A degree proves you bought into some college's marketing, spent a ton of money and bought a certificate saying you have achieved the basic requirements necessary to be recognized by that organization.
A degree is not proof of knowledge, it is proof of passing a test. It is the same as an A+ certification. It provides a baseline that you should be competent in the beginning aspects of that particular discipline. This assumes of course we a re talking about a BS.
A PhD, states you have dedicated the necessary time required to exhaustively study one minute area of knowledge.
None of this is meant to disparrage any one who has undertaken the work necessary for a PhD. A college education is not the end-all, be-all that the OP has based his comments on.
As a practical example that a degree != knowledge, I ask what college Abraham Lincoln went to for his legal degree?
SOmehow we've been conditioned to think that the only people qualified to do something of this caliber are Phds. It's bunk.
It takes desire, attention to detail, and tenacity to not listen to everyone saying they can't do it. If Carmack can lend himself to a project like this and be useful, more power to him and I hope he's successful.
Who was an expert in space exploration 50 years ago? 40? Space exploration has been castrated by the policies of NASA and largely our government. There are risks associated with going into space. Let people who are willing take them.
I find it interesting that you have used the word trespass. I am not a lawyer, but in the case of common sense, I am presenting my view of this.
The ownership of the roads is considered public property. I don't live in California, thank god, but throughout the United States this principle applies. Now, this person moved his truck on public property, or in other words owned by the people of California and put in trust for use by and for the benefit of the people of California, and proceeded to mount his sign, built to regulation, on public property.
He destroyed nothing, he defaced nothing and he interfered with the private property of noone. Now I could see this person getting a slap on the wrist for not obtaining the appropriate permit before posting his sign, but trespassing I would say, by a sane and resonable man's definition (i.e., common sense), is not an appropriate charge.
In response to your question, "does that mean I can trespass," in short yes. If your act is for the greater good, I would see no problem with it. This is a concept called personal responsibility, it's not in vogue now but in some places it is. It's one of those things that says that if you see a wrong you right it.
He fixed a problem, albeit by accepting some risk on to himself. I applaud him. Now if he wanted to come out to my neck of the woods and hang some needed traffic lights we'd be all set.
My apologies to the original poster, this was not meant as a direct flame to them. I've seen this tresspassing BS on this article so many times I want to scream...and here we are.
I was shopping for a laptop for a while and I just could not find anything that fit the bill for me. I'm a cheap bastard so price was definately a big consideration, but I also needed a decent size hard drive as well as a good amount of memory. Due to what I need the laptop for, I did not need the biggest or the best, just a utilitarian box that would let me work.
Make a long story short, I looked through magazines for the ads seeing what was there. Nothing tended to catch my attention. I figured before I would give up I'd go check at Best Buy and CompUSA.
While I was at Best Buy, a Toshiba rep happened to be there for his monthly "make sure everything looks good with the product visits" and we started talking. Basically after chatting for about an hour, we both decided that their cheapest model, an 1805 would do everything I needed and more. It had 256MB RAM, 20GB HD, 1.1Ghz Celeron, the screen was nice and bright, and everything I needed was built in. All, tax included, for under $1000.00.
It came with WindowsXP, so I took it home, booted and within about 45 minutes had Mandrake installed (I love the DVD copy of the ProSuite!).
According to the NSA Commercial Product Evaluations for Trusted Systems CD (September 2001), Windows NT service pack 6 with the C2 security patch is the spec on the M$ Product.
According to the documentation, not only does the product have to pass muster, but the company must have the financial viability to support the testing. The financial health of the company must be good enough so that there are no serious doubts about its long term existence. Apparently the NSA doesn't want to certify a product, bring it into deployment and then have the company fold. That I can see being the biggest hold back to a Linux Distro being certified.
All this information is free on the web. Do a search for rainbow series on google and you will find a link to the nsa site. There's also a number you can call and get a copy of the specs sent to you on cd on Uncle Sam's dime.
