Success, success, success!. Tonight I attended my first 2600 meeting. For many, in Campbell, CA(near San Jose, CA) it was their first as well. Everyone was upset about DeCSS for a variety of reasons. Myself, I felt the MPAA, was committing fraud and attacking the first amendment. If you look at the back of a DVD movie case you will see no mention of the license terms and thus a reasonable person would assume that if they purchase/rent the disc that they can play it back with whatever player they own(be it a $1000 sony unit or an open-source linux player based on DeCSS). So I, being the libertarian, took to the streets to fight against fraud and the assault on the first amendment rights of those seeking to expose this fraud and how to circumvent it. One of my partners in flyer distribution, a socialist, sought to stop the MPAA from creating a monopoly on DVD players. So here were two people, with different points of view on various issues coming together to protest a greater evil. We had no problem distributing the flyers all throughout downtown Campbell in video stores, bars, restaurants, or just to passerbys on the street. We were very polite to people and asked if we could "give them a flyer". Very few people said no. Some wished to discuss the issue further, so we were prepared to present our point of view and we encouraged them to visit the websites to get as much information as possible before they made up their own minds. The only business that asked us to stop distributing flyers was Barnes and Noble. However, they were very polite in their request and we were very polite in leaving. Keep the fight going on many fronts and we should have success. Stuart Eichert
History has shown us that ALL regulations have thwarted innovation. Look at when the government granted AT&T a monopoly on phone service. Look at regulation of cable television, airline industry, electricity. When deregulation came innovation(and lower prices) took off. The government only acts in their own self interest to keep themselves in power. Never be suckered into believing that they "regulate" in order for the good of the citizenry. If you'd like to read more about regulation take a look at the articles at The Cato Institute, Reason magazine, and The Regulation Homepage. And yes I agree with you that the question is incredibly loaded. Stuart Eichert
This is a difficult point. However it is probably more related to Civil Asset Forfeiture law, rather than the 5th amendment. Cato has some great articles on asset forfeiture and how US citizens have basically given up their property rights. I would argue that Kevin's files are his own intellectual property , in whatever form, and that he has a right to have them returned to him. Keeping the files, because they might have something "BAD" in them, is the assumption of guilt. With the exception of the IRS all federal agencies must assume you are innoncent until proven guilty. By the government's logic they can seize all of my property and hold it indefinitely until I tell them everything they want to know. I thought that was called "extortion". Stuart Eichert
No offense, but when I think of Slashdot, I don't think of Holland, MI, and the position you're bringing up isn't exactly unique in America. Many small communities have already initiated censorware projects, and many more already have public petition ballot laws.
The notion of "community standards" is very relavent to a Slashdot audience. Many, who read Slashdot, produce information for the public to consume. They are interested in any legal issue that would prohibit some members of their audience from accessing their content. In the past we have seen instances of "community standards" used to fine or imprison people in one state for providing pornography to those in another(like the case where somebody in Tennesse downloaded pictures from a porn business in Oregon, or something like that). The Internet does not like censorship at any level, local, regional, national, or international. Local politics are always important because often that is where the government has the most control over our lives.
I know Slashdot likes to take on the Causes of the Geek(tm), but I think there comes a time when one has to step back and take a look at exactly what is going on. We have a small community in America, typical of many, I'll assume. Through the workings of democracy, they manage to get a controversial issue on the ballot. A large group of people think this is an initiative that should be enacted. Another large group of people think this is an initiative that shouldn't even be considered. We're not talking about anything groundbreaking here. Moreover, this whole issue isn't even being determined by lawmakers; it's being determined by the people. That's the way it should be.
It is not the way it should be. We live in a constitutional republic, not a democracy. In a democracy the people can vote to do literally anything(like say execute a segment of the population for their religious beliefs). A constitution restricts the power of lawmakers from infringe upon our basic rights(like free speech, religion , etc.). You made another good point about government run libraries and that is that you have to expect them to put in place their rules, which will undoubtedly be motivated by politics. Libraries should be run by non-profit organizations, universities, etc., not governments. I would suggest to the AFA that they organize themselves in the area, form a non-profit and create a "family friendly" library.
I read over the AFA's web page and outside of using the powers of the state I think they have the right idea for civilized protest. In the past it seems they have expressed their opinions to broadcasters, advertisers, etc. and let them know that they would stop watching shows, buying products, etc. I.e. they voted with their dollars. In some cases broadcasters and advertisers responded. This is not government censorship, this is capitalism in action.
Another reason why this story is valuable is touched upon in your last paragraphs. When it comes to your down you will worry about it. Well then the information provided from Holland, MI should assist you in how to deal with this issue when it comes up locally.
