When a USA citizen buys something from a UK shop located in the UK and doing business in the UK, UK laws apply, UK taxes apply, and the rest is meaningless.
This is interesting. I'm sure there are many things allowed in the UK that are not allowed in the US, and vice versa. However, hypothetically, if a UK pharmacist is allowed to sell heroine over the counter, I doubt he would be allowed to set up shop in the US. The internet poses an entirely different problem. Can your pharmacist allow USians to buy heroine online? I'm using drugs as an extreme example, but I think it makes the point.
Gambling is somewhat benign in that unless someone gets their legs broken, it's a victimless crime (notwithstanding the broken marriages and homes, lost nesteggs, and other devastation it might cause).
For some reason the US has taken gambling as one of its major vices, and has governed strongly to control it. Is it not that way in the UK? I'm not being inflamatory, I'm curious.
As for your original hilight:
IT IS NOT HIS RESPONSIBILITY TO PREVENT US CITIZENS FROM BREAKING THE LAW.
IMHO, he's the fellow selling heroine over the internet....
"I'm guilty of selling drugs in the US, even though I never set foot on US soil.
I know this is really late, but I had to chime in here. To take your analogy a little further, let's say that your trebuchet was registered internationally, and everyone knew that it was your trebuchet, and you decided to walk over and talk to the catapult dudes, while your trebuchet was still flingin' dope over the border, and your guys were still receiving the bails of cash. I would think that you had a pretty good chance of getting arrested.
Basically, this guy was standing on U.S. soil, while his servers were still accepting bets from the poor and huddled masses. Of course he got popped!! What was he thinking?!? He had to know that he was a hated man in the U.S., and by being here while he was still perpetrating, is like a F-you to the folks that make it their job to care.
I guess it takes a true gambler to have cajones that big.
Absoulutely!!! My personal mail is a hodgepodge of just about everything, but my IMAP account at work is pretty well organized. I have folders for every project, regardless of how small my role might have been, and I have folders dating back to 10 years ago, when I started with the company. I go through at least once a week, and put everything from my inbox in its place.
Deviating from your point, the article doesn't seem to cover those that may be in the middle ground. Through my CYA attitude at work, I've been somewhat anal about my inbox there, but my personal email...well, even though I try to keep up with the labels and apply rules, it's a freaking mess.
Interesting. The full article from the University of Florida only mentions a $175,000 grant from the DOE. It seems the Army picked up a huge chunk of the tab with the $750,000 grant.
"But what would it mean for slashdot if males were no longer required for the survival of the human race?"
That's right, keep overestimating your importance, copper-top. Did you think they were man-boobs? CmdrTaco IS our female overlord. (Taco's in the name, after all!)
We blindly type away with all of our self-perceived manly knowledge; unwittingly assembled as the male collective (bad spelling, grammar, and hygiene be damned), while the nano-fibers replicate themselves through the dark pipes, up through our keyboards, and before we know it--Google Farm is complete.
I don't know about you, but I'm shutting off the machine, and going outside now....
Thank you. Given your insight, the thread could have been squashed a while ago, and I could have gone back to work. It seems that the inflamatory title, "U.S. Navy Patents THE Firewall" sent the majority of the posters into a tizzy. A more apt title might have been:
--"U.S. Navy Patents THEIR OWN Firewall"
--"U.S. Navy Patents A Firewall"
--Pretty much anything but THE Firewall.
But that's the question, isn't it? How does one know if their information was on that disc? I recieved my letter, from the VA, informing me of the possible exposure in about two weeks after first hearing about it on the news. My Dad, also a veteran, has yet to recieve his. The last paragraph reads as follows:
In accordance with current policy, the Internal Revenue Service has agreed to forward this letter because we do not have current addresses for all affected individuals. The IRS has not disclosed your address or any other tax information to us.
So, by the use of "affected individuals" can one assume that if you didn't get a letter, so kindly forwarded by the IRS, that you're in the clear, or should the fact that tens of millions of veterans and dependants may have been exposed prevail, and you should beware no matter what?