I feel this kid crossed the line in taking the role of cracker and I feel he should be punished accordingly.
However, I am opposed to the comments you made, which I've heard so many time since 9/11, about balancing freedoms with security.
There can be no balance. Our freedoms are guaranteed and the government is limited by our constitution in what they can change and what they cannot. The bill of rights limits government, even though it is not adhered to very well.
If our country's foreign policy has caused us to be under threat of attack (I refuse to say we are at war until there is a declaration of war by congress), then we need to change our foreign policy. If it comes down to foreign policy versus freedoms and liberties, foreign policy loses every time.
Government is not our friend. It serves a purpose and when it stops serving the people it is up to the people to reevaluate its structure and existance. Sometimes it comes to war, but only as an absolute last resort.
I've seen other comments mention our founding fathers and the revolution. What I haven't seen mentioned is that for years the colonists tried to reason with the King to no avail. Ben Franklin spent a considerable amount of time in England trying to get George III to accept our grievances. Lastly, it was over a year into armed hostilities before the second continental congress signed the Declaration of Independence.
This kid was an idiot. Yes he has the right to advocate governmental overthrow and by the laws of nature he is given the right to try to execute those views through force. The government, however, is not oblidged to recognize those laws, and therefore he takes his chances. Now he's caught and will spend the rest of his life mourning the arrogance and stupidity of his youth, but that's his choice.
To summarize, do I agree with what he did...No.
Do I agree with the government's handling of the situation...No.
Do I think our government is doing us dry and just warming up for bigger "ashcroft-thrusts"...yes.
At some time in the future, the citizens of the US will realize just how much they sacrificed when they said, "the government knows best" or when they said, "I'd rather be safe that have dangerous information out in the open for the world to see and use against us." I can only hope that I see that day before the Militarized Police force from the ministry of Love come to drag me from my home because I posted this on slashdot back when we thought we were free.
John Ascroft is not mine, not yours, not anyone else's Attorney General. He's the Attorney General of the United States which is an entity unto itself comprised of the body collective of the several states.
On the same lines, George Bush is the President of the United States and commander-in-chief of the United States military which pretty much means that unless you're in uniform or work for the Federal Executive branch, he means precisely dick the the common citizen.
Pet peeve #2:
Liberty is defined in the constitution of this country. To live in the United States and be pro-security over liberty is in direct conflict with the founding document of what this country is about. If you, assuming you're American, say you love this country, it is your duty as a citizen to defend its liberty. Read the Constitution, as not in vogue as it seems to be now, good bad or otherwise, it's what defines our country. The people can choose bovine-sodomism as their political system but it's wrong under this constitution and fundimentally illegal. Majority only rules in voting, there are hard limits which cannot be crossed. Sucks to be you. Deal (It's what this country's about).
I have the 9/2001 NSA Commercial Product Evaluations CD on my desk and the latest Oracle trusted system was the Version 7 DB with the correct security enhancements. No current version was currently even in the process of being evaluated.
On the other hand, MS SQL server 7 was in the process of getting trusted system status per the NSA under Rainbow criteria as well as the updated CPE criteria.
I'm as much of a conspiracy nut as the rest of/., but when it comes right down to it, reality tells me that a certified trusted system is going to win the bid over a non-trusted system.
And NT 4.0 Service Pack 6a with the Security Level C2 enhancements meet the NSA trusted system criteria for that level.
All of this, of course, is not to say that Larry and the boys couldn't fast track the evaluation...
I had it with my employer so I decided I wanted to pursue other interests. I turned in my resignation on 8/30/1999. I will be leaving on 10/19/2001.
The president of the company made many concessions to me so that I would not leave. I worked for a year at 1 day a week while they paid me for three days so they could have the ability to call me if they needed me.
In October 2000 I upped my time to three days a week and was able to get over a 100% pay raise.