And yes, you should vote libertarian so you don't have to worry about garbage like this. Stuart Eichert
I look at this differently. While I would not contact a member of a foreign government with hopes of influencing his political decision, I would contact another person in a foreign country to give them my opinion on their beliefs/ideas if I thought it was worth my time. Just because someone is a senator/judge/president, etc. doesn't mean they are not a person and thus not worth sharing your ideas with. Part of this whole "Internet thing" is the idea of no borders to free thought. If you want to express an opinion to anyone, anywhere, go for it. Stuart Eichert U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
Speaking of double standards. I feel the many protestors who tried to imprison people in their hotels and the convention center expect a double standard. In the USA the right to peacefully assemble is granted to everyone, not just protestors but also WTO delegates. Imprisoning someone in their hotel and preventing their free assembly is an infringement on their rights. How would say the AFL/CIO protestors like it if a bunch of pro-WTO demonstrators imprisoned them in their hotels and stopped them from assembling in the stadium? Stuart Eichert U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
Also, you have to consider this: Blocking traffic, stringing up banners, and even smashing windows is not violence. It is at worst disruption. Windows don't have feelings, and putting yourself in someone's way is a far cry from hurting them.
People have the right to peacefully assemble, be them environmental/labor protestors or delegates to a WTO convention. So putting yourself in someone's way as they try to peacefully assemble is threatening them with violence if they try to exercise their right. The police/riot squad were correct in removing these protestors from the convention center in order to allow the delegates/reporters to peacefully assemble inside the convention center. Often radicals forget that everybody has rights, regardless of their viewpoint. In so doing, these radicals only injure their position and public image. Stuart Eichert U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
Of course, Al Gore will have something to say about this ruling. He will have to do some simple math to figure out what to say. Basically if he says that this ruling is a miscarriage of justice, you can be ensured that political contributions from the Microsoft camp will increase. If he says that this ruling and the subsequent remedies are just you can be ensured of increased contributions from various Valley firms. Common citizens will still be puzzled why the Justice department went after a company for selling its product the way it saw fit.
The mistake the Valley firms have made is inviting the federal government to regulate their industry. Now there is legal precedent for the government to come in at any point in the future and limit the competitive practices of the market participants. The Valley firms, Sun in particular, have now agreed to play a game whereby they will bid for the political favor of various powerful politicians, instead of spending their time and money on creating better products and marketing strategies. This can only lead to the weakening of many a great firm.
Actually a good friend of mine is going blind, so I have been able to observe him interacting with the web over the past 5 years and also how he has dealt with discrimination, and more annoyingly government meddling. Personally I don't believe the government has the right to enforce the ADA on any private citizen, property, website, etc. I believe that a business has a right to conduct itself as it sees fit and seek out those customers that it would like to serve. I feel it is the job of people like myself, and others to apply social and economic pressures to these firms that keep out the handicapped. The government's role is not to regulate our social interactions or force our businesses to operate in a manner that the gov't sees fit. Personally, my friend and I have dreamed up many ways of making technology more accessible and come up with ways to use existing technology. If we all say that we truly care about the handicapped, then we do not need legislation to force us to take the appropriate actions. Stuart Eichert U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
It was mentioned in the original "Ask Slashdot" question how to start a non-profit. I am not a lawyer, however I have recently incorporated my own non-profit in the state of Nevada. It is relatively easy and relatively inexpensive(I think I paid the Secretary of State $45 for everything). Now this does not get you 501(c)(3) non-profit status, but it is the first step. You can check out the State of Nevada's Secretary of State page at: this URL. Stuart Eichert U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
Would it not be better to privatize NASA as a non-profit research organization and remove gov't involvement? Proper financial structure in this type of organization would be very important in order to ensure continued operations.
While many jump and say "There is no way NASA could make it on its own. It needs government involvement and therefore federal tax dollars!!!" I point to the fact that with NASA's funding being so closely tied to the whims of politicians it is already in danger of dying. Besides about the most inefficient way to fund anything is through taxes. I would suggest that NASA become a private non-profit organization and that the portion of the federal budget earmarked for NASA be returned to the tax payers. If people/corporations/etc really value the work being done by NASA they will make tax-deductible contributions to them with the extra money from the tax cut. Stuart Eichert U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
The real reason people don't like immigrants is a fear of competition. The unions(IEEE, AMA, NEA, Teamsters, etc.) hate the notion of actually having to compete for their job with someone who has a much better work ethic and desire to improve themselves. Personally, I work with several foreigners and recent immigrants. I could not ask for a better work experience. They are increasing my market value on a daily basis. If I want to learn about business, legal, and cultural issues in foreign countries that I might wish to do business in, I have an excellent source of input from a competent, intelligent, technical professional. The US is so hypocritical, we do anything we can to get foreigners to come our universities and then we kick most of them out of the country after they finish their schooling. Wouldn't it make more sense to encourage them to become productive and peaceful citizens. A sensible immigration policy would seek to keep violent criminals out of the US, no one else. As for the rest, many wish to come here simply for the opportunity to work, study, and raise their children in peace. I wouldn't mind having these people as my neighbors. Yes there are many who come here simply for the freebies(welfare, medicare, food stamps, etc.). However these freebies create just as many problems with our own citizens. Eliminate the freebies and let's see what happens. Stuart Eichert U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
I've been suffering from this same problem recently as well. I do not have a stable physical address as I have lived several places in the last four years(college dorms, summer jobs, mom and dad). So now I have a mailboxes , etc. address and I have to put this stupid "PMB" marker on the top. So I talked with the owner of the Mailboxes, Etc. in town and he informed that I only need to give the stupid "PMB"ized address for USPS mail, because fedex, ups, dhl, rps, etc.(pick your more efficient private carrier here) will deliver to the normal style, which is like Suite xxx-yyy, where yyy is your mailbox number.
