When ever I hear about disclosures in large industries such as Banking, I realize that a lot of the time the news is realeased for a purpose: Whatever industry is trying to create a climate of some concept out into a collective delusion.
It seems to me that we are hearing so much about the release of personal data because the Banking and Finance Industries know that the system that they use to verify customers is broken and needs to be fixed. So instead of them creating a system of their own and competing in the marketplace for identification verification, they want the government to pay to but in arduous and verifiable identification systems. That way the costs of the system are put upon the heads of the tax-payers of the USA.
And so we see that Banking and Finance industries are doing what they always do, using their huge amount of power to get governments to spend money on their pet issues. And in the meantime they seek to create a huge and burdensome national security infrastructure that will not be sustainable long term.
I thought that I would be dead by 30, but I always lived like I wouldn't be.
No regrets.
Regrets are a waste of time.
If there is something you should have known and you are the type who loves to wallow in regrets, it pretty much doesn't matter what you knew because you have a perverse desire to imagine some golden age in the past when you shoulda, coulda, woulda. And you will still be in your waller because that is what you want.
What a waste of time imagining a fictional better past is! Live each moment like it is the start of your infinite now and don't buy into the world of regrets and shoulda's. Face each moment, each day, like you are new and fresh and alive and greatful to just have air and water and food and a warm and dry place to sleep. Know that all is well even as you feel all can be better. Screw regret and trying to live in the fantasies of imagined pasts. Just my point of view.
If style sheets are working one could set up the default style for A tags to have rel="nofollow"
Then the page should always include that as part of the A tag attribute list.
My experience with style sheets is that they don't work consistently accross browsers. So while they are a good idea, it is important to be able to use the attribute list as well.
If style sheets work, though, a rel : nofollow in the style for the link should take care of the issues that you mention. But style sheets don't work consistently as I have noticed by viewing pages in different browsers.
A little off topic: I love your sig because it sticks it to the comment spammers from that litigious company in CA.
And I have often thought that it would be good to have a way to spider the content to catch all references to that product that you mention. But if I did that I wouldn't see your awesome parady of the offensive content.
We need a way to surround a parady or joke something that says that what you have is a parady and not comment spam. But then if we have that what stops people from using that to push their message?
Now that we have a way to describe the marketting that goes on here at/., comment spam, with some companies being very egregious in their trolling and posting of veiled rave reviews for dupious products, will/. now have a moderation for some posts as comment spam?
a post that reads as follows could be marked as comment spam:
Yes, I understand how the tsunami was so terrible, and while I was on line I downloaded a song on my new product name here which is from that great company name of a fruit here from Cupertino, and aren't they the best company in the world and I think they rock.
So,/., can you implement a moderate as comment spam feature?
The reason that one creates layers in code is to allow for hooking into the code later with patches and modifications that maintain the idiom of the other layers.
That is why there is a 7 layer stack for communications. 7 layers! but why, that is too complex! However, when looking at it from a position of understanding you see the elegance of it. The abstraction allows for an elegant idiom with the various layers!
And if a layer is not used it is proxied. That way if real code is needed later the hooks are already in place to do this. If you don't need a layer of the stack it calls a proxy which calls the layer below. A complier will optimize away these calls. So the actual code doesn't do anything at this layer unless the calls to it are implemented.
abstraction is thus a very useful tool. A module or an object can be an idea that is a useful tool for the programmer. This is why one doesn't write to the bytes in hardware, but to a device driver. This is why one doesn't write directly to the harddrive but to a layer that takes requests from all processes to do the writing.
And so I conclude that abstraction is often much simpler in the long run. I think that what you may object to is obfuscation.
If you have XML you can suck it into a DOM parser and then do node walking. Then you can write the data from the nodes into structures in whatever language you have. And for this reason it makes a great way to feed data from one program to another.
It is a very inefficient way to have the data for a program while the program is running.
I agree that XML can be whatever you want it to be, and I agree that it is very over-hyped and the OOPSLA mongers, who make their money trying to confuse people into buying into their solutions, are behind XML in a large way.
XML is still good for many things.
But it is very bad for high-performance programming like robotics or video games, or graphics or music. It is a good thing to use to store data, or at startup in a real-time process.
For web pages having the tags around all the data makes XML formated pages very easy to spider. And for that reason alone it is very useful to use in web pages. But that XML will look just like HTML.
