Which part of "Microsoft Product" did you not understand?
I almost feel sorry for them discovering this just after they discontinued Microsoft Messenger and moved people on to Skype. To be fair I expect this hole existed when they brought Skype.
And Christianity's prevalence was not until this, the most recent time of the two to six millennia decline.
Then even later people became stupid enough to believe that the "religion of peace" involved following a pedophile warlord who told people to kill non believers
So, if he, say, posted "I'm the champion of the world!" on his facebook page, and a member of the Mercury estate [wikipedia.org] happened upon it...
It's a pretty safe bet that Farrokh Bulsara left no children behind for there to be an estate.
An estate is a legal concept of left property which in UK law goes to siblings if there are no children then if there are no siblings other relatives in a defined order
This is in part, part of the West's battle with Islam, and is not the first time this has been done.
The government introduced a law some time ago against inciting religious hatred and so forth to prevent people burning Korans and starting a riot amongst muslims in the UK as a result.
The problem is then that some of the Islamic extremists in the UK started burning things like poppies on remembrance day, and burning the British flag and so forth. Obviously a lot of people were pissed off at the hypocrisy of this, so the Police then started enforcing the law against this sort of burning too.
Whether the guy in this case is an Islamic extremist or just a general dick who knows, but that's why we're at the point were at.
Honestly, the lesson is that this is why we can't create laws against burning the Koran - because it is fucking hypocritical for there to be protection against burning something one group holds sacred, but not things other groups hold sacred and having people hence burn them. This really is a case of the slippery slope in action - what started out as a noble plan to prevent anger in UK's Islamic population over the burning of a Koran, has now created awareness of assholes everywhere burning all sorts of different things due to it getting in the news and resulted in a complete waste of police time, time and time again.
I don't blame the police, they're simply enforcing the law fairly and making it clear that it's a two way street. The problem is that in this case, the law shouldn't exist at all whether it's for the Koran, a flag, or a poppy, but fundamentally it's got to be one or the other, either you can burn poppies, flags, and Korans, or you can burn none of them. Currently it's the latter case, so at least the law is being applied consistently and fairly which is more than can be said for a lot of laws.
I agree and far be it for me to defend muslims in normal circumstances this is one case when he should not be prosecuted. Save that for the many cases of muslims plotting to kill and terrorise. Arresting someone for burning the poppy today means that the muslims will push for the arrest of someone pointing out that Sharia law is incompatible with freedom and human rights in future.
I think that the key point is that this was under Malicious Communications Act. It is a very strange act that among other things "information which is false and known or believed to be false by the sender". So if I write "I am the champion of the world!" I could be imprisoned. Full text:
Malicious Communications Act
1988
1988 CHAPTER 27
An Act to make provision for the punishment of persons who send
or deliver letters or other articles for the purpose of causing
distress or anxiety. [29th July 1988]
B E IT ENACTED by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and
with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal,
and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the
authority of the same, as follows:—
1.—(1) Any person who sends to another person—
(a) a letter or other article which conveys—
(i) a message which is indecent or grossly offensive;
(ii) a threat; or
(iii) information which is false and known or believed to be
false by the sender; or
(b) any other article which is, in whole or part, of an indecent or
grossly offensive nature,
is guilty of an offence if his purpose, or one of his purposes, in sending it
is that it should, so far as falling within paragraph (a) or (b) above, cause
distress or anxiety to the recipient or to any other person to whom he
intends that it or its contents or nature should be communicated.
(2) A person is not guilty of an offence by virtue of subsection (l)(a)(ii)
above if he shows—
(a) that the threat was used to reinforce a demand which he believed
he had reasonable grounds for making; and
(b) that he believed that the use of the threat was a proper means of
reinforcing the demand.
(3) In this section references to sending include references to delivering
and to causing to be sent or delivered and "sender" shall be construed
accordingly.
Offence of sending
letters etc. with
intent to cause
distress or anxiety.
2 c. 27 Malicious Communications Act 1988
(4) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on
summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale.