I do not have any regrets about my relationship with the company. The company doesn't have any regrets about their relationship with me. They had needs that I felt obligated to help with. They catered to my wants over the past two years. I am now in a position to fully leave and they are in a position to feel comfortable with me leaving.
Don't get me wrong, my relationship with my employer has not been a huge party. I dread my days in the office and can't wait for them to be over. I have a committment to my job though. I wrote code which needed maintaining as well as set up a network that the company could not administer using their current staff. I have spent the better part of a year bringing the new staff up to speed and just now feel they are able to take over.
Even in this day and age, there is a loyalty that exists between an employee and employer. For the record, I am not under a binding contract that kept me from leaving; I simply negotiated a mutually beneficial agreement which kept me here this long.
I am responding because this is something I feel quite strongly about.
You are quite correct that most politicians do have a lot of personality and charisma. I have none of this, but there are geeks who do. We find them and call them to the plate. If they run, good, if not, we find someone else.
Political Science and Law are fine backgrounds, but it is not a requirement to run. To risk overgeneralization, geeks like to identify and solve problems and learn new things.
To win office it takes money in order to swing popular opinion. Geeks as a general rule tend to be middle class or above (read as disposable income) and tend to devote themselves to some form of evangelism (OS wars, editor wars, desktop wars, etc.).
Lastly, yes geeks and intelligent people in general are a minority. History shows that minority groups can dramatically influence elections if they vote in significant numbers.
I believe this can be done. Will it be easy. No but it is not impossible.
A geek in a real office will give these issues a place they can be heard and fairly weighed. It will require support from the community as well as the right candidate.
I believe that there is a common set of ideas that "we" support.
These include but are not limited to:
technology
Note that I'm not including much else as this is a very diverse group.
I am of the opinion that a representative should listen to their district or in this case, group (geeks) and properly provide them with a voice.
This person should be one that is charismatic enough to sway opinion yet technical enough to understand issues important to their represented base.
It is not for me to decide what "we" believe, just as it is not up to the representative. It is the represented's responsibility to inform their representative what they believe.
This is much different than the deaf ear our pleas fall on now.
We are currently in very dangerous times. Every action by our government must be highly scrutinized to make sure it is in the best intrests of the populous.
Yes, this guy's a mobster. The courts will ultimately decide his guilt. Maybe it's fine that this guy goes away.
Is the FBI right to do this without permission of an advisory? Absolutely not.
The FBI is not autonomous, neither is our government. Both need oversight. Our constitution provides a means to oversee our government namely in checks and balances as well as elections. In a last resort we have the right to choose a new government as a government derives its authority by the consent of the governed.
If we choose to not fight each and every small battle for our privacy and rights, later we will not have the option as the war will be lost.
When I originally posted, it was not specifically to bash Katz. I am by no means a fan as I feel that he is not a very critical thinker when it comes to items pertaining to the world at large. The man infuriates me by his broad strokes of generalism trying to paint a picture more inspired by a need for sensationalism than a real critique or social commentary.
I respect Katz for his opinions if they are truly his. I do not get the feeling, though, that he reached these conclusions by himself. His articles remind me more of a teenager trying to find his voice rather than a serious commentator secure in his convictions.
In the end, I do not hate Jon Katz as I do not know him. I'm sure that to meet him and speak to him he has many competent and unique ideas. I do not get that from his writing. My original post was meant to bring to light the fact that I agree with his commentary this once.
As for the Katz bashing...
I bash Katz because he makes himself an easy target. Criticism fosters improvement, therefore maybe, just maybe, my comments will envoke upon him the need to re-evaluate his style.
It is one thing to preach with authority, it is entirely different to try to be authoritative and yet only sound like the proxy of the true idea, a messenger if you will.
As a member of this Internet "community" and also one of the generations in distress and the citizen of a country in turmoil, if Jon Katz is my spokesman I will do my part to make sure the people who read my post know I feel that most of the time this emperor has no clothes.
Is this ego on my part, probably. Am I a royal ass for thinking this, maybe. Will I change my mind, no.