So don't disregard XML all the way. But please do continue your health skepticism about it. The object-tool mongers caused a lot of problems and a lot of grief for many engineering products by selling tools that were designed by amatuers and supposed to work in real-world real-time situations where they just couldn't hack it.
Were there ever any refunds made for any of these so-called tools? These professors got rich selling their seminars and a lot of very good companies got duped.
That is so obfuscated that because I wrapped my code up in to xml tags, it just disappeared. I guess I should have expected that to happen as/. always allows for tags.
How dumb of me. .. not remembering those & lt ; (no spaces)
Let's see if I can do this again.
<tag_bracket position = start><</tag_bracket>
And then for the end bracket do the same as follows: <tag_bracket position = end>></tag_bracket>
and for binary, 0xff:
<binary BIGENDIAN ="true"> <bit position = "1">1</bit> <bit position = "2">1</bit> <bit position = "3">1</bit> <bit position = "4">1</bit> <bit position = "5">1</bit> <bit position = "6">1</bit> <bit position = "7">1</bit> <bit position = "8">1</bit> </binary>
And, of course, to make it even more obsure apply the first bracket substitution scheme to the bit data.
PS: When trying to show xml tags on a post, it really is important to preview to make sure you got all the escape codes correct.
Oh, yet another reason why XML is overly complicated for a programming language. Why can't they just keep it as a markup langage?
Write a program to replace every tag in the manner that I suggest, and then run the xml through that as many times as you feel is humourous enough.
I like XML, it is a cute way to store data but it is a very band-width intensive way to store data.
How about this way to store data:
for the binary byte 0xff:
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
And then, because it means the same thing, it doesn't matter what order you put the bit fields in, because the data is all there, isn't it? And if you can't see that you must be blind.
XML is good for somethings, but not for all. And it works very well at seeming to be hard to understand (which it isn't) and so it seems like magic.
I still like just using a structure definition with well-defined types of a known number of bytes and known byte order.
Do any of the OOPSLA monger really believe that we are still fooled by their non-sense?
My friend used to love to pick up old TVs, plug them in overnight to charge them up, bring them to the shooting range and blow a hole through them so they would explode.
I remember hearing about a certain type of product that ran a particular type of operating system that is used to make things work very reliably.
And the code was built for this product with all debug symbols resident in the image because it was easier to debug.
And so if you knew the way to hook into which ever port it was that was not secure and you knew the password then you could log on and do whatever you want, download the code, steal the whole product.
And I am sure that is why there are so many companies doing these exact same kinds of devices now.
So, it isn't just windows that leaves the barn door wide open. You just have to know where the barn is. . .
I think that for a very large capacity harddrive if you could get dram prices way down you could set up a screaming psuedo-drive in a dram space.
The noted problems with flash (sram) is that it has limited numbers of writes. But it retains the data when it is powered down.
And so if you design a drive that has a continuous source of power, then you could use cheeper dram for a solid state drive. That would mean that the device would have to have continuous power. And so it would need a very reliable batter power system on it.
All of this seems very doable. Anyone know of such a device?
If you are running systems with very large block of memory allocated for very large objects, and I mean very large, then the Virtual memory system may indeed be thrashing your harddrive. How? Because the V-mem system will continuously swap out blocks of memory, back and forth, back and forth, from the swap area to the physical memory.
I have seen this when we had an amatuer engineer who stupidly made his data-structures 250 meg each. Pretty stupid, but there it was.
This could be the problem with someone who keeps needing to swap out harddrives. The drive might just be worked to death.
Yes, you are wrong about somethings I am sure. So is everyone. And do you really want me correcting you all of the time? I would have to follow you around and listen to everything that you say. And I can be kind of a jerk, plus you would have to put up with me stinking up your house and eating all your food ; ) But on a serious note, because I was troubled that I made the error about corporate vs cooperate:
If you have trouble understanding people when they are speaking you can always ask them for a better explanation of what they mean. Most people will gladly provide this.
Ebonics has been around for a long time, and the style of how it works was well documented by linguists at least by the 1920's as far as I know. Many people confuse urban slang with Ebonics. I understand how slang can be annoying. But Ebonics is not slang. It has simple rules that are about the way that words are pronounced. Most notable is that it often seems to drop a final consonent sound so that non-Ebonics listeners might think that the Ebonics speaker has the tense of a verb incorrect.
