n the mid-nineties I was involved with a political campaign in a Southern California town. We were opposing the powers that be, who were backed by big money (developers pushing a very unpopular $2,000,000,000 development, among others). Encryption proved to be the only way we could communicate in private.
Interesting how this works. It seems that California has the largest percentage of people who have dynamically opposed interests. Every liberally minded group in the country usually has a large contingent in California. More natzi like pollution and environmental laws and such.
Let me say that the number of people who can afford to be political dissidents is probably much higher today than it was in times past because more people want to be communists and rebel against the government. This will subside just like it did when they were present in the 60's.
I certainly can't afford to just randomly decide to rebel and risk life and limb. Unless I have a steady stream of money comming in I have a little problem. Influence and power in society never come to a group of radicals but people who work within the system.
We had death threats. Our phones were tapped. "Private" conversations conducted in my house ended up not being private. Strategies we developed (over phone conversations) were implemented by the competition first. Video rental records were stolen and given to reporters (never published though -- nothing incriminating.) Postal employees postponed the delivery of our mailers until after the election. Private investigators asked our neighbors about any unsavory habits they thought we might have (say, does her son do drugs? Is he homosexual? What about the daughter -- does she sleep around?) It was a very ugly place to be, and it killed most of my idealism.
I have actually theorized about one could easily defeat opponents like this. I have reached the conclusion that anti-terrorist tactics are the most helpful. Essentially this involves a tactical strike team of individuals who can essentially dismantle the enemy's actions with relative ease. Use of say "natural" poisons and weapons which utilize silencers are the most effective.
Trust me any inviduals who think they can get you are usually deluding themselves. People have brute threats but with a little thinking you can perservere.
My ultimate question is why didn't anyone contact the feds? The FBI is quite good about stopping silly little State oriented shit like that. Oh well I guess people have fooled themselves into thinking that the States can do a better job. This illustrates that they most certainly cannot.
I don't know what world you live in, but here in the US of A we see government officials breaking the law regularly. We see people with political influence (read "money") get away with anything, while the people who truly care and want to make a difference are assaulted from every angle. We see the courts used to get around the law, rather than enforce it. We can't depend on the media to report the truth. These lessons were all learned in the same election cycle, in one small town on the west coast. I'm frightened to think what it must be like on higher levels.
Well I really haven't seen anything on slashdot that indicates any other reaction other than something the Lone Gunmen or Fox Mulder would do. Ranting and raving about the evil government will not change. I have advocated infiltration and change within. However most people don't care for that sort of thing.
PGP ended up being the only way we could communicate privately (over a private BBS). It was a PITA to explain text-based encryption tool use to Win 3.1 users who didn't understand DOS, but we did it. And it made a difference.
Explain in a system that has adequate security protections how something could happen like that? If I run a tight ship and only allow people in that I want in via password protected access and login times strictly monitered how does that matter? Back in the good old days (ie before widespread encryption and pgp and all those fanatical Fox Mulder types out there really got a pick me up with the internet) people could keep things reasonably secret. What did those people do? They used common sence. They never had really, really, bad problems with anything of the sort you are describing here.
I genuinely think that people have become more lazy and generally more trusting of their little electronic toys.
Encryption is important if you ever choose to be involved in something political that has real consequences. You're buying the government's line if you think it's only for kiddie pr0n peddlers and terrorists.
I am the not the sort of person who actually has done anything with a higher level of security clearance than probably anyone out there. I have never had data that hardly anyone has ever wanted. I do not have a credit card or anything that I personally paid for online. This makes issues like this a little more out of my reach of caring.
As far as political consequences I do wish I could get a job with a 3 letter organization and actually need encryption like that however I am realistic. The day I manage to actually have data like that needing protection I will think then and only then about using some form of encryption.
n the mid-nineties I was involved with a political campaign in a Southern California town. We were opposing the powers that be, who were backed by big money (developers pushing a very unpopular $2,000,000,000 development, among others). Encryption proved to be the only way we could communicate in private. Interesting how this works. It seems that California has the largest percentage of people who have dynamically opposed interests. Every liberally minded group in the country usually has a large contingent in California. More natzi like pollution and environmental laws and such. Let me say that the number of people who can afford to be political dissidents is probably much higher today than it was in times past because more people want to be communists and rebel against the government. This will subside just like it did when they were present in the 60's. I certainly can't afford to just randomly decide to rebel and risk life and limb. Unless I have a steady stream of money comming in I have a little problem. Influence and power in society never come to a group of radicals but people who work within the system. We had death threats. Our phones were tapped. "Private" conversations conducted in my house ended up not being private. Strategies we developed (over phone conversations) were implemented by the competition first. Video rental records were stolen and given to reporters (never published though -- nothing incriminating.) Postal employees postponed the delivery of our mailers until after the election. Private investigators asked our neighbors about any unsavory habits they thought we might have (say, does her son do drugs? Is he homosexual? What about the daughter -- does she sleep around?) It was a very ugly place to be, and it killed most of my idealism. I have actually theorized about one could easily defeat opponents like this. I have reached the conclusion that anti-terrorist tactics are the most helpful. Essentially this involves a tactical strike team of individuals who can essentially dismantle the enemy's actions with relative ease. Use of say "natural" poisons and weapons which utilize silencers are the most effective. Trust me any inviduals who think they can get you are usually deluding themselves. People have brute threats but with a little thinking you can perservere. My ultimate question is why didn't anyone contact the feds? The FBI is quite good about stopping silly little State oriented shit like that. Oh well I guess people have fooled themselves into thinking that the States can do a better job. This illustrates that they most certainly cannot. I don't know what world you live in, but here in the US of A we see government officials breaking the law regularly. We see people with political influence (read "money") get away with anything, while the people who truly care and want to make a difference are assaulted from every angle. We see the courts used to get around the law, rather than enforce it. We can't depend on the media to report the truth. These lessons were all learned in the same election cycle, in one small town on the west coast. I'm frightened to think what it must be like on higher levels. Well I really haven't seen anything on slashdot that indicates any other reaction other than something the Lone Gunmen or Fox Mulder would do. Ranting and raving about the evil government will not change. I have advocated infiltration and change within. However most people don't care for that sort of thing. PGP ended up being the only way we could communicate privately (over a private BBS). It was a PITA to explain text-based encryption tool use to Win 3.1 users who didn't understand DOS, but we did it. And it made a difference. Explain in a system that has adequate security protections how something could happen like that? If I run a tight ship and only allow people in that I want in via password protected access and login times strictly monitered how does that matter? Back in the good old days (ie before widespread encryption and pgp and all those fanatical Fox Mulder types out there really got a pick me up with the internet) people could keep things reasonably secret. What did those people do? They used common sence. They never had really, really, bad problems with anything of the sort you are describing here. I genuinely think that people have become more lazy and generally more trusting of their little electronic toys. Encryption is important if you ever choose to be involved in something political that has real consequences. You're buying the government's line if you think it's only for kiddie pr0n peddlers and terrorists. I am the not the sort of person who actually has done anything with a higher level of security clearance than probably anyone out there. I have never had data that hardly anyone has ever wanted. I do not have a credit card or anything that I personally paid for online. This makes issues like this a little more out of my reach of caring. As far as political consequences I do wish I could get a job with a 3 letter organization and actually need encryption like that however I am realistic. The day I manage to actually have data like that needing protection I will think then and only then about using some form of encryption.