By the way, if you didn't recieve your letter, and you prefer to err on the side of caution, they did say that "...the VA has teamed up with the Federal Trade Commmission and has a Web site...
These aren't legitimate corporations, or at least they aren't known for their scruples. These 'brokers' obtain the information illegally, and sell it to anyone they want to. The question should be, why aren't they getting arrested for their crimes, instead of profitting from the very people that should be shutting them down?
I guess we justify it by saying that law enforcement has been using informants for as long as it's been around. Think of this as Jimmy the Fink with a paypal account, and an email address. The problem I have with this, is that it's not just trying to get the goods on a specific criminal, the government is buying the information in bulk, hoping to glean out a criminal or two. Now what happens to the remaining honest folks? Their information has been scrutinized for no reason, and there will always be a flag next to their name now. We're not the small fish that get pulled out of the net, and thrown back into the sea. The data is recorded, and always available.
First, congratulations on making me stop to rethink my own knee-jerk reaction to this article, which was that this guy's a douchebag. You almost had me by citing George Carlin, and the NASA joke, but as I quickly realized, and you pointed out for youself:
"...it doesn't appear that they were shooting for humor"
You are correct in that humor--when well crafted--has a certain healing power for some people. I for one, prefer to deal with difficult situations with humor. I've heard jokes about the 9/11 attacks, the Columbine shootings (always aimed at the perpetrators), and other atrocities that have made me laugh. But I think that it's because it takes some of the sting out of the reality, and pushes back on the human condition, which as we know is a barrel of laughs in itself.
I suppose that other folks may need to heal through reenactment, or gaining some perspective and knowledge of what actually happened. This is where your books, movies, and documetaries would come into play. I don't mind documentaries of factual events, although the sensationalism put into the Hollywood/made for T.V. type movies is a total turn off, and I don't give them my time. But different strokes for different folks. Everybody loves a trainwreck, right? However, now we're talking about a video game. What ever point of discussion this fellow was trying to invoke is going to be totally lost in the violence in video game flamewars. No matter how you, me, or any other slashdotter feels about it is irrelevent. What happens here, usually stays here. The media and the politicians are going to have a feild day with this, and the entire point (in my opinion I don't think there is one) is going to be lost. I think the underlying tone of the creation of this game is shock value. The author of the game is surely going to get it--in spades.
Anyway, the fact that you don't seem to care either way, makes you the perfect 'Devil's Advocate', and you proved your point rather well. I for one still think the guy's a douchebag.
"...there's little or no incentive to change the channel to avoid them."
I was thinking the same thing. It's almost impossible to avoid the commercials. Invariably, when I try to surf around them, any of the other networks I would want to watch are airing commercials as well. The only thing this technology would do is prevent me from watching the little gekko instead of the big buckin' chicken.
I wonder if any of the networks will get their panties in a bunch because I was prevented from surfing to their commercials?
I guess what I was trying to say was somewhat more broad than that....
If someone is considering hiring me for a position of responsibility, my credit record, criminal/psychiatric history...etc, is up for grabs, as it should be, but I'd rather they not be privy to my antics as a teenager. This is why I say the line is fuzzy (I'm still talking about the internet, and not a personal reference). If you're judging me based on some pictures found on the internet, I don't think I'd like to work for you, and as much, I would question your own ethics, and perhaps post it on/. as well.
In my opinion the line gets even fuzzier than that. For a non-security level position, potential employers are not allowed to question your politics , religion, sexual orientation, or even whether you smoke or drink. When they check your references, while they may be crafty, they are not allowed to ask your references the same questions about you. Have we stumbled onto the other edge of the double-edged sword that is the internet? How many of you hippies were denied gainful employment because your mug happened to show up in the San Francisco Chronicle in the middle of an anti-war, or pot legalization protest? And what did you do about it?
The legality question is indeed one on the horizon. Not only are the corporations catching your mug below the fold in some paper, it's world wide, and not only are the pictures not buried on some micro-fiche, they are there for the gazing, no matter what age you are. Who didn't kick up their heels in college or high school? Does that mean that we're not employable today?
