Possibly he just assumed that the Chinese government operated by any standards of logic or justice. My personal opinion is that you shouldn't have to be an experienced computer geek to avoid being locked up for quoting the government.
The Chinese gov't is certainly unjust but it's not illogical in its behaviour - you try ruling 1+ Gpeople without any logic and see what happens. That said, don't you think such a honourable freedom frighter like him should restrict himself to evaluating as opposed to supposing what his giv't will do? The bottom line being, that you have to know who you're fighting against. Besides, you don't need to be an experienced computer geek to use the things I referred to; you just need 10 minutes to RTFM and a brain larger than a mosquito's.
I certainly wouldn't class such behaviour as "looking for it", especially given that China is, afaict, fairly inconsistent about stuff like this.
Also, I'm slightly confused. He was stupid for not using stuff that would be death-sentence-worthy? Wouldn't you be claiming he was stupid to have it on his computer if he was caught with it?
Wouldn't you be claiming he was stupid not to have it on his computer so he was caught in the first place?
An anyway as I stressed before, freedom is not free. If you want to play freedom fighter, please read the rules of the game before. Otherwise, you'll just be put in the same cauldron together with war reporters, people who demonstrate in the streets etc.
if "Journalist" Shi Tao is as stupid as to allow something like this to happen, then he deserves it. it's not like pgp, freenet/tor/what have you, anon remailers etc do not exist. what's that you say, there's the death penalty for possessing such software in china? surprise, surprise: freedom is not free.
hello and welcome to the real world.
"a lot of police forces around the planet are turning into bands of thugs" because only hopeless loosers enter the police, and they can do this because the government thinks it's necessary to give them a job sponsored by taxpayers. it's no wonder the army is full of shit - only the government employs idiots.
I disagree. Installing Linux can be harder than installing Windows for all sorts of reasons, however the average user is simply not able to install either of them. To him, they're all just hopelessly geeky mysteries waiting for a tech friend to be unveiled. So there really is no difference: lusers will just whine and ask us to help, whatever their OS might be.
I hope this will help drive down the cost of flash memory so that flash-based hard drives will become available to the general public. Silent, less power-hungry, more reliable. How longer will we have to put up with very fragile magnetic disks spinning at 7000+ rpm under a head that would cut them in half if contact occurred...
if people weren't pirating things, there'd be no need for DRM
Piracy or not piracy, there is no need for DRM, given that it won't be effective in restricting pirates' abilities to do as they like. They would implement it anyway: just look at everything that is being done to restrict your freedom in the name of the greater good.
how can you blame companies for trying to protect their profits when thousands of people are ripping them off
I wouldn't blame them for protecting themselves, but this is not what they're doing. First, their profits are skyrocketing, mainly thanks to P2P; just look at recent studies proving this. Second, nobody's ripping them off: sorry man but I will not take this bullshit anymore. If Joe User downloads stuff that he would not buy if his life depended on it, he's not ripping anyone off.
Even in a scenario where companies were actually suffering because of teh evil P2P haX0rz (which is SF), such measures as DRM would essentially equate to solving the problem of pollution by asking people to switch their lights off about 1/10th of a second earlier than usual. But we would all know the causes of pollution lie elsewhere.
Honestly, you should be mad at the pirates, without whom we wouldn't have this problem
As I have shown, there is no problem. And I'm mad at sheeple like you who think this world would be good and just if not for these damn pirates, and who don't realise the need to act now, to fight against the ones trying to turn your house into a jail and your life into a privilege.
Yeah yeah, I know it was not meant to be. Man, I didn't try to shoot you, I just expressed my disagreement with what I *perceived* as your view on this *particular* movie.
That said, porn does not have to satisfy any criteria to be legal, besides age requirements. However, some people might find it more acceptable (i.e., they would like it more) if it were different than what it's now. But really, all this discussion is nonsense as it stems from two premises: 1. that it makes sense to regulate this stuff; sorry, but it doesn't. 2. that the reason why this politician came out with this idea is not that he simply wants more votes from people who he deems would like to see porn taxed; really, there's no other reason.
Frodo and Samwise are very positive characters in LotR. They fight very rarely and try to avoid combat as much as possible, relying instead on stealth. Frodo suffers a lot from bearing the Ring and Samwise costantly tries to help and comfort him. In the end, you don't get the usual "final fight" scene: rather, the hero is defied by his own weakness and it's by mere coincidence (well... maybe it's not a coincidence) that the Ring is destroyed. So please before coming out with BS such as F and S making war... please at least read the book.
yup, and the next logical step would be to *frigging use the same time all over the world*, sheesh! it's just a convention after all! all i need to do is remember that starting next year, the new day begins at XX.XX and i go to work at YY:YY instead of what i'm used to. quite easy. huge advantages. no cons. deal. sign me up. oh, wait, i'm alone here? uhm...
While I agree with your point I must highlight the humungous differences between:
1. trying to save your people from a nazi dictatorship that, if succesful, would rule over Europe with an iron fist and drown all opposition in blood
2. attacking the first country that comes around, or where you happen to have funded wars for the last 10+ years for your interest, after a smallish attack on your country (sorry man, 6000 is nothing against even the small jew community of 6000000, let alone everybody else) without even retaliating against the real attackers, while seizing the ball to get super rich oil contracts in the next 30+ years.
