No kidding. Crooks put an 'out of order' sign on the night deposit door at a bank. They provided an old style metallic milk box - used for door to door milk deliveries once upon a time - with a slot in the top and an industrial strength padlock and chain attached. Yes I know...but it worked(popup)...at least for a while. They got caught, but some people actually used the milk box. A similar con was related by Frank Abagnale, subject of the movie "Catch Me If You Can" on "The Tonight Show"{popup}. People have an endless capacity for stupidity, especially when you consider an Internet sized sample. Hell, lots of folks still use A.O.L.
billy - who has to go now...Ed McMahon is at the front door
Much as Russia has always longed for a warm water port, Japan has always needed a reliable source of raw materials. Their invasions of China and Russia, and their involvement in WWII, were all based on the limited resources of their homeland. The partnership with the U.S. has provided both a market and a supply of materials for the remarkable post WWII growth of Japanese industry. Space is the perfect answer to a continuing joint effort. I own a Honda and am convinced it is a superior product in every way. I see no reason to believe their robots will be any different. The Japanese are sometimes accused of being better copiers than inovators, at least when it comes to technology. That may be true, but we should also consider that many American companies have copied Japanese management techniques with great success. Traditionally the Japanese people have excelled at successful integration of large populations in small areas with limited resources. Their society incorporates complex and specific codes for individual behavior. In an artificial environment, such as a lunar settlement, the ability to get along in crowded conditions and the socialization of necessary protocols for environmental adaptation are powerful tools for success. The typical Japanese's willingness to give loyalty to the greater good makes them ideal partners in enduring the hardships of space exploration. Note that the articles refer to the Japanese contribution to a lunar colony centering on building and mining robots. Of course the technicians to maintain and control those robots will be a part of that contribution. It may be that in the long run, the lessons learned from the Japanese culture will outweigh the benefits of their technology. Personally I like the idea of a U.S. partnership with a society that is absolutely against the proliferation of nuclear weapons. It will make it that much easier for US to do the right thing.
billy - we have no space-based weapons...no really...we promise...really...
You're right. new technology does change "things" - but not the Constitution. Not one of the rights you quote is violated when you are recorded in public. Remember, you're quoting the 5th AMENDMENT! The drafters of the Constitution were wise enough to realize they could not possibly forsee every eventuality facing the future United States. They provided for revisions in the form of amendments. The IT revolution is only the beginning of the paradigm shifts facing us in the 21st century. Major advances in the life sciences, consequences from ecological concerns like global warming , and the increasing world demand for resources and energy will all require their own adaptations of the current status quo. We must do our best to remain faithful to the ideals we revere while facing these challenges. Answers may include Constitutional amendments, International agreements, or even more individual efforts. It's going to be an interesting time to live.
billy - yeah I know...ancient Chinese curse and all that
The question of privacy in the situations you mention revolves around the difference between rights and privileges. In the U.S., you have a right to personal privacy within certain boundaries. The authorities can not invade or search your home without due process. That process supposedly involves the judicial review and agreement that the authorities have a certain level of reasonable belief that evidence exists establishing your involment in criminal activities. This freedom has traditionally been extended to your mail and telephone lines. Exceptions are always made. Packages can be opened to check for bombs, police can enter your home in hot pursuit of a criminal suspect or if they have the 'reasonable' belief that someone is in danger, etc. Generally, however, two seperate branches of government were required to suspend the individuals rights - and only in individual situations. The new measures being considered in the 'war against terrorism' eliminate both the judicial oversight and the specific instance requirements previously required in order to circumvent Constitutional rights. The Government is asking us to trust them, something recent history makes difficult, and more importantly, something expressly warned against by the founders of this country. These kinds of abridgements of individual privacy rights are not slippery slopes, they are yawning chasms.
That said, a difference exists between rights and priviledges. There is also the question of public and private behaviors. Driving is not a right and takes place in public - thus there is no reasonable expectation that your driving behavior should remain free of observation. Likewise use of public spaces, transportation, and facilities. As much as I personally find it repugnant, the monitoring of my use of public resources, like the public library, is NOT a violation of my Constitutional rights. As a society, we can make laws protecting my privacy in any situation we wish, but freedom from scrunity in public places is not guarenteed by the Constitution. The fact that machines make this possible to degrees unknown or even imagined in the past does not change that basic truth. We must face the reality that, as with many issues, new technology is forcing a reevaluation of the concepts of freedom, privacy, and personal rights. We ARE in a war, not against terrorism, but against those who would shape the laws governing the use of technology to aid in the attainment of their own agendas. There is nothing new about their goals, only their methods.
Yeah, the hacker is so kewl. Too bad it just gives the WIPO some disgusting proof that their opponents in the IP discussion are a group of childish, immature, punks. Mainstream organizations (like legislatures) will consider this another example of the hollow content and negative orientation of the anti-IP community. This community is already rife with ranting zealots who quote others ideas without understanding them, consistently use flawed logical arguments, and refuse to remain open-minded enough to participate in a sincere discussion. They don't seem to realize that the reform of the present deplorable situation requires communication and cooperation. They are not helping. If the exploit's contents are a self-portrait, then every cloud does indeed have a silver lining. The hacker obviously has plenty of room to return his pinhead to its customary location.
billy - who hopes no gerbils were harmed in the hacking of the site
Yeah. The one at the 'hunters market' was the last female. Fur traders are offering 10 beads, 2 pocket mirrors, and a snickers bar for the last male. Paris Hilton wants a new case for her ipod.
So, from your definition, the pilots of military bombers, and the men who command them, including their Commander-in-Chief, are terrorists. Arc Light B-52 strikes during the Vietnam war destroyed anything below them for square miles. During WWII cities were bombed without specifically targeting military installations. Collateral damage is expected by military planners, who somehow define 'acceptable levels' of accidental deaths. Personally, I have a problem with defining deaths you know will occur as the result of a particular action as 'accidental'. Certainly, by your definition, there were Israeli terrorists before there were Palestinian terrorists. I can't imagine how any reasonable person can define the knowing distribution of small pox infected blankets to Native Americans as anything but terrorism. By your definition, the Government of the United States is a terrorist regime.