As far as modern English Grammer goes, I was thinking 1750's or so. The elites did not speak French in England at that time except if they were talking to Frech people.
A good example of a perscriptive vs descriptive view of language: The description of English allowed for a double negative because that was the way that people actually talked. The perscriptive grammatarians decided that they could have none of that. So they perscribed a rule that prohibited the use of the double negative. They did what they thought was logical. And I can see how they would think that this was correct. Modern linquistics doesn't perscribe speech.
There are very good reasons to have correct grammer for many things: Laws, contracts, instructions, directions, etc.
But in the case of people with their automatic typing and their thought overflowing, some times the grammer nazi's just kill the whole flow of what is going on.
I agree that if you don't understand a post then you should ask for a grammer correction or to clarify a typo.
But there is a certain type of poster who just decides to parse up everything that anyone posts and pretend that they don't understand just because they don't like the jist of what the post is all about. That kind of behavior bothers me.
I agree, and was upset at myself, for mistakeing the idea of cooperation with corporation. And I looked up corporation and found that it does come from corpus. But it is true that some people say 'they' and some 'it'. Both are correct. And my point is that both are correct and if the only thing you can say about that other post is an it vs they lameass flame, then why post anything at all?
Correct grammer is very important in formal documents, directions, instructions, contracts, laws, etc. But in everyday person to person discourse the one who insists on formal grammer drives intelligent people away. And this type of person maybe doesn't understand why people are loath to have any kind of discusion with him/her.
So, do yourself a favor, forgive small errors and only insist on a clarification when you are actually confused by what someone else says. Or, if you must, and as a debating tactic you can parse the words of people and act confused as if they are stupid. But you just serve to annoying and possibly enrage the other person. If you get off on doing that, then fine. But just don't expect that other person to feel respect for you.
If you get the proper equipment you can have a reasonably fast connection for everyone.
Naturally if you have people who have high-bandwidth needs, then a local system wouldn't work.
But if it were people in an appartment building and they had one broadband internet connection, and they all did low bandwidth things, then for the cost of some hubs and some wire they could all share one connection.
You are correct about DSL being too slow for this. And you are correct that this won't work if everyone is bittorrenting all day long.
But for people who just want to read news and get the occasional email, this will work find and they all don't have to pay for an ISP.
If you live in a two family or a six family appartment building this is a great idea. One ISP connection for everyone.
Also: It really isn't that hard to wire up a neighborhood. The equipment will just come down in price as time goes on.
If you are legitiamately sharing legal things, then why try and entrap these A-holes?
Don't you realize that many movie and hollywood types are connected players in a much bigger game?
They have a right to try and protect what they produce. So they are doing what they think is correct. It seems that what they do is wrong to me and to you, yes. But why would you want to mess with these people? They will eat you alive and spit you out and feel good about it. Your crys of "gee, it was a honey pot, I didn't do anything wrong" won't make a damn bit of difference. Meanwhile your life will be ruined and you will loose your computer and your reputation and may even go bankrupt in the process. What will happen to them? they will go to their beachhouse and have another drink and laugh about the dork who dared to mess with them.
The best way to deal with this is to go about your day-to-day whatever you do and stop trying to poke the grizzly-bear in the eye.
And if you aren't actually doing anything illeagel you won't get into trouple.
Everyone knows that there are currupt parts of government and industry. These powerful forces will do whatever they can to have their way. And they don't really care what happens to people who taunt them and try to make them look the fool.
So move on and do something else with your time that doesn't involve creating scenarios with you as the David that takes down the evil Gollith of the Movie/Music Industry.
That I had pulled from a beach along Big Sur. I took it out of my suitcase because the case was over 50 lbs and I didn't want to have to pay an extra $25 for an overweight bag.
the airport security guide was very interested and wanted to know where I got the jade. I told him where and he told me that he'd always planned to go to that cove and do exactly what I did.
They let me carry my stones onto the plane.
The try to genetically engineer infertility
on
Plant a Seed, Get Sued?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
A lot of agro-business seeds will not produce the same kinds of flowers in a second generation.
Also agro-business seeds often will be infertile in a second generation.