Northern Ireland. 2. An Order in Council under paragraph 1(l)(b) of Schedule I to the
1974 c. 28. Northern Ireland Act 1974 (legislation for Northern Ireland in the
interim period) which states that it is made only for purposes
corresponding to those of this Act—
(a) shall not be subject to paragraph 1(4) and (5) of that Schedule
(affirmative resolution of both Houses of Parliament); but
(b) shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of
either House.
Short title, 3.—(1) This Act may be cited as the Malicious Communications Act
commencement 1988.
and extent.
(2) Section 1 above shall not come into force until the end of the penod
of two months beginning with the day on which this Act is passed.
(3) This Act does not extend to Scotland or, except for section 2, to
Northern Ireland.
Why is there no mention for those of us not in the UK what the symbolism of the poppy is. Is it like burning a flag? And why has nobody made the joke "Looks like the inmates are running the Aylesham"? Come on, it's easy.
Also, to clarify, this seems to not be over SSL itself, but rather over "using a shared seed value to generate pseudo-random key values at a transmitter and a receiver." RTFA on CipherLaw Blog.
Isn't CTR-mode use of a cipher block prior art? This was invented in 1979 by Dife and Hellman and in effect turns a key into a series of pseudo random values which are xored with the plain text.
Yet another Debian based distribution that tries to keep quiet about it.
Why not just run the real thing?
My perception of debian (which may be wrong) is that it is not as user-friendly as the down-stream copies
What does that mean exactly?
Based on the "marketing" of Ubuntu and others, the down-stream copies are configured with all the apps that you are likely to need and will automatically update these. The assumption is that Debian needs more things to be user-installed. Also I believe downstream apps do more to self-configure to the hardware - certainly Linux Mint installs without issues on my Lenovo E525 whereas Ubuntu needs some manual steps so I would assume that the setup is not in the Debian base.
STOP POINTING OUT FACTS! We just want to hear reinforcement of our stereotype that all white people are evil racists and all minorities are racially superior since they are completely incapable of being bigots towards anyone!
And increasingly anyone pointing out unpleasant things about religious groups is called "racist" by the ignorant
Yet another Debian based distribution that tries to keep quiet about it.
Why not just run the real thing?
My perception of debian (which may be wrong) is that it is not as user-friendly as the down-stream copies, and has a slow release cycle that means that it often runs with older versions of packages. I have heard other people express the same thing, so even if it is wrong it is probably why many people don't use it.
There is friendly competition between Gnome and KDE, but its just that friendly.
Nothing on slashdot is friendly. If I said that I prefer tea to coffee then there would be some people who would call me an idiot for not "knowing" that coffee is better - then someone who had invented his own hot drink that would be a world beater if it wasn't for the conspiracy of tea and coffee drinkers to prevent it. Finally someone would say "what about toast" and get shouted down for being off-topic and supported for understanding the real underlying issues.
Let me examine your world view. Would it also be racist to call Catholics papists or Protestants proddys. Is this just confined to religion or are different ideologies also races - do you have a conservative and liberal race?
The thing is you have to weigh up the possibilities of people starving in a century against the probability that a group of muzzies will bomb the subway next week. Whereas ideally you should counter both it is a lot easier for the government to get praise for finding another bomb factory than to carry out actions that might show effects in 20 years time.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like a real asshole.
With that level of entitlement, lack of morality, and disregard for others I bet he's a Muslim
Which part of "Microsoft Product" did you not understand?
I almost feel sorry for them discovering this just after they discontinued Microsoft Messenger and moved people on to Skype. To be fair I expect this hole existed when they brought Skype.
And Christianity's prevalence was not until this, the most recent time of the two to six millennia decline.
Then even later people became stupid enough to believe that the "religion of peace" involved following a pedophile warlord who told people to kill non believers
ek nadi do nadiA
Hindi for river is 'nadi', not nadia
To clean the mind eye after that Big Black Cock, here are some boobies: http://www.bay-of-fundie.com/img/2008/boobies.jpg
Enjoy!
I couldn't resist!
Perhaps you would like to see a picture of my black ass too.
So, if he, say, posted "I'm the champion of the world!" on his facebook page, and a member of the Mercury estate [wikipedia.org] happened upon it...
