Actually, from what I read, it's a directive from the executive & legislative branch directing judges to dismiss cases if the Telco has a written request from the Govt requesting a tap.
My point was that the written request doesn't have to be a legal warrant, it simply has to be a "note from Daddy" that says it's important that this get done. I think the past eight years should show us that the mechanisms for acquiring warrants exist for a very good reason, and nobody should be allowed to bypass them. We certainly shouldn't tell large corporate entities that they don't have to perform the basic reality check that any individual would do should they be presented with an obviously illegal request from the government.
...because it would grant telecom companies immunity (under certain conditions) from suits for wiretapping conducted at government request.
It's important to note that these "certain conditions" boil down to basically any time the administration says, "We really want to".
On the one hand, I'm utterly sickened by the fact that this is still up for debate. No one should have protection from doing something unconstitutional. It was the telecoms' duty as American citizens to tell the government to stick it where the sun doesn't shine, and then call the newspapers and blow a huge freaking whistle. On the other hand, I'm glad it hasn't just flown through Congress without any resistance.
Hey, good job! Way to turn an amusing, cynical comment about politicians in general into a partisan troll. Keep it up! We could use more us-versus-them in the USA!:P
The odds were 100% for the folks trapped in the towers.
And since when does taking affirmative action = being afraid?
This is exactly the kind of ignorant, fear-based thinking that is fueling this mess. The truly sad thing about it, though, is that it makes normally intelligent, rational people take a step closer to fascism. "Can't we just deport/reeducate/execute the idiots?":P
it's like the film of lock ness, or bigfoot. Why hasn't a modern camera caught something yet?
Isn't it obvious? The camera manufacturers are in it with the government! They use the ultra-high-tech computer technology we've stolen from the alien crash sites to embed into the cameras these very small, highly adaptable AIs that modify the images when they're taken so that we don't ever get solid photographic evidence!
Maybe I'm just a naive developer, but wouldn't they just calculate the hash of each file uploaded, and if it matches that of one already on disk, avoid a second copy?
That is a bit naive.;) Google around for "acoustic fingerprint", and you'll probably find an explanation of why it's necessary to use something other than a bitwise comparison (which is what a hash or checksum would basically boil down to in this example) when comparing audio files. An actual explanation of it would get me slapped down quick for offtopicness.:D
If I were coding this site... Call me an old fashioned developer but despite 20 cent per gig storage, I still refuse to waste it on unneeded duplication of files.
Then not only are you an old-fashioned developer, you're a lousy old-fashioned developer with no knowledge of the wider world your software is operating within. Security and legal concerns (especially legal concerns) trump the $0.00078 savings, by your estimated storage price, per copy of "Toxic". This is especially true when the architecture you're discussing would cost more time and money to implement than the safer version, what with the necessity of acoustic fingerprinting or some other technology to make sure that User1's "Britney Spears - Toxic.mp3" is the same as User2's "Toxic - Britney Spears (ub3r h0t ch1ck).mp3" is the same as User3's "251 - BS - TOXIC.mp3".
So, almost certainly their backup service is a massive shared folder that all their backup service users have access to.
Please, by all that's holy, tell me you're just over-simplifying for the masses. Actually, don't tell me that, because there's only two options here:
1. You're over simplifying a complicated technology, just like the idiots at EMI/SonyBMG/ do to confuse the non-technical people judging a case, or
2. You're not even a developer (or are someone who's written a half-dozen PHP scripts for their buddy's website and thinks they're a developer) and are just blowing smoke on this topic.
Either way, this absurd and technically inappropriate answer isn't doing anything except to muddy the waters. Please leave that to the professionals at EMI.
From a purely economic point of view it is probably better to let the mentally ill and unemployable just die on the street instead of subsidizing them for the rest of their life, but that's not what most people consider acceptable for the first world.
And just for the sake of some actual debate in this thread, rather than just RP Bashing/RP Loving, I'm going to go OT and troll in the same post. *grin* I wonder why that's not acceptable for America? Logically, if we're completely free-market capitalist, doesn't it make sense that people who can't pull their weight should either be supported by their families or allowed to die?
Yeah, he's a little over the edge, but he brings up a fun point.