Once you have labeled someone as a 'terrorist' it is easy to dismiss any consideration of their individual situations. I marvel at how many of my fellow Americans refuse to consider why young men with the ability to accomplish the 9/11 attacks would sacrifice their lives by crashing an airliner into a building full of strangers. Don't misunderstand - I don't support their actions or terrorism in any form - but in order to combat terrorism we must find its roots. To do that we must understand how terrorists are created and their motivations. To dismiss them as 'evil', religious fanatics, or attribute their actions to a 'hatred for our freedom' represents such a simplification of the actual situation that it is useless as an explanation of the reasons behind terrorist actions. It also calls into question the motivations of those who espouse such explanations. Some terrorist actions are undertaken by men who believe the acts are the only way they can call attention to intolerable injustices. In some cases terrorism seems to be the only viable military response to overwhelming odds. Other acts are a result of cold blooded calculations about the reactions of the public and the publics subsequent influence on governments. One factor in the 9/11 attacks was the widespread belief in the Islamic terrorist community that the citizens and government of the U.S. lack the courage and political will to endure in the face of American bloodshed. They were wrong. In other ways they have succeeded by creating a powerful excuse used by our own government to diminish our freedom. The possibility that this effect was planned is not only frightening, but points out the shallow nature of our understanding of the politics of the real world. The United States is not innocent of causing harm to people in the pursuit of its own interests. To admit this and work to prevent its repetition in no way validates the terrorist's actions or hinders our just pursuit of their accountability. It might go a long way in preventing the creation of new terrorists. Our leader's refusal to level with the American people suggests there are factors and agendas which they wish to conceal. The question vital for the future of America is; do we have the courage and political will to face the difficult truths about terrorism and its causes? Are we truly a free democratic society who's citizens exercise both their right and responsibility to control their government? If not, it won't be terrorists who destroy our freedom, it will be our own apathy.
The last thing you want to do if you are avoiding the authorities is make them curious. Any behavior that makes your session stand out from the rest of the traffic is likely to attract attention. That would certainly include encrypted packets from an unusual origin. If you could gain access to a network that routinely used encryption, such as a financial service network, you might get away with it for a time. In the main, the best method to avoid attention is to remain below the threshold of official notice. Looking like one of the flock is the best way to keep you out of the wolf's focus. Of course you're still a sheep, and we all know how the food chain works. If the government wants you, they're gonna get you. Your best bet is not letting them realize they want you.
I had to download Firefox three times today because the first two times the files were 56K and corrupted. After uninstalling the old version (no automatic upgrade will help push up the download count) I dumped the old log and config files and fired up InCtrl5 for the install. I chose just the browser option. I was politely asked if I wanted extra shortcuts - then after I declined they were created anyway. I was given the option of using the Firefox 'start' page as my home page - once again I declined to no avail. The installer kindly put a 'View in Firefox' button on my IE toolbar, no notice required. None of those things are a big deal, and obviously less intrusive than many big name installations (what the hell is with Adobe?). Still, for what's billed as the 'alternative' browser it sure resembles the 'same old, same old'.
Before I get told to "rot in hell" I want to point out that I cut my teeth on Navigator and used it exclusively until the REAL evil empire (AOL) got hold of it. After that it went downhill fast. Then I went to Opera, which in all ways was superior to IE. I PAID for Opera, partly because I was in an early stage of learning to defang Windows and would have slapped Bill Gates if I could have got a hold of him. I was naive and no longer feel that way, to keep the record straight. I also bought Red Hat Linux - I still have the box and all - but frankly, I'm a laptop kind of guy, and Linux in those days was a far cry from the functional, working option it is now. I was disappointed with Opera 7 and tried everything from K-Meleon to Lynx. I finally found MyIE2 which is now Maxthon. Maxthon is an IE based shell that features tabs, enhanced security, and built in RSS as well as ad, pop-up, and active-x filters. It also has built in mouse gestures, sidebars, and supports skins and plug-ins. It has a huge array of customization options, runs fast and lean, and there's an active user community. It has been downloaded just under 26 Million times. I tried Firefox, but I like Maxthon better. It even has an experimental mode that runs the gecko engine.
The point of all that is that I don't have a hidden agenda or receive a damn thing from MS. I just believe that any real long-lasting answers to the problems facing the internet and IT in general can only be resolved in positive ways if they are based on the best estimate of the truth possible. Every sincere person's viewpoint adds value to our shared understanding. We live in a complex world without clear boundaries between good and bad. Most things are are somewhere in the middle, with good and bad characteristics dependent largely on the observer's point of view. Anything less than an open minded evaluation of the truth is a disservice to ourselves, our community, and our future. Fud is fud, no matter the source. Don't let ANYONE use your beliefs to cloud your vision. If it comes out of their mouths and it sounds like bull shit, it probably is.
billy - no fud here...please read the warning at page bottom
If OSS ever succeeds in replacing vendor closed products, it is people like you and persuasive, rational, arguments like this that will make it happen. Then we can hack every system in the world, liberate all the secrets, and all live happily ever after.
billy - if you can't beat 'um - join 'um...and take control
"It itself is not open source, but uses open source projects."
Am I the only one who sees something perverted in this business model? It's kind of like slicing up government cheese, slapping it in plastic wrap, and selling it as 'singles' at the grocery. Something just doesn't smell right.
What's wrong with you? Reality has NOTHING to do with it. OSS means freedom, don't you get it? Of course if your business (or your life) isn't based on IT it can be a huge hassle. It's nice to hear someone with actual experience talking about the difficulty of making solutions work in the real world. I'd like to see the reaction at at a temp provider when your HR department called and...
"Let's see, we need 30 people ready to work qualified to use Linux based Open Office word processing..."
"Did you say Word for Office?"
"No, Open Office on Linux, at least I think that's what it means. I know we need them right away for our annual report."
"Well gee, I never heard of that, and I know we don't test for proficiency in that. I guess we could send people with general computer skills and you could train them."
"Can they use Linux?"
"I think some take the bus, but most have their own transportation. Why, do you have a parking problem?"