FTA, I will quote a whiner: "Deliberate attacks against people's websites are illegal." WTF?! Are you an idiot or what? Since when, exactly, are there laws on the web? Before you reply with witty comments and dates, please understand I'm not saying that there should not be or that there are no written laws, I'm saying that (almost) nobody respects them. Go on, enforce laws on the web. Come back when you succeed. Given that it's impossible to regulate the web beyond the very basics like domain registration etc., people like the whiner above should just accept the fact that the lack of laws on the web make this a no-man's land, where criminals are free to do what they want (which they are doing) and those who object are free to take arms and destroy them (which they are not doing). So who gives a fuck when it's illegal - laws that are not enforced are simply not there. Now do you prefer sitting and whining and blaming it on the innocent ones or actually *doing* something to solve the problem?
somebody made an extension which works well in firefox, but not good in IE. More of that is needed to fight on equal terms
No, please, do not wish for this. It would only lead back to the way it was a couple of years ago. We should just stick to standards and in the long run this will win by itself. Developers are the ones driving this market, they will enjoy the standards, standard-compliant browsers will be more appreciated, we will win. But if we start playing like MS does, we won't. And in the process the web will suffer greatly.
my friend, you are mistaken. no site depends on.net being installed on your system to be displayed. maybe they depend on.net being present on the server but definitely not on the client. no way.
BZZZZT wrong. It actually makes lots of people pirate stuff just for the sake of it, just to stick it to the companies. So the ratio increases. If they wanted to reduce it for real, they would go for something that pleases the user and makes him not want to pirate stuff anymore. Please wake up.
AHHHHH please someone think of the children! This lunatic is on a rampage! Next thing you know, he's installed on your precious machine! And clearly the DVDs he watches depict people torturing computers! PANIC!
Slashdot Mirror
I can assure you that they are being tortured and abused out of mere economical interest, no racism needed there. Are you happier now?
Possibly he just assumed that the Chinese government operated by any standards of logic or justice. My personal opinion is that you shouldn't have to be an experienced computer geek to avoid being locked up for quoting the government.
The Chinese gov't is certainly unjust but it's not illogical in its behaviour - you try ruling 1+ Gpeople without any logic and see what happens. That said, don't you think such a honourable freedom frighter like him should restrict himself to evaluating as opposed to supposing what his giv't will do? The bottom line being, that you have to know who you're fighting against. Besides, you don't need to be an experienced computer geek to use the things I referred to; you just need 10 minutes to RTFM and a brain larger than a mosquito's.
I certainly wouldn't class such behaviour as "looking for it", especially given that China is, afaict, fairly inconsistent about stuff like this.
Also, I'm slightly confused. He was stupid for not using stuff that would be death-sentence-worthy? Wouldn't you be claiming he was stupid to have it on his computer if he was caught with it?
Wouldn't you be claiming he was stupid not to have it on his computer so he was caught in the first place?
An anyway as I stressed before, freedom is not free. If you want to play freedom fighter, please read the rules of the game before. Otherwise, you'll just be put in the same cauldron together with war reporters, people who demonstrate in the streets etc.
A guide to internet reconnaissance? WHERE? This is just an overview of the whois command! And it made the frontpage on /.
How sad.
if "Journalist" Shi Tao is as stupid as to allow something like this to happen, then he deserves it. it's not like pgp, freenet/tor/what have you, anon remailers etc do not exist. what's that you say, there's the death penalty for possessing such software in china? surprise, surprise: freedom is not free.
hello and welcome to the real world.
Two things inspire me to awe -- the starry heavens above and the moral universe within.
Uh... man... I really think it was Kant who wrote that.
"a lot of police forces around the planet are turning into bands of thugs" because only hopeless loosers enter the police, and they can do this because the government thinks it's necessary to give them a job sponsored by taxpayers. it's no wonder the army is full of shit - only the government employs idiots.
... for a tech friend to unveil them, that was...
Interesting lapsus anyway.
Linux for the non-geek is not easy, Windows is.
I disagree. Installing Linux can be harder than installing Windows for all sorts of reasons, however the average user is simply not able to install either of them. To him, they're all just hopelessly geeky mysteries waiting for a tech friend to be unveiled. So there really is no difference: lusers will just whine and ask us to help, whatever their OS might be.
I hope this will help drive down the cost of flash memory so that flash-based hard drives will become available to the general public. Silent, less power-hungry, more reliable. How longer will we have to put up with very fragile magnetic disks spinning at 7000+ rpm under a head that would cut them in half if contact occurred...