It's a pretty safe bet that Farrokh Bulsara left no children behind for there to be an estate.
An estate is a legal concept of left property which in UK law goes to siblings if there are no children then if there are no siblings other relatives in a defined order
The Reiser-McAfee project!
This is in part, part of the West's battle with Islam, and is not the first time this has been done.
The government introduced a law some time ago against inciting religious hatred and so forth to prevent people burning Korans and starting a riot amongst muslims in the UK as a result.
The problem is then that some of the Islamic extremists in the UK started burning things like poppies on remembrance day, and burning the British flag and so forth. Obviously a lot of people were pissed off at the hypocrisy of this, so the Police then started enforcing the law against this sort of burning too.
Whether the guy in this case is an Islamic extremist or just a general dick who knows, but that's why we're at the point were at.
Honestly, the lesson is that this is why we can't create laws against burning the Koran - because it is fucking hypocritical for there to be protection against burning something one group holds sacred, but not things other groups hold sacred and having people hence burn them. This really is a case of the slippery slope in action - what started out as a noble plan to prevent anger in UK's Islamic population over the burning of a Koran, has now created awareness of assholes everywhere burning all sorts of different things due to it getting in the news and resulted in a complete waste of police time, time and time again.
I don't blame the police, they're simply enforcing the law fairly and making it clear that it's a two way street. The problem is that in this case, the law shouldn't exist at all whether it's for the Koran, a flag, or a poppy, but fundamentally it's got to be one or the other, either you can burn poppies, flags, and Korans, or you can burn none of them. Currently it's the latter case, so at least the law is being applied consistently and fairly which is more than can be said for a lot of laws.
I agree and far be it for me to defend muslims in normal circumstances this is one case when he should not be prosecuted. Save that for the many cases of muslims plotting to kill and terrorise. Arresting someone for burning the poppy today means that the muslims will push for the arrest of someone pointing out that Sharia law is incompatible with freedom and human rights in future.
Malicious Communications Act
1988
1988 CHAPTER 27
An Act to make provision for the punishment of persons who send
or deliver letters or other articles for the purpose of causing
distress or anxiety. [29th July 1988]
B E IT ENACTED by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and
with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal,
and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the
authority of the same, as follows:—
1.—(1) Any person who sends to another person—
(a) a letter or other article which conveys—
(i) a message which is indecent or grossly offensive;
(ii) a threat; or
(iii) information which is false and known or believed to be
false by the sender; or
(b) any other article which is, in whole or part, of an indecent or
grossly offensive nature,
is guilty of an offence if his purpose, or one of his purposes, in sending it
is that it should, so far as falling within paragraph (a) or (b) above, cause
distress or anxiety to the recipient or to any other person to whom he
intends that it or its contents or nature should be communicated.
(2) A person is not guilty of an offence by virtue of subsection (l)(a)(ii)
above if he shows—
(a) that the threat was used to reinforce a demand which he believed
he had reasonable grounds for making; and
(b) that he believed that the use of the threat was a proper means of
reinforcing the demand.
(3) In this section references to sending include references to delivering
and to causing to be sent or delivered and "sender" shall be construed
accordingly.
Offence of sending
letters etc. with
intent to cause
distress or anxiety.
2 c. 27 Malicious Communications Act 1988
(4) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on
summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale.
Northern Ireland. 2. An Order in Council under paragraph 1(l)(b) of Schedule I to the
1974 c. 28. Northern Ireland Act 1974 (legislation for Northern Ireland in the
interim period) which states that it is made only for purposes
corresponding to those of this Act—
(a) shall not be subject to paragraph 1(4) and (5) of that Schedule
(affirmative resolution of both Houses of Parliament); but
(b) shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of
either House.
Short title, 3.—(1) This Act may be cited as the Malicious Communications Act
commencement 1988.
and extent.
(2) Section 1 above shall not come into force until the end of the penod
of two months beginning with the day on which this Act is passed.
(3) This Act does not extend to Scotland or, except for section 2, to
Northern Ireland.
Why is there no mention for those of us not in the UK what the symbolism of the poppy is. Is it like burning a flag? And why has nobody made the joke "Looks like the inmates are running the Aylesham"? Come on, it's easy.