The large Agro companies get huge tax writeoffs. They get large subsidies. Meanwhile they buy up smaller seed producing companies and then stop selling the old line seeds that will polinate and reproduce themselves.
There is a level of charity required by the wealthy in that if they do not provide it then the poor who are down on their luck might show up with clubs and beat their skulls in.
This isn't something that I want to happen, but the history of the world seems to show that this is the case.
And so society sets up systems of affirmative action and welfare. The Classical Liberal point of view called this Social Responsibility. The Civil Right Movement called this Affirmative Action.
For example if there were a volcano on an island where there were rich and poor living, society will not allow the rich to charge the poor to ride on the rich man's boat. During crises there is always accomdation for the poor. The Bible recommends that people give 10% of their income as a Tithe. And so you are incorrect in saying that hter is never justification for making the rich pay for the poor.
During WWII the taxes on the rich were very high. Why? Because if the Nazi's had won the war then they would have exterminated most of the rich. So the rich had to pay for the poor to get the GI bill after the war. It was justified because the poor saved the rich from the Nazis and from the Communists.
I do not buy into the Marxist politics of envy. Nor do I buy into the super-wealthy point of view that some of the rich have where the great unwashed are trying to take away all of their well-deserved (and mostly inherited) wealth.
As far a Affirmative Action goes I will end with one question: Does any wealthy person whos rich parents send to college ever complain that they got to go to college for free? So why do so many wealthy complain when a poor and deserving kid gets grant money and gets to go to college for free? The fact is that many wealthy understand the awesome responsibility of inherited wealth. These are the very people who set up scholarships for the poor.
And when people are miserly the taxes are set up to redistribute some of the awesome wealth that the trust-fund class has to those of us who don't even know what a trust fund is.
Slashdot Mirror
They should send the tapes the same way that they send cash, with the same level of security.
When ever I hear about disclosures in large industries such as Banking, I realize that a lot of the time the news is realeased for a purpose: Whatever industry is trying to create a climate of some concept out into a collective delusion.
It seems to me that we are hearing so much about the release of personal data because the Banking and Finance Industries know that the system that they use to verify customers is broken and needs to be fixed. So instead of them creating a system of their own and competing in the marketplace for identification verification, they want the government to pay to but in arduous and verifiable identification systems. That way the costs of the system are put upon the heads of the tax-payers of the USA.
And so we see that Banking and Finance industries are doing what they always do, using their huge amount of power to get governments to spend money on their pet issues.
And in the meantime they seek to create a huge and burdensome national security infrastructure that will not be sustainable long term.
I thought that I would be dead by 30, but I always lived like I wouldn't be.
No regrets.
Regrets are a waste of time.
If there is something you should have known and you are the type who loves to wallow in regrets, it pretty much doesn't matter what you knew because you have a perverse desire to imagine some golden age in the past when you shoulda, coulda, woulda. And you will still be in your waller because that is what you want.
What a waste of time imagining a fictional better past is! Live each moment like it is the start of your infinite now and don't buy into the world of regrets and shoulda's. Face each moment, each day, like you are new and fresh and alive and greatful to just have air and water and food and a warm and dry place to sleep. Know that all is well even as you feel all can be better.
Screw regret and trying to live in the fantasies of imagined pasts.
Just my point of view.
Stan is awesome.
He isn't part of an ilk.
If style sheets are working one could set up the default style for A tags to have rel="nofollow"
Then the page should always include that as part of the A tag attribute list.
My experience with style sheets is that they don't work consistently accross browsers. So while they are a good idea, it is important to be able to use the attribute list as well.
If style sheets work, though, a rel : nofollow in the style for the link should take care of the issues that you mention. But style sheets don't work consistently as I have noticed by viewing pages in different browsers.
A little off topic:
I love your sig because it sticks it to the comment spammers from that litigious company in CA.
And I have often thought that it would be good to have a way to spider the content to catch all references to that product that you mention. But if I did that I wouldn't see your awesome parady of the offensive content.
We need a way to surround a parady or joke something that says that what you have is a parady and not comment spam. But then if we have that what stops people from using that to push their message?
I like to call them free speech ghettos.
Now that we have a way to describe the marketting that goes on here at /., comment spam, with some companies being very egregious in their trolling and posting of veiled rave reviews for dupious products, will /. now have a moderation for some posts as comment spam?