The real reason the USPS is doing this is because they hate competition. Where I live I have MBE, Postal Express, and the USPS all within.25 miles of each other. From talking with the owner of MBE he said that nobody wants to deal with the PO Boxes at the Post office anymore. So basically these overpaid government bureacrats had to come up with a law to hurt private mail carriers and mail stops. Stuart Eichert U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
I must agree with your sentiments. I generally do not want the government messing with a free market. If Microsoft has broken the laws that everyone else abides by then yes they must be punished in some way. I honestly can not think of an acceptable to do this however. I would rather, see us(us being anyone who wants quality software to win out) beat Microsoft. I don't want the government's help and consequently I don't want them to bully me if my company does really well. Instead I want to be able to compete and win customers on the basis of the quality of my work and my ability to convey that ability(i.e. marketing). I know that is idealistic, but I think we have to push for a market that rewards quality work. Stuart Eichert U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
I think you are right on with this one. I own a computer at home and use that for computation purposes. I use my palm for nothing more than its basic functions (address, schedule, to do, short notes). I think palm apps should focus around the sharing and acquisition of data. If we get really abstract we can see ourselves as part of the data network carrying an interface device(the palm) and using it to send and receive data with people we meet in person. Stuart Eichert U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
My Palmpro runs for like 1-2 months on a set of batteries. not 12 hours. that is the biggest CE problem is that it dies so quickly. not that the O/S is particularly wonderful either. Stuart Eichert U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
I try often to think about the philosophy of taxation everytime I start to complain about a tax. I feel the government should be collecting taxes for transactions(i.e. sales, income, etc) for which it has given service to the participants in the transaction. For example, if I own a brick-and-mortar store I receive certain inherent government services(like police protection, fire department(assuming it is not volunteer), maintenance of public roads for my customers to get to me, etc). Therefore as a store owner I do not mind paying taxes to the government, as I am receiving services from them. As a consumer going into the store to purchase items I also receive inherent government services(again police protection for when I leave with my purchase, maybe even the FBI/police for investigating merchants that committ fraud against consumers, etc). I don't mind paying for these services because they are beneficial. Now when we move business transactions to the Internet some things change. The government provides less service to both the merchant and consumer than if the transaction happened in physical space. However there are still services provided so taxation on that basis seems fair.
Now if all of my tax money went to just pay for the services that I received from the government I think we would all be content. However, local, state,and federal budgets do not reflect this fact. Sales taxes, that consumers pay, and other taxes, that merchants pay, are used to fund other government programs. Here is where I object to the use of the taxes paid.
Taxes will never go away, it seems. But in theory, our governments(federal, state, and local) should be using technology just like the rest of us to increase efficiency and reduce the need for the numerous people they employ. If a company can lower the prices on its goods and services based on increased efficiency then the government should be able to do the same.
Tom Petty's contract with his music publisher likely indicates that any recording he does that he intends to share with the public is theirs. In other words the record company has a claim over the right to distribute "Free Girl Now" for money. This is going to become a very sketchy area over the next few years, because now I could buy the CD and make a decent MP3 and then send it to everyone. It would be to expensive to hunt down everyone who does this. As well record companies could sell music via MP3, but then the same thing would happen. I guess they could put a digital watermark in the.mp3 and then use that to track down the original pirater. I think the nature of the recording industry and how they make money is going to change dramatically. Artists now do not need the record company for distribution, only for promotion and funding for a new album. Stuart Eichert U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
While I abhor the KKK I will always defend their right to promote their point of view through speech and print. I will also defend the right of anyway to denounce their point of view through speech and print. You have to take the good with the bad. Defaming someone is a serious matter. Remember you can charge the KKK with defamation if they single out some innoncent black guy and say "He murdered and raped three white women last week." Defamation laws allow people to fight the KKK when they go beyond just publicizing their point of view.
This information was obtained from Smith & Roberson's Business Law 9th Editition, West Publishing.(page 146-147) The tort of defamation is false communication that injures a person's reputation by disgracing him and diminishing the respect to which he is held. An example would be the publication of a false statement that a person had committed a crime or had a loathsome disease." .... ..... Elements of Defamation The elements of a defamation action are (1)a false and defamatory statement concerning another, (2) an unprivileged publication (communication) to a third party, (3)in some cases, depending on the status of the defendant, some degree of fault on her part in knowing or failing to ascertain the falsity of the statement, and (4) in some cases, proof of special harm caused by the publication. Restatement, Section 558. The burden of proof is on the plantiff to prove the falsity of the defamatory statement.
