Ok, let's assume Ford is really doing the Right Thing and for the Right Reasons.
Suppose Northwest airlines had done this a while back. Would they have an easier time claiming they were really searching *their* own computers for whatever they wanted to troll for? --
I'm in Minnesota. No, I do not work for nor represent Northwest. A not far drive from Minneapolis (a Northwest hub -- so much so other airlines ahve complained, and I belive rightly so, about being unable to get sufficient gate space). I have flown NWA before. At the time they were about like any other major airline.
I'm a similar distance away from another, smaller airport that is more evenly served by various airlines. I prefer that one, it's cheaper to park, to fly, and I have *gasp* CHOICE of carrier there.
I'm also not typically one to side with any union, having been up close to a couple and see them as the lazyman's excuse to get paid handsomely to only almost work... while nonunion folks next to them busted thier butts to get stuff done, for far less pay (and no benefits).
But this is too much. Search the computers USED ON THE JOB, yes. That is quite quite legal, though uncomfortable. But home machines? Does Northwest expect to be able to tap employee's home phones too? And when was this 'sickout' (Ththe union I must say was very very careful to discourage any such thing - having seen another airline's pilot's union get deservedly zapped for pulling it) occurred, guess when? The height of flu season, in a year where the flu made the news for it's severity. Hrmmmmmm...
Northwest is only hurting themselves with this one.
Here's a twist. Some folks, such as myself, don't using local email programs at home, but telnet or ssh our way to shell accounts for our mail. Would some company demand our passwords? Or would they try to extract info from the account provider? I suppose this sort of thing is another call for easy to use encryption.
Yes, E&Y was called in, but that's still different from the normal evidence gathering for any other thing. Why shouldn't the rules for digital evidence gathering be as strict as the rules for paper? Just becuase it's "new"? Then why don't we allow wiretapping at whim? That's "new" too. I do wonder how Minnesota's privacy laws (yes, we have them) may affect things or if that's just non-court sanction spying on folks. Yes, spying. Let's call it what it is.
What to do? Well, I can think of a few things - keep the accounts non-local (make 'em work across as many states as possible, countries, ideally). Fill up things with innocuous references. Encrypt. (I'm really partial to the idea of dual-decryptable fils, one decryption being as valid as the other, but with different results. Irksome indeed, but if my privacy is invaded, I want to be as protected UP FRONT as I can be. First and Fourth Amendments are nice, but I can't fight giants easily, especially after they've had their way. Delete delete delete and scramble if need be.
And no, I'm NOT advocating anything illegal. But those who would do such acts against me deserve to have as rough a time as I can make it.
But Northwest has another solution: Never ever exercise First (or Fourth) Amendment rights. Or else. Sorry, NWA, that bird ain't gonna fly. And I've no sympathy for you.
The problem with that is the longer one waits, the more opportunity given to someone else.
If company A doesn't want to work with system X (or Y..etc), then that leave it wide open for company B, doesn't it?
Badgering, demanding, mailbombing, threatening are of course counterproductive. Requesting, calmly should not be countrproductive. Mention of money spent (or not spent) is also an attention grabber.
If Blizzard doesn't care to fiddle with Linux or such, that's their decision. Company B, did you hear that? Time to take Company A's place from them, with their blessing. --
FreeDOS's first intent is to provide a 'free' (insert favorite definition here) version of DOS which is compatible with MS-DOS.. to the point of running on an 8088/8086 system.
As for licensing, FreeDOS encourages GPLed software, but the distribution is not restricted to GPL-only. There are 'public domain' items in the distribution. A current poll on the FreeDOS site is asking if 'free for noncommercial use' software should be included. (I think such should be, but only for 'non-essentail' items and kept as a seperate download so folks can avoid it if desired.)
Multitasking and 32-bit utilities/extensions may be considered for a later distribution option or addition, as I understand it. Much as I would like that, the 32-bit world is already being served by Linux/BSD/(and even Windows), so I can see why the original objective is held to for now. Yes, 16 bit is "obsolete" but the machinery still runs and for some things is sufficient.
