a newsflash on TV about obese people protesting against being called "fat" and threatening to sue various people for psychological damages (go figure), because they couldn't change their fat condition. What shocked me was that a woman in the group kept saying that fat people should be comfortable with their fatness because it was part of who they were, or some bull**** like that.
Perhaps not individually, but as a mass, they are. Surely obsese people don't like being called "fat tub of lard" but in the end they do nothing to improve their condition. ...
Score:5 Insightful? You must be kidding. Clearly this posting is flamebait (and I'm taking it). "In the end they do nothing..." Not one single obese person does anything about being obese?
In my statement I'm obviously overlooking the exceptions. That's why I said "as a mass". Actually, I was paraphrasing Kay from MiB when he said "A person is smart, but the masses are stupid". After all, obesity isn't called an epidemic "just because". What I'm talking about, is that people fail to realize that it's their eating and sedentary habits that make them fat. And that the bad way of eating is inherited from their parents. Right from eating all those extra bread slices at the restaurant, to consuming lots of high fructose sodas, to eating everything on the plate, to eating twice the quantity of snacks because they're "lite".
And don't get me started on the "lose weight fast!" infomercials. I'm still amazed that people fall for that "no diets, no exercise" garbage. But well, if people STILL believe the Earth is 6,000 years old, I shouldn't be surprised about that. But I still am.
More than that, it's essentially meaningless. Americans are not "oblivious" to obesity, and do not "tolerate" drunk-driving deaths.
Perhaps not individually, but as a mass, they are. Surely obsese people don't like being called "fat tub of lard" but in the end they do nothing to improve their condition. They keep eating the same quantities of junk / high-carb food, do from little to no exercise, and even ask not to be "discriminated" for their "condition". See, it's not a problem, it's a disease, and since it's a disease, there's nothing they can do about it. They feel better with themselves, and problem solved.... right? RIGHT?
If you happen to have a blog or website and google it, you'll probably find it placed in a search-magnet - you know, those sites that collect text from the most random webpages and contain no links at all, but later become frontends for sales websites.
I hate those. Hopefully I can mod them down with this new google feature.
More importantly, he lacks the "sarcasm" tag at the end of his post when his tone makes him look completely serious.
Yes, the GGGP post left off this tag. Is that a requirement of sarcasm?
When your writing looks serious, and given the abundance of trolls in slashdot, yes, it is necessary. Why do you think emoticons were invented in the first place?
See, now i viewed the GP as being nonsensical, and somewhat funny. But not nearly as funny as how seriously you took it!
I wouldn't have replied that way if the GGP hadn't been modded INFORMATIVE! :-/
More importantly, he lacks the "sarcasm" tag at the end of his post when his tone makes him look completely serious.
From your answer, I conclude that the term "pop culture" isn't quite the right term. I'd use "scientists' preconceived ideas". Among such ideas are:
* Dinosaurs were like today's lizards. This was a common belief 2 centuries ago.
* T-Rex was the king of dinosaurs, a terrible hunter. New evidence suggest it was more like the king of scavengers.
* Stomach ulcers could not possibly be caused by a bacteria. The discovery of the H. Pilori set them wrong.
* There couldn't be anything like black holes. And it was Einstein who believed this.
* There are 9 planets orbiting the sun. Turns out Pluto isn't even a planet.
See, precisely the point of science is that new theories can replace old theories (and even beliefs). But calling preconceived ideas "pop culture" is stretching it a bit too much. Unless you want to start a debate about Pirates vs. Ninjas :)
In the first place, we don't have the proof that the Neanderthals gave away their technology so that the Homo Sapiens could improve it.
Second, you're mixing up military knowledge with copyright laws, which make both closed source and open source possible. No copyright and anybody can hack your software, improve on it and resell it. Therefore, your analogy does not apply.
Third, open source is completely OFF TOPIC in this discussion!!
I agree. GP is both funny and insightful.
We have known for a long time that Neanderthal had a larger brain than modern human and a sophisticated culture, including burial rites. There was no scientific consensus that Neandethal was stupid.
