I think it's an interesting problem to create a satellite that emits a radio signal that can only be used by some people, but not others, as in the "military" and "civilian" signals from these satellites.
I daresay at some point it would be considered a war crime to disrupt GPS signals, in any case, when civilization is much more dependent on them, as I think it is reasonable to expect in the future.
When is free trade too free? The summary itself says that Icahn bought a bunch of shares in the last week--after Yahoo rejected MS's bid. How deep is his stake, really, when he's a speculator and not a true investor?
I don't know...just doesn't seem completely right to me. I know he's acted well within his rights. But I also know he's looking for a short term gain in turning these shares around, as opposed to actually helping Yahoo the company survive. Which it does not if MS injests and wastes it, which I think (and apparently Mr. Yang thinks) would happen.
Just because people state intentions, doesn't mean they can actually accomplish their goals. The more you suppress these people, the stronger they will get, until it explodes in an orgasm of violence.
Let them have their day, and the people will tire of their fanatacism--people, on the whole, everywhere, are very moderate.
Just look what happened in Algeria. An Islamist government got elected, and the secular apparatus went to war with them. Finally the war ended, and the Islamists were voted in...and voted out again a few years later.
By suppressing these people, you give them credibility they wouldn't have otherwise, most of the time.
Why grace them with the title "inventors", when they haven't actually made the thing. They are science fiction writers, or futurists, at best.
And since the thing is only an idea at this stage, does that make science fiction stories with similar ideas prior art? My God what a mess the patent system is right now...nuke it.
Yeah, but it is interesting to consider what will happen in the future, when GPL software is, in fact, the norm--certainly for platforms. It'll happen, I promise you.
Still, kinda awkward to suggest that GPL is somehow abusing it's monopoly position, evnen then.
Although I think you make a good point, your real point is that Freenet is not the system for you. If there is content that you would not host, then you are not a Freenet Man (or Woman).
You don't want what it offers bad enough, in other words. And that's fine.
I'm beginning to be terrified that the war on copyright infrigement, and the war on terror, are getting the momentum that the War on Drugs now has, with no end in sight even though it plainly does not, and cannot, ever work.
But seriously, here in Houston we recently put up red-light traffic cameras. However, people's behavoir at red lights immediately changed when they announced they were GOING to do it, not when they actually put them up.
You really must have some form of user moderation. Slashdot is one example, but I know it confuses less savvy folks. The Houston Chronicle has finally gotten what I think is a reasonable and yet simple recommendation system ( http://www.chron.com/ ).
It's amazing how I've come to expect user comments after stories. Sometimes they're even quite informative, insightful, or whatever. Sometimes in local news the people involved or witnesses may even post about inaccuracies in the article.
He and Gates surely control enough stock to do as they please. After all, if the board hasn't come after them after six billion down the hole for Vista, they aren't going to come after them for anything.
Both those guys are convinced they're geniuses, too, which is not conducive to stepping aside for someone else. And to be fair, given the corporate culture they've carefully nurtured, I seriously doubt any of those waiting in the wings could do a better job, anyway, so fuck it you know?
I bet they still both wish they were Steve Jobs tho.;-)
Another way you're wrong is that you're not considering that Google, and others, will still have to pay for the access priviledge. They just get to where whatever shoes they want when crossing your lawn:-)
Your analogy would be perfect, if this were a nice lot on a lake. But it's not. It's the public airwaves being auctioned out here, which belong to all of us.
The "guy" in your analogy would be us, the American people.
I have certain people who play my game who simply _cannot_ download from my website--although it works great for me and most others.
I generally suspect malware on their clients, but I don't know for sure and it has long baffled me, because it is not rare at all. Something like 40% or so. Surely the malware problem is not so bad that 40% of net users can't download a 130 MB file via http without corruption?
(The takedown notice is not yet up at Chilling Effects, but Google's page has a link that will take you there when it is.)
No, Google's page has a link to Chilling Effects homepage. Where did the submitter get the idea that "it will take you there when it is"?
Please people, I know it's a bit trivial but please put on your reading comprehension hats.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it's an interesting problem to create a satellite that emits a radio signal that can only be used by some people, but not others, as in the "military" and "civilian" signals from these satellites.
I daresay at some point it would be considered a war crime to disrupt GPS signals, in any case, when civilization is much more dependent on them, as I think it is reasonable to expect in the future.
When is free trade too free? The summary itself says that Icahn bought a bunch of shares in the last week--after Yahoo rejected MS's bid. How deep is his stake, really, when he's a speculator and not a true investor?