I've played a bit with FreeDOS (Beta3) on a spare 386 some. I will likely be trying Beta4 (or later, depending on my time..) in the foreseeable future. I'm reasonably impressed with the "lite" setup version. (Though warning a third disk, blank, may be needed would be a Good Idea, IMO.)
What do you feel are the remaining steps that must be taken to move from beta to the first non-beta version? No, I am NOT asking time to that release, that is always 'longer than desired.' And thank you for your time.
No, the injuction is crafted such that it does prohibit linking to sites with the information.
A question may be, is that an HTML link (and even grant simply listing the URL to be copied & pasted rather than an "easy" link) or is that ANY link in the chain(s) that *could* lead there.
If it is any link that *could* lead to the information it takes on a whole new, greater significance (yes, more than just DVD). Why?
Here's the links I'd consider: search engines. By now some spiders have surely indexed sites that carry the information which CCA is trying to suppress.
Intent (use the search engine to find the information we can't show you) may be a factor. But is having a specific link to an engine any different than saying "If you seek it, try a search engine"? If 'secondary links' are also forbidden, wouldn't this be a thing for the engines to be concerned about? Of course the CCA won't go after them, at least not publicly, as that would make them out to be fools to everyone, not just the few (really, how widespread is balanced coverage? Not very.) already.
What might be done? Quiet behind the scenes stuff, if they wanted to try and risk that should it get out. More likely, nothing, aside from going after anyone actually using the above technique as following the letter rather than the "spirit" of things.
As for going "all the way" that may be a very good thing. A Supreme Court ruling (which would of course not involve that particaluar judge..) could set things straight once and for all. But if things went the other way.. *shudder*.. and it would be slow getting there.
1. Content sellers get the DIVX like stuff they want.
2. Consumers appear to get privacy. Pay cash, take home, watch, forget about bringing it back or fooling with weird authentication scams, er, schemes.
Bad points:
1. This, not DeCSS, would seem to encourage piracy more than anything. Joe Random Customer: "Hey, I paid for it once, why can't I play it again now? That does it, next one I copy.. or get a copy that isn't Broken As Designed."
2. The privacy bit is moot. Pay cash for a DVD that stays good and you still have all the privacy that a degrading disc would appear to provide.
3. Conspiracy time: Content sellers could could issues only on these auto-defective media.
4. What does the degrading do to a play or drive if left there for an extended time? What about me, is there any gas emitted that might affect my health? Or substance on an "aged" disc that I don't want to be touching?
It looks like another DIVX from here, if consumers have a choice (which may not be the case). Content sellers want to sell over and over and this may seem a boon. It is not. The one thing you should never do is make your customers mad at you. This looks to do just that, and likely very very well.
The now famous cartoon about nobody knowing one is a dog holds also for age, and gender, and almost anything else one wishes not to reveal if one is careful.
Almost anything. There is a glaring exception that shines through every time. The exception is maturity
Maturity will show every time, as those lacking it simply haven't the control to required to fake it. A mature post or comment or action can come from a 13 year old girl, or 97 year old man. Both can hide gender or age if they so choose, by making the effort. Perhaps online discussion forums are revealing that maturity is a lot less common than many of us would like it be. Of course, the immature posts and comments tend to stand out, as out of place, so maybe they just get more notice, like a brat yelling his (or her) lungs out it only takes a one or maybe a few to make life miserable for those around them.
Slashdot is at least trying to deal with the 'brats' by moderation. It is an imperfect system, as shown by the need for meta-moderation, but is at least an attempt to deal with the problem. I've seen other web-board sites (gross oversimplifation of/. isn't it?) close rather than work at the problem. I prefer the/. take: acknowledg the problem and at least try to fix it.
Maybe you don't care for Jon Katz articles, fine. You can exclude them from your sight if you wish.
But your anonymous post of simply katz is a jerk! only serves to support the very article you've posted that in followup to.
I support anonymous posting, but do please think out a post before posting it. Posts like the one above only give those who have legitimate need of anonymity a bad name. Surely if Mr. Katz is a jerk you could easily make that case, and much more powerfully, by refuting the claims in the article.