Businesses don't care about the echoing cries of 'give us freedom' from people who use OSS on a desktop or two and say things like "then you just modify the code" or "I never pay anything for software". Open Source Freedom is a nice dream, but if you want big business to play along, your best bet is to work on open source reality. Even a Christian business owner is not going to hire a Christian cafeteria manager whose plan for Friday lunch is one fish and one loaf and a prayer to feed the masses. If Open Source is a superior model for software development then in the end it will triumph. Because it is superior. Not because a bunch of guys who wouldn't know logic if it rearranged their sock drawers make unsupported arguments like "everybody knows it's better" and throw in a few terms such as 'monopoly', DRM, and M$. Get a clue - the guys who own and run these companies LIKE $. They don't TRUST geeks who run around bashing the most successful software company ever, advocating illegal violations of copyright, and condemning monopolies. If they had the choice, they would all have monopolies of their own. So they're just not going to pay attention when you tell them Baltic Avenue is just as good as Park Place. Now - if you MAKE Baltic Avenue as good as Park Place, then you've got something.
billy - someday ALL software could be open source, but not if it's free
"Do not murder', for example, is clear -- yet it doesn't come with a laundry list of possible ways of committing murder that has to be revised every time a new weapon is made or a new trick learned. Perhaps it needs a definition of murder (example: actively and intentionally causing the death of a human who doesn't consent to it) but just because it's simple doesn't mean it's gray. From that simple law, you can probably deduce whether or not something you're about to do is legal."
The reason there's no new laundry list is because we have OLD laundry lists we've been refining for centuries. The concepts of killing in time of war and killing in self defense are two prime examples. We have all sorts of highly defined special case laws covering murder. Many of these definitions change over time. As we evolve as a species our definitions become more specific and require a higher degree of individual responsibility. Killing an armed enemy in active combat is OK, killing an unarmed enemy who is surrendering is murder. Bombing a city and accidently killing civilians is OK, walking into a city and shooting down civilians on purpose is murder. If you're intentionally out to teach someone a lesson by beating but not killing them, and they accidently die, it's murder. In the U.S., if someone dies, for any reason, in the commission of a felony, we consider it murder. Bombing the enemy from the sky is heroic warfare, bombing the enemy with a roadside device is murderous terrorism. Each situation is different, yet they all consist of taking a life without consent.
What is it if you deny your child medical treatment that violates your religious beliefs and she dies? Is it murder? What is it if you make laws banning stem cell research due to religious beliefs, have you murdered those who could have been saved by stem cell therapy? It is murder to pay farmers to not grow food when people in the world are starving? It's definitely incredibly stupid. In some future society it very well may be considered murder. What about manslaughter? Is the victim less dead due to accident than intent? You see there are many different laws concerning murder. In most of the world stoning a woman to death for adultery would be murder, but not everywhere.
My point is that the law MUST be a living thing - not so much because of the changes in technology - but because of the changes in the human heart. Not so long ago if a man trespassed you were within your right to kill him. If he threatened you with his fists you could kill him. Now we have the concept of proportional response. Would a reasonable man in that situation respond with that level of violence? The definition of a reasonable man is determined by the courts in each case. A reasonable man in 12th century France resembles a modern citizen of Atlanta as a mammoth resembles an elephant. Our concept of 'reasonable' and indeed, 'man', has changed. Killing a slave used to be an offense against property. Today we find that idea horrible.
It is true that laws must bear a certain gravity and stability. Changing laws on the whim of current notion is as bad as clinging to laws we have outgrown. Some laws are designed to make us better - laws bestowing freedoms and rights; some laws are designed to confound the dark side of human nature - laws condemning tyranny and violence. The Rule of Law, like every human thing is flawed and incomplete, it is also the supreme example of the finest qualities of the human character. When we speak of laws we must do our upmost to see clearly and speak truly. The law must remain alive in the human heart, for when it dies, so do we.
billy - of course there's something to be said for civil disobedience
I have to disagree - they are not exploiting grey areas - they are simply breaking the law. If the p2p crowd had maintained a little moderation and kept a low profile things wouldn't be as bad as they are. The record industry was always willing to overlook some piracy, but the distribution of free copies of new releases all over the world the same day as the official release was something their business could not survive. I admit that if you've got the chops to hack free music I don't have a lot to say. By hanging out thousands of files where anyone who had a box and knew how to click could build vast libraries of content with virtually no effort - and then bragging it all about - the p2p crowd brought it on themselves. The rest of us are paying for it in the hassles the copyright protection creates in the fair and legal use of our purchased products. How many of you know people with huge collections of songs who never listen to half of them? It's not the law that exists in a grey area - it's our moral values.
"Somebody should come up with some standardized layout for/.'ers and other interested parties to submit a professional looking opinion quickly."
I would think it would be more valuable to submit an opinion more representative of professional thinking than one looking professional. A standardized format used by all/.ers is most likely to result in a new filter. If the goal is to affect positive change and create meaningful dialog, the last thing we need is to facilitate quick, spur of the moment 'opinions'. Lets face it, there really are not that many of us who need a special copyright exemption to allow the free distribution of goatse.
The article is rather long and after a short perusal I still am not sure whether non-Australian viewpoints would be welcomed. It's too bad there is no way to require a submitter to actually read the document before posting, the foreword is very promising. I was wondering if any of you blokes from down under could clue us in. Is this on the up and up or just cynical political pandering? In your experience, is the government of Australia seriously seeking advice from their citizens or, like here in the U.S., are they making their decisions in the backrooms and at lobbyist's shindigs? At least they're pretending to pay attention, lately our leaders attitudes seems to be: "now just sit back and don't worry your pointy little heads, as soon as God whispers in my ear I'll tell you in words you can understand exactly what we're gonna do - now say Amen".
You know it sounds like she might have been looking for a way to do some good. I doubt if she had the push to authorize a months pay. It could be that news of your resignation reached levels beyond those informed of the earlier events. The fact that you were so pissed that you refused cash would tend to eliminate quite a few potential motivations when considering the cause of your behavior. Then again, there may have been forms routinely included in the interview they wished you to sign. Either they were covering their ass or trying to wipe some of the shit off. The fact that they offered more money at all suggests that you had - and may still have - a stronger hand than you thought. Like mobs, people in companies will do things they would never consider on their own, never realizing just how far off the beaten path they've wandered. They may still be willing to make that interview worth your while - besides with the perspective you now enjoy - it could be fun.
Personally, I'd have loved to give them that interview - and I would have been the most helpful, respectful, level headed example of a model employee those HR people had ever seen. I would have explained with great reluctance that my valuable contribution to their company was ceasing as a last resort, that I had been driven to it, and that it probably wouldn't be long till they were sitting down with the next victim. Most HR people live in a fantasy world, fed BS by both management and employees, occasionally they get it right. You might have got paid AND planted the seed that eventually spelled doom for the manager. Well, OK, you'd have got paid.