Because it is not copyrighted or trademarked. Look close and you'll see Microsoft(C) .NET.
if people weren't pirating things, there'd be no need for DRM
Piracy or not piracy, there is no need for DRM, given that it won't be effective in restricting pirates' abilities to do as they like. They would implement it anyway: just look at everything that is being done to restrict your freedom in the name of the greater good.
how can you blame companies for trying to protect their profits when thousands of people are ripping them off
I wouldn't blame them for protecting themselves, but this is not what they're doing. First, their profits are skyrocketing, mainly thanks to P2P; just look at recent studies proving this. Second, nobody's ripping them off: sorry man but I will not take this bullshit anymore. If Joe User downloads stuff that he would not buy if his life depended on it, he's not ripping anyone off.
Even in a scenario where companies were actually suffering because of teh evil P2P haX0rz (which is SF), such measures as DRM would essentially equate to solving the problem of pollution by asking people to switch their lights off about 1/10th of a second earlier than usual. But we would all know the causes of pollution lie elsewhere.
Honestly, you should be mad at the pirates, without whom we wouldn't have this problem
As I have shown, there is no problem. And I'm mad at sheeple like you who think this world would be good and just if not for these damn pirates, and who don't realise the need to act now, to fight against the ones trying to turn your house into a jail and your life into a privilege.
Yeah yeah, I know it was not meant to be. Man, I didn't try to shoot you, I just expressed my disagreement with what I *perceived* as your view on this *particular* movie.
That said, porn does not have to satisfy any criteria to be legal, besides age requirements. However, some people might find it more acceptable (i.e., they would like it more) if it were different than what it's now. But really, all this discussion is nonsense as it stems from two premises: 1. that it makes sense to regulate this stuff; sorry, but it doesn't. 2. that the reason why this politician came out with this idea is not that he simply wants more votes from people who he deems would like to see porn taxed; really, there's no other reason.
Frodo and Samwise are very positive characters in LotR. They fight very rarely and try to avoid combat as much as possible, relying instead on stealth. Frodo suffers a lot from bearing the Ring and Samwise costantly tries to help and comfort him. In the end, you don't get the usual "final fight" scene: rather, the hero is defied by his own weakness and it's by mere coincidence (well... maybe it's not a coincidence) that the Ring is destroyed. So please before coming out with BS such as F and S making war... please at least read the book.
I can't believe this, it's wonderful! It's gonna become my precious! It's GOT to become my precious...
yup, and the next logical step would be to *frigging use the same time all over the world*, sheesh! it's just a convention after all! all i need to do is remember that starting next year, the new day begins at XX.XX and i go to work at YY:YY instead of what i'm used to. quite easy. huge advantages. no cons. deal. sign me up. oh, wait, i'm alone here? uhm...
ow come on, it comes from pulcher, which means pretty/beautiful. quite easy.
While I agree with your point I must highlight the humungous differences between:
1. trying to save your people from a nazi dictatorship that, if succesful, would rule over Europe with an iron fist and drown all opposition in blood
2. attacking the first country that comes around, or where you happen to have funded wars for the last 10+ years for your interest, after a smallish attack on your country (sorry man, 6000 is nothing against even the small jew community of 6000000, let alone everybody else) without even retaliating against the real attackers, while seizing the ball to get super rich oil contracts in the next 30+ years.
I *DO* see some differences.
Nowadays it looks like tons and tons of morality flow out of anononymous cowards' asses. I guess you will side with the whiners, fucking idiot.
FTA, I will quote a whiner: "Deliberate attacks against people's websites are illegal."
WTF?! Are you an idiot or what? Since when, exactly, are there laws on the web?
Before you reply with witty comments and dates, please understand I'm not saying that there should not be or that there are no written laws, I'm saying that (almost) nobody respects them. Go on, enforce laws on the web. Come back when you succeed.
Given that it's impossible to regulate the web beyond the very basics like domain registration etc., people like the whiner above should just accept the fact that the lack of laws on the web make this a no-man's land, where criminals are free to do what they want (which they are doing) and those who object are free to take arms and destroy them (which they are not doing).
So who gives a fuck when it's illegal - laws that are not enforced are simply not there. Now do you prefer sitting and whining and blaming it on the innocent ones or actually *doing* something to solve the problem?
i'm sorry man but you're deeply mistaken. BOTH sides are completely evil. after you understand this simple fact, all analysis becomes very simple.
somebody made an extension which works well in firefox, but not good in IE. More of that is needed to fight on equal terms
No, please, do not wish for this. It would only lead back to the way it was a couple of years ago. We should just stick to standards and in the long run this will win by itself. Developers are the ones driving this market, they will enjoy the standards, standard-compliant browsers will be more appreciated, we will win. But if we start playing like MS does, we won't. And in the process the web will suffer greatly.
my friend, you are mistaken. no site depends on .net being installed on your system to be displayed. maybe they depend on .net being present on the server but definitely not on the client. no way.
At least copy protection helps reduce that ratio.
BZZZZT wrong. It actually makes lots of people pirate stuff just for the sake of it, just to stick it to the companies. So the ratio increases. If they wanted to reduce it for real, they would go for something that pleases the user and makes him not want to pirate stuff anymore. Please wake up.
AHHHHH please someone think of the children! This lunatic is on a rampage! Next thing you know, he's installed on your precious machine! And clearly the DVDs he watches depict people torturing computers! PANIC!
oh my
you certainly are brainfucked