The problem really isn't that complex. I grew up basically in charge of my life from the age of 12 (not just thinking--I had to be), and while it broadened my 'scope' somewhat, it also had detrimental effects. I never went to college, barely graduated high school, and went into the military due to a lack of options. It has served me well, don't get me wrong, but it was at the cost of tuition to the school of hard knocks. I feel I could have been so much more at this point in life. But, I'm digressing too much.
I've also had friends a the other end of the spectrum. They were locked down tightly, and they only managed to become extremely crafty in their 'ways'. They were my worst influences.
I think the obvious answer is balance. It's much harder now that the local hangout is the entire world--literally--but I feel that comunication, understanding, and basic knowledge of the world your child is living in goes a long way to protecting them, no, helping them recognize the hurtful things in life. I've lamented about this in previous posts, but it has gotten all too acceptable to turn our kids over to society at a very young age (i.e. daycare, school with no one at home when they got there...).
Talk to them. Know where they are, but don't be a jerk about it. Be a friend, but still be in charge. Be a friend to their friends, but still be in charge. Check your own self once in a while to make sure you're consistent.
You will never control the ether. You will never control the little individual you've created. However, you can be a part of it. Teach it, and embrace it.....
I'm in mechanical design (sorry, not IT), and many times throughout the day, I need to focus on something different. Slashdot is my usual refuge, because I dare the network nazis to ban me from here (if any of you are reading, this isn't my work acount. My UID is much lower at work..:-)
Anyway, as far as the RUA, I think that everybody could get fired--if it was enforced. It's never enforced until it's needed.
How many of you admins pass over the receptionist's Christmas shopping on company time?
I'm seeming cocky here, even trollish, but, isn't this a case of 'you gotta go'?
Slashdot Mirror
I think you're on to something. With a quick slingshot around the sun, they could start offering 'UPS Yesterday Air'
Conversely, could it be used to obfuscate the actual caller? Imagine a beowolf cluster of phone proxies. I can see this being nipped in the bud.
I was going to mod you up, but I've been dying to use this quote from George Washington--
"Arbitrary power is most easily established on the ruins of libery abused to licentiousness."
Given the way things are happening, his thought almost seems prophetic.
Not so much well spoken, but well done! I too had a WTF moment when I saw the moderation, and nearly coughed up a lung when I saw your comment. Thanks
This is interesting. I'm sure there are many things allowed in the UK that are not allowed in the US, and vice versa. However, hypothetically, if a UK pharmacist is allowed to sell heroine over the counter, I doubt he would be allowed to set up shop in the US. The internet poses an entirely different problem. Can your pharmacist allow USians to buy heroine online? I'm using drugs as an extreme example, but I think it makes the point.
Gambling is somewhat benign in that unless someone gets their legs broken, it's a victimless crime (notwithstanding the broken marriages and homes, lost nesteggs, and other devastation it might cause).
For some reason the US has taken gambling as one of its major vices, and has governed strongly to control it. Is it not that way in the UK? I'm not being inflamatory, I'm curious.
As for your original hilight:
IMHO, he's the fellow selling heroine over the internet....
I know this is really late, but I had to chime in here. To take your analogy a little further, let's say that your trebuchet was registered internationally, and everyone knew that it was your trebuchet, and you decided to walk over and talk to the catapult dudes, while your trebuchet was still flingin' dope over the border, and your guys were still receiving the bails of cash. I would think that you had a pretty good chance of getting arrested.
Basically, this guy was standing on U.S. soil, while his servers were still accepting bets from the poor and huddled masses. Of course he got popped!! What was he thinking?!? He had to know that he was a hated man in the U.S., and by being here while he was still perpetrating, is like a F-you to the folks that make it their job to care.
I guess it takes a true gambler to have cajones that big.
Absoulutely!!! My personal mail is a hodgepodge of just about everything, but my IMAP account at work is pretty well organized. I have folders for every project, regardless of how small my role might have been, and I have folders dating back to 10 years ago, when I started with the company. I go through at least once a week, and put everything from my inbox in its place.