I'd take it a step farther. Take a note from the corporate world - document, document, document. Although you may be right that most of the people around are aware of the relative merits of your positions, a few years down the road something of a more permanent and clear cut nature may avert one of those unforeseeable disasters. It helps that your new job is in a different field, but that also means that once you're gone, his is the only voice people will hear. When someone asks: "hey, where's old Bob - he seemed like a good guy?" and he begins: "yeah, I thought that way too - until we started to suspect he was selling us out to Microsoft - yeah I hated to do it but I had to let old Bob go." He was your boss and if that's the only story around - well who would you believe? If the guy is as personally bereft of judgment and as hostile as you believe, you know he's going to trash you every chance he gets.
When a big company wants to get rid of someone they follow a specific pathway. It starts with a heads up informally, proceeds through counseling sessions, and finally results in "we tried everything, but you just don't seem to trying to improve Bob, we wish it could be some other way, but we all have to live with our policies, 3 written interventions is automatic termination". The 3 interventions could be for 3 five minutes late episodes - it won't matter - they've covered their ass. Cover yours. Don't forget that sometimes burning bridges will keep you out of the whole neighborhood, not just one building. Try to find documentation for your side of the argument. If you can get copies of your employment record, do so, especially reviews and any commendations or letters of appreciation. Try to get a copy of your resignation with a signature and date of acceptance. If your co-workers agree you might get them to verify your description of actual occurrences. For instance you could e-mail them and ask them to verify that YOU are not misunderstanding the situation.
Just remember - a perspective employer might understand that your boss was a psycho and still find your responses to be out of line. 5 years from now it will be a lot easier to answer the question: "Did you give notice and then walk out early?" with a simple "no" rather than an example of why you were right. As you have found with your present boss, the business world recognizes no obligation to be fair. Don't give anyone any reason to accuse YOU of unprofessional behavior. Don't worry too much about the check, most states are very proactive when it comes to employers withholding wages. In at least two states if the employer does not pay by the normal payday, the amount automatically gets multiplied two or three times. You know you're moving on to a better situation, bite the bullet and find honor in handling the situation as well as you are able. Making the best of a bad situation is an essential business skill, take this example to demonstrate your ability.
billy - then, 2 months later, beat the snot out of him in a honkytonk pisser
We'll start an online magazine specializing in how much shit the hardware can take before it goes crispy!
"The Westsea Digimax Shredder 2 Terabyte hard drive with 8 gig FlashCache and fuzzy logic predictive prefetch is the first consumer grade hard drive using IBM's licensed DiskWard Quantum Force Field technology to insure platter physical integrity. The 2M RPM Buckytubes composite platters spin in vacuum on a room temperature superconductor frictionless mounting system. The ZMP (Zero Moving Parts) MRI based seek array is the same unit featured on the popular Guillotine line of hard drives. Writing chores are handled by the proven Entangled Pair Matrix Observer chip set from Via, toned down a notch to avoid the costly and physically heavy Reality Guard containment enclosures necessary on their commercial and military drives. EPMO has been the cutting edge state editing choice for the past year, and will likely remain that way until the much anticipated BioSeer precognitive feline brain based technology receives the Department of Bioethics certification sometime next year. In the meantime, the Shredders state of the art systems and top of the line materials should make for read and write speeds fast enough to satisfy even the most demanding Cybersexsim user. There is no discernable lag in smell or tactile rendering even with the tickle factor set all the way up and scent/memory mapping enabled. It is possible to tweak EPMO for even faster state change event recognition but VIA warns against exceeding the preset limits. Without the Reality Guard enclosures, the Laws of Physics Instability Field might project beyond the walls of the drive case. Take my advice, you don't want to see your data take off for some other galaxy in a red shifted blur of hyper light speed photonic fragments. Recovering data from beyond interstellar distances can get expensive fast!
Overall we were very pleased with the Westsea Digimax Shredder 2T. Its combination of high performance, robust Disaster Avoidance Protocols, and competitive pricing make it a solid choice for any high end system. On the downside, we would have liked to have seen some quieter cooling fans. At anything over 1,000,000 RPM the fans start to sound a little like a jet engine. During a 8 or 9 hour sexsim session it might get a little annoying. Next week: Performance Tests."
billy - I had a good idea and got a little carried away with the setup
I wonder if you're ineligible if you're the same company that MS got the technology from when they bought you out as a startup the first time? Does MS have a big list of technologies awaiting the 'proper' time for development? Microsoft has made several moves in the recent past that suggest they are migrating towards a more open minded approach to collaboration and the OS community. THIS may be the REAL 'tipping point' for free software. Has Bill Gates decided 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'? Of course one logical conclusion to that process is 'join 'em - and then take over'. I'm dying to see how the MS bashers react if MS bandwagons its way to Open Source Nirvana. They have the same access to OS code as any developer. Better be careful Fanboys - you might find yourself in a worse place than you could ever imagine - competing head to head with Microsoft in the same market with MS applications based on YOUR code. Oh the horror. The horror.
billy - Ms. Linux...the softer more feminine OS
Re:No a DOS does not count, slashdot is out :)
on
Hack IIS6 Contest
·
· Score: 1
"Congradulations on your successful exploit feelthelureofthedarkside. We were pleased youarewizard31337bowtoyou at the response we received from the hacker community muchmoneymuchrenownmanymanytoysdoyoudeserve and the amazing variety of successful intrusions. youwillgetbigironalluwant Your performance, being first to crack each level of the challenge, with three versions of penetration per level was outstanding. weneversawthetarballforkbombcoming Please respond to get your prize toyouallpowerallglory. For some reason your legal address seems to be changing feelthedarksidesmellthemoneyjoinusjoinusbetraythem whenever the file is accessed. We were also unable to determine the method you used in your third crack at the first level - we know it was some sort of bit bang that initiated a buffer chuck in the SATA Raid engine - but we can't figure where the codes hiding, when we grep it's only there every third time. Please respond as our server is still wedged. joinusjoinusjoinusbetraythem In conclusion we would like to offer joinusjoinus you a position joinusjoinus on Microsofts new Security Optimization Leadership Development Overview Utilization Team. We think this a wonderful opportunity weknowmanygirlsmanymany for you to join with us friendlygirlsmanyfriendlygirlsslightlyslutty to help make the future a better place. joinusfeelthedarkside
Yep - the same one where you can say shit like that all you want. Hell, you don't even have to post as anonymous coward. We know we got problems. We bitch about 'em more than the rest of the world combined. Oh, by the way, any Americans ever get killed protecting your country?