I used to teach Introduction to the Internet classes at a community college where I also ran the open student lab. I would tell the students that they should not send anything in email that they wouldn't want to see in the headline of tomorrows newspaper. If I'm having a private email conversation with a friend about a third party, there may be information that I don't want the third party to know I said and information I don't want made public.
Ahh however if you remember that there are certain laws that take such behavior as criminal on many levels. Eventually they will end up in a court room.
Assume I am a psychiatrist consulting with a colleague in another place about a client. I wouldn't want anyone but the intended recipient to see the information about the patients condition.
The individual who obtained the information was breaking the law. If they steal the data they can be prosecuted. I doubt that many psychiatrists actually use encryption anyway.
And what about business plans? If I was working on developing a new product, the exposure of that information could give someone else (with more money - like M/$) the idea to develop before I could get all my ducks in a row.
Most of communication about projects in any reasonably secure company is done internally. Email is usually intraoffice variety and as such would not fall to foul play from people wanting to get it unless you have a leak; and really that's an internal security issue best solved internally.
Other than that, is just simply the fact that I have a right to be secure in my possessions and particulary, my information. That was the whole point to forming this country (USA). For my government to force me to give them the encryption key to data is the same as demanding that I incriminate myself (also prohibited by the US Constitution.)
You already do that. If I have a computer someone has to be able to retrieve that computer. You have a lock on your door however do you happen to live in a bomb shelter, do you have 30 feet of concrete surrounding your house? Some things are overkill.
I realize the article is about the law in the UK, but the encryption issue is truly international.
If you notice the countries that do not have policies against some form of crypto are usually countries that are not really that totally powerful, or are not as ecconomically massive?
Governments are chipping away at our rights to privacy (at whatever level) in many countries around the world. If we don't stop it now, nothing about our private lives will be beyond the reach of Government, and then corporations as they further lobby the Government (become the Government?)
The government has various laws that restrict the flow of information. The federal government cares more about people's rights than most. Where you find all the massive breaches of privacy are usually on State and local levels. Garbage that the states do are usually 10x worse than what the national government does because they are held to a higher standard of responsibility.
Well, those people in the commercial moved it around the house pretty easily... Well, those people in the commercial moved it around the house pretty easily...
Well that would work really good until you get massive concussions and skull factures because your flat pannel TV fel onto your cranium.
If you are living in anything but abject poverty, there are certain people who would be very interested in things like your credit card numbers, bank account numbers, social security numbers, etc., especially in combination.
That's what we have fraud protection for. Consumer protection prevents law breakers from totally wiping you out when you don't want to. If you take the ideas that many of the people here everything will be monitered and tracked. If that happens it will make law breakers especially vulnerable to capture and arrest. Cryptography will be rendered moot and the government dosn't matter in areas of commercial interest as I illustrate below.
And I also have to mention that, while many FSF true believers may find this objectionable, I do have to mention that there were times when I had, on my home system, source code that sold for something like $100,000, in the course of some consulting projects. (That's what the source license cost. I wouldn't have paid a nickle for it though. It was crap.)
Well I don't object to charging although you admit that the code was crap and you sold it for $100,000. That's the kind of thing you keep the recipt for the refund.
Perhaps not a common situation, but then, it is not uncommon for managerial types to have data on their systems that would be of great interest to their competitors.
Unless over 50% of the people in the US are managers of something and have such data then there is no problem. Usually such data is secured on machines that are physically located within a building or in a system that is essentially secure to begin with. You would have to have a group of terrorists or militia groups to break through some buildings.
Cryptography is not important just as a means to keep data from the government.
Since the government can basically do what it wants because it makes the rules protecting your data from the government is pointless unless you want to try to escape the problem. The government dosn't want to or does not actually engage in commercial or industrial espionage because it has essentially nothing to gain.
Because you might want to order stuff on-line? People (especially those in card companies) really care about credit card fraud. Encrypting your card number before you send it is the most pragmatic way to prevent financial loss and the hassles of cancelling your card etc.
Yeah but as an average person you don't need to build a credit card transaction system. Online processing dosn't really force the user to care about encryption except having an https url prefixed to the site.
Besides, most people now assume that an actual internet connection is soon going to be as ubiquitous as electricity or water supply is today. Cryptography will be useful for everyone and should therefore be available and adequately strong.
Also a really, really, really, big assumption. Not everyone will be online. And ceternally not everyone will need cryptography. This still dosn't invalidate my argument.
I will simply point you to the recent story, Northwest Searches Employees' Home Computers and see if you can extrapolate why this particular case might be relevant even though it only points out one specific utility for encryption among average folks.
Reminds me of a simpson's episode where Homer is leader of the Union at the nuclear power plant. One night he hears a knock on the door.
*Knock* *Knock* *Knock*
Homer: Who's There? Man at door: Goons Homer: Who? Man at door: Hired Goons Homer: *opens door* Man at door: *grabs Homer*
In your own home you do not have the need to open the door to anyone unless they have a search warrant. That is how it works at least in the USA. Now if they did do such a thing I would have every reason to physically beat their brains out with a club in keeping them off my property. If I buy the computer then I have free access to it. If they want to look at the computer fine! I'll just delete very thourally (about 1,000 times for each sector of the hd that had the files). Or more exactly take the hd out of the machine completely delete it and then use some thermite on the hd. Then have another hd that I could swap back in without any data that they want. Simple problem solved.
Even with encryption if I have a directory called
C:\my_evil_secret_plans_for_Northwest and has files like:
Many, if not most of these are _digital_, while the old monitor in front of you is analog--there is a D/A conversion in the graphics card or in the monitor box. Plus there are a whole lot more pixels. A maxed out graphics card for one of these babies might have 64 meg of VRAM. Egad. Without the D/A conversion, things like autoaliasing work differently too, so they will have some really low level impacts on the design of drivers. You probably won't be at all happy if you just plug one of these babies into your box.
Well if they make one that fits into an ISA slot I will be a happy person.
/* Disclaimer anything said in the below post is something that I personally believe and as such may offend persons who have vested interests in the concept of cryptography. If this offends you realize that it is indeed a valid opinion */
I would think that in fact the average person has no use for cryptography in their daily lives. I don't mostly because I really don't know anyone and have never had the need to use communications media to interact with individuals in a private way. Generally I think that if I have a choice between using cryptography or going to prison I will choice to not use it.
The ultimate question is why would anyone really care about you so much that you need encrypted data anyway? If you are being monitered that closely you should run far, far away and never return.
Cryptography is only useful if you happen to be a spy or have an actual internet connection (ie the use of pgp to sign, encrypt, or both messages with it). Most data that you have is not really that interesting.
Multiple Alpha processors,(screw that SMP stuff. Three-way!) a G400 and two of these babies? Complete with MD, DVD-R and a *nix kernel with all of the 'legacy' support ripped sound good? We'll hand roll it all in assembler for performance!
Uh huh. Ok now let's look at all that dye stained money that you seem to have. That's nice and Ski masks wow that must have been some bank robbery.