But even for this entire rant, sometimes a sow's ear can be a silk purse. Katz did a nice job on this article, in my not so humble (cliche' spewing) opinion.
I normally try not to read things by Katz as I find his line of thinking very unoriginal and often sensationalist.
Although I have not changed my opinion, Katz has, this time at least, summed up my view on this situation quite well. I agree that there is a double standard and that the law needs to be changed.
Katz may be late on the bandwagon, but I think he nailed the essence of the arguement.
(There's just this part of me that refuses to believe it's really him and not some very insightful imposter.)
"Face the reality: MicroSoft is a damn effective company, that makes good software and knows, how to sell it"
Although I don't agree with the makes good software part, I do agree with the fact that Microsoft has done its homework on business and marketing. Their software is adequate for the most part. I would love to tout Linux as the end-all be-all but just as a saw cannot drive a screw as good as a screwdriver, there are somethings windows is better suited for.
Microsoft is the champ in marketing. Does anyone remember the hype around windows 95? I remember the story of people without computers asking for windows 95 because they thought they needed it. That's marketing.
Let me preface my comment by saying that I use Mandrake both for personal use and for corporate use. I do not download ISOs; I buy retail because I believe in the company and the product they produce.
On to my opinion:
When I left full time corporate work to pursue my own ventures, I did it with the simple premise...make money. As I realized I could no longer accept the liabilities and exposures of doing business as a private individual, I formed a business as a corporate entity. Still for the goal of making money.
AFAIK, MandrakeSoft is not a non-profit although their investors probably not so sure. As a for-profit company, Mandrake needs to increase their profits or reduce expenses. I do not agree with a for-profit accepting donations.
Mandrake is in business for money. A for-profit company has no nobler goal than to make money. There is no higher power. There is no lofty ideal. Some companies work to make money in more ethical ways than others, but the end goal is the same.
In the end, if Mandrake wants to charge to download, so be it. If they want to leave the downloads free, again so be it. For me, I will buy shrink wrapped to support their efforts. I will not, however, donate to a for-profit corporation. Let them earn their operating expenses the old-fashioned way.
I've never been a fan of Compaq although I have had good experience with the Proliant servers. My biggest complaint is the fact that all of their components are quite expensive considering the servers are x86 based.
Now, though, a lot of companies are building some nice x86 servers so my buying decision would not be quite so quick on Compaq.
I would not under any circumstances touch one of their consumer products (Desktops / Notebooks) with a 10 foot pole. There is not a definative return on investment. I say that as the hardware only seems to have a working life of about 18 months in a corporate environment without a major failure. When buying systems for a typical business application, I like to see them last several years.
I do like these new designs. I would be more inclined to purchase if they came from another company. I figure if Compaq launches these designs, in about 6 months there will be enough copies to go around. So all in all, this is good.
Ford did not invent the assembly line, despite being credited with it - that honour goes to Ransome Olds, 10-15 years previously
Actually, If I remember correctly, both are incorrect, the first would be Eli Whitney of the cotton gin fame. He was the first to mass produce a product. He had a method and contract from the US government to produce rifles with interchangeable parts back in the 1830's(?).
The product did not work well and the parts were not very interchangeable, but it established Whitney as the father of mass production.
Slashdot Mirror
A degree proves you bought into some college's marketing, spent a ton of money and bought a certificate saying you have achieved the basic requirements necessary to be recognized by that organization.
A degree is not proof of knowledge, it is proof of passing a test. It is the same as an A+ certification. It provides a baseline that you should be competent in the beginning aspects of that particular discipline. This assumes of course we a re talking about a BS.
A PhD, states you have dedicated the necessary time required to exhaustively study one minute area of knowledge.
None of this is meant to disparrage any one who has undertaken the work necessary for a PhD. A college education is not the end-all, be-all that the OP has based his comments on.
As a practical example that a degree != knowledge, I ask what college Abraham Lincoln went to for his legal degree?
