I don't have the confidence level you do regarding peak oil, but I'm not very informed on the subject either, so the level of my confidence is completely irrelevant in the scheme of things. I WAS referring to peak oil, but again, I don't know enough to really make a judgment call. That's why I qualified it with 'probably' but you're right, I should have emphasized a stronger uncertainty than was evident.
That's like the little hacker guys in Command and Conquer whatever the hell version that was. It was kinda neat, they'd sit down with a laptop and start making like 5 bucks every few seconds...
I agree with what I think is your base point about China, but still, what about any of those places makes you think that the U.S. would be willing to risk having China stop financing our debt for any of them?
Besides that a couple of years ago China's political leadership and military leadership both told the press that if they DID go to war with the U.S. they would immediately resort to nuclear weapons, because they know they couldn't win conventionally.
No, even if that's all bluster, it's still too much risk (especially the debt financing) as long as they don't try and take OUR piece of the oil/diamonds/whatever economists say we need today. They won't, I think they are willing to share with the U.S. for now, and probably for the foreseeable future, barring something like peak oil being imminent or something. Maybe then, but that's probably not likely in the near future.
Linux is many things, but its not a cyber weapon. You're right, it can however be a perfectly powerful cyber-weapons factory, deployment platform, hidden storage facility, you name it.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing linux at all, but if my history serves me well here, linux gained a following among, shall we say, highly technical miscreants for a reason. It's powerful and able to be reconfigured to perform most any given task optimally.
This is just a new battlefield, like between the world wars when everyone scrambled to get together some kind of airforce. Space hasn't been officially militarized yet because of cold war fears that led to a treaty banning that type of activity. It seems that certain powers in the world are changing their mind about that, but I digress...
Yeah, cyberspace (I know, played out term, but it's common vernacular now) is a place (kinda) where strategy can be applied to hamper an enemies war fighting potential. Not only that, it can be the equivalent to infrastructure destruction when targeted at the private sector. Yep, all that advantage without firing a shot, without having to wait for resupply of ammunition and without putting a single person within killing range of the target.
I personally think that since we know enough (not everything, but a good decent working approximation) about biochemistry that it is entirely possible to now do enhanced speed evolutionary experiments in a simulated environment. In fact, I know such research has been going on for longer than -I've- been alive already.
I myself, being passively interested in self-adapting systems have been mucking around for years with various AI, AL (artificial life), machine learning and genetic algorithm programs. You can experience the wonders of evolution for yourself if you're willing to stare at a screen for hours on end. This IS slashdot, many of us do that already.:-)
Seriously though, if you're really interested in at least seeing the very basics of evolution at work, I'd suggest a good start to be NetLOGO. It comes with a nice allotment of pre-built experiments for you to study and watch. Adaptive systems can effect very complex behaviors with very simple rules, and you can see that happen yourself if you really care.
After NetLOGO you might wanna have a look at framsticks. Framsticks is basically an evolution simulator. Not true biochemical evolution (though I do think work has been done to make a biochemically accurate framework for framsticks) but a decent framework for macro-effects of biological evolution.
Basically we already know that the mechanisms of life can (DO) change over time, and it's not too hard to grasp that the ones that work better survive longer. Since all life reproduces, it's probably a good assumption, though not 100% accurate, that the longer an organism lives, the more it reproduces. I cannot possibly fathom why such a simple system can draw so much ire.
With framsticks (if memory serves, it's been a year) you need (unless you're a text mode superstar) the shareware package. It's not annoying bother you alot shareware, and though it IS slightly crippled, IFIAK all the crippling is done on things like rendering your creatures in a full OpenGL world. It DOES render them for you, just not in a beautifully crafted world. Again, I may be wrong, or things might have changed.
I'm -REALLY- not sure of this, but looking closely at it it seems that just maybe the driver is thrown out of the car. You can see a dark looking shape that seems to be ejected from the front of the car just as it hits the island. If that's true, it's still highly unlikely the person survived, but in this (rare) case I think being ejected could possibly have been beneficial to the victim (or victim/perp if the case may be, I dunno) as the vehicle itself very quickly became unsurvivable.
Thought I'd toss out that glimmer of hope for the person.
Look, now you've gone so far as to get a registered to Democrat tell you to get of your big D high horse.