Seriously how does the processor actually influence that quality of the display except for generating the screen's content. You could just as easily hook one of those up to a 386 or 486 running dos or windows 3.1 or with Xfree 86 and still get a good looking display.
'm wondering why both my home and work computers are viewing the NYT links without registration...
I usually can do that also, I just assume my browser has a cookie for whatever registration I last used.
George
Actually I have never even entered a login id on this machine and the links are displaying. I believe that the NYT may have actually dropped (at least temporarly) the need of a registration.
Make them for an entirely new system, designed from the ground up with the newest technologies. I think that it is about time that entirely new systems not based on the old x86 systems succeeded in the mainstream. I realize that it would be quite a feat, but just think about the raw power you could get from new chips and equipment that didn't have to be compatible with old chips/code/peripherals.
Well unfortunately most people don't want to buy totally new things. I ceternally don't. I would love to get the maxium life out of anything until it is completely broken and then if I have to then buy something. I guess some people never really care.
I am curious why people have to think that compatablity with older hardware is such a problem. I think that the less you have to spend the better off you are in general. Plus with more compatability comes lesser price and better transition.
When does one declare the existing social structure so inneficient that change is impossible from within? Now.
Your method of change is what? Protests. Making laws. There are many theories which suggest that if liberal minded folks ran things life would be easily harder for those who generally try to make a living.
Suppose you make a law that would coerce people to prevent the release of carbon dixoide by x% (this has been tried but failed thank god). What instantly happens is that prices increase 300x or more. All industry processes increase in complexity and difficulty. With this you hve the eventual collapse of people who were/are already poor into what we had in the middle ages or in ancient India: a stratified caste system. Such a system could easily ensnare each and every person in it's grasp for many, many, years.
Plans to stop money will only hurt people who rely on said money. Unless you make money in a barter system and don't really have a job where you get a paycheck you are totally effected by this. We had a crummy labor marked in the 70's and it could only see a repeat if we follow advice like this. It took a lot of sabre rattling and hard work and innovative stratagies to get out of said slump.
At which point does a person declare the existing social structure to be so inefficient, harmful and biased that change from within is impossible?
I would say at the time that the person/person's have actually had something quite harmful done specifically to them ie suffered a personal loss. We have lived in a time when anyone could just walk up to you on the street and end your life. The higher crime rate the higher chance that will happen. For some people this has already happened and they become bitter.
You must realize that change has and will always occured. History will show you that people go from periods of relative freedom to periods of relative slavery. Over the long haul humanity will perservere. As much as I have a 1984 sig I do not believe that 1984 could be a reality. There are too many people involved. People like you and I are capable of running a totalitarian machine. Believe me if such a totalitarian governemnt existed I would do plenty of boot polishing that would eventually lead me to get great power within the sturcture. Then once I had power I could shape the system to whatever I felt like.
I'm rapidly reaching the conclusion that there is little anyone can do to stop the large money'd interests from taking away our online freedom: the freedom of information, fair use, free speech, the right to peacefully assemble (ie: post in public forums without fear of retribution - like having your access revoked). I think the system has been evolving ever since about the late 1960's when various economic breakthroughs kickstarted this modern super-corporate era. We railed hard against government invading our privacy, our homes, and our lives... only to turn a blind eye to another group: corporations. And now we have nobody accountable in those positions. We're worse off than before.
You must remember that those "monied interests" were at one time little children who had no money . Through the process of freedom they slowly built power in a society that allowed for absolute freedom. Then they set up shop. Now theoretically you can do the same. However I would not exactly want to dedicate my life to business. I have had my share of crap in my life and am still going through crap. In once sence you could say that I really should rebel and leave society to it's own. However I cannot because the only other choice is death by my hand or by the grim reaper due to starvation. Therefore the logical choice is to act and try to change your surroundings.
You know I can post in public forums. I would give 5 bucks to the first slashdotter who could correctly pinpoint me to within 100 feet, give my real name, address, telephone number, etc. I seriously doubt this could be done.
This would also preclude any possibility of tracing me and allowing anyone to actually "punish" me. If someone were to actually dismiss a person for talking about things they believe in within the confines of a public forum you have grounds for a lawsuit. Having personal experience with the legal system this is not cheap but neither is being fired by hired goons.
These "breakthroughs" are in fact the revolution in terms of technological power and access that PCs have given us. People progressed to this state and we have wanted this state. There's no such thing as a free lunch. This is true with progress. We can't have an advanced society or an industrial revolution without polution and habitat destruction. Every city simulation out there (ala Simcity and clones like lincity) portrays a developing society in terms of low progress and low technology then increasing technology and envirnomental damage and social ills (homelessness, poverty, high taxes), then in a few years you get a good group of people who change things. After all this it cycles all around and goes back to the beginning just with more technology or perhaps to step 2. This has to be shown.
In they Eye of The World series you get a medieval interpretation of this with the concept of the Wheel of Time. Essentially because of the backward methods of data archival and constant state of medieval warfar humanity was stuck into patterns of 7 differnt ages which gradually change and when the first comes around again no one knows that it isn't deja vu because there's no evidence. People developed super corporatism because it was what the people wanted. They wanted more and they got more.
Corporations are made of people. Those people are all working for their own disperate interests. However they have a similar goal to create more of the corporation because they are part and might get some back. If you start to ban corporations you get damage to the people who are part of those corporations. One could say you punish success. Now this dosn't mean that I don't believe what you say however I don't believe that you could successfully break up all corporations at a certain level and have all their workers discharged. Wow I can see the reactions of each and every labor union in the USA and abroad (if they really have any) raising riots in the streets. People want job security not to have to guess how long they can keep those bill collectors away with the 12 gauge shotgun.
So here I am, watching the internet, my playground for most of my youth, evaporate in a flood of money, greed, and ignorance. Am I to stand by, waving a banner saying "please don't steal my rights"? Or should I practice civil disobedience - thumb my nose to the super-corporations, risk life and property and stand up and say simply "No more"?
The internet is created via connections that are *VERY* expensive. I seriously doubt (I just might be suprised) that you have a large ammount of fiberoptic cables coming out of your house with multiple OC-48's do you? What has made the internet so accessible was corporate money. If you doubt this look at the horrendous charges all those BBS type services that were run by companies were charging. I have a copy of a book about the "internet" that dates from the 80s. This book talks about various "online" services and typical charges. They all charged by the minute at rates that could quickly add up. Want to transfer a file? Well things like the Linux kernel would set you back a pretty penny. You have that $19.95/month deal because a great deal of rich men decided that access would be given and get them more money if it were much cheaper: and here we are with dedicated connections that would be definately out of the question for any but the most monied people in the world.
Now I can't say I have been able to use the internet for "most of my youth". And I can't say that I think I am fairly treated in all things. I can say that some of the thoughtless flamming posters responding to my posts have driven a steak into my heart numerous times. I can also say that the internet hasn't really given me almost anything at all. Mostly it has sucked my time away and generally done little. However for you something must have happened. Some little thing gave the internet utility to you. That connection and the mere fact that you can send data to anyone in the world must be petter than candy. I salute you for finding that niche for your life.
As a matter of rights comes up. You have to say is it really worth it to do something like that? When was the last time that you seriously send some revolutionary thing like the Communist Manifesto to anyone else or post something equally revolutionary on your web site? Probably not. Corporations cannot do anything really evil unless the members let them.
