He openly solicits what odds are are insider info, and odds are those are covered by NDAs, and tells the world, and in California that's a crime.
1. The word is "tort," not "crime." We're in civil court here, not criminal.
2. Careful how you bandy about the word "solicit." It has a specific meaning, and I don't think publicly posting an 800 number on a website and requesting information measures up to it.
3. How were Woodward and Bernstein any different? Weren't they actually more "culpable" since they went to the houses of insiders and called them up on the phone - they knew exactly who they were talking to - to find out all their secrets? Woodward knows who Deep Throat is, after all. Nick probably doesn't know who leaves him voicemail unless they say so.
Even if the actual theft were theoretically illegal, how could one prosecute if the person disseminating your private information had a legal right to protect the identity of the thief?
That's easy: Journalism shield laws protect sources of information that are newsworthy. The fact that Apple is going to ship the mac mini? Newsworthy. My prothrombin time test results from last week? Not newsworthy. Why not? Two excellent reasons: I am not a public figure, therefore nothing about my daily life is newsworthy, but even if I were a public figure, the law carves out exceptions for personal *detailed* medical and financial information that imposes a duty on *everyone* who gets ahold of them.
Anyone who thinks Apple should win this should consider the question: at the core, how different is Nick dePlume's journalism from what Woodward and Bernstein were doing to uncover Watergate?
I would hesitate to label as "solicitation," in the legal sense of the word, the act of posting a phone number on a web site and merely requesting information.
Of course, IANAL, but I think "solicitation" that rises to the level of a tort would have to involve something akin to a briefcase of unmarked bills.
As for the line between "news reporting" and blogs... guess what: As far as the constitution goes, there IS NO DIFFERENCE. What, do you think the 1st ammendment requires you to buy a permit first or something?
The nice thing about Apple's cinema displays (well, one of the nice things) is that they're almost exactly 100 dpi. My powerbook display (1280x854) is also 100dpi.
I've used Windows on much more dense screens, but you wind up with problems because you have to bump up the font sizes to be able to read anything, and there's lots of software that either doesn't lay things out properly with high resolution fonts or doesn't have any way of adjusting how they look.
For $999, you can get 1680x1050, with a built-in USB2 and Firewire 400 hub. Despite where it comes from, it would work fine with any PC capable of outputting the correct resolution on a DVI-D port.
now PC users will have to contend with all the DRM nonsense that the people who bought new HDTVs recently will soon be exposed to
I don't believe that's the case. HDCP is not required for a signal source. I expect all signal-sink components to fully be able to support unencrypted content.
I suppose in theory, you could see HDDVD player programs that run on PCs work with the video card driver to output HDMI-HDCP, should the disk demand it. That could potentially cause headaches for Open Source OSes if the video chipset folks don't make that stuff default to being disabled and out of the way.
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which vary from state to state.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses ( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected ( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks ( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it (X) Users of email will not put up with it (X) Microsoft will not put up with it ( ) The police will not put up with it ( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers ( ) Requires cooperation from too many of your friends and is counterintuitive (X) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once ( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers ( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists ( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business ( ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever worked ( ) Other:
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it ( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email ( ) Open relays in foreign countries ( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses ( ) Asshats ( ) Jurisdictional problems ( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes (X) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money (X) Huge existing software investment in SMTP ( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack ( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email ( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes (X) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches (X) Extreme profitability of spam ( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft ( ) Technically illiterate politicians (X) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers (X) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves ( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering (X) Outlook ( ) Other:
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable ( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation ( ) Blacklists suck ( ) Whitelists suck ( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored ( ) Countermeasures cannot involve wire fraud or credit card fraud ( ) Countermeasures cannot involve sabotage of public networks (X) Sending email should be free (X) Why should we have to trust you and your servers? ( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses (X) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem ( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome ( ) I don't want the government reading my email ( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough ( ) Other:
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(X) Nice try, dude, but I don't think it will work. ( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it. ( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
My mom's computer is good as the day she got it too. But I only did one of the things on your list: there's a firewall/NAT box in the house, but that's so that the connection can be shared. She doesn't need any of the other countermeasures.