It goes on to discuss the difference between libel and slander. Libel being communication in a medium other than spoken or oral. Slander, of course, being oral or spoken communication. There are however defenses to defamation. They fall into two classes:truth and privilege. Truth, is self evident. If what you communicated is true, then you have not defamed the plantiff. There are three types of privilege: absolute, conditional, and constitutional. Absolute privilege is for the rare situations where public policy favors complete freedom of speech like (1) statements made by participants regarding a judicial proceeding; (2)statements made by members of Congress on the floor of Congress; (3) statements made by certain executive branch officesrs in the discharge of their governmental duties; (4)statements regarding a third party made between spouses when they are alone. Conditional priviledge depends upon proper use of the privilege. A person has conditional privilege to publish defamatory matter to protect his own legitimate interests, or in some cases the interests of another. Conditional privilege also extends to many cases where the publisher and the recipient have a common interest, such as in letters of reference. A publisher who acts in an excessive manner, without probable cause, or for an improper purpose forfeits conditional privilege. Constitutional priviledge refers to the first amendment and allows individuals or the press to comment regarding public officials or public figures so long as it is done without malice.
Therefore if these individuals have communicated false statements about Wade Cook(possibly)(1) to a third party(the internet community)(2) without bothering to check the validity of their statements(3) and created special harm to Wade Cook(4) then they are guilty of defamation in the form of libel. Their only defense could be truth as I don't believe they qualify for any of the three types of priviledge.
The law is the law is the law. The internet is just another communication medium as far as defamation is concerned. If they had printed up flyers defaming Wade Cook and mailed them to everyone they knew, it would still be defamation.
Now the important question, is not whether a bunch of bozos defamed Wade Cook but rather what will happen to Yahoo!. Any good lawyer is not going to waste time trying to sue these bozos for money. Rather he will try for a criminal conviction against them and then sue Yahoo! for publishing the statements without verification and in effect acting as an accomplice to the defamation. Obviously the lawyer would do this because Yahoo! is likely to have more money than the bozos. Stuart Eichert U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
All you/. readers listen up. If you keep trying to insult this guy, please stop. All this guy is trying to do is save his job and get himself even more rich.
I don't think we can discern his exact motivations from one position paper.
I realize Slashdot is mostly College kids (as am I) who come from preppy ass upper-middle class homes in the richest parts of U.S. cities and small cities.
I have not seen the demographics on slashdot readers. It would be interesting to know "Who is your average slashdot reader?".
But once you get out into the real world, you will realize that there is more to business than just _the most stable platform for running your servers_. Microsoft is all about MONEY. So are businesses [at least the last time I checked]. Business and making money out in the real world depends on having a structured support system. (maybe someone else with more of an economics background could elaborate for me)
You are correct in that the purpose of a business is to make money. As a matter of fact, if you are an officer of company with shareholders, you have a responsiblity to them to try and make money. In the case of a publicly traded corporation, failure to do so could be illegal. However, I think it is bad business strategy to offer a consistently inferior product to the consumer. This strategy can surely not be successful in the long run. Yes good marketing allows firms to sell poor products, but we are entering a new economic age, where the cost of discovering information conerning the quality of a product is approaching zero. The web offers me the "Consumer reports" of the new economy. If I want to know which O/S is best for my needs I can read opinion papers, expert analysis, anything. And yes I can also read cute little ads. I often conceive of starting my own software / consulting firm. I have decided that the quality of my work will be my most important marketing weapon. Certainly I will seek to publicize this quality to perspective customers/clients, but I will also be willing to take fair criticism. I think this attitude stems from the way I was raised by my parents. They made it clear to me from a young age that I should never submit a homework assignment that I hadn't done to the best of my ability. "Would you want your name on poor quality work? Work you know you could have done better?". I believe the answer is no. In the new economy I hope that quality can be a vital part of corporate strategy.
Don't just reply with and say I'm a troll, as I will give an e-mail address at the end of this. I am not in a mood right now to elaborate more on this, so I will let others do so. But I would like to say this: don't ANY of you give a fuck about MONEY? If you do, then don't just keep saying 'fuck Microsoft',
I have sought to move away from saying 'f*ck Microsoft'. Though to be honest I let it slip a few times a day while reading ZDNet articles. I have decided that my energy and excitement is better used towards developing new business ideas, creating quality software, and serving as resource to newbies(be they new to the Internet, linux,whatever).
because while their software (most of it) is of very low quality, they do have a very structured business UNLIKE most of the Linux world.
Their business and management structure, are yes structured. As evidenced by the Redmond campus with its 30 or 40 or "who knows how many" buildings that house different product teams. In addition their marketing efforts are coordinated and targeted. At these levels they do run an excellent business. The "Linux World" is not a corporation. It is a community with many diverse participants. Some are seeking to explore business issues with Linux. Others are looking to improve the kernel or device drivers of linux. Some are looking at how to develop applications and interfaces that are useful to them and others. Rigid structure would not serve this community's participants well.