I think that your idea of civil disobedience would largely fail. What do you really think that you could do to make a corporation quake? Well boycotting every corporation that does anything bad would result in you starving to death naked, alone, and cold in a snow drift. Youthful enthusiasm aside if you really think that given your priviledged status as a member of the online community do you think that it would conflict with your dream to divorce you from that medium that has given you life? Classical literature is repleate with instinces of where something really nasty happens to a person and it slowly drives them from who they are. They feel conflict and they just wither from within and slowly go mad or just go out in a balze of glory literately or figuratively.
In the Scarlet Letter you see this in the character of Roger Chillingworth. The man had wrong done unto him and declared war on the society that spawned that evil. He saught revenge and his whole being was revenge. If he had picked up the pieces and decided to make good what he could where he was he seriously would have been better off.
If they want to try to change the rules then perhaps you can make yourself a king in the new rules. If you want to have uninformed people capitalize on that! Just cheat all those sheep and make millions of dollars. When you get there then and only then can you make change. The days of instant discoveries by science and instant political change from one are gone. Although one can change things instant policital change is nigh impossible.
In conclusion I really don't care if I get moderated down or my account deleted. I merely care for what I believe. If you can't fight the bully and get beat up each and every day then change. Otherwise you end up like mass murders who just decide to get their own private revenge/control fantasies. Avoid the bully make a few concessions. Allow for your eventual phoenix rise from the ashes and then you can smite that bully.
It wouldn't surprise me if WIN2K was *banned* in Europe for whatever reason the Euro-Parliament digs up (Brussels is very big on giving european companies a head start over the US).
That isn't really all that new. Ever heard of tariffs? Essentially those are created to insure that people but US goods because most people don't want to pay more $$ for something that is overseas. However this dosn't rule out you buying it just decreases the sales of such products.
With some of the strange laws passed in Europe affecting the UK recently, such as we *have* to use metric measurement instead of imperial and we can get away with a speeding ticket due to the right to remain silent. I would think that Brussels could also provide a law that it is illegal to sell a crap product to people while telling them that its great:)
If I sell horse feces in a can and say it's the best all around health food is this a good thing? Precenting people from being able to sell fradulent defective products is all what the 20th century and reform were all about.
Domain registration should not take 14 days, it should take about 14 minutes at most....
I thought that for domain registration under the typical regime of the NSI that it took 24-48 hours to process your request. Yeah sure possibly if you streamline the process and have more people doing it it would take 14 minutes. However You have to consider that usually there is a line to get domains registered and that probably a human is entering in each and every one.
Take your income taxes as an example. In the US you have a tax form that could be processed by a machine in less than 10 minutes however because of the fact that a great many other people have taxes as well you have to wait and end up waiting for a long time.
how secure is the slashdot domain name. If it isn't, I'd do something. There are a lot of trolls and worse things out there.
I think that it's fine. You see even if someone tried to steal it it would be found out quickly and all you would have to do is just call them up and say:
Hello this is Rob Malda from that little ol' slashdot.org site I would really appreciate it if you would fix the problem with our domain name. Seems like a group of Lebaneese terrorists have taken it and are using it for their new web site.
BofA just bought loans.com for $3,000,000. Wouldn't it suck if that got stolen:)
Maybe I don't see something here but if the actual registration is held at Network Solutions then all that would have to be done is to have to owner to contract the company and have it returned. Just hope they kept the recipt.:)
Alright my next litle rant is going to be about my experiences about games under linux and as such does not exactly translate to 100% of the total experience that one would usually see in areas like this. Whenever I run games on linux (almost any game except extremely simple stuff using standard curses/ncurses combinations) my machine tried to betray me. I have had extremely sluggish preformance for what games that are actually GPLed and such. It seems that the insidious minions of Orthodoxy have decided that some users are worthy of the mantle of playing games and some are not. My question is exactly how are things being made as backwards compatable and streamlined to allow a usable experience for everyone. Another little thing currently on my debian box I have nearly 20+ libraries that are needed by just one program that only serve that program or game. Why do all developers see that developing games to require the use or implimentation of a different set of libraries and a different philosophy about exactly how to code? The results of these things have essentially been that you machine's resources are being wasted and wasted hard to run even a cheesy game badly.
My question is what makes this game so special in terms of it being ported to linux. Not being one of the monied few who has accewss to a NASA JPL mainframe to run these on what is so good about it. I remember buying a game about around Christhmas time and it really sucked and didn't hardly offer most of what it promised. That was my most expensive and last purtchess in the game arena (it was called Pyro technica created by Gt Interactive if anyone wants to know).
I am quite interested how your writings can engender so much animosity and hatred about topics which are not the kind which the messenger should be killed over. Why do you think your writing has this effect?
I was leading the SALESPERSON on? If you read the transcript, I believe you will find the opposite is true. If I had not known a damn thing about anything, I would have been led to believe that apache was a server architecture, RPM is a programming language, and EVERY distribution of Linux is insecure. I fed absolutely no information to this person, yet you insist that I "lead the person on with false data". I would have at least said that perhaps they were slightly misinformed. Letting someone carry one like that (at least from where I come from) is bad manners. If someone says something stupid I don't just let them hang themselves. I was leading the SALESPERSON on? If you read the transcript, I believe you will find the opposite is true. If I had not known a damn thing about anything, I would have been led to believe that apache was a server architecture, RPM is a programming language, and EVERY distribution of Linux is insecure. I fed absolutely no information to this person, yet you insist that I "lead the person on with false data". You then asked if there were methods of programming in rpm and such. I am sorry as I cannot view your page now but I got the impression that you were toying with the person and allowing them to continue to think that what they said was correct when it wasn't. It would be like talking to a small child and snickering behind their back.
So not only are their Booth people (executives?) very uninformed, so are their phone staff.
They are phone staff because they aren't the smartest or the quickest or the luckiest people but they still have to make a living.
The following URL has a quick wrap-up of the LinuxOne situation, as well as a call I placed to them. I spoke with a salesperson who frankly, didn't know a damn thing about what she was pitching. That's quite evident in the transcript that's on the same page.
http://hackphreak.org/~accipiter/
Funny ha ha ha
See the problem with what you did irrevelent of the fact that it was tapes and potentially illegal was the fact that the person is potentially publically libeled against; or more precisely the company. This person could loose their job because you as the shittless little punk that you are had the gaul to actually deliberately lead the person on with false data of your own. Perhaps a little hint? You know not everyone knows everything all at once we all learn.
I would respectively ask that you grow up and live and let live. You can't really believe that you actually treated that human like a human do you? Hmm well if you call up about your car or whatnot that gets into the shop that the mechanics should deliberately make you look like an ass right?
Yeah well um the kinetic tranducer module in the carbine recalibration chamber had a little bit of a problem. This will set you back at least $700.00 however I can cut you a deal and fix it with parts and labor combined for $650.
See a problem here. You make people look like fools you are basically saying that the above is proper behavior.
Slashdot Mirror
But quite frankly I don't care if a large company's web site goes down. What about the possibility of such things happening on WinNT or 95/98?
n the mid-nineties I was involved with a political campaign in a Southern California town. We were opposing the powers that be, who were backed by big money (developers pushing a very unpopular $2,000,000,000
development, among others). Encryption proved to be the only way we could communicate in private.