"Off the table" Pelosi and the rest of her DLC following Dempublicans are playing political patty-cake while this travesty of a revenge act against the completely wrong party goes on full swing. The big media-hogging "mainstream" (*snicker*) Democrats are doing they're best to do nothing as furiously and noisily as possible to end this... End this what? War? No. Police Action? Maybe. Disarmament? Heh. Regime Change? Oops, that didn't work out so well... Well, whatever the hell it is, it's failed (by any sane measure) and the Pelosi crew are to busy milking it politically to stop it.
If you really want to support democratic ideals, you're going to have to look a bit deeper into the party to find them. Kucinich is probably the most well known example.
Use your fair use legally defensible position to rip that content and encode it into a more friendly format, like vorbis or theora, plop it all in a nice ogg container and enjoy your media on your favorite (nice choice BTW) OS.
Just because they tell you it's illegal, it's not. Fair Use is a LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE reason to break the law. IANAL, but I'm pretty sure it's like an asterisk on all laws relating to copyright that says that of course people can protect their copyrights, but copyright doesn't apply at all in -these- certain situations. Preserving an archival copy of your media is one of those situations.
Again, I Am Not A Lawyer, and I didn't stay at any damn Holiday Inn's last night (express or original) but this is pretty simple stuff. Well, simple until armies of law school trained sharks start trying to convince you otherwise.
I mean, everyone knows he never said he invented the internet. If I'm wrong, find the quote, and it's original publication. Good luck.
BTW, Did you know that the legislation wandering around Washington in the late 80s to open arpanet up to the public was referred to around town as "the Gore Bill?"
Any more I can shoot down for you?
Oh, one more thing, if you want some current data about the winds of politics, check out this poll from MSNBC: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904/
Sometimes I get pissed when racist little cowards like you sit behind your screen and anonymously spew hate you're too scared to breath in public.
But ya know what? I just smile when I realize that your daughters and sons are mixing races as we speak. That's right, your little girls are getting knocked up by mexicans, blacks, asians, even *gasp* JEWS....
If not THIS generation, then the next (at the MOST 1 more after that) all you little racist degenerates will be bred out of existence. That puts a nice grin on my face right there.
I loved the video, funny, educational and, I think, effective critique. I don't think they're going to touch you with a 10 foot pole, but that leads to my question...
I noticed that the video was produced in association with Stanford Law, or something like that. How far does this association go? Are they going to back you legally in case things DO get hairy over this? Are they 100% committed to defending this work?
Alrighty, that's more than 1 question, but they're at least related.:-)
No no no. Most people here aren't against copyright, they're against goofy companies using their copyright like a baseball bat against citizen's skulls. Fair Use, and the steps being taken to nullify it, are whats at issue here.
And really, I'd like to know if you think something can be 'misuse' if the Fair Use defense is applicable. Usage of the Fair Use defense (I think, but IANAL) requires that there is no doubt that the possible offending material is an original work. I think that makes any misuse or misquotation no longer a copyright issue, libel or slander maybe, but nothing to do with copyright anymore.
You must be new here... Just roll with it, that particular train is unstoppable. Like goatse but with a lot less vomit and a little less 'flamebait' modding.
I second this comment. I had a different experience myself, but with a similar outcome. Long story short, CPS does indeed know the difference between abuse and punishment, at least where I live.
-I- have kids. 3 of them composed of my own spermies, and a live in nephew. You know what else? I spank my kids. I sure do. In public if they ask for it. I don't punch my kids, kick my kids, throw them around, spank until they can't sit, none of that. I don't abuse my kids, and you know what? No one has ever called Child Protective Services on me. Well, once, but that's because my son got 2 black eyes by accident. That happened while he was playing, was in no way related to any punishment, and the nice lady from the state realized this and poof, the problem went away. When she asked if I spanked them I said "I sure do", and my response was greeted with a smile and nod. I suppose that's because after a nice long chat with my child she came away with the impression that he was a happy and pleasant child. Well balanced.
I on the other hand was only spanked when I did something REALLY stupid, say once every 3 years or so. I ended up being one of those turds that doesn't understand that life has real consequences, and was thus woefully unprepared for real adult life. I completely screwed up my teenage years trying to be 'cool', it took me the better part of my early 20s to come to grips with reality and my place in it. I don't want my kids to go through that. Hell, I THOUGHT I had it good, till I realized I had been passed up by all the kids I had it better than.
I'm not going to make the same mistake with my kids as my grandmother made with me. She tried though, bless her soul.