It could, it if genuinely is "suprise proof" lead to fewer warnings. I rather doubt that even this machine is really "surprise proof" with something as annoyingly comlpex as weather prediction. The real test, and likely downfall, will be to predict truly nasty weather - genuinely severe storms that spawn tornadoes, for example. While these may be somewhat predictable, I rather doubt we'll see forecasts of which paths to get clear of before the twister shreds it. That would be "surprise proof" prediction. Who really cares if the forecast high or low is off by a couple degrees?
The real hope is that there will be sufficiently increased accuracy so that needless warnings are not issued. Hopefully the reverse will not happen and overconfidence cause a failure to issue a warning that deserves to be issued.
As for runs on stores due to snow, maybe that situation happens in places where snow is an unusual event. I happen to be in a place where it is possible, in the colder months, to walk across lakes without getting wet. It is snowing right now and nothing much is unusual. Folks still go to work and all, and there's no rush to stores as this is just like a rain shower here, except when it's over the result can (or has to) be pushed aside.
I learned on a 'Cosmac ELF II' with an 1802 processor. Yes, weird, limiting in many ways (multiply opcode? What multiply?!).
But it was small and easily understood. That helped with other processors, from 6502 to 8086 to 68hc11, and PIC and 8051... the only real trouble was getting used to being 'starved' for registers on some by comparison. But everything seemed to be a step up, otherwise.
I do not pretend to understand if this is truly a big deal or a minot blip with regard to Linux in Germany. However, it seems the perception is that it is a Bad Thing.
Perhaps it would behoove linux advocates in various countries to attempt to get trademark for "Linux" (ditto BSDs?) specifically to prevent this type thing. The trademark could then be transferred to Linus, to some noncommercial Linux body, or perhaps even simply held and 'not enforced' - which, and I may be wrong, means the trademark loses it 'power' but also prevents the seeming undesired re-use.
Or is this being done and I just have yet to hear of it?
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, let's assume Ford is really doing the Right Thing and for the Right Reasons.
Suppose Northwest airlines had done this a while back. Would they have an easier time claiming they were really searching *their* own computers for whatever they wanted to troll for?
--
I'm in Minnesota. No, I do not work for nor represent Northwest. A not far drive from Minneapolis (a Northwest hub -- so much so other airlines ahve complained, and I belive rightly so, about being unable to get sufficient gate space). I have flown NWA before. At the time they were about like any other major airline.
I'm a similar distance away from another, smaller airport that is more evenly served by various airlines. I prefer that one, it's cheaper to park, to fly, and I have *gasp* CHOICE of carrier there.
I'm also not typically one to side with any union, having been up close to a couple and see them as the lazyman's excuse to get paid handsomely to only almost work... while nonunion folks next to them busted thier butts to get stuff done, for far less pay (and no benefits).
But this is too much. Search the computers USED ON THE JOB, yes. That is quite quite legal, though uncomfortable. But home machines? Does Northwest expect to be able to tap employee's home phones too? And when was this 'sickout' (Ththe union I must say was very very careful to discourage any such thing - having seen another airline's pilot's union get deservedly zapped for pulling it) occurred, guess when? The height of flu season, in a year where the flu made the news for it's severity. Hrmmmmmm...
Northwest is only hurting themselves with this one.
Here's a twist. Some folks, such as myself, don't using local email programs at home, but telnet or ssh our way to shell accounts for our mail. Would some company demand our passwords? Or would they try to extract info from the account provider? I suppose this sort of thing is another call for easy to use encryption.
Yes, E&Y was called in, but that's still different from the normal evidence gathering for any other thing. Why shouldn't the rules for digital evidence gathering be as strict as the rules for paper? Just becuase it's "new"? Then why don't we allow wiretapping at whim? That's "new" too. I do wonder how Minnesota's privacy laws (yes, we have them) may affect things or if that's just non-court sanction spying on folks. Yes, spying. Let's call it what it is.