Interesting how this works. It seems that California has the largest percentage of people who have dynamically opposed interests. Every liberally minded group in the country usually has a large contingent in California. More natzi like pollution and environmental laws and such.
Let me say that the number of people who can afford to be political dissidents is probably much higher today than it was in times past because more people want to be communists and rebel against the government. This will subside just like it did when they were present in the 60's.
I certainly can't afford to just randomly decide to rebel and risk life and limb. Unless I have a steady stream of money comming in I have a little problem. Influence and power in society never come to a group of radicals but people who work within the system.
We had death threats. Our phones were tapped. "Private" conversations conducted in my house ended up not being private. Strategies we developed (over phone conversations) were implemented by the competition first.
Video rental records were stolen and given to reporters (never published though -- nothing incriminating.) Postal employees postponed the delivery of our mailers until after the election. Private investigators asked our
neighbors about any unsavory habits they thought we might have (say, does her son do drugs? Is he homosexual? What about the daughter -- does she sleep around?) It was a very ugly place to be, and it killed most of
my idealism.
I have actually theorized about one could easily defeat opponents like this. I have reached the conclusion that anti-terrorist tactics are the most helpful. Essentially this involves a tactical strike team of individuals who can essentially dismantle the enemy's actions with relative ease. Use of say "natural" poisons and weapons which utilize silencers are the most effective.
Trust me any inviduals who think they can get you are usually deluding themselves. People have brute threats but with a little thinking you can perservere.
My ultimate question is why didn't anyone contact the feds? The FBI is quite good about stopping silly little State oriented shit like that. Oh well I guess people have fooled themselves into thinking that the States can do a better job. This illustrates that they most certainly cannot.
I don't know what world you live in, but here in the US of A we see government officials breaking the law regularly. We see people with political influence (read "money") get away with anything, while the people who
truly care and want to make a difference are assaulted from every angle. We see the courts used to get around the law, rather than enforce it. We can't depend on the media to report the truth. These lessons were all
learned in the same election cycle, in one small town on the west coast. I'm frightened to think what it must be like on higher levels.
Well I really haven't seen anything on slashdot that indicates any other reaction other than something the Lone Gunmen or Fox Mulder would do. Ranting and raving about the evil government will not change. I have advocated infiltration and change within. However most people don't care for that sort of thing.
PGP ended up being the only way we could communicate privately (over a private BBS). It was a PITA to explain text-based encryption tool use to Win 3.1 users who didn't understand DOS, but we did it. And it
made a difference.
Explain in a system that has adequate security protections how something could happen like that? If I run a tight ship and only allow people in that I want in via password protected access and login times strictly monitered how does that matter? Back in the good old days (ie before widespread encryption and pgp and all those fanatical Fox Mulder types out there really got a pick me up with the internet) people could keep things reasonably secret. What did those people do? They used common sence. They never had really, really, bad problems with anything of the sort you are describing here.
I genuinely think that people have become more lazy and generally more trusting of their little electronic toys.
Encryption is important if you ever choose to be involved in something political that has real consequences. You're buying the government's line if you think it's only for kiddie pr0n peddlers and terrorists.
I am the not the sort of person who actually has done anything with a higher level of security clearance than probably anyone out there. I have never had data that hardly anyone has ever wanted. I do not have a credit card or anything that I personally paid for online. This makes issues like this a little more out of my reach of caring.
As far as political consequences I do wish I could get a job with a 3 letter organization and actually need encryption like that however I am realistic. The day I manage to actually have data like that needing protection I will think then and only then about using some form of encryption.
n the mid-nineties I was involved with a political campaign in a Southern California town. We were opposing the powers that be, who were backed by big money (developers pushing a very unpopular $2,000,000,000 development, among others). Encryption proved to be the only way we could communicate in private. Interesting how this works. It seems that California has the largest percentage of people who have dynamically opposed interests. Every liberally minded group in the country usually has a large contingent in California. More natzi like pollution and environmental laws and such. Let me say that the number of people who can afford to be political dissidents is probably much higher today than it was in times past because more people want to be communists and rebel against the government. This will subside just like it did when they were present in the 60's. I certainly can't afford to just randomly decide to rebel and risk life and limb. Unless I have a steady stream of money comming in I have a little problem. Influence and power in society never come to a group of radicals but people who work within the system. We had death threats. Our phones were tapped. "Private" conversations conducted in my house ended up not being private. Strategies we developed (over phone conversations) were implemented by the competition first. Video rental records were stolen and given to reporters (never published though -- nothing incriminating.) Postal employees postponed the delivery of our mailers until after the election. Private investigators asked our neighbors about any unsavory habits they thought we might have (say, does her son do drugs? Is he homosexual? What about the daughter -- does she sleep around?) It was a very ugly place to be, and it killed most of my idealism. I have actually theorized about one could easily defeat opponents like this. I have reached the conclusion that anti-terrorist tactics are the most helpful. Essentially this involves a tactical strike team of individuals who can essentially dismantle the enemy's actions with relative ease. Use of say "natural" poisons and weapons which utilize silencers are the most effective. Trust me any inviduals who think they can get you are usually deluding themselves. People have brute threats but with a little thinking you can perservere. My ultimate question is why didn't anyone contact the feds? The FBI is quite good about stopping silly little State oriented shit like that. Oh well I guess people have fooled themselves into thinking that the States can do a better job. This illustrates that they most certainly cannot. I don't know what world you live in, but here in the US of A we see government officials breaking the law regularly. We see people with political influence (read "money") get away with anything, while the people who truly care and want to make a difference are assaulted from every angle. We see the courts used to get around the law, rather than enforce it. We can't depend on the media to report the truth. These lessons were all learned in the same election cycle, in one small town on the west coast. I'm frightened to think what it must be like on higher levels. Well I really haven't seen anything on slashdot that indicates any other reaction other than something the Lone Gunmen or Fox Mulder would do. Ranting and raving about the evil government will not change. I have advocated infiltration and change within. However most people don't care for that sort of thing. PGP ended up being the only way we could communicate privately (over a private BBS). It was a PITA to explain text-based encryption tool use to Win 3.1 users who didn't understand DOS, but we did it. And it made a difference. Explain in a system that has adequate security protections how something could happen like that? If I run a tight ship and only allow people in that I want in via password protected access and login times strictly monitered how does that matter? Back in the good old days (ie before widespread encryption and pgp and all those fanatical Fox Mulder types out there really got a pick me up with the internet) people could keep things reasonably secret. What did those people do? They used common sence. They never had really, really, bad problems with anything of the sort you are describing here. I genuinely think that people have become more lazy and generally more trusting of their little electronic toys. Encryption is important if you ever choose to be involved in something political that has real consequences. You're buying the government's line if you think it's only for kiddie pr0n peddlers and terrorists. I am the not the sort of person who actually has done anything with a higher level of security clearance than probably anyone out there. I have never had data that hardly anyone has ever wanted. I do not have a credit card or anything that I personally paid for online. This makes issues like this a little more out of my reach of caring. As far as political consequences I do wish I could get a job with a 3 letter organization and actually need encryption like that however I am realistic. The day I manage to actually have data like that needing protection I will think then and only then about using some form of encryption.