/., can you implement a moderate as comment spam feature?
a post that reads as follows could be marked as comment spam:
Yes, I understand how the tsunami was so terrible, and while I was on line I downloaded a song on my new product name here which is from that great company name of a fruit here from Cupertino, and aren't they the best company in the world and I think they rock.
So,
How hard could it be?
The reason that one creates layers in code is to allow for hooking into the code later with patches and modifications that maintain the idiom of the other layers.
That is why there is a 7 layer stack for communications. 7 layers! but why, that is too complex! However, when looking at it from a position of understanding you see the elegance of it. The abstraction allows for an elegant idiom with the various layers!
And if a layer is not used it is proxied. That way if real code is needed later the hooks are already in place to do this. If you don't need a layer of the stack it calls a proxy which calls the layer below. A complier will optimize away these calls. So the actual code doesn't do anything at this layer unless the calls to it are implemented.
abstraction is thus a very useful tool. A module or an object can be an idea that is a useful tool for the programmer. This is why one doesn't write to the bytes in hardware, but to a device driver. This is why one doesn't write directly to the harddrive but to a layer that takes requests from all processes to do the writing.
And so I conclude that abstraction is often much simpler in the long run. I think that what you may object to is obfuscation.
If you have XML you can suck it into a DOM parser and then do node walking. Then you can write the data from the nodes into structures in whatever language you have. And for this reason it makes a great way to feed data from one program to another.
It is a very inefficient way to have the data for a program while the program is running.
I agree that XML can be whatever you want it to be, and I agree that it is very over-hyped and the OOPSLA mongers, who make their money trying to confuse people into buying into their solutions, are behind XML in a large way.
XML is still good for many things.
But it is very bad for high-performance programming like robotics or video games, or graphics or music. It is a good thing to use to store data, or at startup in a real-time process.
For web pages having the tags around all the data makes XML formated pages very easy to spider. And for that reason alone it is very useful to use in web pages. But that XML will look just like HTML.
So don't disregard XML all the way. But please do continue your health skepticism about it.
The object-tool mongers caused a lot of problems and a lot of grief for many engineering products by selling tools that were designed by amatuers and supposed to work in real-world real-time situations where they just couldn't hack it.
Were there ever any refunds made for any of these so-called tools? These professors got rich selling their seminars and a lot of very good companies got duped.
HTML escape codes:
< , or less than is lt;
>, or greater than is gt;
and , or amperstand is AMP;
But I am guessing htat you figured that out. I had the same exact problem ; )
That is so obfuscated that because I wrapped my code up in to xml tags, it just disappeared. I guess I should have expected that to happen as /. always allows for tags.
.
How dumb of me. .
not remembering those & lt ; (no spaces)
Let's see if I can do this again.
<tag_bracket position = start><</tag_bracket>
And then for the end bracket do the same as follows:
<tag_bracket position = end>></tag_bracket>
and for binary, 0xff:
<binary BIGENDIAN ="true">
<bit position = "1">1</bit>
<bit position = "2">1</bit>
<bit position = "3">1</bit>
<bit position = "4">1</bit>
<bit position = "5">1</bit>
<bit position = "6">1</bit>
<bit position = "7">1</bit>
<bit position = "8">1</bit>
</binary>
And, of course, to make it even more obsure apply the first bracket substitution scheme to the bit data.
PS: When trying to show xml tags on a post, it really is important to preview to make sure you got all the escape codes correct.
Oh, yet another reason why XML is overly complicated for a programming language. Why can't they just keep it as a markup langage?
I think you can make it even better.
For each '
for each > have the following:
>
Write a program to replace every tag in the manner that I suggest, and then run the xml through that as many times as you feel is humourous enough.
I like XML, it is a cute way to store data but it is a very band-width intensive way to store data.
How about this way to store data:
for the binary byte 0xff:
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
And then, because it means the same thing, it doesn't matter what order you put the bit fields in, because the data is all there, isn't it? And if you can't see that you must be blind.
XML is good for somethings, but not for all.
And it works very well at seeming to be hard to understand (which it isn't) and so it seems like magic.
I still like just using a structure definition with well-defined types of a known number of bytes and known byte order.
Do any of the OOPSLA monger really believe that we are still fooled by their non-sense?