Plus how many of those 62% are members of households that do have broadband? How many have access at work? I travel to towns of all sizes and geographic distribution and have yet to find one without public high speed access, usually for free. The only problem I've had was one cybercafe in Berkeley where the only box available had an OS in Korean. I didn't understand everything the folks there were saying, but I'm pretty sure they were ganging up on me at Unreal Tournament.
billy - respawning means never having to say you're sorry
Slashdot Mirror
Better explain what you mean. Them theres fightin' words pardner.
billy - never have - never will
No kidding. Crooks put an 'out of order' sign on the night deposit door at a bank. They provided an old style metallic milk box - used for door to door milk deliveries once upon a time - with a slot in the top and an industrial strength padlock and chain attached. Yes I know...but it worked(popup)...at least for a while. They got caught, but some people actually used the milk box. A similar con was related by Frank Abagnale, subject of the movie "Catch Me If You Can" on "The Tonight Show"{popup}. People have an endless capacity for stupidity, especially when you consider an Internet sized sample. Hell, lots of folks still use A.O.L.
billy - who has to go now...Ed McMahon is at the front door
Much as Russia has always longed for a warm water port, Japan has always needed a reliable source of raw materials. Their invasions of China and Russia, and their involvement in WWII, were all based on the limited resources of their homeland. The partnership with the U.S. has provided both a market and a supply of materials for the remarkable post WWII growth of Japanese industry. Space is the perfect answer to a continuing joint effort. I own a Honda and am convinced it is a superior product in every way. I see no reason to believe their robots will be any different. The Japanese are sometimes accused of being better copiers than inovators, at least when it comes to technology. That may be true, but we should also consider that many American companies have copied Japanese management techniques with great success. Traditionally the Japanese people have excelled at successful integration of large populations in small areas with limited resources. Their society incorporates complex and specific codes for individual behavior. In an artificial environment, such as a lunar settlement, the ability to get along in crowded conditions and the socialization of necessary protocols for environmental adaptation are powerful tools for success. The typical Japanese's willingness to give loyalty to the greater good makes them ideal partners in enduring the hardships of space exploration. Note that the articles refer to the Japanese contribution to a lunar colony centering on building and mining robots. Of course the technicians to maintain and control those robots will be a part of that contribution. It may be that in the long run, the lessons learned from the Japanese culture will outweigh the benefits of their technology. Personally I like the idea of a U.S. partnership with a society that is absolutely against the proliferation of nuclear weapons. It will make it that much easier for US to do the right thing.
billy - we have no space-based weapons...no really...we promise...really...
You're right. new technology does change "things" - but not the Constitution. Not one of the rights you quote is violated when you are recorded in public. Remember, you're quoting the 5th AMENDMENT! The drafters of the Constitution were wise enough to realize they could not possibly forsee every eventuality facing the future United States. They provided for revisions in the form of amendments. The IT revolution is only the beginning of the paradigm shifts facing us in the 21st century. Major advances in the life sciences, consequences from ecological concerns like global warming , and the increasing world demand for resources and energy will all require their own adaptations of the current status quo. We must do our best to remain faithful to the ideals we revere while facing these challenges. Answers may include Constitutional amendments, International agreements, or even more individual efforts. It's going to be an interesting time to live.
billy - yeah I know...ancient Chinese curse and all that
The question of privacy in the situations you mention revolves around the difference between rights and privileges. In the U.S., you have a right to personal privacy within certain boundaries. The authorities can not invade or search your home without due process. That process supposedly involves the judicial review and agreement that the authorities have a certain level of reasonable belief that evidence exists establishing your involment in criminal activities. This freedom has traditionally been extended to your mail and telephone lines. Exceptions are always made. Packages can be opened to check for bombs, police can enter your home in hot pursuit of a criminal suspect or if they have the 'reasonable' belief that someone is in danger, etc. Generally, however, two seperate branches of government were required to suspend the individuals rights - and only in individual situations. The new measures being considered in the 'war against terrorism' eliminate both the judicial oversight and the specific instance requirements previously required in order to circumvent Constitutional rights. The Government is asking us to trust them, something recent history makes difficult, and more importantly, something expressly warned against by the founders of this country. These kinds of abridgements of individual privacy rights are not slippery slopes, they are yawning chasms.
That said, a difference exists between rights and priviledges. There is also the question of public and private behaviors. Driving is not a right and takes place in public - thus there is no reasonable expectation that your driving behavior should remain free of observation. Likewise use of public spaces, transportation, and facilities. As much as I personally find it repugnant, the monitoring of my use of public resources, like the public library, is NOT a violation of my Constitutional rights. As a society, we can make laws protecting my privacy in any situation we wish, but freedom from scrunity in public places is not guarenteed by the Constitution. The fact that machines make this possible to degrees unknown or even imagined in the past does not change that basic truth. We must face the reality that, as with many issues, new technology is forcing a reevaluation of the concepts of freedom, privacy, and personal rights. We ARE in a war, not against terrorism, but against those who would shape the laws governing the use of technology to aid in the attainment of their own agendas. There is nothing new about their goals, only their methods.
billy - who tracks ISPs by street address and mph
Yeah, the hacker is so kewl. Too bad it just gives the WIPO some disgusting proof that their opponents in the IP discussion are a group of childish, immature, punks. Mainstream organizations (like legislatures) will consider this another example of the hollow content and negative orientation of the anti-IP community. This community is already rife with ranting zealots who quote others ideas without understanding them, consistently use flawed logical arguments, and refuse to remain open-minded enough to participate in a sincere discussion. They don't seem to realize that the reform of the present deplorable situation requires communication and cooperation. They are not helping. If the exploit's contents are a self-portrait, then every cloud does indeed have a silver lining. The hacker obviously has plenty of room to return his pinhead to its customary location.
billy - who hopes no gerbils were harmed in the hacking of the site
Yeah. The one at the 'hunters market' was the last female. Fur traders are offering 10 beads, 2 pocket mirrors, and a snickers bar for the last male. Paris Hilton wants a new case for her ipod.
billy - anyone seen any baby seals?
So, from your definition, the pilots of military bombers, and the men who command them, including their Commander-in-Chief, are terrorists. Arc Light B-52 strikes during the Vietnam war destroyed anything below them for square miles. During WWII cities were bombed without specifically targeting military installations. Collateral damage is expected by military planners, who somehow define 'acceptable levels' of accidental deaths. Personally, I have a problem with defining deaths you know will occur as the result of a particular action as 'accidental'. Certainly, by your definition, there were Israeli terrorists before there were Palestinian terrorists. I can't imagine how any reasonable person can define the knowing distribution of small pox infected blankets to Native Americans as anything but terrorism. By your definition, the Government of the United States is a terrorist regime.