He reasons that if reality was to do something that information processing cannot, then it cannot be virtual.
How do you define what information processing cannot do? Currently, information processing can't simulate a sentient being, ergo our universe is not a simulation. Or do we extend this to what information processing might be able to do? At which point, we're probably in an infinite recursion loop, and will eventually exhaust the heap space of our simulator and end the universe.
Personally, I propose that the universe is NOT a simulation, because if it was some twit would have already spawned a runaway process and crashed the sim.:)
And, as a scientifically-inclined reader, I like my science news to have at least references to some of the original media involved in the discovery they're reporting on. Without that, there's no point in me looking at their news story, because I have nothing I can use to gauge how much spin and/or ignorance was present when the news story was created.
It's not that people don't understand that this saves spaces (that wasn't an amazing thought you put together there), it's that people realize that the cons outweigh the pros.
Yeah, because DRM'd files are soooo secure, and nobody ever cracks the encryption.
Personally, I bought one because, like the poster you're flaming, I have way too many reference books to cart around, and umpteen bookshelves full of books that I'd like to condense down. For me, paying another $10 for a book that I use a lot to get it in a digital format is worth it, even if it is mildly distasteful. Plus, the thing that people keep forgetting about the Kindle is that all the non-DRMed PDF files and.mobi files I've already got sitting around on my hard drive and accumulating binary mold can be converted, for free, by free/open software, to use on the Kindle.
So yes, there are design problems. Yes, the cost is high. But for people like myself the cost is worth it, and I'm certain that the DRM issues -- which only exist for Kindle-specific books that I purchase -- will be solved by enterprising people who are better with high-end math than I am.
Bottom line is that the Kindle isn't passing new copyright laws or coming into your home and having forcible anal sex with you while you sleep, so if you don't like it, don't buy it, and stop annoying the people who actually find some utility in it.
Is it too much to ask that New Scientist stop using crappy CGI and start posting some of the actual photographs that the astronomers used to form their theories?
Isn't that mostly because anyone can get them from a store? If you had to import these things from other countries (unless you want a hunting rifle) that wouldn't be nearly as easy.
Yeah, because we're so good at keeping out people who shouldn't be in the country, it's going to be a LOT easier to keep out small, easily portable devices that we don't want in here.:P
Slashdot Mirror
My point was that the written request doesn't have to be a legal warrant, it simply has to be a "note from Daddy" that says it's important that this get done. I think the past eight years should show us that the mechanisms for acquiring warrants exist for a very good reason, and nobody should be allowed to bypass them. We certainly shouldn't tell large corporate entities that they don't have to perform the basic reality check that any individual would do should they be presented with an obviously illegal request from the government.
It's important to note that these "certain conditions" boil down to basically any time the administration says, "We really want to".
On the one hand, I'm utterly sickened by the fact that this is still up for debate. No one should have protection from doing something unconstitutional. It was the telecoms' duty as American citizens to tell the government to stick it where the sun doesn't shine, and then call the newspapers and blow a huge freaking whistle. On the other hand, I'm glad it hasn't just flown through Congress without any resistance.
Gee...why didn't they name themselves the American Space Society?
*grins sheepishly and backs out of the discussion*
Hey, good job! Way to turn an amusing, cynical comment about politicians in general into a partisan troll. Keep it up! We could use more us-versus-them in the USA! :P
Damn. You beat me to it. :)
This is exactly the kind of ignorant, fear-based thinking that is fueling this mess. The truly sad thing about it, though, is that it makes normally intelligent, rational people take a step closer to fascism. "Can't we just deport/reeducate/execute the idiots?" :P
Isn't it obvious? The camera manufacturers are in it with the government! They use the ultra-high-tech computer technology we've stolen from the alien crash sites to embed into the cameras these very small, highly adaptable AIs that modify the images when they're taken so that we don't ever get solid photographic evidence!