Someone else who is more educated in Economics might want to elaborate on this a bit more, because I am just speaking from a REAL WORLD point of view. I now work in the Real World, and the Real World is a little bit different than the college world that many of the Slashdot.org readers are used to.
To give you my demographics. I am a 4th year student at the University of Pennsylvania studying computer science engineering and business as a undergraduate and Telecommunications and Networking as a graduate student. I have worked in the "real world" for IBM, Bellcore, and 3Com and was glad to meet people at each of these companies that were committed to producing high quality work.
Again, please feel free to e-mail me... stifle33@hotmail.com
And please feel free to e-mail me at Stuart.Eichert.wh99@wharton.upenn.edu with your thoughts on these subjects. I am considering writing an essay on the role of product/service quality in software companies.
Slashdot Mirror
Success, success, success!. Tonight I attended my first 2600 meeting. For many, in Campbell, CA(near San Jose, CA) it was their first as well. Everyone was upset about DeCSS for a variety of reasons. Myself, I felt the MPAA, was committing fraud and attacking the first amendment. If you look at the back of a DVD movie case you will see no mention of the license terms and thus a reasonable person would assume that if they purchase/rent the disc that they can play it back with whatever player they own(be it a $1000 sony unit or an open-source linux player based on DeCSS). So I, being the libertarian, took to the streets to fight against fraud and the assault on the first amendment rights of those seeking to expose this fraud and how to circumvent it. One of my partners in flyer distribution, a socialist, sought to stop the MPAA from creating a monopoly on DVD players. So here were two people, with different points of view on various issues coming together to protest a greater evil. We had no problem distributing the flyers all throughout downtown Campbell in video stores, bars, restaurants, or just to passerbys on the street. We were very polite to people and asked if we could "give them a flyer". Very few people said no. Some wished to discuss the issue further, so we were prepared to present our point of view and we encouraged them to visit the websites to get as much information as possible before they made up their own minds. The only business that asked us to stop distributing flyers was Barnes and Noble. However, they were very polite in their request and we were very polite in leaving. Keep the fight going on many fronts and we should have success.
Stuart Eichert
History has shown us that ALL regulations have thwarted innovation. Look at when the government granted AT&T a monopoly on phone service. Look at regulation of cable television, airline industry, electricity. When deregulation came innovation(and lower prices) took off. The government only acts in their own self interest to keep themselves in power. Never be suckered into believing that they "regulate" in order for the good of the citizenry. If you'd like to read more about regulation take a look at the articles at The Cato Institute, Reason magazine, and The Regulation Homepage. And yes I agree with you that the question is incredibly loaded.
Stuart Eichert
This is a difficult point. However it is probably more related to Civil Asset Forfeiture law, rather than the 5th amendment. Cato has some great articles on asset forfeiture and how US citizens have basically given up their property rights. I would argue that Kevin's files are his own intellectual property , in whatever form, and that he has a right to have them returned to him. Keeping the files, because they might have something "BAD" in them, is the assumption of guilt. With the exception of the IRS all federal agencies must assume you are innoncent until proven guilty. By the government's logic they can seize all of my property and hold it indefinitely until I tell them everything they want to know. I thought that was called "extortion".
Stuart Eichert
The notion of "community standards" is very relavent to a Slashdot audience. Many, who read Slashdot, produce information for the public to consume. They are interested in any legal issue that would prohibit some members of their audience from accessing their content. In the past we have seen instances of "community standards" used to fine or imprison people in one state for providing pornography to those in another(like the case where somebody in Tennesse downloaded pictures from a porn business in Oregon, or something like that). The Internet does not like censorship at any level, local, regional, national, or international. Local politics are always important because often that is where the government has the most control over our lives.
I know Slashdot likes to take on the Causes of the Geek(tm), but I think there comes a time when one has to step back and take a look at exactly what is going on. We have a small community in America, typical of many, I'll assume. Through the workings of democracy, they manage to get a controversial issue on the ballot. A large group of people think this is an initiative that should be enacted. Another large group of people think this is an initiative that shouldn't even be considered. We're not talking about anything groundbreaking here. Moreover, this whole issue isn't even being determined by lawmakers; it's being determined by the people. That's the way it should be.
It is not the way it should be. We live in a constitutional republic, not a democracy. In a democracy the people can vote to do literally anything(like say execute a segment of the population for their religious beliefs). A constitution restricts the power of lawmakers from infringe upon our basic rights(like free speech, religion , etc.). You made another good point about government run libraries and that is that you have to expect them to put in place their rules, which will undoubtedly be motivated by politics. Libraries should be run by non-profit organizations, universities, etc., not governments. I would suggest to the AFA that they organize themselves in the area, form a non-profit and create a "family friendly" library.
