Damned if they do, damned if they don't. If they didn't mention the issue, the criticism from drooling/. hordes would instead be "why didn't you fix this right away?", and *then* they'd have to mention the Debian thing anyways.
That's because the "tax" is not really a tax and is a levy (which means all the money goes to the recording industry). This is the same as the levy on pop bottles in some provinces. The levy is part of the "price" and is taxable.
Stupid corporate-biased Liberal (yeah, I know) government.
CBC's monday night comedy set is by far better than the crap being put together by the private stations. I'm not down with their dramas and what not, but I'm happy to serve up my tax dollars for the comedy alone.
At trade shows the Be guys used to demonstrate the FS by actually yanking out the cord and rebooting. No just one or twice in a show mind, but repeatedly as necessary.
And out comes the overreacter, bent on showing us how off the wall I am *L*.
You obviously have no idea how a govt. bureaucracy works. Try changing the pencil brand at the FBI. See how many levels of approval and form-filling that takes.
You're wrong actually, I have a decent idea of how gov't works, having worked there before. However, Not all branches of the government are so slow and ponderous, the SEALs are a good example of this. Besides, if the attack was done by the gov't, it wouldn't have to be (and probably couldn't be) something that was done on the spur of the moment, lots of planning went into those attacks, be it by a TLA, your neighbourhood script kiddy or someone else.
A DoS attack secretly engineered by the FBI is neither monitoring nor controlling, it's just rabid paranoia. The fact that crap like this gets moderated to 5 simply makes/. the haunt of hyper-caffeinated conspiracy theorists.
As of this time my post is still at 1, what are you talking about? Simply because you call it rabid paranoia, doesn't lessen the fact that it's quite possible that something like this can happen, or has happened. The fact that you seem to refuse to consider even the possibility of something like this makes it all the more likely that something like this could happen without "common" people knowing about it.
Well, you can't just point to X and say Y is true.
Not surprisingly, I didn't do that at all. I pointed to X and said that Y is possible. Read my post before engaging the auto-flame next time Mr. AC, thanks.
When govt. does things like carnivore, the people doing it make sure it is legal.
Absolutely wrong. Go read "A Gift of Fire" by Sara Baase. Specifically, check out chapter 3 (if I recall) which deals with the illegal wiretapping done by the FBI. The fact that wiretapping has subsequently become legal does not mitigate the fact that they did intentionally break the law for years.
Breaking the law doesn't hurt your career when your superiors see nothing wrong with it.
You're right in saying that evidence is required to prove that something is actually happening, but you don't need hard evidence to consider the possibility of a thing happening. If your mind is so closed that you refuse to even gauge the possiblities, I feel sorry for you.
I don't think you have to convince a whole shwack of people to do the work it would take to set up and execute a DDoS attack. If it wasn't the gov't (I'm not saying either way), how many skr1pt kiddi3s do you think it took to set this up? A small handful I bet. Why wouldn't it work the same with some kind of weird covert computer ops inside an american TLA? It's not like breaking the law is new to them, how many illegal wiretaps were performed in the US in the 20th century... lots.
As far as it not being a benefit to businesses, I think you're looking at the short term at the expense of the more important long term. An increasingly monitered and controled internet (be it by coporations or by the gov't, which some would argue is just proxy for corps) makes it easier to do the things that make money, like user profiling and strict content access controls.
One thing I think that people forget when they say stuff like you did about X-Files and gov't employees, is that despite the fact that most gov't employees are regular people, some aren't. It doesn't take to whole lot of people to do covert type things, look at Echelon. Talk to any regular joe on the street and they'll tell you they'd never work in such a place, yet there's a whole bunch of people who actually do.
If even say 5% of the stuff that "paranoid" people believe is true, that's still pretty damn scary. The best way to ignore something like that is to turn off your brain and stick a label on them.
- The masses of America are brainwashed.
- That it's by the "liberal" media.
- The media is all "liberal" in the first place.
- All liberals are cool with free speech as long as they can moniter it (wtf are you thinking here??)
I guess it's only childish and ignorant if you're not the one doing it.
As far as I agree with them, libertarian beliefs should (idealy) lead to more community-oriented co-operation. When you put the responsibility of action on people, and not governments, you get things like effective product boycotts. Unfortunately that rarely happens, because a lot of people don't seem to like to work together, or do anything that might be seen as different, or "radical".
Try storing all the tin cans of food you have upside down all the time, or tell people you refuse to watch any TV anymore, see what kind of reaction you get.