Define "a long time", please. 100 years? 50 years? 30 years? 20 years?
And brain rot everywhere else.
Except in Nebraska!
May I be first in line for a brain transplant?
This is the first intelligent thing I've heard you say, Pinky.
Expect this discussion to be full of astroturf, red herrings and trolls
Ah, no problem. Just give the red herring to the troll and he'll let you pass the bridge :)
You fail to see the problem. It's not just the rich families which are abducted. It's middle class families, for only a few thousands of dollars. Things have really gotten bad in here. It's no use "fighting poverty" where corruption reaches nearly all judges.
Here's a textual copy of the PDF.
Anathem: (1) In Proto- Orth, a poetic or musical invocation of Our
Mother Hylaea, which since the time of Adrakhones has been the
climax of the daily liturgy (hence the Fluccish word Anthem meaning
a song of great emotional resonance, esp. one that inspires listeners
to sing along). Note: this sense is archaic, and used only in a
ritual context where it is unlikely to be confused with the much
more commonly used sense 2. (2) In New Orth, an aut by which an
incorrigible fraa or suur is ejected from the math and his or her
work sequestered (hence the Fluccish word Anathema meaning intolerable
statements or ideas). See Throwback.
â"the dictionary, 4th edition, A.R. 3000
Extramuros: (1) In Old Orth, literally âoeoutside the walls.â Often used
in reference to the walled city- states of that age. (2) In Middle Orth,
the non- mathic world; the turbulent and violent state of aff airs that
prevailed after the Fall of Baz. (3) In Praxic Orth, geo graph i cal regions
or social classes not yet enlightened by the resurgent wisdom
of the mathic world. (4) In New Orth, similar to sense 2 above, but
often used to denote those settlements immediately surrounding
the walls of a math, implying comparative prosperity, stability, etc.
â"the dictionary, 4th edition, A.R. 3000
Saunt: (1) In New Orth, a term of veneration applied to great thinkers,
almost always posthumously. Note: this word was accepted only
in the Millennial Orth Convox of A.R. 3000. Prior to then it was considered
a misspelling of Savant. In stone, where only upper- case
letters are used, this is rendered SAVANT (or ST. if the stonecarver
is running out of space). During the decline of standards in the decades
that followed the Third Sack, a confusion between the letters
U and V grew commonplace (the âoelazy stonecarver problemâ), and
many began to mistake the word for SAUANT. This soon degenerated
to saunt (now accepted) and even sant (still deprecated). In written
form, St. may be used as an abbreviation for any of these. Within
some traditional orders it is still pronounced âoeSavantâ and obviously
the same is probably true among Millenarians.
â"the dictionary, 4th edition, A.R. 3000
Bulshytt: (1) In Fluccish of the late Praxic Age and early Reconstitution,
a derogatory term for false speech in general, esp. knowing
and deliberate falsehood or obfuscation. (2) In Orth, a more technical
and clinical term denoting speech (typically but not necessarily
commercial or po liti cal) that employs euphemism, con ve nient
vagueness, numbing repetition, and other such rhetorical subterfuges
to create the impression that something has been said. (3)
According to the Knights of Saunt Halikaarn, a radical order of the
2nd Millennium A.R., all speech and writings of the ancient Sphenics;
the Mystagogues of the Old Mathic Age; Praxic Age commercial
and po liti cal institutions; and, since the Reconstitution, anyone
they deemed to have been infected by Procian thinking. Their frequent
and loud use of this word to interrupt lectures, dialogs, private
conversations, etc., exacerbated the divide between Procian
and Halikaarnian orders that characterized the mathic world in
the years leading up to the Third Sack. Shortly before the Third
Sack, all of the Knights of Saunt Halikaarn were Thrown Back, so
little more is known about them (their frequent appearance in
Sæcular entertainments results from confusion between them and
the Incanters).
Usage note: In the mathic world, if the word is suddenly shouted
out in a chalk hall or refectory it brings to mind the events associated
with sense (3) and is therefore to be avoided. Spoken in a moderate
tone of voice, it takes on sense (2), which long ago lost any vulgar
connotations it may once have had. In the Sæculum it is easily confused
Perhaps if Bill Gates hadn't been fired... he wouldn't have ended up creating Microsoft.