Once you have labeled someone as a 'terrorist' it is easy to dismiss any consideration of their individual situations. I marvel at how many of my fellow Americans refuse to consider why young men with the ability to accomplish the 9/11 attacks would sacrifice their lives by crashing an airliner into a building full of strangers. Don't misunderstand - I don't support their actions or terrorism in any form - but in order to combat terrorism we must find its roots. To do that we must understand how terrorists are created and their motivations. To dismiss them as 'evil', religious fanatics, or attribute their actions to a 'hatred for our freedom' represents such a simplification of the actual situation that it is useless as an explanation of the reasons behind terrorist actions. It also calls into question the motivations of those who espouse such explanations. Some terrorist actions are undertaken by men who believe the acts are the only way they can call attention to intolerable injustices. In some cases terrorism seems to be the only viable military response to overwhelming odds. Other acts are a result of cold blooded calculations about the reactions of the public and the publics subsequent influence on governments. One factor in the 9/11 attacks was the widespread belief in the Islamic terrorist community that the citizens and government of the U.S. lack the courage and political will to endure in the face of American bloodshed. They were wrong. In other ways they have succeeded by creating a powerful excuse used by our own government to diminish our freedom. The possibility that this effect was planned is not only frightening, but points out the shallow nature of our understanding of the politics of the real world. The United States is not innocent of causing harm to people in the pursuit of its own interests. To admit this and work to prevent its repetition in no way validates the terrorist's actions or hinders our just pursuit of their accountability. It might go a long way in preventing the creation of new terrorists. Our leader's refusal to level with the American people suggests there are factors and agendas which they wish to conceal. The question vital for the future of America is; do we have the courage and political will to face the difficult truths about terrorism and its causes? Are we truly a free democratic society who's citizens exercise both their right and responsibility to control their government? If not, it won't be terrorists who destroy our freedom, it will be our own apathy.
billy - in order to form a more perfect union
The last thing you want to do if you are avoiding the authorities is make them curious. Any behavior that makes your session stand out from the rest of the traffic is likely to attract attention. That would certainly include encrypted packets from an unusual origin. If you could gain access to a network that routinely used encryption, such as a financial service network, you might get away with it for a time. In the main, the best method to avoid attention is to remain below the threshold of official notice. Looking like one of the flock is the best way to keep you out of the wolf's focus. Of course you're still a sheep, and we all know how the food chain works. If the government wants you, they're gonna get you. Your best bet is not letting them realize they want you.
billy - baaa...baaaa
I had to download Firefox three times today because the first two times the files were 56K and corrupted. After uninstalling the old version (no automatic upgrade will help push up the download count) I dumped the old log and config files and fired up InCtrl5 for the install. I chose just the browser option. I was politely asked if I wanted extra shortcuts - then after I declined they were created anyway. I was given the option of using the Firefox 'start' page as my home page - once again I declined to no avail. The installer kindly put a 'View in Firefox' button on my IE toolbar, no notice required. None of those things are a big deal, and obviously less intrusive than many big name installations (what the hell is with Adobe?). Still, for what's billed as the 'alternative' browser it sure resembles the 'same old, same old'.
Before I get told to "rot in hell" I want to point out that I cut my teeth on Navigator and used it exclusively until the REAL evil empire (AOL) got hold of it. After that it went downhill fast. Then I went to Opera, which in all ways was superior to IE. I PAID for Opera, partly because I was in an early stage of learning to defang Windows and would have slapped Bill Gates if I could have got a hold of him. I was naive and no longer feel that way, to keep the record straight. I also bought Red Hat Linux - I still have the box and all - but frankly, I'm a laptop kind of guy, and Linux in those days was a far cry from the functional, working option it is now. I was disappointed with Opera 7 and tried everything from K-Meleon to Lynx. I finally found MyIE2 which is now Maxthon. Maxthon is an IE based shell that features tabs, enhanced security, and built in RSS as well as ad, pop-up, and active-x filters. It also has built in mouse gestures, sidebars, and supports skins and plug-ins. It has a huge array of customization options, runs fast and lean, and there's an active user community. It has been downloaded just under 26 Million times. I tried Firefox, but I like Maxthon better. It even has an experimental mode that runs the gecko engine.
The point of all that is that I don't have a hidden agenda or receive a damn thing from MS. I just believe that any real long-lasting answers to the problems facing the internet and IT in general can only be resolved in positive ways if they are based on the best estimate of the truth possible. Every sincere person's viewpoint adds value to our shared understanding. We live in a complex world without clear boundaries between good and bad. Most things are are somewhere in the middle, with good and bad characteristics dependent largely on the observer's point of view. Anything less than an open minded evaluation of the truth is a disservice to ourselves, our community, and our future. Fud is fud, no matter the source. Don't let ANYONE use your beliefs to cloud your vision. If it comes out of their mouths and it sounds like bull shit, it probably is.
billy - no fud here...please read the warning at page bottom
If OSS ever succeeds in replacing vendor closed products, it is people like you and persuasive, rational, arguments like this that will make it happen. Then we can hack every system in the world, liberate all the secrets, and all live happily ever after.
billy - if you can't beat 'um - join 'um...and take control
"It itself is not open source, but uses open source projects."
Am I the only one who sees something perverted in this business model? It's kind of like slicing up government cheese, slapping it in plastic wrap, and selling it as 'singles' at the grocery. Something just doesn't smell right.
billy - it's not my feet, really it's not
What's wrong with you? Reality has NOTHING to do with it. OSS means freedom, don't you get it? Of course if your business (or your life) isn't based on IT it can be a huge hassle. It's nice to hear someone with actual experience talking about the difficulty of making solutions work in the real world. I'd like to see the reaction at at a temp provider when your HR department called and...
"Let's see, we need 30 people ready to work qualified to use Linux based Open Office word processing..."
"Did you say Word for Office?"
"No, Open Office on Linux, at least I think that's what it means. I know we need them right away for our annual report."
"Well gee, I never heard of that, and I know we don't test for proficiency in that. I guess we could send people with general computer skills and you could train them."
"Can they use Linux?"
"I think some take the bus, but most have their own transportation. Why, do you have a parking problem?"