You're not right though. You've walked into a discussion and are trying to argue an FAQ (Frequently Asked Question). The point you've tried to make is that unlicensed software that decodes DVDs is a tool used for piracy. This is correct, in the same way that having a DVD player, or a computer at all could potentially be a tool for piracy. The argument doesn't hold water because:
a) Any player can be used to pirate a DVD.
b) If you were intent on mass-pirating DVDs (or even making copies of DVDs), there's equipment out there that can do this without even decoding the disk first. There is no way to prevent someone from copying the encrypted stuff on the disk to another disk, then having a player (licensed or not) happily decode the thing for you to watch.
The argument concerning piracy in this case is completely and utterly invalid, forget you even thought of it, because it doesn't seem that you've fully thought it through.
BTW: As I mentioned above, you're being called a troll because you've asked a question that's been answered soooo many times. I know it's easy to just spout off opinions on Slashdot (I"m a good example) but it's a good idea to do some reading before you post. HTH
I hate to turn this into an GPL-based flame-war, i really do, but you're just wrong here.
The GPL *requires* that you release any changes you've made to the "copyright-less" material you're working with (if it's based on the GPL, of course). In a world without copyright, I could take your work, modify it, and sell it, keep it to myself, or give it away for free, it's *my* choice. It doesn't quite translate to music cause you can't hand out binaries only.
The GPL is all about freedom for the user, and restrictions for the developper of related works. For all you out there who argue "There are some freedoms you shouldn't have", think about that the next time you download copyrigted MP3s from napster or wherever. If I respected the GPL license as much as you guys respected copyright for music, I'd probably end up in court with RMS.
It's a logical fallacy to compare physical theft to copying a digital work.
When you copy music illegally you are breaking copyright laws. You can call it "theft of intellectual property" if you want, but you should call it that explicitly. Otherwise you're just like the media, overloading words with varied meanings and not being specific when you say things like "And taking that property makes you a thief."
If I make a copy of a metallica song outside of fair-use laws (or other situations allowed by the band in question), I may be depriving them of money (assuming that I would have otherwised bought the piece of music), and I'm definitely breaking copyright laws, but I'm definitely not stealing or committing theft in the classic sense of the word.
Trying to link a physical or tangible act to something like copying/trading music does nothing but obscure the situation and play on emotions. No one likes to be robbed or have their stuff stolen, and bringing up the word theft is a sure way to immediatly stigmatize whomever you're talking about in the minds of anyone who hasn't yet thought the issue through.
Explain the logical differences between your attitude towards this and -for example- someone breaking into your home and stealing stuff from you.
By your line of reasoning, the police really shouldn't be involved in any sort of break and enter or property crime. If you can't secure your residence, TS for you.
If the above is what you're implying (which I assume it's not, since you seem to think authorities should involve themselves with a certain size of entity (what's the cut-off by the way, 100k+ revenue per year? less/more?)) I certainly hope you're never in a position of power in any government.
I find that in a lot of my classes the "higher learning" aspect of the course gets bogged down and diminished because of the (lack of) techincal capabilities of students. They don't know how to use their compilers or unix (we have Solaris in the labs as well as Linux).
Thus, professors usually have no time for people who are asking for help (or having problems with) technical things that are outside the scope of the class, and outside of the materials said to be supported at the start of the course.
However, if you take the time to make an appointment and go talk to your professor -not after class, not during drop-in times that are supposed to be for people who are having trouble with the actual contents of the course- you'll probably find that your professor is very accomodating and helpful. They're there to help you learn the material, not kick your grade down a couple notches because you have a compiler or OS preference.
The FUD is simply saying "more eyes means better security". Most people take this to mean that since Linux has more people using it, it's by nature more secure.
Maybe the phrase isn't supposed to mean that, but you have to be more precise.
c.f. the problem with computers in general. They understand what you say, not what you mean.
It seems that the poster of this story is do a little logical dancing when it comes to "this isn't Linux's fault".
Just as buggy code isn't the fault of closed-source software (programmers make mistakes, not licensing models), Linux itself isn't at fault for any tinkering done in the IT dept of an organization.
However, Linux does make it a lot easier, and potentially much more damaging.
The whole bit about there being limited resources (food-wise) in the world is completely false.
More than enough food to feed every single person on earth gets grown or raised each year, even with the terribly uneconomic way we raise food in north america (think I'm full of it? compare the caloric production of corn over a given area compared to cattle or hogs). The starvation problem is simply a matter of greed and distribution.