My friend used to love to pick up old TVs, plug them in overnight to charge them up, bring them to the shooting range and blow a hole through them so they would explode.
Don't knock it till you try it.
I remember hearing about a certain type of product that ran a particular type of operating system that is used to make things work very reliably.
And the code was built for this product with all debug symbols resident in the image because it was easier to debug.
And so if you knew the way to hook into which ever port it was that was not secure and you knew the password then you could log on and do whatever you want, download the code, steal the whole product.
And I am sure that is why there are so many companies doing these exact same kinds of devices now.
So, it isn't just windows that leaves the barn door wide open. You just have to know where the barn is. . .
I think that for a very large capacity harddrive if you could get dram prices way down you could set up a screaming psuedo-drive in a dram space.
The noted problems with flash (sram) is that it has limited numbers of writes. But it retains the data when it is powered down.
And so if you design a drive that has a continuous source of power, then you could use cheeper dram for a solid state drive. That would mean that the device would have to have continuous power. And so it would need a very reliable batter power system on it.
All of this seems very doable. Anyone know of such a device?
If you are running systems with very large block of memory allocated for very large objects, and I mean very large, then the Virtual memory system may indeed be thrashing your harddrive. How? Because the V-mem system will continuously swap out blocks of memory, back and forth, back and forth, from the swap area to the physical memory.
I have seen this when we had an amatuer engineer who stupidly made his data-structures 250 meg each. Pretty stupid, but there it was.
This could be the problem with someone who keeps needing to swap out harddrives. The drive might just be worked to death.
I mean dyslectic
Seriously, spelling has always been an issue for me which is why I go off about understanding verses meaning.
Which of the above words do you think that I meant.
If you are really confused then I am sorry.
I can't help you then.
I would rather be dyslectic than less-dicks-ic
Yes, you are wrong about somethings I am sure. So is everyone. And do you really want me correcting you all of the time? I would have to follow you around and listen to everything that you say. And I can be kind of a jerk, plus you would have to put up with me stinking up your house and eating all your food ; )
But on a serious note, because I was troubled that I made the error about corporate vs cooperate:
If you have trouble understanding people when they are speaking you can always ask them for a better explanation of what they mean. Most people will gladly provide this.
Ebonics has been around for a long time, and the style of how it works was well documented by linguists at least by the 1920's as far as I know.
Many people confuse urban slang with Ebonics. I understand how slang can be annoying. But Ebonics is not slang. It has simple rules that are about the way that words are pronounced. Most notable is that it often seems to drop a final consonent sound so that non-Ebonics listeners might think that the Ebonics speaker has the tense of a verb incorrect.
As far as modern English Grammer goes, I was thinking 1750's or so. The elites did not speak French in England at that time except if they were talking to Frech people.
A good example of a perscriptive vs descriptive view of language: The description of English allowed for a double negative because that was the way that people actually talked. The perscriptive grammatarians decided that they could have none of that. So they perscribed a rule that prohibited the use of the double negative. They did what they thought was logical. And I can see how they would think that this was correct. Modern linquistics doesn't perscribe speech.
There are very good reasons to have correct grammer for many things: Laws, contracts, instructions, directions, etc.
But in the case of people with their automatic typing and their thought overflowing, some times the grammer nazi's just kill the whole flow of what is going on.
I agree that if you don't understand a post then you should ask for a grammer correction or to clarify a typo.
But there is a certain type of poster who just decides to parse up everything that anyone posts and pretend that they don't understand just because they don't like the jist of what the post is all about. That kind of behavior bothers me.
I agree, and was upset at myself, for mistakeing the idea of cooperation with corporation. And I looked up corporation and found that it does come from corpus. But it is true that some people say 'they' and some 'it'. Both are correct. And my point is that both are correct and if the only thing you can say about that other post is an it vs they lameass flame, then why post anything at all?
Correct grammer is very important in formal documents, directions, instructions, contracts, laws, etc. But in everyday person to person discourse the one who insists on formal grammer drives intelligent people away. And this type of person maybe doesn't understand why people are loath to have any kind of discusion with him/her.
So, do yourself a favor, forgive small errors and only insist on a clarification when you are actually confused by what someone else says.