Look it up, it'll be good excersize.
Did Carmack steal your girlfriend or something?
SOmehow we've been conditioned to think that the only people qualified to do something of this caliber are Phds. It's bunk.
It takes desire, attention to detail, and tenacity to not listen to everyone saying they can't do it. If Carmack can lend himself to a project like this and be useful, more power to him and I hope he's successful.
Who was an expert in space exploration 50 years ago? 40? Space exploration has been castrated by the policies of NASA and largely our government. There are risks associated with going into space. Let people who are willing take them.
It only took 1 week for the Katz analysis. I should have known that Cmdr Taco's review would not be the final word.
We all hoped too soon.
I find it interesting that you have used the word trespass. I am not a lawyer, but in the case of common sense, I am presenting my view of this.
The ownership of the roads is considered public property. I don't live in California, thank god, but throughout the United States this principle applies. Now, this person moved his truck on public property, or in other words owned by the people of California and put in trust for use by and for the benefit of the people of California, and proceeded to mount his sign, built to regulation, on public property.
He destroyed nothing, he defaced nothing and he interfered with the private property of noone. Now I could see this person getting a slap on the wrist for not obtaining the appropriate permit before posting his sign, but trespassing I would say, by a sane and resonable man's definition (i.e., common sense), is not an appropriate charge.
In response to your question, "does that mean I can trespass," in short yes. If your act is for the greater good, I would see no problem with it. This is a concept called personal responsibility, it's not in vogue now but in some places it is. It's one of those things that says that if you see a wrong you right it.
He fixed a problem, albeit by accepting some risk on to himself. I applaud him. Now if he wanted to come out to my neck of the woods and hang some needed traffic lights we'd be all set.
My apologies to the original poster, this was not meant as a direct flame to them. I've seen this tresspassing BS on this article so many times I want to scream...and here we are.
I was shopping for a laptop for a while and I just could not find anything that fit the bill for me. I'm a cheap bastard so price was definately a big consideration, but I also needed a decent size hard drive as well as a good amount of memory. Due to what I need the laptop for, I did not need the biggest or the best, just a utilitarian box that would let me work.
Make a long story short, I looked through magazines for the ads seeing what was there. Nothing tended to catch my attention. I figured before I would give up I'd go check at Best Buy and CompUSA.
While I was at Best Buy, a Toshiba rep happened to be there for his monthly "make sure everything looks good with the product visits" and we started talking. Basically after chatting for about an hour, we both decided that their cheapest model, an 1805 would do everything I needed and more. It had 256MB RAM, 20GB HD, 1.1Ghz Celeron, the screen was nice and bright, and everything I needed was built in. All, tax included, for under $1000.00.
It came with WindowsXP, so I took it home, booted and within about 45 minutes had Mandrake installed (I love the DVD copy of the ProSuite!).
I love my toshiba 1805 with linux.
I saw the headline and thought somehow I was mystically transported back to fall 1999.
Shudder.
According to the NSA Commercial Product Evaluations for Trusted Systems CD (September 2001), Windows NT service pack 6 with the C2 security patch is the spec on the M$ Product.
According to the documentation, not only does the product have to pass muster, but the company must have the financial viability to support the testing. The financial health of the company must be good enough so that there are no serious doubts about its long term existence. Apparently the NSA doesn't want to certify a product, bring it into deployment and then have the company fold. That I can see being the biggest hold back to a Linux Distro being certified.
All this information is free on the web. Do a search for rainbow series on google and you will find a link to the nsa site. There's also a number you can call and get a copy of the specs sent to you on cd on Uncle Sam's dime.
I feel this kid crossed the line in taking the role of cracker and I feel he should be punished accordingly.
However, I am opposed to the comments you made, which I've heard so many time since 9/11, about balancing freedoms with security.
There can be no balance. Our freedoms are guaranteed and the government is limited by our constitution in what they can change and what they cannot. The bill of rights limits government, even though it is not adhered to very well.