Establish authority in a non-threatening way? What animals are you talking about? Certainly not either dogs or cats. Every dog or cat I've raised that raised offspring of their own resorted to savage looking growls and nips (nips hurt!) to keeps their young in line.
Oh look, some racist tard once again mistakenly thinks that his or her words are worth seeing.
Good thing that they were lucid enough to realize that if you don't post it as an AC you're never taken seriously again because then everyone can match the little tiny mind that doesn't work so well to the name.
Are you really unaware of the inadequacies of the levy system they had in place or are you just a snide little troll trying to be cute?
Probably a little punk troll trying to be cute, I'd say. AC posting of talking-point-memo one liners is something trolls do when they know that what they are saying has been proven so foolish that posting them under their real name would make them a joke.
The DCMA has been pretty fair-use myopic, at least in the hands of the **AA. This just reminds the gentlemen that sometimes people DO have a right to copy copyrighted materials. That's all really, but it's about time IMHO.
The first video link has a malformed video ID according to youtube. Slashdot ate a little bit of my logo code the other day too, I prolly shoulda switched it to code mode eh? It happens.
The second link is one of the funniest bits of internet violence I've seen in a long time. The lady really REALLY isn't about to let some punk snatch her purse.
I give the second link two thumbs up (and after a few watchings, half a chubber too! teehee)
She isn't hosting a website, she's hosting photographs. What part of flickr is anything but hosting photographs? What part of hosting photographs means she needs a full-on webhost?
It was only un-sensible had she the ability to see the future.
And, lastly, what part of economics doesn't take cost into consideration? What version of voodoo economics tells you to raise costs wherever possible? WTF are you even talking about? Oh, and it's nice how you put quotes around the words lowest cost when they appear nowhere in my original post.
So paying a site to host your stuff is different from hosting your stuff how? Any way you try to paint it, there's going to be some level of someone else hosting your site, you can't just toss some fiber into the air and be on the internet. She took the most sensible and economic route of hosting her photos, paying a small amount of money to ensure reliable posting of a small amount of data.
If you leave the 'free' in your original comment, it's almost defensible, without it it's flamebait.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't have the confidence level you do regarding peak oil, but I'm not very informed on the subject either, so the level of my confidence is completely irrelevant in the scheme of things. I WAS referring to peak oil, but again, I don't know enough to really make a judgment call. That's why I qualified it with 'probably' but you're right, I should have emphasized a stronger uncertainty than was evident.
That's like the little hacker guys in Command and Conquer whatever the hell version that was. It was kinda neat, they'd sit down with a laptop and start making like 5 bucks every few seconds...
I agree with what I think is your base point about China, but still, what about any of those places makes you think that the U.S. would be willing to risk having China stop financing our debt for any of them?
Besides that a couple of years ago China's political leadership and military leadership both told the press that if they DID go to war with the U.S. they would immediately resort to nuclear weapons, because they know they couldn't win conventionally.
No, even if that's all bluster, it's still too much risk (especially the debt financing) as long as they don't try and take OUR piece of the oil/diamonds/whatever economists say we need today. They won't, I think they are willing to share with the U.S. for now, and probably for the foreseeable future, barring something like peak oil being imminent or something. Maybe then, but that's probably not likely in the near future.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing linux at all, but if my history serves me well here, linux gained a following among, shall we say, highly technical miscreants for a reason. It's powerful and able to be reconfigured to perform most any given task optimally.
This is just a new battlefield, like between the world wars when everyone scrambled to get together some kind of airforce. Space hasn't been officially militarized yet because of cold war fears that led to a treaty banning that type of activity. It seems that certain powers in the world are changing their mind about that, but I digress...
Yeah, cyberspace (I know, played out term, but it's common vernacular now) is a place (kinda) where strategy can be applied to hamper an enemies war fighting potential. Not only that, it can be the equivalent to infrastructure destruction when targeted at the private sector. Yep, all that advantage without firing a shot, without having to wait for resupply of ammunition and without putting a single person within killing range of the target.
In other words, this is common sense.
That is a 'man in the middle attack', and it is indeed vulnerable to that method.
I personally think that since we know enough (not everything, but a good decent working approximation) about biochemistry that it is entirely possible to now do enhanced speed evolutionary experiments in a simulated environment. In fact, I know such research has been going on for longer than -I've- been alive already.