What to do? Well, I can think of a few things - keep the accounts non-local (make 'em work across as many states as possible, countries, ideally). Fill up things with innocuous references. Encrypt. (I'm really partial to the idea of dual-decryptable fils, one decryption being as valid as the other, but with different results. Irksome indeed, but if my privacy is invaded, I want to be as protected UP FRONT as I can be. First and Fourth Amendments are nice, but I can't fight giants easily, especially after they've had their way. Delete delete delete and scramble if need be.
And no, I'm NOT advocating anything illegal. But those who would do such acts against me deserve to have as rough a time as I can make it.
But Northwest has another solution: Never ever exercise First (or Fourth) Amendment rights. Or else. Sorry, NWA, that bird ain't gonna fly. And I've no sympathy for you.
It sounds so sensible to 'wait and see'.
The problem with that is the longer one waits,
the more opportunity given to someone else.
If company A doesn't want to work with system X
(or Y..etc), then that leave it wide open for
company B, doesn't it?
Badgering, demanding, mailbombing, threatening
are of course counterproductive. Requesting,
calmly should not be countrproductive. Mention
of money spent (or not spent) is also an attention
grabber.
If Blizzard doesn't care to fiddle with Linux or
such, that's their decision. Company B, did you
hear that? Time to take Company A's place from
them, with their blessing.
--
FreeDOS's first intent is to provide a 'free' (insert favorite definition here) version of DOS which is compatible with MS-DOS.. to the point of running on an 8088/8086 system.
As for licensing, FreeDOS encourages GPLed software, but the distribution is not restricted to GPL-only. There are 'public domain' items in the distribution. A current poll on the FreeDOS site is asking if 'free for noncommercial use' software should be included. (I think such should be, but only for 'non-essentail' items and kept as a seperate download so folks can avoid it if desired.)
Multitasking and 32-bit utilities/extensions may be considered for a later distribution option or addition, as I understand it. Much as I would like that, the 32-bit world is already being served by Linux/BSD/(and even Windows), so I can see why the original objective is held to for now. Yes, 16 bit is "obsolete" but the machinery still runs and for some things is sufficient.
I've played a bit with FreeDOS (Beta3) on a spare 386 some. I will likely be trying Beta4 (or later, depending on my time..) in the foreseeable future. I'm reasonably impressed with the "lite" setup version. (Though warning a third disk, blank, may be needed would be a Good Idea, IMO.)
What do you feel are the remaining steps that must be taken to move from beta to the first non-beta version? No, I am NOT asking time to that release, that is always 'longer than desired.' And thank you for your time.
No, the injuction is crafted such that it does prohibit linking to sites with the information.
A question may be, is that an HTML link (and even grant simply listing the URL to be copied & pasted rather than an "easy" link) or is that ANY link in the chain(s) that *could* lead there.
If it is any link that *could* lead to the information it takes on a whole new, greater significance (yes, more than just DVD). Why?
Here's the links I'd consider: search engines.
By now some spiders have surely indexed sites that carry the information which CCA is trying to suppress.
Intent (use the search engine to find the information we can't show you) may be a factor. But is having a specific link to an engine any different than saying "If you seek it, try a search engine"? If 'secondary links' are also forbidden, wouldn't this be a thing for the engines to be concerned about? Of course the CCA won't go after them, at least not publicly, as that would make them out to be fools to everyone, not just the few (really, how widespread is balanced coverage? Not very.) already.
What might be done? Quiet behind the scenes stuff, if they wanted to try and risk that should it get out. More likely, nothing, aside from going after anyone actually using the above technique as following the letter rather than the "spirit" of things.
As for going "all the way" that may be a very good thing. A Supreme Court ruling (which would of course not involve that particaluar judge..) could set things straight once and for all. But if things went the other way.. *shudder*.. and it would be slow getting there.
Good points:
1. Content sellers get the DIVX like stuff they want.
2. Consumers appear to get privacy. Pay cash, take home, watch, forget about bringing it back or fooling with weird authentication scams, er, schemes.
Bad points:
1. This, not DeCSS, would seem to encourage piracy more than anything. Joe Random Customer: "Hey, I paid for it once, why can't I play it again now? That does it, next one I copy.. or get a copy that isn't Broken As Designed."
