Many folks call copyright (rather than copyright violations) "theft", but I'd go farther. Being a form of censorship, it is a crime against humanity.
A mere war against lives is limited in scope. With free dissemination of ideas, oppressive regimes don't last long -- note how the first thing they try is blocking communication among protesters and jailing of authors/journalists/etc who dare to voice something that opposes the regime in question. War on culture has effects that last forever. Books burned don't come back.
Imagine a guy in, say, 400BC, who took a spray^H^H^H^H^Hbucket of paint and wrote something on a wall. Like everyone else born during the next 2300 years, his life is gone. Yet a part of him lives on. Culture has the potential to last forever.
Copyright, by massively hampering culture, is the very worst thing we have.
As someone who hates mosquitoes, I'm going to keep cruelly murdering them as long as I'm capable of doing that. And I'm going to torture PETA members the very moment they're declared to be less important than animals, like they consider themselves to be.
No, it's not the biggest. The Deep Space Network has satellites (antennae and data storage servers) around Earth and around Mars. And neither it nor the KM3NeT are solid structures.
The Great Wall is not strictly connected either but at least it consists of large solid fragments that are big on their own. This observatory is merely an array of sensors suspended in the sea. If you want the biggest structure, I'd look at a road system of a country.
You can't have encryption without authentication, otherwise anyone can stand between you and the endpoint and impersonate the other end.
A MitM is somewhat harder than passive eavesdropping, but not in any fundamental way -- there's surprisingly little difference in being able to intercept your communication to read it and being able to modify it on the fly.
large enough and sharp enough to do some serious damage
That's the whole point in a weapon. Sikhs are supposed to use kirpans in defense and for public good, something you can't do with a toy knife.
At the time, a sword was a good weapon, but sadly the gurus didn't include an upgrade clause. I think a Sikh that carries a gun instead of the kirpan would fulfill the intended meaning better.
Not in the UK, the most they're allowed to is a tiny toy knife with dull edges which merely resembles a kirpan. In some cases the most that's allowed is a brooch or a pendant with a depiction of the kirpan.
Still better than Denmark, which disallows carrying a knife in public places at all.
A majority of devices bought today use ARM, and there are no 64 bit ARM machines in production. And due to limited memory, phones and tablets are where heavy optimizations are needed the most.
I did, and I admit this bozo really crossed the line and deserves to be punished, harshly. Still doesn't give the court the right to take away the right to free speech, which is protected by the consitution, unconditionally.
And some of those also believe there is nothing that can excuse censorship, ever. Is a speech libel? Is a speech spam (ie, forcing someone else to listen -- like telemarketer victims, or here, the guy's ex's family)? No? So you have no right to muzzle that person. You USians have this wonderful "just a goddamn piece of paper" which is pretty clear on this matter.
A restraining order that orders the bastard to keep his distance, including electronic means? Sure, that's fine with me. Banning him to write about his ex as long as he doesn't force this onto her or her family? Strictly forbidden by the supreme law of your land.
He did force his speech onto his ex, and should be slapped for that. But that doesn't allow the court to violate the consistution.
I am much less distracted while talking on my hands free blue tooth headset than I am with a passenger in the front seat who I feel like I need to make eye contact with once in awhile during a conversation.
In other words, having Asperger's and thus having a revulsion towards eye contact has a yet another upside? Great!
You see, all that empathy and sociability are overrated:p
That 10% of the screen (10%? Often more like 70%!) occupied by junk is still a distraction. Contrary to what Palant says, being non-animated doesn't make such ads all nice and harmless.
And since I react to ads with revulsion, NOT seeing them makes me more likely to buy the advertised product. That's what the advertiser wants, right?
There's no such thing as "unobtrusive ad", just like there is no "unobtrusive DRM".
With a toggle or not, it's the thought and default what counts, and we need something to recommend to non-technical friends to make their www browsing palatable. I for one go with several partially redundant layers of anti-crap defense and put some time into maintaining them, but ordinary people deserve to have something decent out of the box.
You mean, the organization that did the most book burning in history should be absolved because a few of its adherents dared to preserve heretical writings?
We tend to pay too much heed to the number of people killed, and too little to decreasing the quality of life, when doing charts of "who was the evilest". If you add up the joy of life destroyed by Christianity, it doesn't take a big weighting to put Stalin, Hitler and Mao together to shame. And Islam is a close runner-up.
We do, but the incorrect number is not on Slashdot. Also, I doubt the person who wrote this text could made this mistake, it's quite certainly the editor's fault ("editor" as a person, not as a program).
Slashdot Mirror
It's long proven that Hanlon's Razor doesn't apply to Microsoft and politicians.
Uhm no, mere vandals need to be cherished and promoted; those who work for the Chinese govt won't tell you something is amiss.
It is the companies' fault for not following basic security practices, especially if what they take taxpayers' money for is "intelligence".
Many folks call copyright (rather than copyright violations) "theft", but I'd go farther. Being a form of censorship, it is a crime against humanity.
A mere war against lives is limited in scope. With free dissemination of ideas, oppressive regimes don't last long -- note how the first thing they try is blocking communication among protesters and jailing of authors/journalists/etc who dare to voice something that opposes the regime in question. War on culture has effects that last forever. Books burned don't come back.