Deviating from your point, the article doesn't seem to cover those that may be in the middle ground. Through my CYA attitude at work, I've been somewhat anal about my inbox there, but my personal email...well, even though I try to keep up with the labels and apply rules, it's a freaking mess.
Interesting. The full article from the University of Florida only mentions a $175,000 grant from the DOE. It seems the Army picked up a huge chunk of the tab with the $750,000 grant.
Actually, the U.S. Secret Service is very much alive in the U.S.. But I think their job is a little different than you think.
Damn...You didn't get it?
"But what would it mean for slashdot if males were no longer required for the survival of the human race?"
That's right, keep overestimating your importance, copper-top. Did you think they were man-boobs? CmdrTaco IS our female overlord. (Taco's in the name, after all!)
We blindly type away with all of our self-perceived manly knowledge; unwittingly assembled as the male collective (bad spelling, grammar, and hygiene be damned), while the nano-fibers replicate themselves through the dark pipes, up through our keyboards, and before we know it--Google Farm is complete.
I don't know about you, but I'm shutting off the machine, and going outside now....
Thank you. Given your insight, the thread could have been squashed a while ago, and I could have gone back to work. It seems that the inflamatory title, "U.S. Navy Patents THE Firewall" sent the majority of the posters into a tizzy. A more apt title might have been:
--"U.S. Navy Patents THEIR OWN Firewall"
--"U.S. Navy Patents A Firewall"
--Pretty much anything but THE Firewall.
Good grief...
But that's the question, isn't it? How does one know if their information was on that disc? I recieved my letter, from the VA, informing me of the possible exposure in about two weeks after first hearing about it on the news. My Dad, also a veteran, has yet to recieve his. The last paragraph reads as follows:
So, by the use of "affected individuals" can one assume that if you didn't get a letter, so kindly forwarded by the IRS, that you're in the clear, or should the fact that tens of millions of veterans and dependants may have been exposed prevail, and you should beware no matter what?
By the way, if you didn't recieve your letter, and you prefer to err on the side of caution, they did say that "...the VA has teamed up with the Federal Trade Commmission and has a Web site...
You didn't hear? They're upgrading their cars.
These aren't legitimate corporations, or at least they aren't known for their scruples. These 'brokers' obtain the information illegally, and sell it to anyone they want to. The question should be, why aren't they getting arrested for their crimes, instead of profitting from the very people that should be shutting them down?
I guess we justify it by saying that law enforcement has been using informants for as long as it's been around. Think of this as Jimmy the Fink with a paypal account, and an email address. The problem I have with this, is that it's not just trying to get the goods on a specific criminal, the government is buying the information in bulk, hoping to glean out a criminal or two. Now what happens to the remaining honest folks? Their information has been scrutinized for no reason, and there will always be a flag next to their name now. We're not the small fish that get pulled out of the net, and thrown back into the sea. The data is recorded, and always available.
Sorry for all of the analogies.
You, sir, are a genius!!!
First, congratulations on making me stop to rethink my own knee-jerk reaction to this article, which was that this guy's a douchebag. You almost had me by citing George Carlin, and the NASA joke, but as I quickly realized, and you pointed out for youself:
You are correct in that humor--when well crafted--has a certain healing power for some people. I for one, prefer to deal with difficult situations with humor. I've heard jokes about the 9/11 attacks, the Columbine shootings (always aimed at the perpetrators), and other atrocities that have made me laugh. But I think that it's because it takes some of the sting out of the reality, and pushes back on the human condition, which as we know is a barrel of laughs in itself.
I suppose that other folks may need to heal through reenactment, or gaining some perspective and knowledge of what actually happened. This is where your books, movies, and documetaries would come into play. I don't mind documentaries of factual events, although the sensationalism put into the Hollywood/made for T.V. type movies is a total turn off, and I don't give them my time. But different strokes for different folks. Everybody loves a trainwreck, right? However, now we're talking about a video game. What ever point of discussion this fellow was trying to invoke is going to be totally lost in the violence in video game flamewars. No matter how you, me, or any other slashdotter feels about it is irrelevent. What happens here, usually stays here. The media and the politicians are going to have a feild day with this, and the entire point (in my opinion I don't think there is one) is going to be lost. I think the underlying tone of the creation of this game is shock value. The author of the game is surely going to get it--in spades.