I read over the AFA's web page and outside of using the powers of the state I think they have the right idea for civilized protest. In the past it seems they have expressed their opinions to broadcasters, advertisers, etc. and let them know that they would stop watching shows, buying products, etc. I.e. they voted with their dollars. In some cases broadcasters and advertisers responded. This is not government censorship, this is capitalism in action.
Another reason why this story is valuable is touched upon in your last paragraphs. When it comes to your down you will worry about it. Well then the information provided from Holland, MI should assist you in how to deal with this issue when it comes up locally.
And yes, you should vote libertarian so you don't have to worry about garbage like this.
Stuart Eichert
I look at this differently. While I would not contact a member of a foreign government with hopes of influencing his political decision, I would contact another person in a foreign country to give them my opinion on their beliefs/ideas if I thought it was worth my time. Just because someone is a senator/judge/president, etc. doesn't mean they are not a person and thus not worth sharing your ideas with. Part of this whole "Internet thing" is the idea of no borders to free thought. If you want to express an opinion to anyone, anywhere, go for it.
Stuart Eichert
U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
Speaking of double standards. I feel the many protestors who tried to imprison people in their hotels and the convention center expect a double standard. In the USA the right to peacefully assemble is granted to everyone, not just protestors but also WTO delegates. Imprisoning someone in their hotel and preventing their free assembly is an infringement on their rights. How would say the AFL/CIO protestors like it if a bunch of pro-WTO demonstrators imprisoned them in their hotels and stopped them from assembling in the stadium?
Stuart Eichert
U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
People have the right to peacefully assemble, be them environmental/labor protestors or delegates to a WTO convention. So putting yourself in someone's way as they try to peacefully assemble is threatening them with violence if they try to exercise their right. The police/riot squad were correct in removing these protestors from the convention center in order to allow the delegates/reporters to peacefully assemble inside the convention center. Often radicals forget that everybody has rights, regardless of their viewpoint. In so doing, these radicals only injure their position and public image.
Stuart Eichert
U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
The mistake the Valley firms have made is inviting the federal government to regulate their industry. Now there is legal precedent for the government to come in at any point in the future and limit the competitive practices of the market participants. The Valley firms, Sun in particular, have now agreed to play a game whereby they will bid for the political favor of various powerful politicians, instead of spending their time and money on creating better products and marketing strategies. This can only lead to the weakening of many a great firm.
Stuart Eichert
U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
Actually a good friend of mine is going blind, so I have been able to observe him interacting with the web over the past 5 years and also how he has dealt with discrimination, and more annoyingly government meddling. Personally I don't believe the government has the right to enforce the ADA on any private citizen, property, website, etc. I believe that a business has a right to conduct itself as it sees fit and seek out those customers that it would like to serve. I feel it is the job of people like myself, and others to apply social and economic pressures to these firms that keep out the handicapped. The government's role is not to regulate our social interactions or force our businesses to operate in a manner that the gov't sees fit. Personally, my friend and I have dreamed up many ways of making technology more accessible and come up with ways to use existing technology. If we all say that we truly care about the handicapped, then we do not need legislation to force us to take the appropriate actions.
Stuart Eichert
U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
It was mentioned in the original "Ask Slashdot" question how to start a non-profit. I am not a lawyer, however I have recently incorporated my own non-profit in the state of Nevada. It is relatively easy and relatively inexpensive(I think I paid the Secretary of State $45 for everything). Now this does not get you 501(c)(3) non-profit status, but it is the first step. You can check out the State of Nevada's Secretary of State page at: this URL.
Stuart Eichert
U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
While many jump and say "There is no way NASA could make it on its own. It needs government involvement and therefore federal tax dollars!!!" I point to the fact that with NASA's funding being so closely tied to the whims of politicians it is already in danger of dying. Besides about the most inefficient way to fund anything is through taxes. I would suggest that NASA become a private non-profit organization and that the portion of the federal budget earmarked for NASA be returned to the tax payers. If people/corporations/etc really value the work being done by NASA they will make tax-deductible contributions to them with the extra money from the tax cut.
Stuart Eichert
U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
The real reason people don't like immigrants is a fear of competition. The unions(IEEE, AMA, NEA, Teamsters, etc.) hate the notion of actually having to compete for their job with someone who has a much better work ethic and desire to improve themselves. Personally, I work with several foreigners and recent immigrants. I could not ask for a better work experience. They are increasing my market value on a daily basis. If I want to learn about business, legal, and cultural issues in foreign countries that I might wish to do business in, I have an excellent source of input from a competent, intelligent, technical professional. The US is so hypocritical, we do anything we can to get foreigners to come our universities and then we kick most of them out of the country after they finish their schooling. Wouldn't it make more sense to encourage them to become productive and peaceful citizens. A sensible immigration policy would seek to keep violent criminals out of the US, no one else. As for the rest, many wish to come here simply for the opportunity to work, study, and raise their children in peace. I wouldn't mind having these people as my neighbors. Yes there are many who come here simply for the freebies(welfare, medicare, food stamps, etc.). However these freebies create just as many problems with our own citizens. Eliminate the freebies and let's see what happens.