Or, if you must, and as a debating tactic you can parse the words of people and act confused as if they are stupid. But you just serve to annoying and possibly enrage the other person. If you get off on doing that, then fine. But just don't expect that other person to feel respect for you.
If you get the proper equipment you can have a reasonably fast connection for everyone.
Naturally if you have people who have high-bandwidth needs, then a local system wouldn't work.
But if it were people in an appartment building and they had one broadband internet connection, and they all did low bandwidth things, then for the cost of some hubs and some wire they could all share one connection.
You are correct about DSL being too slow for this.
And you are correct that this won't work if everyone is bittorrenting all day long.
But for people who just want to read news and get the occasional email, this will work find and they all don't have to pay for an ISP.
If you live in a two family or a six family appartment building this is a great idea. One ISP connection for everyone.
Also: It really isn't that hard to wire up a neighborhood. The equipment will just come down in price as time goes on.
Did this notice show up in a paper form?
If not does it have any leagally binding effect at all?
If this was email how do they even know that you rea d it?
If you are legitiamately sharing legal things, then why try and entrap these A-holes?
Don't you realize that many movie and hollywood types are connected players in a much bigger game?
They have a right to try and protect what they produce. So they are doing what they think is correct. It seems that what they do is wrong to me and to you, yes. But why would you want to mess with these people? They will eat you alive and spit you out and feel good about it.
Your crys of "gee, it was a honey pot, I didn't do anything wrong" won't make a damn bit of difference. Meanwhile your life will be ruined and you will loose your computer and your reputation and may even go bankrupt in the process. What will happen to them? they will go to their beachhouse and have another drink and laugh about the dork who dared to mess with them.
The best way to deal with this is to go about your day-to-day whatever you do and stop trying to poke the grizzly-bear in the eye.
And if you aren't actually doing anything illeagel you won't get into trouple.
Everyone knows that there are currupt parts of government and industry. These powerful forces will do whatever they can to have their way. And they don't really care what happens to people who taunt them and try to make them look the fool.
So move on and do something else with your time that doesn't involve creating scenarios with you as the David that takes down the evil Gollith of the Movie/Music Industry.
That I had pulled from a beach along Big Sur. I took it out of my suitcase because the case was over 50 lbs and I didn't want to have to pay an extra $25 for an overweight bag.
the airport security guide was very interested and wanted to know where I got the jade. I told him where and he told me that he'd always planned to go to that cove and do exactly what I did.
They let me carry my stones onto the plane.
A lot of agro-business seeds will not produce the same kinds of flowers in a second generation.
Also agro-business seeds often will be infertile in a second generation.
The large Agro companies get huge tax writeoffs. They get large subsidies. Meanwhile they buy up smaller seed producing companies and then stop selling the old line seeds that will polinate and reproduce themselves.
This has been going on for a long long time.
There is a level of charity required by the wealthy in that if they do not provide it then the poor who are down on their luck might show up with clubs and beat their skulls in.
This isn't something that I want to happen, but the history of the world seems to show that this is the case.
And so society sets up systems of affirmative action and welfare. The Classical Liberal point of view called this Social Responsibility. The Civil Right Movement called this Affirmative Action.
For example if there were a volcano on an island where there were rich and poor living, society will not allow the rich to charge the poor to ride on the rich man's boat. During crises there is always accomdation for the poor. The Bible recommends that people give 10% of their income as a Tithe. And so you are incorrect in saying that hter is never justification for making the rich pay for the poor.
During WWII the taxes on the rich were very high. Why? Because if the Nazi's had won the war then they would have exterminated most of the rich. So the rich had to pay for the poor to get the GI bill after the war. It was justified because the poor saved the rich from the Nazis and from the Communists.
I do not buy into the Marxist politics of envy. Nor do I buy into the super-wealthy point of view that some of the rich have where the great unwashed are trying to take away all of their well-deserved (and mostly inherited) wealth.
As far a Affirmative Action goes I will end with one question: Does any wealthy person whos rich parents send to college ever complain that they got to go to college for free? So why do so many wealthy complain when a poor and deserving kid gets grant money and gets to go to college for free? The fact is that many wealthy understand the awesome responsibility of inherited wealth. These are the very people who set up scholarships for the poor.
And when people are miserly the taxes are set up to redistribute some of the awesome wealth that the trust-fund class has to those of us who don't even know what a trust fund is.