The debts held by the western world against 3rd world countries (african countries especially) are crippling to their economies, whereas the money they represent is less than that lost on a bad day for the NYSE.
Speaking about the world from a purely economic perspective is like talking about the climate in your house while disregarding the weather outside.
As the infamous quote goes: "For economists, the real world is a special case."
This story has been posted here a while, so no one might ever read this:
Anyways, one of the rfc's I read somewhere proposed a.nom TLD for personal homepages.. it would be nice to see countries that have strict business and org policies implement something like this.
Slashdot Mirror
Your patches gratefully accepted. (But sweet fruitless grudge-holding in the meantime)
Damned if they do, damned if they don't. If they didn't mention the issue, the criticism from drooling /. hordes would instead be "why didn't you fix this right away?", and *then* they'd have to mention the Debian thing anyways.
You're being incredibly retarded here.
1. Start browser
2. Commence dialup.
Idiot.
all IMHO, but feel free to flame away
1. Open
2. Open
3. Dunno, but I'd place bets on Free or all of them
4. Free
That's because the "tax" is not really a tax and is a levy (which means all the money goes to the recording industry). This is the same as the levy on pop bottles in some provinces. The levy is part of the "price" and is taxable.
Stupid corporate-biased Liberal (yeah, I know) government.
DS9 didn't portray cloning in a negative light. It was a plot device, no judgements made.
CBC's monday night comedy set is by far better than the crap being put together by the private stations. I'm not down with their dramas and what not, but I'm happy to serve up my tax dollars for the comedy alone.
That's the whole point.
At trade shows the Be guys used to demonstrate the FS by actually yanking out the cord and rebooting. No just one or twice in a show mind, but repeatedly as necessary.
You obviously have no idea how a govt. bureaucracy works. Try changing the pencil brand at the FBI. See how many levels of approval and form-filling that takes.
You're wrong actually, I have a decent idea of how gov't works, having worked there before. However, Not all branches of the government are so slow and ponderous, the SEALs are a good example of this. Besides, if the attack was done by the gov't, it wouldn't have to be (and probably couldn't be) something that was done on the spur of the moment, lots of planning went into those attacks, be it by a TLA, your neighbourhood script kiddy or someone else.
A DoS attack secretly engineered by the FBI is neither monitoring nor controlling, it's just rabid paranoia. The fact that crap like this gets moderated to 5 simply makes /. the haunt of hyper-caffeinated conspiracy theorists.
As of this time my post is still at 1, what are you talking about? Simply because you call it rabid paranoia, doesn't lessen the fact that it's quite possible that something like this can happen, or has happened. The fact that you seem to refuse to consider even the possibility of something like this makes it all the more likely that something like this could happen without "common" people knowing about it.
Well, you can't just point to X and say Y is true.
Not surprisingly, I didn't do that at all. I pointed to X and said that Y is possible. Read my post before engaging the auto-flame next time Mr. AC, thanks.
When govt. does things like carnivore, the people doing it make sure it is legal.
Absolutely wrong. Go read "A Gift of Fire" by Sara Baase. Specifically, check out chapter 3 (if I recall) which deals with the illegal wiretapping done by the FBI. The fact that wiretapping has subsequently become legal does not mitigate the fact that they did intentionally break the law for years.
Breaking the law doesn't hurt your career when your superiors see nothing wrong with it.
You're right in saying that evidence is required to prove that something is actually happening, but you don't need hard evidence to consider the possibility of a thing happening. If your mind is so closed that you refuse to even gauge the possiblities, I feel sorry for you.
Next time, turn on your brain before you make an argument. Thanks.
As far as it not being a benefit to businesses, I think you're looking at the short term at the expense of the more important long term. An increasingly monitered and controled internet (be it by coporations or by the gov't, which some would argue is just proxy for corps) makes it easier to do the things that make money, like user profiling and strict content access controls.
One thing I think that people forget when they say stuff like you did about X-Files and gov't employees, is that despite the fact that most gov't employees are regular people, some aren't. It doesn't take to whole lot of people to do covert type things, look at Echelon. Talk to any regular joe on the street and they'll tell you they'd never work in such a place, yet there's a whole bunch of people who actually do.
If even say 5% of the stuff that "paranoid" people believe is true, that's still pretty damn scary. The best way to ignore something like that is to turn off your brain and stick a label on them.
- The masses of America are brainwashed.
- That it's by the "liberal" media.