Businesses don't care about the echoing cries of 'give us freedom' from people who use OSS on a desktop or two and say things like "then you just modify the code" or "I never pay anything for software". Open Source Freedom is a nice dream, but if you want big business to play along, your best bet is to work on open source reality. Even a Christian business owner is not going to hire a Christian cafeteria manager whose plan for Friday lunch is one fish and one loaf and a prayer to feed the masses. If Open Source is a superior model for software development then in the end it will triumph. Because it is superior. Not because a bunch of guys who wouldn't know logic if it rearranged their sock drawers make unsupported arguments like "everybody knows it's better" and throw in a few terms such as 'monopoly', DRM, and M$. Get a clue - the guys who own and run these companies LIKE $. They don't TRUST geeks who run around bashing the most successful software company ever, advocating illegal violations of copyright, and condemning monopolies. If they had the choice, they would all have monopolies of their own. So they're just not going to pay attention when you tell them Baltic Avenue is just as good as Park Place. Now - if you MAKE Baltic Avenue as good as Park Place, then you've got something.
billy - someday ALL software could be open source, but not if it's free
Why in the world would I ever want a computer that I couldn't take in the shower?
Jeez....think people.
billy - rub-a-dub-dub...3 gigs in the tub
"Do not murder', for example, is clear -- yet it doesn't come with a laundry list of possible ways of committing murder that has to be revised every time a new weapon is made or a new trick learned. Perhaps it needs a definition of murder (example: actively and intentionally causing the death of a human who doesn't consent to it) but just because it's simple doesn't mean it's gray. From that simple law, you can probably deduce whether or not something you're about to do is legal."
The reason there's no new laundry list is because we have OLD laundry lists we've been refining for centuries. The concepts of killing in time of war and killing in self defense are two prime examples. We have all sorts of highly defined special case laws covering murder. Many of these definitions change over time. As we evolve as a species our definitions become more specific and require a higher degree of individual responsibility. Killing an armed enemy in active combat is OK, killing an unarmed enemy who is surrendering is murder. Bombing a city and accidently killing civilians is OK, walking into a city and shooting down civilians on purpose is murder. If you're intentionally out to teach someone a lesson by beating but not killing them, and they accidently die, it's murder. In the U.S., if someone dies, for any reason, in the commission of a felony, we consider it murder. Bombing the enemy from the sky is heroic warfare, bombing the enemy with a roadside device is murderous terrorism. Each situation is different, yet they all consist of taking a life without consent.
What is it if you deny your child medical treatment that violates your religious beliefs and she dies? Is it murder? What is it if you make laws banning stem cell research due to religious beliefs, have you murdered those who could have been saved by stem cell therapy? It is murder to pay farmers to not grow food when people in the world are starving? It's definitely incredibly stupid. In some future society it very well may be considered murder. What about manslaughter? Is the victim less dead due to accident than intent? You see there are many different laws concerning murder. In most of the world stoning a woman to death for adultery would be murder, but not everywhere.
My point is that the law MUST be a living thing - not so much because of the changes in technology - but because of the changes in the human heart. Not so long ago if a man trespassed you were within your right to kill him. If he threatened you with his fists you could kill him. Now we have the concept of proportional response. Would a reasonable man in that situation respond with that level of violence? The definition of a reasonable man is determined by the courts in each case. A reasonable man in 12th century France resembles a modern citizen of Atlanta as a mammoth resembles an elephant. Our concept of 'reasonable' and indeed, 'man', has changed. Killing a slave used to be an offense against property. Today we find that idea horrible.
It is true that laws must bear a certain gravity and stability. Changing laws on the whim of current notion is as bad as clinging to laws we have outgrown. Some laws are designed to make us better - laws bestowing freedoms and rights; some laws are designed to confound the dark side of human nature - laws condemning tyranny and violence. The Rule of Law, like every human thing is flawed and incomplete, it is also the supreme example of the finest qualities of the human character. When we speak of laws we must do our upmost to see clearly and speak truly. The law must remain alive in the human heart, for when it dies, so do we.
billy - of course there's something to be said for civil disobedience
I have to disagree - they are not exploiting grey areas - they are simply breaking the law. If the p2p crowd had maintained a little moderation and kept a low profile things wouldn't be as bad as they are. The record industry was always willing to overlook some piracy, but the distribution of free copies of new releases all over the world the same day as the official release was something their business could not survive. I admit that if you've got the chops to hack free music I don't have a lot to say. By hanging out thousands of files where anyone who had a box and knew how to click could build vast libraries of content with virtually no effort - and then bragging it all about - the p2p crowd brought it on themselves. The rest of us are paying for it in the hassles the copyright protection creates in the fair and legal use of our purchased products. How many of you know people with huge collections of songs who never listen to half of them? It's not the law that exists in a grey area - it's our moral values.
billy - 700 cds 0 mp3s
"Somebody should come up with some standardized layout for
I would think it would be more valuable to submit an opinion more representative of professional thinking than one looking professional. A standardized format used by all
The article is rather long and after a short perusal I still am not sure whether non-Australian viewpoints would be welcomed. It's too bad there is no way to require a submitter to actually read the document before posting, the foreword is very promising. I was wondering if any of you blokes from down under could clue us in. Is this on the up and up or just cynical political pandering? In your experience, is the government of Australia seriously seeking advice from their citizens or, like here in the U.S., are they making their decisions in the backrooms and at lobbyist's shindigs? At least they're pretending to pay attention, lately our leaders attitudes seems to be: "now just sit back and don't worry your pointy little heads, as soon as God whispers in my ear I'll tell you in words you can understand exactly what we're gonna do - now say Amen".
billy - thank the lord for term limits
You know it sounds like she might have been looking for a way to do some good. I doubt if she had the push to authorize a months pay. It could be that news of your resignation reached levels beyond those informed of the earlier events. The fact that you were so pissed that you refused cash would tend to eliminate quite a few potential motivations when considering the cause of your behavior. Then again, there may have been forms routinely included in the interview they wished you to sign. Either they were covering their ass or trying to wipe some of the shit off. The fact that they offered more money at all suggests that you had - and may still have - a stronger hand than you thought. Like mobs, people in companies will do things they would never consider on their own, never realizing just how far off the beaten path they've wandered. They may still be willing to make that interview worth your while - besides with the perspective you now enjoy - it could be fun.
billy - 6 weeks pay hmmmmm
Personally, I'd have loved to give them that interview - and I would have been the most helpful, respectful, level headed example of a model employee those HR people had ever seen. I would have explained with great reluctance that my valuable contribution to their company was ceasing as a last resort, that I had been driven to it, and that it probably wouldn't be long till they were sitting down with the next victim. Most HR people live in a fantasy world, fed BS by both management and employees, occasionally they get it right. You might have got paid AND planted the seed that eventually spelled doom for the manager. Well, OK, you'd have got paid.
billy - hey - it could happen
I'd take it a step farther. Take a note from the corporate world - document, document, document. Although you may be right that most of the people around are aware of the relative merits of your positions, a few years down the road something of a more permanent and clear cut nature may avert one of those unforeseeable disasters. It helps that your new job is in a different field, but that also means that once you're gone, his is the only voice people will hear. When someone asks: "hey, where's old Bob - he seemed like a good guy?" and he begins: "yeah, I thought that way too - until we started to suspect he was selling us out to Microsoft - yeah I hated to do it but I had to let old Bob go." He was your boss and if that's the only story around - well who would you believe? If the guy is as personally bereft of judgment and as hostile as you believe, you know he's going to trash you every chance he gets.