I used to teach Introduction to the Internet classes at a community college where I also ran the open student lab. I would tell the students that they should not send anything in email that they wouldn't want to see in the headline of
tomorrows newspaper. If I'm having a private email conversation with a friend about a third party, there may be information that I don't want the third party to know I said and information I don't want made public.
Ahh however if you remember that there are certain laws that take such behavior as criminal on many levels. Eventually they will end up in a court room.
Assume I am a psychiatrist consulting with a colleague in another place about a client. I wouldn't want anyone but the intended recipient to see the information about the patients condition.
The individual who obtained the information was breaking the law. If they steal the data they can be prosecuted. I doubt that many psychiatrists actually use encryption anyway.
And what about business plans? If I was working on developing a new product, the exposure of that information could give someone else (with more money - like M/$) the idea to develop before I could get all my ducks in a row.
Most of communication about projects in any reasonably secure company is done internally. Email is usually intraoffice variety and as such would not fall to foul play from people wanting to get it unless you have a leak; and really that's an internal security issue best solved internally.
Other than that, is just simply the fact that I have a right to be secure in my possessions and particulary, my information. That was the whole point to forming this country (USA). For my government to force me to give them the
encryption key to data is the same as demanding that I incriminate myself (also prohibited by the US Constitution.)
You already do that. If I have a computer someone has to be able to retrieve that computer. You have a lock on your door however do you happen to live in a bomb shelter, do you have 30 feet of concrete surrounding your house? Some things are overkill.
I realize the article is about the law in the UK, but the encryption issue is truly international.
If you notice the countries that do not have policies against some form of crypto are usually countries that are not really that totally powerful, or are not as ecconomically massive?
Governments are chipping away at our rights to privacy (at whatever level) in many countries around the world. If we don't stop it now, nothing about our private lives will be beyond the reach of Government, and then corporations as
they further lobby the Government (become the Government?)
The government has various laws that restrict the flow of information. The federal government cares more about people's rights than most. Where you find all the massive breaches of privacy are usually on State and local levels. Garbage that the states do are usually 10x worse than what the national government does because they are held to a higher standard of responsibility.
Well, those people in the commercial moved it around the house pretty easily... Well, those people in the commercial moved it around the house pretty easily...
Well that would work really good until you get massive concussions and skull factures because your flat pannel TV fel onto your cranium.
If you are living in anything but abject poverty, there are certain people who would be very interested in things like your credit card numbers, bank account numbers, social security numbers, etc., especially in combination.
That's what we have fraud protection for. Consumer protection prevents law breakers from totally wiping you out when you don't want to. If you take the ideas that many of the people here everything will be monitered and tracked. If that happens it will make law breakers especially vulnerable to capture and arrest. Cryptography will be rendered moot and the government dosn't matter in areas of commercial interest as I illustrate below.
And I also have to mention that, while many FSF true believers may find this objectionable, I do have to mention that there were times when I had, on my home system, source code that sold for something like $100,000, in the
course of some consulting projects. (That's what the source license cost. I wouldn't have paid a nickle for it though. It was crap.)
Well I don't object to charging although you admit that the code was crap and you sold it for $100,000. That's the kind of thing you keep the recipt for the refund.
Perhaps not a common situation, but then, it is not uncommon for managerial types to have data on their systems that would be of great interest to their competitors.
Unless over 50% of the people in the US are managers of something and have such data then there is no problem. Usually such data is secured on machines that are physically located within a building or in a system that is essentially secure to begin with. You would have to have a group of terrorists or militia groups to break through some buildings.
Cryptography is not important just as a means to keep data from the government.
Since the government can basically do what it wants because it makes the rules protecting your data from the government is pointless unless you want to try to escape the problem. The government dosn't want to or does not actually engage in commercial or industrial espionage because it has essentially nothing to gain.
Because you might want to order stuff on-line? People (especially those in card companies) really care about credit card fraud. Encrypting your card number before you send it is the most pragmatic way to prevent financial loss and the
hassles of cancelling your card etc.
Yeah but as an average person you don't need to build a credit card transaction system. Online processing dosn't really force the user to care about encryption except having an https url prefixed to the site.
Besides, most people now assume that an actual internet connection is soon going to be as ubiquitous as electricity or water supply is today. Cryptography will be useful for everyone and should therefore be available and adequately
strong.
Also a really, really, really, big assumption. Not everyone will be online. And ceternally not everyone will need cryptography. This still dosn't invalidate my argument.
I will simply point you to the recent story, Northwest Searches Employees' Home Computers and see if you can extrapolate why this particular case might be relevant even though it only points out one specific utility for encryption
among average folks.
Reminds me of a simpson's episode where Homer is leader of the Union at the nuclear power plant. One night he hears a knock on the door.
*Knock* *Knock* *Knock*
Homer: Who's There?
Man at door: Goons
Homer: Who?
Man at door: Hired Goons
Homer: *opens door*
Man at door: *grabs Homer*
In your own home you do not have the need to open the door to anyone unless they have a search warrant. That is how it works at least in the USA. Now if they did do such a thing I would have every reason to physically beat their brains out with a club in keeping them off my property. If I buy the computer then I have free access to it. If they want to look at the computer fine! I'll just delete very thourally (about 1,000 times for each sector of the hd that had the files). Or more exactly take the hd out of the machine completely delete it and then use some thermite on the hd. Then have another hd that I could swap back in without any data that they want. Simple problem solved.
Even with encryption if I have a directory called
C:\my_evil_secret_plans_for_Northwest
and has files like:
bomb_making_plans.doc
strikes_and_how_they_work.doc
...
etc then perhaps that is still incriminating and especially so if you have the data encrypted.
Many, if not most of these are _digital_, while the old monitor in front of you is analog--there is a D/A conversion in the graphics card or in the monitor box. Plus there are a whole lot more pixels. A maxed out graphics card for one
of these babies might have 64 meg of VRAM. Egad. Without the D/A conversion, things like autoaliasing work differently too, so they will have some really low level impacts on the design of drivers. You probably won't be at all
happy if you just plug one of these babies into your box.
Well if they make one that fits into an ISA slot I will be a happy person.
/* Disclaimer anything said in the below post is something that I personally believe and as such may offend persons who have vested interests in the concept of cryptography. If this offends you realize that it is indeed a valid opinion */
I would think that in fact the average person has no use for cryptography in their daily lives. I don't mostly because I really don't know anyone and have never had the need to use communications media to interact with individuals in a private way. Generally I think that if I have a choice between using cryptography or going to prison I will choice to not use it.
The ultimate question is why would anyone really care about you so much that you need encrypted data anyway? If you are being monitered that closely you should run far, far away and never return.
Cryptography is only useful if you happen to be a spy or have an actual internet connection (ie the use of pgp to sign, encrypt, or both messages with it). Most data that you have is not really that interesting.
I propose
Ok with you there.
Multiple Alpha processors,(screw that SMP stuff. Three-way!) a G400 and two of these babies? Complete with MD, DVD-R and a *nix kernel with all of the 'legacy' support ripped sound good? We'll hand roll it all in assembler for
performance!
Uh huh. Ok now let's look at all that dye stained money that you seem to have. That's nice and Ski masks wow that must have been some bank robbery.