Stuart Eichert
U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
The real reason the USPS is doing this is because they hate competition. Where I live I have MBE, Postal Express, and the USPS all within .25 miles of each other. From talking with the owner of MBE he said that nobody wants to deal with the PO Boxes at the Post office anymore. So basically these overpaid government bureacrats had to come up with a law to hurt private mail carriers and mail stops.
Stuart Eichert
U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
I must agree with your sentiments. I generally do not want the government messing with a free market. If Microsoft has broken the laws that everyone else abides by then yes they must be punished in some way. I honestly can not think of an acceptable to do this however.
I would rather, see us(us being anyone who wants quality software to win out) beat Microsoft. I don't want the government's help and consequently I don't want them to bully me if my company does really well. Instead I want to be able to compete and win customers on the basis of the quality of my work and my ability to convey that ability(i.e. marketing). I know that is idealistic, but I think we have to push for a market that rewards quality work.
Stuart Eichert
U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
I think you are right on with this one. I own a computer at home and use that for computation purposes. I use my palm for nothing more than its basic functions (address, schedule, to do, short notes). I think palm apps should focus around the sharing and acquisition of data. If we get really abstract we can see ourselves as part of the data network carrying an interface device(the palm) and using it to send and receive data with people we meet in person.
Stuart Eichert
U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
My Palmpro runs for like 1-2 months on a set of batteries. not 12 hours. that is the biggest CE problem is that it dies so quickly. not that the O/S is particularly wonderful either.
Stuart Eichert
U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
I try often to think about the philosophy of taxation everytime I start to complain about a tax. I feel the government should be collecting taxes for transactions(i.e. sales, income, etc) for which it has given service to the participants in the transaction. For example, if I own a brick-and-mortar store I receive certain inherent government services(like police protection, fire department(assuming it is not volunteer), maintenance of public roads for my customers to get to me, etc). Therefore as a store owner I do not mind paying taxes to the government, as I am receiving services from them. As a consumer going into the store to purchase items I also receive inherent government services(again police protection for when I leave with my purchase, maybe even the FBI/police for investigating merchants that committ fraud against consumers, etc). I don't mind paying for these services because they are beneficial. Now when we move business transactions to the Internet some things change. The government provides less service to both the merchant and consumer than if the transaction happened in physical space. However there are still services provided so taxation on that basis seems fair.
Now if all of my tax money went to just pay for the services that I received from the government I think we would all be content. However, local, state,and federal budgets do not reflect this fact. Sales taxes, that consumers pay, and other taxes, that merchants pay, are used to fund other government programs. Here is where I object to the use of the taxes paid.
Taxes will never go away, it seems. But in theory, our governments(federal, state, and local) should be using technology just like the rest of us to increase efficiency and reduce the need for the numerous people they employ. If a company can lower the prices on its goods and services based on increased efficiency then the government should be able to do the same.
Stuart Eichert
U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
Tom Petty's contract with his music publisher likely indicates that any recording he does that he intends to share with the public is theirs. In other words the record company has a claim over the right to distribute "Free Girl Now" for money. .mp3 and then use that to track down the original pirater. I think the nature of the recording industry and how they make money is going to change dramatically. Artists now do not need the record company for distribution, only for promotion and funding for a new album.
This is going to become a very sketchy area over the next few years, because now I could buy the CD and make a decent MP3 and then send it to everyone. It would be to expensive to hunt down everyone who does this. As well record companies could sell music via MP3, but then the same thing would happen. I guess they could put a digital watermark in the
Stuart Eichert
U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
On another note: capitalism is freedom.
Stuart Eichert
U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
The tort of defamation is false communication that injures a person's reputation by disgracing him and diminishing the respect to which he is held. An example would be the publication of a false statement that a person had committed a crime or had a loathsome disease."
Elements of Defamation The elements of a defamation action are (1)a false and defamatory statement concerning another, (2) an unprivileged publication (communication) to a third party, (3)in some cases, depending on the status of the defendant, some degree of fault on her part in knowing or failing to ascertain the falsity of the statement, and (4) in some cases, proof of special harm caused by the publication. Restatement, Section 558. The burden of proof is on the plantiff to prove the falsity of the defamatory statement.
It goes on to discuss the difference between libel and slander. Libel being communication in a medium other than spoken or oral. Slander, of course, being oral or spoken communication. There are however defenses to defamation. They fall into two classes:truth and privilege. Truth, is self evident. If what you communicated is true, then you have not defamed the plantiff. There are three types of privilege: absolute, conditional, and constitutional. Absolute privilege is for the rare situations where public policy favors complete freedom of speech like (1) statements made by participants regarding a judicial proceeding; (2)statements made by members of Congress on the floor of Congress; (3) statements made by certain executive branch officesrs in the discharge of their governmental duties; (4)statements regarding a third party made between spouses when they are alone. Conditional priviledge depends upon proper use of the privilege. A person has conditional privilege to publish defamatory matter to protect his own legitimate interests, or in some cases the interests of another. Conditional privilege also extends to many cases where the publisher and the recipient have a common interest, such as in letters of reference. A publisher who acts in an excessive manner, without probable cause, or for an improper purpose forfeits conditional privilege. Constitutional priviledge refers to the first amendment and allows individuals or the press to comment regarding public officials or public figures so long as it is done without malice.