- The media is all "liberal" in the first place.
- All liberals are cool with free speech as long as they can moniter it (wtf are you thinking here??)
I guess it's only childish and ignorant if you're not the one doing it.
Try storing all the tin cans of food you have upside down all the time, or tell people you refuse to watch any TV anymore, see what kind of reaction you get.
a) Any player can be used to pirate a DVD.
b) If you were intent on mass-pirating DVDs (or even making copies of DVDs), there's equipment out there that can do this without even decoding the disk first. There is no way to prevent someone from copying the encrypted stuff on the disk to another disk, then having a player (licensed or not) happily decode the thing for you to watch.
The argument concerning piracy in this case is completely and utterly invalid, forget you even thought of it, because it doesn't seem that you've fully thought it through.
BTW: As I mentioned above, you're being called a troll because you've asked a question that's been answered soooo many times. I know it's easy to just spout off opinions on Slashdot (I"m a good example) but it's a good idea to do some reading before you post. HTH
The GPL *requires* that you release any changes you've made to the "copyright-less" material you're working with (if it's based on the GPL, of course). In a world without copyright, I could take your work, modify it, and sell it, keep it to myself, or give it away for free, it's *my* choice. It doesn't quite translate to music cause you can't hand out binaries only.
The GPL is all about freedom for the user, and restrictions for the developper of related works. For all you out there who argue "There are some freedoms you shouldn't have", think about that the next time you download copyrigted MP3s from napster or wherever. If I respected the GPL license as much as you guys respected copyright for music, I'd probably end up in court with RMS.
When you copy music illegally you are breaking copyright laws. You can call it "theft of intellectual property" if you want, but you should call it that explicitly. Otherwise you're just like the media, overloading words with varied meanings and not being specific when you say things like "And taking that property makes you a thief."
If I make a copy of a metallica song outside of fair-use laws (or other situations allowed by the band in question), I may be depriving them of money (assuming that I would have otherwised bought the piece of music), and I'm definitely breaking copyright laws, but I'm definitely not stealing or committing theft in the classic sense of the word.
Trying to link a physical or tangible act to something like copying/trading music does nothing but obscure the situation and play on emotions. No one likes to be robbed or have their stuff stolen, and bringing up the word theft is a sure way to immediatly stigmatize whomever you're talking about in the minds of anyone who hasn't yet thought the issue through.
Of course, this is just an extension of his meta-troll of mankind.
HTH
HAND
Explain the logical differences between your attitude towards this and -for example- someone breaking into your home and stealing stuff from you.
By your line of reasoning, the police really shouldn't be involved in any sort of break and enter or property crime. If you can't secure your residence, TS for you.
If the above is what you're implying (which I assume it's not, since you seem to think authorities should involve themselves with a certain size of entity (what's the cut-off by the way, 100k+ revenue per year? less/more?)) I certainly hope you're never in a position of power in any government.
Thus, professors usually have no time for people who are asking for help (or having problems with) technical things that are outside the scope of the class, and outside of the materials said to be supported at the start of the course.
However, if you take the time to make an appointment and go talk to your professor -not after class, not during drop-in times that are supposed to be for people who are having trouble with the actual contents of the course- you'll probably find that your professor is very accomodating and helpful. They're there to help you learn the material, not kick your grade down a couple notches because you have a compiler or OS preference.
Maybe the phrase isn't supposed to mean that, but you have to be more precise.
c.f. the problem with computers in general. They understand what you say, not what you mean.
Just as buggy code isn't the fault of closed-source software (programmers make mistakes, not licensing models), Linux itself isn't at fault for any tinkering done in the IT dept of an organization.
However, Linux does make it a lot easier, and potentially much more damaging.
I won't hit you over the head with the allusion.
More than enough food to feed every single person on earth gets grown or raised each year, even with the terribly uneconomic way we raise food in north america (think I'm full of it? compare the caloric production of corn over a given area compared to cattle or hogs). The starvation problem is simply a matter of greed and distribution.
The debts held by the western world against 3rd world countries (african countries especially) are crippling to their economies, whereas the money they represent is less than that lost on a bad day for the NYSE.
Speaking about the world from a purely economic perspective is like talking about the climate in your house while disregarding the weather outside.
As the infamous quote goes: "For economists, the real world is a special case."
Anyways, one of the rfc's I read somewhere proposed a .nom TLD for personal homepages.. it would be nice to see countries that have strict business and org policies implement something like this.
The .nom is for nomenclature.