If our country's foreign policy has caused us to be under threat of attack (I refuse to say we are at war until there is a declaration of war by congress), then we need to change our foreign policy. If it comes down to foreign policy versus freedoms and liberties, foreign policy loses every time.
Government is not our friend. It serves a purpose and when it stops serving the people it is up to the people to reevaluate its structure and existance. Sometimes it comes to war, but only as an absolute last resort.
I've seen other comments mention our founding fathers and the revolution. What I haven't seen mentioned is that for years the colonists tried to reason with the King to no avail. Ben Franklin spent a considerable amount of time in England trying to get George III to accept our grievances. Lastly, it was over a year into armed hostilities before the second continental congress signed the Declaration of Independence.
This kid was an idiot. Yes he has the right to advocate governmental overthrow and by the laws of nature he is given the right to try to execute those views through force. The government, however, is not oblidged to recognize those laws, and therefore he takes his chances. Now he's caught and will spend the rest of his life mourning the arrogance and stupidity of his youth, but that's his choice.
To summarize, do I agree with what he did...No.
Do I agree with the government's handling of the situation...No.
Do I think our government is doing us dry and just warming up for bigger "ashcroft-thrusts"...yes.
At some time in the future, the citizens of the US will realize just how much they sacrificed when they said, "the government knows best" or when they said, "I'd rather be safe that have dangerous information out in the open for the world to see and use against us." I can only hope that I see that day before the Militarized Police force from the ministry of Love come to drag me from my home because I posted this on slashdot back when we thought we were free.
Just a quick nitpick about your post:
John Ascroft is not mine, not yours, not anyone else's Attorney General. He's the Attorney General of the United States which is an entity unto itself comprised of the body collective of the several states.
On the same lines, George Bush is the President of the United States and commander-in-chief of the United States military which pretty much means that unless you're in uniform or work for the Federal Executive branch, he means precisely dick the the common citizen.
Pet peeve #2:
Liberty is defined in the constitution of this country. To live in the United States and be pro-security over liberty is in direct conflict with the founding document of what this country is about. If you, assuming you're American, say you love this country, it is your duty as a citizen to defend its liberty. Read the Constitution, as not in vogue as it seems to be now, good bad or otherwise, it's what defines our country. The people can choose bovine-sodomism as their political system but it's wrong under this constitution and fundimentally illegal. Majority only rules in voting, there are hard limits which cannot be crossed. Sucks to be you. Deal (It's what this country's about).
Odd but true -
/., but when it comes right down to it, reality tells me that a certified trusted system is going to win the bid over a non-trusted system.
I have the 9/2001 NSA Commercial Product Evaluations CD on my desk and the latest Oracle trusted system was the Version 7 DB with the correct security enhancements. No current version was currently even in the process of being evaluated.
On the other hand, MS SQL server 7 was in the process of getting trusted system status per the NSA under Rainbow criteria as well as the updated CPE criteria.
I'm as much of a conspiracy nut as the rest of
And NT 4.0 Service Pack 6a with the Security Level C2 enhancements meet the NSA trusted system criteria for that level.
All of this, of course, is not to say that Larry and the boys couldn't fast track the evaluation...
Here's one for y'all.
I had it with my employer so I decided I wanted to pursue other interests. I turned in my resignation on 8/30/1999. I will be leaving on 10/19/2001.
The president of the company made many concessions to me so that I would not leave. I worked for a year at 1 day a week while they paid me for three days so they could have the ability to call me if they needed me.
In October 2000 I upped my time to three days a week and was able to get over a 100% pay raise.
I do not have any regrets about my relationship with the company. The company doesn't have any regrets about their relationship with me. They had needs that I felt obligated to help with. They catered to my wants over the past two years. I am now in a position to fully leave and they are in a position to feel comfortable with me leaving.