Seriously how does the processor actually influence that quality of the display except for generating the screen's content. You could just as easily hook one of those up to a 386 or 486 running dos or windows 3.1 or with Xfree 86 and still get a good looking display.
'm wondering why both my home and work computers are viewing the NYT links without registration...
I usually can do that also, I just assume my browser has a cookie for whatever registration I last used.
George
Actually I have never even entered a login id on this machine and the links are displaying. I believe that the NYT may have actually dropped (at least temporarly) the need of a registration.
Make them for an entirely new system, designed from the ground up with the newest technologies. I think that it is about time that entirely new systems not based on the old x86 systems succeeded in the mainstream. I realize that it
would be quite a feat, but just think about the raw power you could get from new chips and equipment that didn't have to be compatible with old chips/code/peripherals.
Well unfortunately most people don't want to buy totally new things. I ceternally don't. I would love to get the maxium life out of anything until it is completely broken and then if I have to then buy something. I guess some people never really care.
I am curious why people have to think that compatablity with older hardware is such a problem. I think that the less you have to spend the better off you are in general. Plus with more compatability comes lesser price and better transition.
When does one declare the existing social structure so inneficient that change is impossible from within? Now.
Your method of change is what? Protests. Making laws. There are many theories which suggest that if liberal minded folks ran things life would be easily harder for those who generally try to make a living.
Suppose you make a law that would coerce people to prevent the release of carbon dixoide by x% (this has been tried but failed thank god). What instantly happens is that prices increase 300x or more. All industry processes increase in complexity and difficulty. With this you hve the eventual collapse of people who were/are already poor into what we had in the middle ages or in ancient India: a stratified caste system. Such a system could easily ensnare each and every person in it's grasp for many, many, years.
Plans to stop money will only hurt people who rely on said money. Unless you make money in a barter system and don't really have a job where you get a paycheck you are totally effected by this. We had a crummy labor marked in the 70's and it could only see a repeat if we follow advice like this. It took a lot of sabre rattling and hard work and innovative stratagies to get out of said slump.
At which point does a person declare the existing social structure to be so inefficient, harmful and biased that change from within is impossible?
I would say at the time that the person/person's have actually had something quite harmful done specifically to them ie suffered a personal loss. We have lived in a time when anyone could just walk up to you on the street and end your life. The higher crime rate the higher chance that will happen. For some people this has already happened and they become bitter.
You must realize that change has and will always occured. History will show you that people go from periods of relative freedom to periods of relative slavery. Over the long haul humanity will perservere. As much as I have a 1984 sig I do not believe that 1984 could be a reality. There are too many people involved. People like you and I are capable of running a totalitarian machine. Believe me if such a totalitarian governemnt existed I would do plenty of boot polishing that would eventually lead me to get great power within the sturcture. Then once I had power I could shape the system to whatever I felt like.
I'm rapidly reaching the conclusion that there is little anyone can do to stop the large money'd interests from taking away our online freedom: the freedom of information, fair use, free speech, the right to peacefully assemble (ie: post in
public forums without fear of retribution - like having your access revoked). I think the system has been evolving ever since about the late 1960's when various economic breakthroughs kickstarted this modern super-corporate era. We
railed hard against government invading our privacy, our homes, and our lives... only to turn a blind eye to another group: corporations. And now we have nobody accountable in those positions. We're worse off than before.
You must remember that those "monied interests" were at one time little children who had no money . Through the process of freedom they slowly built power in a society that allowed for absolute freedom. Then they set up shop. Now theoretically you can do the same. However I would not exactly want to dedicate my life to business. I have had my share of crap in my life and am still going through crap. In once sence you could say that I really should rebel and leave society to it's own. However I cannot because the only other choice is death by my hand or by the grim reaper due to starvation. Therefore the logical choice is to act and try to change your surroundings.
You know I can post in public forums. I would give 5 bucks to the first slashdotter who could correctly pinpoint me to within 100 feet, give my real name, address, telephone number, etc. I seriously doubt this could be done.
This would also preclude any possibility of tracing me and allowing anyone to actually "punish" me. If someone were to actually dismiss a person for talking about things they believe in within the confines of a public forum you have grounds for a lawsuit. Having personal experience with the legal system this is not cheap but neither is being fired by hired goons.
These "breakthroughs" are in fact the revolution in terms of technological power and access that PCs have given us. People progressed to this state and we have wanted this state. There's no such thing as a free lunch. This is true with progress. We can't have an advanced society or an industrial revolution without polution and habitat destruction. Every city simulation out there (ala Simcity and clones like lincity) portrays a developing society in terms of low progress and low technology then increasing technology and envirnomental damage and social ills (homelessness, poverty, high taxes), then in a few years you get a good group of people who change things. After all this it cycles all around and goes back to the beginning just with more technology or perhaps to step 2. This has to be shown.
In they Eye of The World series you get a medieval interpretation of this with the concept of the Wheel of Time. Essentially because of the backward methods of data archival and constant state of medieval warfar humanity was stuck into patterns of 7 differnt ages which gradually change and when the first comes around again no one knows that it isn't deja vu because there's no evidence. People developed super corporatism because it was what the people wanted. They wanted more and they got more.
Corporations are made of people. Those people are all working for their own disperate interests. However they have a similar goal to create more of the corporation because they are part and might get some back. If you start to ban corporations you get damage to the people who are part of those corporations. One could say you punish success. Now this dosn't mean that I don't believe what you say however I don't believe that you could successfully break up all corporations at a certain level and have all their workers discharged. Wow I can see the reactions of each and every labor union in the USA and abroad (if they really have any) raising riots in the streets. People want job security not to have to guess how long they can keep those bill collectors away with the 12 gauge shotgun.
So here I am, watching the internet, my playground for most of my youth, evaporate in a flood of money, greed, and ignorance. Am I to stand by, waving a banner saying "please don't steal my rights"? Or should I practice civil
disobedience - thumb my nose to the super-corporations, risk life and property and stand up and say simply "No more"?
The internet is created via connections that are *VERY* expensive. I seriously doubt (I just might be suprised) that you have a large ammount of fiberoptic cables coming out of your house with multiple OC-48's do you? What has made the internet so accessible was corporate money. If you doubt this look at the horrendous charges all those BBS type services that were run by companies were charging. I have a copy of a book about the "internet" that dates from the 80s. This book talks about various "online" services and typical charges. They all charged by the minute at rates that could quickly add up. Want to transfer a file? Well things like the Linux kernel would set you back a pretty penny. You have that $19.95/month deal because a great deal of rich men decided that access would be given and get them more money if it were much cheaper: and here we are with dedicated connections that would be definately out of the question for any but the most monied people in the world.
Now I can't say I have been able to use the internet for "most of my youth". And I can't say that I think I am fairly treated in all things. I can say that some of the thoughtless flamming posters responding to my posts have driven a steak into my heart numerous times. I can also say that the internet hasn't really given me almost anything at all. Mostly it has sucked my time away and generally done little. However for you something must have happened. Some little thing gave the internet utility to you. That connection and the mere fact that you can send data to anyone in the world must be petter than candy. I salute you for finding that niche for your life.