That is a bit naive. ;) Google around for "acoustic fingerprint", and you'll probably find an explanation of why it's necessary to use something other than a bitwise comparison (which is what a hash or checksum would basically boil down to in this example) when comparing audio files. An actual explanation of it would get me slapped down quick for offtopicness. :D
Then not only are you an old-fashioned developer, you're a lousy old-fashioned developer with no knowledge of the wider world your software is operating within. Security and legal concerns (especially legal concerns) trump the $0.00078 savings, by your estimated storage price, per copy of "Toxic". This is especially true when the architecture you're discussing would cost more time and money to implement than the safer version, what with the necessity of acoustic fingerprinting or some other technology to make sure that User1's "Britney Spears - Toxic.mp3" is the same as User2's "Toxic - Britney Spears (ub3r h0t ch1ck).mp3" is the same as User3's "251 - BS - TOXIC.mp3".
Please, by all that's holy, tell me you're just over-simplifying for the masses. Actually, don't tell me that, because there's only two options here:
- 1. You're over simplifying a complicated technology, just like the idiots at EMI/SonyBMG/ do to confuse the non-technical people judging a case, or
- 2. You're not even a developer (or are someone who's written a half-dozen PHP scripts for their buddy's website and thinks they're a developer) and are just blowing smoke on this topic.
Either way, this absurd and technically inappropriate answer isn't doing anything except to muddy the waters. Please leave that to the professionals at EMI.I don't know about everyone else, but I think that's hilarious. Where's my +1:Unintentional Irony mod option? :)
Maybe this should tell us that the US's copyright laws are archaic and it's time to get rid of them?
And just for the sake of some actual debate in this thread, rather than just RP Bashing/RP Loving, I'm going to go OT and troll in the same post. *grin* I wonder why that's not acceptable for America? Logically, if we're completely free-market capitalist, doesn't it make sense that people who can't pull their weight should either be supported by their families or allowed to die?
That's news to me. Got a citation for us?
Cue the "that's what's wrong with our two-party system" flamewar in three, two...
Mod parent up. "Insightful" gets my vote, since there's no "Trollslayer" moderation. :)
Yeah, he's a little over the edge, but he brings up a fun point.
How do you define what information processing cannot do? Currently, information processing can't simulate a sentient being, ergo our universe is not a simulation. Or do we extend this to what information processing might be able to do? At which point, we're probably in an infinite recursion loop, and will eventually exhaust the heap space of our simulator and end the universe.
Personally, I propose that the universe is NOT a simulation, because if it was some twit would have already spawned a runaway process and crashed the sim. :)
Haven't you learned yet, cicho? There's no point in arguing this because the people who don't get it never will. *sighs sadly*
And, as a scientifically-inclined reader, I like my science news to have at least references to some of the original media involved in the discovery they're reporting on. Without that, there's no point in me looking at their news story, because I have nothing I can use to gauge how much spin and/or ignorance was present when the news story was created.
Yeah, because DRM'd files are soooo secure, and nobody ever cracks the encryption.
Personally, I bought one because, like the poster you're flaming, I have way too many reference books to cart around, and umpteen bookshelves full of books that I'd like to condense down. For me, paying another $10 for a book that I use a lot to get it in a digital format is worth it, even if it is mildly distasteful. Plus, the thing that people keep forgetting about the Kindle is that all the non-DRMed PDF files and .mobi files I've already got sitting around on my hard drive and accumulating binary mold can be converted, for free, by free/open software, to use on the Kindle.
So yes, there are design problems. Yes, the cost is high. But for people like myself the cost is worth it, and I'm certain that the DRM issues -- which only exist for Kindle-specific books that I purchase -- will be solved by enterprising people who are better with high-end math than I am.
Bottom line is that the Kindle isn't passing new copyright laws or coming into your home and having forcible anal sex with you while you sleep, so if you don't like it, don't buy it, and stop annoying the people who actually find some utility in it.
Is it too much to ask that New Scientist stop using crappy CGI and start posting some of the actual photographs that the astronomers used to form their theories?
Didn't we just have this comment yesterday?
Yeah, because we're so good at keeping out people who shouldn't be in the country, it's going to be a LOT easier to keep out small, easily portable devices that we don't want in here. :P
...if and only if they promise it's not going to be some half-assed PC/platform mutant like Deus Ex 2. :P
Obviously, the only way these rocks could move is if God told them to. Finally! Concrete proof of creationism! :)