1. As soon as ElGato comes out with one, you'll be able to plug it right into the firewire port. For myself, I plan on trying the EyeTV 500 with it. In theory, there isn't enough horsepower to display 1080i, but I have some hope that since I'll be outputting 720p instead of 1080i, it might work. Quicktime 7 (Tiger) might eventually help as well.
2. There is a $100 USB dongle on the mac mini accessories page that fixes that. It will even let you get 5.1 audio from the DVD player out to optical.
3. ATI has a dongle that clips on to their DVI ports that gives YPrPb, but I'm 99% sure they use a driver hack to redefine the RGB output on the analog pins to YPrPb. It would indeed be nice if Apple were able to do something similar. From where I set, it looks like an awful lot of people are repurposing this machine from the entry level 'switchers' machine to the home media machine. I'm really, really surprised that Steve didn't talk more about this idea. This *can't* be a surprise to them, can it?
4. ElGato, again.
5. ElGato, again. Though for my part, I think using a remote control to talk to a computer is underpowered. For my mini, I got the full Bluetooth thing going on. I'll do some bad woodworking to lash together a bt keyboard and bt trackball in one unit. Now *THAT* will be a remote!
If you look at the accessories page for the mac mini, I believe in the third row they list a USB audio dongle that does optical I/O, and does it at 96 kHz / 24 bit, no less (or will do 5.1, including take 5.1 from the DVD Player). It would have been nice if Apple had done the same thing with the headphone jack they did with the AirPort Express, but since this is intended to be an entry level machine, I'm not particularly offended that they didn't, particularly since it's an easy thing to remedy if you want/need it.
1. I can think of lots of tech jobs that cannot easily be exported. Just one example: field service techs.
2. Most jobs that require clearances exclude foreign nationals. Just find a random defense contractor and look at their job listings.
Keep in mind that the grandparent asked a specific question, and I answered it. It's like an existence proof: you succeed if you find a single example.
There isn't much wrong with Unix, IMHO. But nothing is perfect. I believe a lot of other replies, however, have concentrated on particular incarnations of Unix.
I think the one thing that was a mistake was making UID 0 special. Rather, I think they could have made more use of nodes in/dev/ to manage permissions. For example, posessing an open file descriptor on/dev/security/tcp/lowsocket would permit applications to open sockets below 1024.
This concept could have been combined with, perhaps, a process-based ACL system - something like/dev/security/tcp/lowsocket can be opened by any process whose text comes from/usr/sbin/in.fingerd.
I haven't really thought this through much. It's just a first stab, the idea being that far too many things wind up having to be SUID root just because they have to do one privileged thing.
The current rage for poker has apparently destroyed the old neighborhood friendly game of poker (where such things were said all the time) forever.
I have a friendly game at my house every week, thank you very much.
Having rules and strictly adhering to them is what keeps the game friendly, whether it's a home game or the 6-12 table (or the 20-40 table, for that matter) at Bay 101. The rules keep the playing field level for all participants. Lax adherence to the rules works until someone perceives that an advantage has been taken and then gets bent out of shape about it.
Amazing that we've not drawn an off-topic yet. The Mods Must Be Crazy.
That turn of phrase is quite erroneous. When playing poker, your first declaration or action stands and you cannot then alter it. Attempting to do so is called "string betting." The instant you said "see," that implied a call. At that point, a raise in the same action is not allowed. You will never hear that phrase at a poker table without two things happening: the speaker will be instantly recognized as a greenhorn, and the dealer will disallow the raise.
As for the spelling of "mis-spelt", asking google is a lousy way to go. Dictionary.com says "misspelled," or optionally "misspelt". I've always used the former.
As to the question of whether the great-grandparent misspelled or not, I guess you say poe-TAY-toh and I say poe-TAH-toh.
That by claiming it is "AS IS" you get away from all of those?
In most US states, yes.
"AS IS" has a specific legal meaning. There may be restrictions on manufacturers in various industries that bar them from selling AS IS goods in normal retail channels. You can't sell new cars "AS IS," for example, because there are statutorily required warranties on things like the emissions system.