Don't get me wrong, my relationship with my employer has not been a huge party. I dread my days in the office and can't wait for them to be over. I have a committment to my job though. I wrote code which needed maintaining as well as set up a network that the company could not administer using their current staff. I have spent the better part of a year bringing the new staff up to speed and just now feel they are able to take over.
Even in this day and age, there is a loyalty that exists between an employee and employer. For the record, I am not under a binding contract that kept me from leaving; I simply negotiated a mutually beneficial agreement which kept me here this long.
I am responding because this is something I feel quite strongly about.
You are quite correct that most politicians do have a lot of personality and charisma. I have none of this, but there are geeks who do. We find them and call them to the plate. If they run, good, if not, we find someone else.
Political Science and Law are fine backgrounds, but it is not a requirement to run. To risk overgeneralization, geeks like to identify and solve problems and learn new things.
To win office it takes money in order to swing popular opinion. Geeks as a general rule tend to be middle class or above (read as disposable income) and tend to devote themselves to some form of evangelism (OS wars, editor wars, desktop wars, etc.).
Lastly, yes geeks and intelligent people in general are a minority. History shows that minority groups can dramatically influence elections if they vote in significant numbers.
I believe this can be done. Will it be easy. No but it is not impossible.
A geek in a real office will give these issues a place they can be heard and fairly weighed. It will require support from the community as well as the right candidate.
I believe that there is a common set of ideas that "we" support.
These include but are not limited to:
technology
Note that I'm not including much else as this is a very diverse group.
I am of the opinion that a representative should listen to their district or in this case, group (geeks) and properly provide them with a voice.
This person should be one that is charismatic enough to sway opinion yet technical enough to understand issues important to their represented base.
It is not for me to decide what "we" believe, just as it is not up to the representative. It is the represented's responsibility to inform their representative what they believe.
This is much different than the deaf ear our pleas fall on now.
Instead of writing to your congressman / senator, why doesn't someone try running for that office?
/. populous thinks. Can we send one of our own to the seat of power where real change can be effected?
We do a lot of whining and there are a lot of calls for letters to be written but is anyone truly making the sacrafice of public office?
Why isn't there a well spoken geek that could run for either congressman / senator and address these issues as the voice of our demographic?
We could have a geek get out the vote.
I would like to hear what the
Forgive me for being too ultra paranoid.
We are currently in very dangerous times. Every action by our government must be highly scrutinized to make sure it is in the best intrests of the populous.
Yes, this guy's a mobster. The courts will ultimately decide his guilt. Maybe it's fine that this guy goes away.
Is the FBI right to do this without permission of an advisory? Absolutely not.
The FBI is not autonomous, neither is our government. Both need oversight. Our constitution provides a means to oversee our government namely in checks and balances as well as elections. In a last resort we have the right to choose a new government as a government derives its authority by the consent of the governed.
If we choose to not fight each and every small battle for our privacy and rights, later we will not have the option as the war will be lost.
When I originally posted, it was not specifically to bash Katz. I am by no means a fan as I feel that he is not a very critical thinker when it comes to items pertaining to the world at large. The man infuriates me by his broad strokes of generalism trying to paint a picture more inspired by a need for sensationalism than a real critique or social commentary. I respect Katz for his opinions if they are truly his. I do not get the feeling, though, that he reached these conclusions by himself. His articles remind me more of a teenager trying to find his voice rather than a serious commentator secure in his convictions. In the end, I do not hate Jon Katz as I do not know him. I'm sure that to meet him and speak to him he has many competent and unique ideas. I do not get that from his writing. My original post was meant to bring to light the fact that I agree with his commentary this once. As for the Katz bashing... I bash Katz because he makes himself an easy target. Criticism fosters improvement, therefore maybe, just maybe, my comments will envoke upon him the need to re-evaluate his style. It is one thing to preach with authority, it is entirely different to try to be authoritative and yet only sound like the proxy of the true idea, a messenger if you will. As a member of this Internet "community" and also one of the generations in distress and the citizen of a country in turmoil, if Jon Katz is my spokesman I will do my part to make sure the people who read my post know I feel that most of the time this emperor has no clothes. Is this ego on my part, probably. Am I a royal ass for thinking this, maybe. Will I change my mind, no. But even for this entire rant, sometimes a sow's ear can be a silk purse. Katz did a nice job on this article, in my not so humble (cliche' spewing) opinion.