Imagine a guy in, say, 400BC, who took a spray^H^H^H^H^Hbucket of paint and wrote something on a wall. Like everyone else born during the next 2300 years, his life is gone. Yet a part of him lives on. Culture has the potential to last forever.
Copyright, by massively hampering culture, is the very worst thing we have.
GPL2: "The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it.".
A program ran through an obfuscator is not source, according to both common sense and the wording of the GPL.
Your torrent is for C++, not C. Still a vital thing to grab, just not what we need for this article.
Interesting that you rushed to the defense of mosquitoes but not PETA :)
As someone who hates mosquitoes, I'm going to keep cruelly murdering them as long as I'm capable of doing that. And I'm going to torture PETA members the very moment they're declared to be less important than animals, like they consider themselves to be.
No, it's not the biggest. The Deep Space Network has satellites (antennae and data storage servers) around Earth and around Mars. And neither it nor the KM3NeT are solid structures.
The Great Wall is not strictly connected either but at least it consists of large solid fragments that are big on their own. This observatory is merely an array of sensors suspended in the sea. If you want the biggest structure, I'd look at a road system of a country.
You can't have encryption without authentication, otherwise anyone can stand between you and the endpoint and impersonate the other end.
A MitM is somewhat harder than passive eavesdropping, but not in any fundamental way -- there's surprisingly little difference in being able to intercept your communication to read it and being able to modify it on the fly.
Advertising is a fantasy.
This is what this law intends to fix.
Get over yourself. Nobody needs that kind of help.
Wrong, if such advertising wouldn't work for a vast majority of the population, companies wouldn't use it.
That's a problem with the UK, not the Sikh religion.
large enough and sharp enough to do some serious damage
That's the whole point in a weapon. Sikhs are supposed to use kirpans in defense and for public good, something you can't do with a toy knife.
At the time, a sword was a good weapon, but sadly the gurus didn't include an upgrade clause. I think a Sikh that carries a gun instead of the kirpan would fulfill the intended meaning better.
Not in the UK, the most they're allowed to is a tiny toy knife with dull edges which merely resembles a kirpan. In some cases the most that's allowed is a brooch or a pendant with a depiction of the kirpan.
Still better than Denmark, which disallows carrying a knife in public places at all.
No, this just means Windows is compiled with crappy optimizations. You can build Firefox in the conventional one unit at a time mode just as well.
Seriously, anyone who modded you up has none of that slightest clue you're talking about.
A majority of devices bought today use ARM, and there are no 64 bit ARM machines in production. And due to limited memory, phones and tablets are where heavy optimizations are needed the most.
I did, and I admit this bozo really crossed the line and deserves to be punished, harshly. Still doesn't give the court the right to take away the right to free speech, which is protected by the consitution, unconditionally.
What about a week but with a link to proceed to the content anyway?
Don't worry, some of us live outside the US.
And some of those also believe there is nothing that can excuse censorship, ever. Is a speech libel? Is a speech spam (ie, forcing someone else to listen -- like telemarketer victims, or here, the guy's ex's family)? No? So you have no right to muzzle that person. You USians have this wonderful "just a goddamn piece of paper" which is pretty clear on this matter.
A restraining order that orders the bastard to keep his distance, including electronic means? Sure, that's fine with me. Banning him to write about his ex as long as he doesn't force this onto her or her family? Strictly forbidden by the supreme law of your land.
He did force his speech onto his ex, and should be slapped for that. But that doesn't allow the court to violate the consistution.
I am much less distracted while talking on my hands free blue tooth headset than I am with a passenger in the front seat who I feel like I need to make eye contact with once in awhile during a conversation.
In other words, having Asperger's and thus having a revulsion towards eye contact has a yet another upside? Great!
You see, all that empathy and sociability are overrated :p
That 10% of the screen (10%? Often more like 70%!) occupied by junk is still a distraction. Contrary to what Palant says, being non-animated doesn't make such ads all nice and harmless.
And since I react to ads with revulsion, NOT seeing them makes me more likely to buy the advertised product. That's what the advertiser wants, right?
There's no such thing as "unobtrusive ad", just like there is no "unobtrusive DRM".
With a toggle or not, it's the thought and default what counts, and we need something to recommend to non-technical friends to make their www browsing palatable. I for one go with several partially redundant layers of anti-crap defense and put some time into maintaining them, but ordinary people deserve to have something decent out of the box.
You mean, the organization that did the most book burning in history should be absolved because a few of its adherents dared to preserve heretical writings?
We tend to pay too much heed to the number of people killed, and too little to decreasing the quality of life, when doing charts of "who was the evilest". If you add up the joy of life destroyed by Christianity, it doesn't take a big weighting to put Stalin, Hitler and Mao together to shame. And Islam is a close runner-up.
We do, but the incorrect number is not on Slashdot. Also, I doubt the person who wrote this text could made this mistake, it's quite certainly the editor's fault ("editor" as a person, not as a program).
Uhm, it's obvious something dropped <sup> tags. Just like, for example, Slashdot does.
Try this: 2<sup>80</sup> -> 280. Not the writer's fault, the blame lies on editors who didn't notice their software mutilates basic harmless tags.