How would a world without Microsoft be? Would we have the internet as we know it? Less viruses, probably. But now that I think about it... the internet may have not had the same popularity... Linux would still be for hobbyists... would we have a browser war? What would have happened to specs made by the W3C? Maybe Netscape would still be alive... AND buggy.
Most people are idealistic and want to believe that Bill Gates was the ONLY evil in computing - but what about the "patches welcome" attitude in programming?
Sometimes I'd like to start a contest on "how the world would have been without Microsoft". Would we have social networking sites? CSS 2? Ubuntu? And would the Mac have adopted a Freebsd-based Operating System?
How would the 80x86 computers run, for starters? Would they run Unix? CP/M? Would videogames use even worse copy protection schemes? Would the PC be an actual competitor against Nintendo and Sony? Or maybe, Atari would take the place that the XBOX has now?
I'd love to see the possibilities with my own eyes. Just to satisfy my curiosity.
Put into another way, it is a company A trying to prevent company B from releasing a piece of work , on the ground that company A still has some rights secured for the corresponding IP.
Let's replace Fox with Microsoft, Warner with the community, and IP with Linux. No wonder this case seemed so familiar...
I don't understand how Warner Bros can presumably spend millions of dollars producing a movie without first securing the rights to the work the movie is based on. Do they not have a legal department?
Yes, but it's too busy fighting pirates, YARRR!
Dr Aki was more creepy than sexy.
"More creepy than sexy" -- four words that sum up most of the anime I've been subjected to.
Aw man, they forced you to watch Haruhi? :(
I was not talking about the technical aspects, but about Market Share. It doesn't matter whether your product is superior or not, existing market share is a horrible obstacle to overcome.
OpenSolaris vs. Linux = Linux vs. Windows
Sure, it's Open Source and everything. But the problem is that complex programs like this are often designed with a top-down instead of a bottom-up approach. I mean, this isn't a bazaar, it's a cathedral. Oh, and OpenSolaris is not GPL. *buzz*
There's still one company responsible and only that company will make the changes, because the codebase is so huge that it's a pain in the *** to maintain. Well, eventually many open source projects end up like that, with a huge codebase and with a company. BUT, this wasn't built by the community and it's not likely that it will get enough userbase so that a dev will become interested.
Compare this with the Linux Kernel. Linus message, which was more or less like "Hey guys, I'm making a unix-like kernel, anyone want to join?", was followed by a stampede of developers and testers like you can't imagine.
So, if we want competition, it's very improbable that a cathedral project such as OpenSolaris can compete with Linux, a 100% GPL'ed project built by the whole community.
Maybe it can compete with the bsd clones, but Linux? I don't think so.
Because if they don't, eventually the open source community will reverse engineer all their crap and put it out there for free without any involvement from them and they'll just be left sucking hind tit.
Like the Gimp, wow. Thousands of Adobe users are migrating to it. Right.</sarcasm>
The fact of the matter is, IPv6 is a solution looking for a problem. With IP shortages and the ease of NAT/PAT
And that's NOT a problem? I can't log in remotely to my friend's PC to give him tech support because his stupid ISP is behind a NAT.
Make all porn only reachable through IPv6.
Did you check the post above you?
From the post's link:
We're taking over 100 gigabytes of the most popular "adult entertainment" videos from one of the largest subscription websites on the internet, and giving away access to anyone who can connect to it via IPv6. No advertising, no subscriptions, no registration. If you access the site via IPv4, you get a primer on IPv6, instructions on how to set up IPv6 through your ISP, a list of ISPs that support IPv6 natively, and a discussion forum to share tips and troubleshooting. If you access the site via IPv6 you get instant access to "the goods".
Unfortunately, that won't work, because it's not aimed to the industry. The ones who decide whether the public will use IPv6 or not are the ISPs, and better internet access is definitely NOT in their agenda (Hellooo Comcast!).