Anyway, the fact that you don't seem to care either way, makes you the perfect 'Devil's Advocate', and you proved your point rather well. I for one still think the guy's a douchebag.
Stephen Wright: "If I was in my truck, traveling at the speed of light would my headlights work?"
Interviewer: "I don't know."
Stephen Wright: "I don't think I want to work here."
"...there's little or no incentive to change the channel to avoid them."
I was thinking the same thing. It's almost impossible to avoid the commercials. Invariably, when I try to surf around them, any of the other networks I would want to watch are airing commercials as well. The only thing this technology would do is prevent me from watching the little gekko instead of the big buckin' chicken.
I wonder if any of the networks will get their panties in a bunch because I was prevented from surfing to their commercials?
I don't know who I love more. Asia for being her bad-assed self, or you for posting the link? Either way, thanks!!!
I guess what I was trying to say was somewhat more broad than that....
If someone is considering hiring me for a position of responsibility, my credit record, criminal/psychiatric history...etc, is up for grabs, as it should be, but I'd rather they not be privy to my antics as a teenager. This is why I say the line is fuzzy (I'm still talking about the internet, and not a personal reference). If you're judging me based on some pictures found on the internet, I don't think I'd like to work for you, and as much, I would question your own ethics, and perhaps post it on /. as well.
In my opinion the line gets even fuzzier than that. For a non-security level position, potential employers are not allowed to question your politics , religion, sexual orientation, or even whether you smoke or drink. When they check your references, while they may be crafty, they are not allowed to ask your references the same questions about you. Have we stumbled onto the other edge of the double-edged sword that is the internet? How many of you hippies were denied gainful employment because your mug happened to show up in the San Francisco Chronicle in the middle of an anti-war, or pot legalization protest? And what did you do about it?
The legality question is indeed one on the horizon. Not only are the corporations catching your mug below the fold in some paper, it's world wide, and not only are the pictures not buried on some micro-fiche, they are there for the gazing, no matter what age you are. Who didn't kick up their heels in college or high school? Does that mean that we're not employable today?
"For the lazy, the Independent newspaper in the UK printed their top 20 from the exhibition."
What are you talking about? I didn't even read the top 20, because there was no pictures!
The problem really isn't that complex. I grew up basically in charge of my life from the age of 12 (not just thinking--I had to be), and while it broadened my 'scope' somewhat, it also had detrimental effects. I never went to college, barely graduated high school, and went into the military due to a lack of options. It has served me well, don't get me wrong, but it was at the cost of tuition to the school of hard knocks. I feel I could have been so much more at this point in life. But, I'm digressing too much.
I've also had friends a the other end of the spectrum. They were locked down tightly, and they only managed to become extremely crafty in their 'ways'. They were my worst influences.
I think the obvious answer is balance. It's much harder now that the local hangout is the entire world--literally--but I feel that comunication, understanding, and basic knowledge of the world your child is living in goes a long way to protecting them, no, helping them recognize the hurtful things in life. I've lamented about this in previous posts, but it has gotten all too acceptable to turn our kids over to society at a very young age (i.e. daycare, school with no one at home when they got there...).
Talk to them. Know where they are, but don't be a jerk about it. Be a friend, but still be in charge. Be a friend to their friends, but still be in charge. Check your own self once in a while to make sure you're consistent.
You will never control the ether. You will never control the little individual you've created. However, you can be a part of it. Teach it, and embrace it.....
I'm in mechanical design (sorry, not IT), and many times throughout the day, I need to focus on something different. Slashdot is my usual refuge, because I dare the network nazis to ban me from here (if any of you are reading, this isn't my work acount. My UID is much lower at work.. :-)
Anyway, as far as the RUA, I think that everybody could get fired--if it was enforced. It's never enforced until it's needed.
How many of you admins pass over the receptionist's Christmas shopping on company time?
I'm seeming cocky here, even trollish, but, isn't this a case of 'you gotta go'?