2. The privacy bit is moot. Pay cash for a DVD that stays good and you still have all the privacy that a degrading disc would appear to provide.
3. Conspiracy time: Content sellers could could issues only on these auto-defective media.
4. What does the degrading do to a play or drive if left there for an extended time? What about me, is there any gas emitted that might affect my health? Or substance on an "aged" disc that I don't want to be touching?
It looks like another DIVX from here, if consumers have a choice (which may not be the case). Content sellers want to sell over and over and this may seem a boon. It is not. The one thing you should never do is make your customers mad at you. This looks to do just that, and likely very very well.
The now famous cartoon about nobody knowing one is a dog holds also for age, and gender, and almost anything else one wishes not to reveal if one is careful.
Almost anything. There is a glaring exception that shines through every time. The exception is maturity
Maturity will show every time, as those lacking it simply haven't the control to required to fake it. A mature post or comment or action can come from a 13 year old girl, or 97 year old man. Both can hide gender or age if they so choose, by making the effort. Perhaps online discussion forums are revealing that maturity is a lot less common than many of us would like it be. Of course, the immature posts and comments tend to stand out, as out of place, so maybe they just get more notice, like a brat yelling his (or her) lungs out it only takes a one or maybe a few to make life miserable for those around them.
Slashdot is at least trying to deal with the 'brats' by moderation. It is an imperfect system, as shown by the need for meta-moderation, but is at least an attempt to deal with the problem. I've seen other web-board sites (gross oversimplifation of /. isn't it?) close rather than work at the problem. I prefer the /. take: acknowledg the problem and at least try to fix it.
Maybe you don't care for Jon Katz articles, fine. You can exclude them from your sight if you wish.
But your anonymous post of simply katz is a jerk! only serves to support the very article you've posted that in followup to.
I support anonymous posting, but do please think out a post before posting it. Posts like the one above only give those who have legitimate need of anonymity a bad name. Surely if Mr. Katz is a jerk you could easily make that case, and much more powerfully, by refuting the claims in the article.
It could, it if genuinely is "suprise proof" lead to fewer warnings. I rather doubt that even this machine is really "surprise proof" with something as annoyingly comlpex as weather prediction. The real test, and likely downfall, will be to predict truly nasty weather - genuinely severe storms that spawn tornadoes, for example. While these may be somewhat predictable, I rather doubt we'll see forecasts of which paths to get clear of before the twister shreds it. That would be "surprise proof" prediction. Who really cares if the forecast high or low is off by a couple degrees?
The real hope is that there will be sufficiently increased accuracy so that needless warnings are not issued. Hopefully the reverse will not happen and overconfidence cause a failure to issue a warning that deserves to be issued.
As for runs on stores due to snow, maybe that situation happens in places where snow is an unusual event. I happen to be in a place where it is possible, in the colder months, to walk across lakes without getting wet. It is snowing right now and nothing much is unusual. Folks still go to work and all, and there's no rush to stores as this is just like a rain shower here, except when it's over the result can (or has to) be pushed aside.
I learned on a 'Cosmac ELF II' with an 1802 processor. Yes, weird, limiting in many ways (multiply opcode? What multiply?!).
But it was small and easily understood. That helped with other processors, from 6502 to 8086 to 68hc11, and PIC and 8051... the only real trouble was getting used to being 'starved' for registers on some by comparison. But everything seemed to be a step up, otherwise.
I do not pretend to understand if this is truly a big deal or a minot blip with regard to Linux in Germany. However, it seems the perception is that it is a Bad Thing.
Perhaps it would behoove linux advocates in various countries to attempt to get trademark for "Linux" (ditto BSDs?) specifically to prevent this type thing. The trademark could then be transferred to Linus, to some noncommercial Linux body, or perhaps even simply held and 'not enforced' - which, and I may be wrong, means the trademark loses it 'power' but also prevents the seeming undesired re-use.
Or is this being done and I just have yet to hear of it?
Supports or demands? :)