Slashdot Mirror
1. The word is "tort," not "crime." We're in civil court here, not criminal.
2. Careful how you bandy about the word "solicit." It has a specific meaning, and I don't think publicly posting an 800 number on a website and requesting information measures up to it.
3. How were Woodward and Bernstein any different? Weren't they actually more "culpable" since they went to the houses of insiders and called them up on the phone - they knew exactly who they were talking to - to find out all their secrets? Woodward knows who Deep Throat is, after all. Nick probably doesn't know who leaves him voicemail unless they say so.
And in the wake of those cases, many states have indeed passed journalist shield laws so that such fiascos need not be repeated. Such laws, in fact, continue to be strengthened.
That's easy: Journalism shield laws protect sources of information that are newsworthy. The fact that Apple is going to ship the mac mini? Newsworthy. My prothrombin time test results from last week? Not newsworthy. Why not? Two excellent reasons: I am not a public figure, therefore nothing about my daily life is newsworthy, but even if I were a public figure, the law carves out exceptions for personal *detailed* medical and financial information that imposes a duty on *everyone* who gets ahold of them.
Anyone who thinks Apple should win this should consider the question: at the core, how different is Nick dePlume's journalism from what Woodward and Bernstein were doing to uncover Watergate?
I would hesitate to label as "solicitation," in the legal sense of the word, the act of posting a phone number on a web site and merely requesting information.
Of course, IANAL, but I think "solicitation" that rises to the level of a tort would have to involve something akin to a briefcase of unmarked bills.
As for the line between "news reporting" and blogs... guess what: As far as the constitution goes, there IS NO DIFFERENCE. What, do you think the 1st ammendment requires you to buy a permit first or something?
Apple's 20" cinema display is 1680x1050.
The nice thing about Apple's cinema displays (well, one of the nice things) is that they're almost exactly 100 dpi. My powerbook display (1280x854) is also 100dpi.
I've used Windows on much more dense screens, but you wind up with problems because you have to bump up the font sizes to be able to read anything, and there's lots of software that either doesn't lay things out properly with high resolution fonts or doesn't have any way of adjusting how they look.
For $999, you can get 1680x1050, with a built-in USB2 and Firewire 400 hub. Despite where it comes from, it would work fine with any PC capable of outputting the correct resolution on a DVI-D port.
Or does he resemble Mark Hamil in those photos?
I don't believe that's the case. HDCP is not required for a signal source. I expect all signal-sink components to fully be able to support unencrypted content.
I suppose in theory, you could see HDDVD player programs that run on PCs work with the video card driver to output HDMI-HDCP, should the disk demand it. That could potentially cause headaches for Open Source OSes if the video chipset folks don't make that stuff default to being disabled and out of the way.
You must be new here.
Your post advocates a
(X) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which vary from state to state.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
(X) Users of email will not put up with it
(X) Microsoft will not put up with it
( ) The police will not put up with it
( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
( ) Requires cooperation from too many of your friends and is counterintuitive
(X) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
( ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever worked
( ) Other:
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
( ) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
( ) Asshats
( ) Jurisdictional problems
( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
(X) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
(X) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
(X) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
(X) Extreme profitability of spam
( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
( ) Technically illiterate politicians
(X) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
(X) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
(X) Outlook
( ) Other:
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) Blacklists suck
( ) Whitelists suck
( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures cannot involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
( ) Countermeasures cannot involve sabotage of public networks
(X) Sending email should be free
(X) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
(X) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) I don't want the government reading my email
( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
( ) Other:
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(X) Nice try, dude, but I don't think it will work.
( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
My mom's computer is good as the day she got it too. But I only did one of the things on your list: there's a firewall/NAT box in the house, but that's so that the connection can be shared. She doesn't need any of the other countermeasures.
Oh, didn't I mention that it's an iBook?
No poker player would ever actually say that.
Au contraire. Now, I'm not sure I'd actually try it on a mini, but it is at least possible.
1. As soon as ElGato comes out with one, you'll be able to plug it right into the firewire port. For myself, I plan on trying the EyeTV 500 with it. In theory, there isn't enough horsepower to display 1080i, but I have some hope that since I'll be outputting 720p instead of 1080i, it might work. Quicktime 7 (Tiger) might eventually help as well.