:-)
I myself, being passively interested in self-adapting systems have been mucking around for years with various AI, AL (artificial life), machine learning and genetic algorithm programs. You can experience the wonders of evolution for yourself if you're willing to stare at a screen for hours on end. This IS slashdot, many of us do that already.
Seriously though, if you're really interested in at least seeing the very basics of evolution at work, I'd suggest a good start to be NetLOGO. It comes with a nice allotment of pre-built experiments for you to study and watch. Adaptive systems can effect very complex behaviors with very simple rules, and you can see that happen yourself if you really care.
After NetLOGO you might wanna have a look at framsticks. Framsticks is basically an evolution simulator. Not true biochemical evolution (though I do think work has been done to make a biochemically accurate framework for framsticks) but a decent framework for macro-effects of biological evolution.
Basically we already know that the mechanisms of life can (DO) change over time, and it's not too hard to grasp that the ones that work better survive longer. Since all life reproduces, it's probably a good assumption, though not 100% accurate, that the longer an organism lives, the more it reproduces. I cannot possibly fathom why such a simple system can draw so much ire.
Oh, here are links to the programs I referenced.
http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/
http://www.frams.alife.pl/
With framsticks (if memory serves, it's been a year) you need (unless you're a text mode superstar) the shareware package. It's not annoying bother you alot shareware, and though it IS slightly crippled, IFIAK all the crippling is done on things like rendering your creatures in a full OpenGL world. It DOES render them for you, just not in a beautifully crafted world. Again, I may be wrong, or things might have changed.
Careful now, your jackboots are showing.
I'm -REALLY- not sure of this, but looking closely at it it seems that just maybe the driver is thrown out of the car. You can see a dark looking shape that seems to be ejected from the front of the car just as it hits the island. If that's true, it's still highly unlikely the person survived, but in this (rare) case I think being ejected could possibly have been beneficial to the victim (or victim/perp if the case may be, I dunno) as the vehicle itself very quickly became unsurvivable.
Thought I'd toss out that glimmer of hope for the person.
Look, now you've gone so far as to get a registered to Democrat tell you to get of your big D high horse.
"Off the table" Pelosi and the rest of her DLC following Dempublicans are playing political patty-cake while this travesty of a revenge act against the completely wrong party goes on full swing. The big media-hogging "mainstream" (*snicker*) Democrats are doing they're best to do nothing as furiously and noisily as possible to end this... End this what? War? No. Police Action? Maybe. Disarmament? Heh. Regime Change? Oops, that didn't work out so well... Well, whatever the hell it is, it's failed (by any sane measure) and the Pelosi crew are to busy milking it politically to stop it.
If you really want to support democratic ideals, you're going to have to look a bit deeper into the party to find them. Kucinich is probably the most well known example.
Oh, and here is how mainstream Pelosi is in her thought process...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904/
Off the table.
Use your fair use legally defensible position to rip that content and encode it into a more friendly format, like vorbis or theora, plop it all in a nice ogg container and enjoy your media on your favorite (nice choice BTW) OS.
Just because they tell you it's illegal, it's not. Fair Use is a LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE reason to break the law. IANAL, but I'm pretty sure it's like an asterisk on all laws relating to copyright that says that of course people can protect their copyrights, but copyright doesn't apply at all in -these- certain situations. Preserving an archival copy of your media is one of those situations.
Again, I Am Not A Lawyer, and I didn't stay at any damn Holiday Inn's last night (express or original) but this is pretty simple stuff. Well, simple until armies of law school trained sharks start trying to convince you otherwise.
That old thing again? How absolutely DROLL!
I mean, everyone knows he never said he invented the internet. If I'm wrong, find the quote, and it's original publication. Good luck.
BTW, Did you know that the legislation wandering around Washington in the late 80s to open arpanet up to the public was referred to around town as "the Gore Bill?"
Any more I can shoot down for you?
Oh, one more thing, if you want some current data about the winds of politics, check out this poll from MSNBC:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904/
Sometimes I get pissed when racist little cowards like you sit behind your screen and anonymously spew hate you're too scared to breath in public.
But ya know what? I just smile when I realize that your daughters and sons are mixing races as we speak. That's right, your little girls are getting knocked up by mexicans, blacks, asians, even *gasp* JEWS....
If not THIS generation, then the next (at the MOST 1 more after that) all you little racist degenerates will be bred out of existence. That puts a nice grin on my face right there.
e,
:-)
comment and a question:
I loved the video, funny, educational and, I think, effective critique. I don't think they're going to touch you with a 10 foot pole, but that leads to my question...