The poppy is the symbol of remembrance of soldiers who have died in war. Burning the poppy is probably equivalent of the Westboro baptists "Thank God for dead soldiers" posters in terms of disrespect, upset to service family members, etc. In my view not nice but should not be criminalised
Also, to clarify, this seems to not be over SSL itself, but rather over "using a shared seed value to generate pseudo-random key values at a transmitter and a receiver." RTFA on CipherLaw Blog.
Isn't CTR-mode use of a cipher block prior art? This was invented in 1979 by Dife and Hellman and in effect turns a key into a series of pseudo random values which are xored with the plain text.
Yet another Debian based distribution that tries to keep quiet about it.
Why not just run the real thing?
My perception of debian (which may be wrong) is that it is not as user-friendly as the down-stream copies
What does that mean exactly?
Based on the "marketing" of Ubuntu and others, the down-stream copies are configured with all the apps that you are likely to need and will automatically update these. The assumption is that Debian needs more things to be user-installed. Also I believe downstream apps do more to self-configure to the hardware - certainly Linux Mint installs without issues on my Lenovo E525 whereas Ubuntu needs some manual steps so I would assume that the setup is not in the Debian base.
Porn has forever changed the common vernacular of the acronym "BBC."
Now it means, the Big, Black Cock.
I think I understand why you post as AC now.
-- Ethanol-fueled
Want to see a picture of my big black cock. (This is work-safe.)
STOP POINTING OUT FACTS! We just want to hear reinforcement of our stereotype that all white people are evil racists and all minorities are racially superior since they are completely incapable of being bigots towards anyone!
And increasingly anyone pointing out unpleasant things about religious groups is called "racist" by the ignorant
How did they account for multiple racists tweets from one "tweeter"?
One racist sending 100 racist tweets is not the same as 100 different racists each sending one racist tweet each.
They just ignored Mitt's account
299 times more racist.
Not on any normal scale. If I have a jar of pickles and you have three then you have three times as much as me, not twice as much
Yet another Debian based distribution that tries to keep quiet about it.
Why not just run the real thing?
My perception of debian (which may be wrong) is that it is not as user-friendly as the down-stream copies, and has a slow release cycle that means that it often runs with older versions of packages. I have heard other people express the same thing, so even if it is wrong it is probably why many people don't use it.
There is friendly competition between Gnome and KDE, but its just that friendly.
Nothing on slashdot is friendly. If I said that I prefer tea to coffee then there would be some people who would call me an idiot for not "knowing" that coffee is better - then someone who had invented his own hot drink that would be a world beater if it wasn't for the conspiracy of tea and coffee drinkers to prevent it. Finally someone would say "what about toast" and get shouted down for being off-topic and supported for understanding the real underlying issues.
Nadia, Meaning: Hope (in Ukrainian, diminutive form in Bulgarian/Polish/Russian, etc.) Moist and dewy[1] (in Arabic) Dew in Persian
Courtesy of Wikipedia
Its from Kim Stanley Robinson’s Mars Trilogy, Nadezhda “Nadia” Chernyshevski is Maya’s best friend...Maya was the name of Mint 13 :)
Also means "rivers" in Hindi
"muzzies"?
So you are a racist pig...
Let me examine your world view. Would it also be racist to call Catholics papists or Protestants proddys. Is this just confined to religion or are different ideologies also races - do you have a conservative and liberal race?
Plus, it doesn't even remotely apply to anyone on Slashdot, because it involves physical activity.
But it also involves digital watches!
The thing is you have to weigh up the possibilities of people starving in a century against the probability that a group of muzzies will bomb the subway next week. Whereas ideally you should counter both it is a lot easier for the government to get praise for finding another bomb factory than to carry out actions that might show effects in 20 years time.
That site wasn't supposed to launch until Utah secedes.
Somehow, I don't think we'll be going to war over that one.
Well, we did before, back when it was Deseret...
Its less desirable now though
its been my experience that people are generally pretty good, some better than others, but I rarely run into an evil person.
companies, otoh, ...
You haven't lived in a Muslim country, have you