I normally try not to read things by Katz as I find his line of thinking very unoriginal and often sensationalist.
Although I have not changed my opinion, Katz has, this time at least, summed up my view on this situation quite well. I agree that there is a double standard and that the law needs to be changed.
Katz may be late on the bandwagon, but I think he nailed the essence of the arguement.
(There's just this part of me that refuses to believe it's really him and not some very insightful imposter.)
Will any of this cause the price of corrective laser eye surgery to drop?
You just described a lot of amateur or volunteer software projects I've looked into.
Could this be the first space program hosted on sourceforge?
"Face the reality: MicroSoft is a damn effective company, that makes good software and knows, how to sell it"
Although I don't agree with the makes good software part, I do agree with the fact that Microsoft has done its homework on business and marketing. Their software is adequate for the most part. I would love to tout Linux as the end-all be-all but just as a saw cannot drive a screw as good as a screwdriver, there are somethings windows is better suited for.
Microsoft is the champ in marketing. Does anyone remember the hype around windows 95? I remember the story of people without computers asking for windows 95 because they thought they needed it. That's marketing.
I'm sure if they're going to loose that much money, we could start sending donations that way a la Mandrake.
(For the sarcasm challenged, this was a pitiful attempt at humor)
Let me preface my comment by saying that I use Mandrake both for personal use and for corporate use. I do not download ISOs; I buy retail because I believe in the company and the product they produce.
On to my opinion:
When I left full time corporate work to pursue my own ventures, I did it with the simple premise...make money. As I realized I could no longer accept the liabilities and exposures of doing business as a private individual, I formed a business as a corporate entity. Still for the goal of making money.
AFAIK, MandrakeSoft is not a non-profit although their investors probably not so sure. As a for-profit company, Mandrake needs to increase their profits or reduce expenses. I do not agree with a for-profit accepting donations.
Mandrake is in business for money. A for-profit company has no nobler goal than to make money. There is no higher power. There is no lofty ideal. Some companies work to make money in more ethical ways than others, but the end goal is the same.
In the end, if Mandrake wants to charge to download, so be it. If they want to leave the downloads free, again so be it. For me, I will buy shrink wrapped to support their efforts. I will not, however, donate to a for-profit corporation. Let them earn their operating expenses the old-fashioned way.
I've never been a fan of Compaq although I have had good experience with the Proliant servers. My biggest complaint is the fact that all of their components are quite expensive considering the servers are x86 based.
Now, though, a lot of companies are building some nice x86 servers so my buying decision would not be quite so quick on Compaq.
I would not under any circumstances touch one of their consumer products (Desktops / Notebooks) with a 10 foot pole. There is not a definative return on investment. I say that as the hardware only seems to have a working life of about 18 months in a corporate environment without a major failure. When buying systems for a typical business application, I like to see them last several years.
I do like these new designs. I would be more inclined to purchase if they came from another company. I figure if Compaq launches these designs, in about 6 months there will be enough copies to go around. So all in all, this is good.
"richly-imagined imagination"
With descriptors like that, both Katz and whomever taught him should be dragged into the literary streets and flogged with a thesaurus.
Or better yet have obviously-heavy heavy things dropped on them.
Ford did not invent the assembly line, despite being credited with it - that honour goes to Ransome Olds, 10-15 years previously
Actually, If I remember correctly, both are incorrect, the first would be Eli Whitney of the cotton gin fame. He was the first to mass produce a product. He had a method and contract from the US government to produce rifles with interchangeable parts back in the 1830's(?).
The product did not work well and the parts were not very interchangeable, but it established Whitney as the father of mass production.