2. There is a $100 USB dongle on the mac mini accessories page that fixes that. It will even let you get 5.1 audio from the DVD player out to optical.
3. ATI has a dongle that clips on to their DVI ports that gives YPrPb, but I'm 99% sure they use a driver hack to redefine the RGB output on the analog pins to YPrPb. It would indeed be nice if Apple were able to do something similar. From where I set, it looks like an awful lot of people are repurposing this machine from the entry level 'switchers' machine to the home media machine. I'm really, really surprised that Steve didn't talk more about this idea. This *can't* be a surprise to them, can it?
4. ElGato, again.
5. ElGato, again. Though for my part, I think using a remote control to talk to a computer is underpowered. For my mini, I got the full Bluetooth thing going on. I'll do some bad woodworking to lash together a bt keyboard and bt trackball in one unit. Now *THAT* will be a remote!
If you look at the accessories page for the mac mini, I believe in the third row they list a USB audio dongle that does optical I/O, and does it at 96 kHz / 24 bit, no less (or will do 5.1, including take 5.1 from the DVD Player). It would have been nice if Apple had done the same thing with the headphone jack they did with the AirPort Express, but since this is intended to be an entry level machine, I'm not particularly offended that they didn't, particularly since it's an easy thing to remedy if you want/need it.
The warning would have been funnier if it said not to download britneyspearsnude.wmv because it really IS a video of her stripping.
1. I can think of lots of tech jobs that cannot easily be exported. Just one example: field service techs.
2. Most jobs that require clearances exclude foreign nationals. Just find a random defense contractor and look at their job listings.
Keep in mind that the grandparent asked a specific question, and I answered it. It's like an existence proof: you succeed if you find a single example.
Presuming that "you" refers to a U.S. citizen and by "an indian or chinese" you mean a citizen of the respective country, then the list includes:
- Work legally in the U.S. without obtaining approval from the INS.
- Apply for a U.S. government security clearance.
That is, there are a variety of jobs for which being a foreign national is a disqualification.You compared the US government to the Nazis. Game, set, match.
Godwin's law strikes again. You are now disqualified.
There isn't much wrong with Unix, IMHO. But nothing is perfect. I believe a lot of other replies, however, have concentrated on particular incarnations of Unix.
/dev/ to manage permissions. For example, posessing an open file descriptor on /dev/security/tcp/lowsocket would permit applications to open sockets below 1024.
/dev/security/tcp/lowsocket can be opened by any process whose text comes from /usr/sbin/in.fingerd.
I think the one thing that was a mistake was making UID 0 special. Rather, I think they could have made more use of nodes in
This concept could have been combined with, perhaps, a process-based ACL system - something like
I haven't really thought this through much. It's just a first stab, the idea being that far too many things wind up having to be SUID root just because they have to do one privileged thing.
I have a friendly game at my house every week, thank you very much.
Having rules and strictly adhering to them is what keeps the game friendly, whether it's a home game or the 6-12 table (or the 20-40 table, for that matter) at Bay 101. The rules keep the playing field level for all participants. Lax adherence to the rules works until someone perceives that an advantage has been taken and then gets bent out of shape about it.
Amazing that we've not drawn an off-topic yet. The Mods Must Be Crazy.
That turn of phrase is quite erroneous. When playing poker, your first declaration or action stands and you cannot then alter it. Attempting to do so is called "string betting." The instant you said "see," that implied a call. At that point, a raise in the same action is not allowed. You will never hear that phrase at a poker table without two things happening: the speaker will be instantly recognized as a greenhorn, and the dealer will disallow the raise.
As for the spelling of "mis-spelt", asking google is a lousy way to go. Dictionary.com says "misspelled," or optionally "misspelt". I've always used the former.
As to the question of whether the great-grandparent misspelled or not, I guess you say poe-TAY-toh and I say poe-TAH-toh.
In most US states, yes.
"AS IS" has a specific legal meaning. There may be restrictions on manufacturers in various industries that bar them from selling AS IS goods in normal retail channels. You can't sell new cars "AS IS," for example, because there are statutorily required warranties on things like the emissions system.
Technically, he did spell it right. It was just the wrong word.