Therefore if these individuals have communicated false statements about Wade Cook(possibly)(1) to a third party(the internet community)(2) without bothering to check the validity of their statements(3) and created special harm to Wade Cook(4) then they are guilty of defamation in the form of libel. Their only defense could be truth as I don't believe they qualify for any of the three types of priviledge.
The law is the law is the law. The internet is just another communication medium as far as defamation is concerned. If they had printed up flyers defaming Wade Cook and mailed them to everyone they knew, it would still be defamation.
Now the important question, is not whether a bunch of bozos defamed Wade Cook but rather what will happen to Yahoo!. Any good lawyer is not going to waste time trying to sue these bozos for money. Rather he will try for a criminal conviction against them and then sue Yahoo! for publishing the statements without verification and in effect acting as an accomplice to the defamation. Obviously the lawyer would do this because Yahoo! is likely to have more money than the bozos.
Stuart Eichert
U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker
I don't think we can discern his exact motivations from one position paper.
I realize Slashdot is mostly College kids (as am I) who come from preppy ass upper-middle class homes in the richest parts of U.S. cities and small cities.
I have not seen the demographics on slashdot readers. It would be interesting to know "Who is your average slashdot reader?".
But once you get out into the real world, you will realize that there is more to business than just _the most stable platform for running your servers_. Microsoft is all about MONEY. So are businesses [at least the last time I checked]. Business and making money out in the real world depends on having a structured support system. (maybe someone else with more of an economics background could elaborate for me)
You are correct in that the purpose of a business is to make money. As a matter of fact, if you are an officer of company with shareholders, you have a responsiblity to them to try and make money. In the case of a publicly traded corporation, failure to do so could be illegal. However, I think it is bad business strategy to offer a consistently inferior product to the consumer. This strategy can surely not be successful in the long run. Yes good marketing allows firms to sell poor products, but we are entering a new economic age, where the cost of discovering information conerning the quality of a product is approaching zero. The web offers me the "Consumer reports" of the new economy. If I want to know which O/S is best for my needs I can read opinion papers, expert analysis, anything. And yes I can also read cute little ads. I often conceive of starting my own software / consulting firm. I have decided that the quality of my work will be my most important marketing weapon. Certainly I will seek to publicize this quality to perspective customers/clients, but I will also be willing to take fair criticism. I think this attitude stems from the way I was raised by my parents. They made it clear to me from a young age that I should never submit a homework assignment that I hadn't done to the best of my ability. "Would you want your name on poor quality work? Work you know you could have done better?". I believe the answer is no. In the new economy I hope that quality can be a vital part of corporate strategy.
Don't just reply with and say I'm a troll, as I will give an e-mail address at the end of this. I am not in a mood right now to elaborate more on this, so I will let others do so. But I would like to say this: don't ANY of you give a fuck about MONEY? If you do, then don't just keep saying 'fuck Microsoft',
I have sought to move away from saying 'f*ck Microsoft'. Though to be honest I let it slip a few times a day while reading ZDNet articles. I have decided that my energy and excitement is better used towards developing new business ideas, creating quality software, and serving as resource to newbies(be they new to the Internet, linux,whatever).
because while their software (most of it) is of very low quality, they do have a very structured business UNLIKE most of the Linux world.Their business and management structure, are yes structured. As evidenced by the Redmond campus with its 30 or 40 or "who knows how many" buildings that house different product teams. In addition their marketing efforts are coordinated and targeted. At these levels they do run an excellent business. The "Linux World" is not a corporation. It is a community with many diverse participants. Some are seeking to explore business issues with Linux. Others are looking to improve the kernel or device drivers of linux. Some are looking at how to develop applications and interfaces that are useful to them and others. Rigid structure would not serve this community's participants well.
Someone else who is more educated in Economics might want to elaborate on this a bit more, because I am just speaking from a REAL WORLD point of view. I now work in the Real World, and the Real World is a little bit different than the college world that many of the Slashdot.org readers are used to.
To give you my demographics. I am a 4th year student at the University of Pennsylvania studying computer science engineering and business as a undergraduate and Telecommunications and Networking as a graduate student. I have worked in the "real world" for IBM, Bellcore, and 3Com and was glad to meet people at each of these companies that were committed to producing high quality work.
Again, please feel free to e-mail me... stifle33@hotmail.com
And please feel free to e-mail me at Stuart.Eichert.wh99@wharton.upenn.edu with your thoughts on these subjects. I am considering writing an essay on the role of product/service quality in software companies.
Stuart Eichert
U. of PENN student/FreeBSD hacker