I noticed that the video was produced in association with Stanford Law, or something like that. How far does this association go? Are they going to back you legally in case things DO get hairy over this? Are they 100% committed to defending this work?
Alrighty, that's more than 1 question, but they're at least related.
No no no. Most people here aren't against copyright, they're against goofy companies using their copyright like a baseball bat against citizen's skulls. Fair Use, and the steps being taken to nullify it, are whats at issue here.
And really, I'd like to know if you think something can be 'misuse' if the Fair Use defense is applicable. Usage of the Fair Use defense (I think, but IANAL) requires that there is no doubt that the possible offending material is an original work. I think that makes any misuse or misquotation no longer a copyright issue, libel or slander maybe, but nothing to do with copyright anymore.
You must be new here... Just roll with it, that particular train is unstoppable.
Like goatse but with a lot less vomit and a little less 'flamebait' modding.
I second this comment. I had a different experience myself, but with a similar outcome.
Long story short, CPS does indeed know the difference between abuse and punishment, at least where I live.
-I- have kids. 3 of them composed of my own spermies, and a live in nephew. You know what else? I spank my kids. I sure do. In public if they ask for it. I don't punch my kids, kick my kids, throw them around, spank until they can't sit, none of that. I don't abuse my kids, and you know what? No one has ever called Child Protective Services on me. Well, once, but that's because my son got 2 black eyes by accident. That happened while he was playing, was in no way related to any punishment, and the nice lady from the state realized this and poof, the problem went away. When she asked if I spanked them I said "I sure do", and my response was greeted with a smile and nod. I suppose that's because after a nice long chat with my child she came away with the impression that he was a happy and pleasant child. Well balanced.
I on the other hand was only spanked when I did something REALLY stupid, say once every 3 years or so. I ended up being one of those turds that doesn't understand that life has real consequences, and was thus woefully unprepared for real adult life. I completely screwed up my teenage years trying to be 'cool', it took me the better part of my early 20s to come to grips with reality and my place in it. I don't want my kids to go through that. Hell, I THOUGHT I had it good, till I realized I had been passed up by all the kids I had it better than.
I'm not going to make the same mistake with my kids as my grandmother made with me. She tried though, bless her soul.
Establish authority in a non-threatening way? What animals are you talking about? Certainly not either dogs or cats. Every dog or cat I've raised that raised offspring of their own resorted to savage looking growls and nips (nips hurt!) to keeps their young in line.
Oh look, some racist tard once again mistakenly thinks that his or her words are worth seeing.
Good thing that they were lucid enough to realize that if you don't post it as an AC you're never taken seriously again because then everyone can match the little tiny mind that doesn't work so well to the name.
Get some balls Anonymous Pussy!
Are you really unaware of the inadequacies of the levy system they had in place or are you just a snide little troll trying to be cute?
Probably a little punk troll trying to be cute, I'd say. AC posting of talking-point-memo one liners is something trolls do when they know that what they are saying has been proven so foolish that posting them under their real name would make them a joke.
The DCMA has been pretty fair-use myopic, at least in the hands of the **AA. This just reminds the gentlemen that sometimes people DO have a right to copy copyrighted materials. That's all really, but it's about time IMHO.
The first video link has a malformed video ID according to youtube. Slashdot ate a little bit of my logo code the other day too, I prolly shoulda switched it to code mode eh? It happens.
The second link is one of the funniest bits of internet violence I've seen in a long time. The lady really REALLY isn't about to let some punk snatch her purse.
I give the second link two thumbs up (and after a few watchings, half a chubber too! teehee)
She isn't hosting a website, she's hosting photographs. What part of flickr is anything but hosting photographs? What part of hosting photographs means she needs a full-on webhost?
It was only un-sensible had she the ability to see the future.
And, lastly, what part of economics doesn't take cost into consideration? What version of voodoo economics tells you to raise costs wherever possible? WTF are you even talking about? Oh, and it's nice how you put quotes around the words lowest cost when they appear nowhere in my original post.
So paying a site to host your stuff is different from hosting your stuff how? Any way you try to paint it, there's going to be some level of someone else hosting your site, you can't just toss some fiber into the air and be on the internet. She took the most sensible and economic route of hosting her photos, paying a small amount of money to ensure reliable posting of a small amount of data.
If you leave the 'free' in your original comment, it's almost defensible, without it it's flamebait.