I don't know...just doesn't seem completely right to me. I know he's acted well within his rights. But I also know he's looking for a short term gain in turning these shares around, as opposed to actually helping Yahoo the company survive. Which it does not if MS injests and wastes it, which I think (and apparently Mr. Yang thinks) would happen.
Do you think that's air you're breathing?
How depressing....
I costs them time to process the payments.
It won't cost you time to schedule them via your PC banking, however.
If everybody did it, hilarity would ensue.
What do you mean by that? It's done forever? Bad at the moment?
Scam. Nothing to see here, move along.
If you made this comment on a normal website, yes, it would be controversial. But this is Slashdot...baby experiments are fine, move on.
Just because people state intentions, doesn't mean they can actually accomplish their goals. The more you suppress these people, the stronger they will get, until it explodes in an orgasm of violence.
Let them have their day, and the people will tire of their fanatacism--people, on the whole, everywhere, are very moderate.
Just look what happened in Algeria. An Islamist government got elected, and the secular apparatus went to war with them. Finally the war ended, and the Islamists were voted in...and voted out again a few years later.
By suppressing these people, you give them credibility they wouldn't have otherwise, most of the time.
Why grace them with the title "inventors", when they haven't actually made the thing. They are science fiction writers, or futurists, at best.
And since the thing is only an idea at this stage, does that make science fiction stories with similar ideas prior art? My God what a mess the patent system is right now...nuke it.
I'm constantly amazed by many company's aversion to sharing their source. I don't even mean GPL, but even with a super proprietary license.
The problem, I think, is that they think they are very clever. But coding is not really all that hard, generally speaking.
Yeah, but it is interesting to consider what will happen in the future, when GPL software is, in fact, the norm--certainly for platforms. It'll happen, I promise you.
Still, kinda awkward to suggest that GPL is somehow abusing it's monopoly position, evnen then.
Although I think you make a good point, your real point is that Freenet is not the system for you. If there is content that you would not host, then you are not a Freenet Man (or Woman).
You don't want what it offers bad enough, in other words. And that's fine.
I'm beginning to be terrified that the war on copyright infrigement, and the war on terror, are getting the momentum that the War on Drugs now has, with no end in sight even though it plainly does not, and cannot, ever work.
Then I'm all for putting up surveillance posts!
But seriously, here in Houston we recently put up red-light traffic cameras. However, people's behavoir at red lights immediately changed when they announced they were GOING to do it, not when they actually put them up.
People are stupid.
Your the first Brit who lives in the US I've heard say this. Out of like six or seven.
Please, please, pirate the game I've been working on for the last two years: http://www.singularityfps.com/
You really must have some form of user moderation. Slashdot is one example, but I know it confuses less savvy folks. The Houston Chronicle has finally gotten what I think is a reasonable and yet simple recommendation system ( http://www.chron.com/ ). It's amazing how I've come to expect user comments after stories. Sometimes they're even quite informative, insightful, or whatever. Sometimes in local news the people involved or witnesses may even post about inaccuracies in the article.
He and Gates surely control enough stock to do as they please. After all, if the board hasn't come after them after six billion down the hole for Vista, they aren't going to come after them for anything.
;-)
Both those guys are convinced they're geniuses, too, which is not conducive to stepping aside for someone else. And to be fair, given the corporate culture they've carefully nurtured, I seriously doubt any of those waiting in the wings could do a better job, anyway, so fuck it you know?
I bet they still both wish they were Steve Jobs tho.
Another way you're wrong is that you're not considering that Google, and others, will still have to pay for the access priviledge. They just get to where whatever shoes they want when crossing your lawn :-)
Your analogy would be perfect, if this were a nice lot on a lake. But it's not. It's the public airwaves being auctioned out here, which belong to all of us.
The "guy" in your analogy would be us, the American people.
So what, you suppport it?
You seem to think you have a choice in the matter. That's my point--perhaps we don't.
I have certain people who play my game who simply _cannot_ download from my website--although it works great for me and most others.
I generally suspect malware on their clients, but I don't know for sure and it has long baffled me, because it is not rare at all. Something like 40% or so. Surely the malware problem is not so bad that 40% of net users can't download a 130 MB file via http without corruption?
No, Google's page has a link to Chilling Effects homepage. Where did the submitter get the idea that "it will take you there when it is"? Please people, I know it's a bit trivial but please put on your reading comprehension hats.