As a matter of rights comes up. You have to say is it really worth it to do something like that? When was the last time that you seriously send some revolutionary thing like the Communist Manifesto to anyone else or post something equally revolutionary on your web site? Probably not. Corporations cannot do anything really evil unless the members let them.
I think that your idea of civil disobedience would largely fail. What do you really think that you could do to make a corporation quake? Well boycotting every corporation that does anything bad would result in you starving to death naked, alone, and cold in a snow drift. Youthful enthusiasm aside if you really think that given your priviledged status as a member of the online community do you think that it would conflict with your dream to divorce you from that medium that has given you life? Classical literature is repleate with instinces of where something really nasty happens to a person and it slowly drives them from who they are. They feel conflict and they just wither from within and slowly go mad or just go out in a balze of glory literately or figuratively.
In the Scarlet Letter you see this in the character of Roger Chillingworth. The man had wrong done unto him and declared war on the society that spawned that evil. He saught revenge and his whole being was revenge. If he had picked up the pieces and decided to make good what he could where he was he seriously would have been better off.
If they want to try to change the rules then perhaps you can make yourself a king in the new rules. If you want to have uninformed people capitalize on that! Just cheat all those sheep and make millions of dollars. When you get there then and only then can you make change. The days of instant discoveries by science and instant political change from one are gone. Although one can change things instant policital change is nigh impossible.
In conclusion I really don't care if I get moderated down or my account deleted. I merely care for what I believe. If you can't fight the bully and get beat up each and every day then change. Otherwise you end up like mass murders who just decide to get their own private revenge/control fantasies. Avoid the bully make a few concessions. Allow for your eventual phoenix rise from the ashes and then you can smite that bully.
It wouldn't surprise me if WIN2K was *banned* in Europe for whatever reason the Euro-Parliament digs up (Brussels is very big on giving european companies a head start over the US).
:)
That isn't really all that new. Ever heard of tariffs? Essentially those are created to insure that people but US goods because most people don't want to pay more $$ for something that is overseas. However this dosn't rule out you buying it just decreases the sales of such products.
With some of the strange laws passed in Europe affecting the UK recently, such as we *have* to use metric measurement instead of imperial and we can get away with a speeding ticket due to the right to remain silent. I would think
that Brussels could also provide a law that it is illegal to sell a crap product to people while telling them that its great
If I sell horse feces in a can and say it's the best all around health food is this a good thing? Precenting people from being able to sell fradulent defective products is all what the 20th century and reform were all about.
Domain registration should not take 14 days, it should take about 14 minutes at most....
I thought that for domain registration under the typical regime of the NSI that it took 24-48 hours to process your request. Yeah sure possibly if you streamline the process and have more people doing it it would take 14 minutes. However You have to consider that usually there is a line to get domains registered and that probably a human is entering in each and every one.
Take your income taxes as an example. In the US you have a tax form that could be processed by a machine in less than 10 minutes however because of the fact that a great many other people have taxes as well you have to wait and end up waiting for a long time.
how secure is the slashdot domain name. If it isn't, I'd do something. There are a lot of trolls and worse things out there.
I think that it's fine. You see even if someone tried to steal it it would be found out quickly and all you would have to do is just call them up and say:
Hello this is Rob Malda from that little ol' slashdot.org site I would really appreciate it if you would fix the problem with our domain name. Seems like a group of Lebaneese terrorists have taken it and are using it for their new web site.
BofA just bought loans.com for $3,000,000. Wouldn't it suck if that got stolen :)
:)
Maybe I don't see something here but if the actual registration is held at Network Solutions then all that would have to be done is to have to owner to contract the company and have it returned. Just hope they kept the recipt.
Alright my next litle rant is going to be about my experiences about games under linux and as such does not exactly translate to 100% of the total experience that one would usually see in areas like this.
Whenever I run games on linux (almost any game except extremely simple stuff using standard curses/ncurses combinations) my machine tried to betray me. I have had extremely sluggish preformance for what games that are actually GPLed and such. It seems that the insidious minions of Orthodoxy have decided that some users are worthy of the mantle of playing games and some are not. My question is exactly how are things being made as backwards compatable and streamlined to allow a usable experience for everyone. Another little thing currently on my debian box I have nearly 20+ libraries that are needed by just one program that only serve that program or game. Why do all developers see that developing games to require the use or implimentation of a different set of libraries and a different philosophy about exactly how to code?
The results of these things have essentially been that you machine's resources are being wasted and wasted hard to run even a cheesy game badly.
My question is what makes this game so special in terms of it being ported to linux. Not being one of the monied few who has accewss to a NASA JPL mainframe to run these on what is so good about it.
I remember buying a game about around Christhmas time and it really sucked and didn't hardly offer most of what it promised. That was my most expensive and last purtchess in the game arena (it was called Pyro technica created by Gt Interactive if anyone wants to know).
I am quite interested how your writings can engender so much animosity and hatred about topics which are not the kind which the messenger should be killed over. Why do you think your writing has this effect?
I was leading the SALESPERSON on? If you read the transcript, I believe you will find the opposite is true. If I had not known a damn thing about anything, I would have been led to believe that apache was a server architecture, RPM is a programming language, and EVERY distribution of Linux is insecure. I fed absolutely no information to this person, yet you insist that I "lead the person on with false data". I would have at least said that perhaps they were slightly misinformed. Letting someone carry one like that (at least from where I come from) is bad manners. If someone says something stupid I don't just let them hang themselves. I was leading the SALESPERSON on? If you read the transcript, I believe you will find the opposite is true. If I had not known a damn thing about anything, I would have been led to believe that apache was a server architecture, RPM is a programming language, and EVERY distribution of Linux is insecure. I fed absolutely no information to this person, yet you insist that I "lead the person on with false data". You then asked if there were methods of programming in rpm and such. I am sorry as I cannot view your page now but I got the impression that you were toying with the person and allowing them to continue to think that what they said was correct when it wasn't. It would be like talking to a small child and snickering behind their back.
That's funny.
No I think that's sad.
So not only are their Booth people (executives?) very uninformed, so are their phone staff.
They are phone staff because they aren't the smartest or the quickest or the luckiest people but they still have to make a living.
The following URL has a quick wrap-up of the LinuxOne situation, as well as a call I placed to them. I spoke with a salesperson who frankly, didn't know a damn thing about what she was pitching. That's quite evident in the
transcript that's on the same page.
http://hackphreak.org/~accipiter/
Funny ha ha ha
See the problem with what you did irrevelent of the fact that it was tapes and potentially illegal was the fact that the person is potentially publically libeled against; or more precisely the company. This person could loose their job because you as the shittless little punk that you are had the gaul to actually deliberately lead the person on with false data of your own. Perhaps a little hint? You know not everyone knows everything all at once we all learn.
I would respectively ask that you grow up and live and let live. You can't really believe that you actually treated that human like a human do you? Hmm well if you call up about your car or whatnot that gets into the shop that the mechanics should deliberately make you look like an ass right?
Yeah well um the kinetic tranducer module in the carbine recalibration chamber had a little bit of a problem. This will set you back at least $700.00 however I can cut you a deal and fix it with parts and labor combined for $650.
See a problem here. You make people look like fools you are basically saying that the above is proper behavior.
This will be possible (and probable) when IPv6 is in full use
Not unless the last mile problem is solved secussfully.