When a big company wants to get rid of someone they follow a specific pathway. It starts with a heads up informally, proceeds through counseling sessions, and finally results in "we tried everything, but you just don't seem to trying to improve Bob, we wish it could be some other way, but we all have to live with our policies, 3 written interventions is automatic termination". The 3 interventions could be for 3 five minutes late episodes - it won't matter - they've covered their ass. Cover yours. Don't forget that sometimes burning bridges will keep you out of the whole neighborhood, not just one building. Try to find documentation for your side of the argument. If you can get copies of your employment record, do so, especially reviews and any commendations or letters of appreciation. Try to get a copy of your resignation with a signature and date of acceptance. If your co-workers agree you might get them to verify your description of actual occurrences. For instance you could e-mail them and ask them to verify that YOU are not misunderstanding the situation.
Just remember - a perspective employer might understand that your boss was a psycho and still find your responses to be out of line. 5 years from now it will be a lot easier to answer the question: "Did you give notice and then walk out early?" with a simple "no" rather than an example of why you were right. As you have found with your present boss, the business world recognizes no obligation to be fair. Don't give anyone any reason to accuse YOU of unprofessional behavior. Don't worry too much about the check, most states are very proactive when it comes to employers withholding wages. In at least two states if the employer does not pay by the normal payday, the amount automatically gets multiplied two or three times. You know you're moving on to a better situation, bite the bullet and find honor in handling the situation as well as you are able. Making the best of a bad situation is an essential business skill, take this example to demonstrate your ability.
billy - then, 2 months later, beat the snot out of him in a honkytonk pisser
Hey how about this?
We'll start an online magazine specializing in how much shit the hardware can take before it goes crispy!
"The Westsea Digimax Shredder 2 Terabyte hard drive with 8 gig FlashCache and fuzzy logic predictive prefetch is the first consumer grade hard drive using IBM's licensed DiskWard Quantum Force Field technology to insure platter physical integrity. The 2M RPM Buckytubes composite platters spin in vacuum on a room temperature superconductor frictionless mounting system. The ZMP (Zero Moving Parts) MRI based seek array is the same unit featured on the popular Guillotine line of hard drives. Writing chores are handled by the proven Entangled Pair Matrix Observer chip set from Via, toned down a notch to avoid the costly and physically heavy Reality Guard containment enclosures necessary on their commercial and military drives. EPMO has been the cutting edge state editing choice for the past year, and will likely remain that way until the much anticipated BioSeer precognitive feline brain based technology receives the Department of Bioethics certification sometime next year. In the meantime, the Shredders state of the art systems and top of the line materials should make for read and write speeds fast enough to satisfy even the most demanding Cybersexsim user. There is no discernable lag in smell or tactile rendering even with the tickle factor set all the way up and scent/memory mapping enabled. It is possible to tweak EPMO for even faster state change event recognition but VIA warns against exceeding the preset limits. Without the Reality Guard enclosures, the Laws of Physics Instability Field might project beyond the walls of the drive case. Take my advice, you don't want to see your data take off for some other galaxy in a red shifted blur of hyper light speed photonic fragments. Recovering data from beyond interstellar distances can get expensive fast!
Overall we were very pleased with the Westsea Digimax Shredder 2T. Its combination of high performance, robust Disaster Avoidance Protocols, and competitive pricing make it a solid choice for any high end system. On the downside, we would have liked to have seen some quieter cooling fans. At anything over 1,000,000 RPM the fans start to sound a little like a jet engine. During a 8 or 9 hour sexsim session it might get a little annoying. Next week: Performance Tests."
billy - I had a good idea and got a little carried away with the setup
I wonder if you're ineligible if you're the same company that MS got the technology from when they bought you out as a startup the first time? Does MS have a big list of technologies awaiting the 'proper' time for development? Microsoft has made several moves in the recent past that suggest they are migrating towards a more open minded approach to collaboration and the OS community. THIS may be the REAL 'tipping point' for free software. Has Bill Gates decided 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'? Of course one logical conclusion to that process is 'join 'em - and then take over'. I'm dying to see how the MS bashers react if MS bandwagons its way to Open Source Nirvana. They have the same access to OS code as any developer. Better be careful Fanboys - you might find yourself in a worse place than you could ever imagine - competing head to head with Microsoft in the same market with MS applications based on YOUR code. Oh the horror. The horror.
billy - Ms. Linux...the softer more feminine OS
"Congradulations on your successful exploit feelthelureofthedarkside. We were pleased youarewizard31337bowtoyou at the response we received from the hacker community muchmoneymuchrenownmanymanytoysdoyoudeserve and the amazing variety of successful intrusions. youwillgetbigironalluwant Your performance, being first to crack each level of the challenge, with three versions of penetration per level was outstanding. weneversawthetarballforkbombcoming Please respond to get your prize toyouallpowerallglory. For some reason your legal address seems to be changing feelthedarksidesmellthemoneyjoinusjoinusbetraythe
billy - well there's always Walmart
Yep - the same one where you can say shit like that all you want. Hell, you don't even have to post as anonymous coward. We know we got problems. We bitch about 'em more than the rest of the world combined. Oh, by the way, any Americans ever get killed protecting your country?
billy - America...love it or change it
Plus how many of those 62% are members of households that do have broadband? How many have access at work? I travel to towns of all sizes and geographic distribution and have yet to find one without public high speed access, usually for free. The only problem I've had was one cybercafe in Berkeley where the only box available had an OS in Korean. I didn't understand everything the folks there were saying, but I'm pretty sure they were ganging up on me at Unreal Tournament.
billy - respawning means never having to say you're sorry