President Abraham Lincoln - suspended Habeus Corpus
President Wilson during WWI - used warrantless searches
President Roosevelt during WWII - used warantless searches as well as interned citizens of the US who might/maybe/could be enemy spies
Clinton's Deputy Atty General in 1994 - "The Department of Justice believes, and the case law supports, that the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes."
One year and one month folks. One year and one month. Till the same thing that has happened before happens again.
Any MS environment built in this decade is most likely running Active Directory and, thus, internal DNS. All workstations are pointing at an internal dns server(s), and that internal DNS box is the only machine configured to point to an upstream (hopefully) or the roots to make queries.
I said 'what some view' as excesses. I did not say all people view current policy as excessive, nor intimate that people blindly accept or reject the entirety of the Bush administration's policy. A lesson for yourself perhaps in cognitive thinking.
Encouraging people to report the activities of their neighbors is not political involvement.
If you disagree that czarist Russia spawned the future facist states, take it up with Richard Pipes or any number of other historians. Better yet, post a plausible and contradicting analysis.
Your rant about Phil Hartman and car accidents does not address the very simple point I made - terrorist attacks have far greater and far reaching consequences than the mundane tragedies of life that you bring up. Even if, oh my gosh, a celebrity is murdered.
The fact that Joe McCarthy was a nut does not mean the United States has no enemies.
I could go on but why bother.
Wipe froth from mouth, take a deep breath, let your mind approach the problem from all angles. As your right to spew babble has clearly not been trampled on, post again when you have a coherent argument.
Nice analogy. However if someone in your family murders you, frankly no one else gives a damn.
As oppossed to, say, a few thousand people getting killed at the same time and witnessed by people around the globe. People who then wonder, can I even count on being safe going to work in the morning. Financial markets that then wonder, exactly how resilient is this supposed super power. Industry leaders who then wonder, maybe I should scale back hiring and investment because who knows what's going to happen next.
So all things considered, the two are not the same and the consequences of one are much greater and reach much further than the other. Thankfully, outside of Slashdot, the nation is not populated by chicken littles and people are willing to take a slight reduction in privacy/anonymity in return for an increased liklihood that the government will be able to prevent more attacks. People also have enough common sense to realize that this is not a dictatorship, GW and friends will be out of power in a few more years, and our system of government will - as it always has - correct what some see as the excesses of current policy.
By the way, facism starts when the populace has its involvement in political life curtailed. The first shadow of the future police states was cast by the policies of Czarist Russia. It was not the czars overreaction to domestic terrorism that spawned it, it was the systematic denial of political involvement to the Russian citizenry for centuries. There have and always will be enemies of the state, and it is foolish to think that they are falsehoods perpetuated by those in power. The key to preventing facism is an engaged citizenry with the political ability to curtail the overreaction of the government when faced with these enemies.
Despite what many here think, we do have a politically active citizenry. How active and what sort of changes they can affect in a two party system is another discussion entirely. Nontheless, just because people are willing to accept what the government is doing does not make them sheep. It means they disagree with your (paranoid) point of view. That is perhaps the most fundamental right of all.
One wonders why the Athenians haven't evolved pollution filtering mechanisms in their respiratory systems or a toxin carried in their blood that wards off these SUPER KILLER INSECTS FROM HELL.
You mean the fact that Arpanet was already moving from research to deployment when Gore was still in college, right? Because the time discrepancy in my own rambling was caused by the fact that I followed along with the original poster's (aka Cerf's Close Buddy) lies.
You forgot to point out his incredible time management skills. How he was able to co-invent the Internet while at the same time championing his wife's attempt at censoring music she didn't like is a marvel.
It's a shame the guy has more or less fallen out of poilitics. The innovation needed to create a global information sharing network and the moral authority to head censorship committees is a very rare combination indeed.
Why is a supposedly neutral standards body worried about releasing updated specifications that are far beyond the capabilities of IE? Do the work and release the standards. If MS can't/won't write an updated browser then that is their problem. It should not prohibit other companies from writing browsers that utilize the new specs. God forbid, one of them might actually innovate and create something that unseats IE as the browser of choice - even with the countless obstacles to that ever happening standing in the way.
I just don't understand what one has to do with the other. Standards creation should have nothing at all to do with the product development of any one company, even the world's most dominant in the field.
1) It's either a free market or it's not. The government should stay out of this issue and let businesses figure it out. Let the telcos set up a tiered pricing structure and start gouging consumers and providers. Market forces would correct it by fostering new connectivity mediums (this would be that innovation thing everyone keeps saying is slowing down) to get around the old boys and new businesses to provide alternative access means to the "angry" (though most likely disinterested) consumers.
2) Since when is the Internet supposed to be a platform of such stability that it can support "emergency services"? There is no guarantee that everyone can access all the time, just that (hopefully) at any time the whole thing will not go down. Emergency communication services in the last 5 years both in the US and Europe have proven to be insufficient in times of crisis (9/11, London bombings) though built on solid, proven, always-on technologies. At what point did it seem like a good idea to take that already bad situation and stick it on top of a historically unreliable structure like the net?
In 33 years the government hasn't been an obstacle to anything I've done, wanted to do, said, written, created. For fun, I can surf the web and read people's opinions on how shitty that situation is. They don't even go to jail for posting fud.
This story is unsubstantiated. ABC will generally report anything to grab some ratings, but this one only made it so far as a blog...
Nontheless, people in DC who are leaking info about classified programs to people who then go and make headlines out of it damn well should be nervous. Treason warrants severe penalties.
If this were whistleblowing, the programs would be being 'leaked' to members of Congress. Last I checked, mass media is not part of the checks and balances system of government.
I have yet to see one of the crowd of chicken littles here offering some sort of solution to this dire, end-of-democracy-as-we-know-it situation they see us in.
Hotbed of dorm room insurrection that Slashdot seems to be, the constant references to 1984, the misguided and naieve allusions to Weimar Germany, the hyper paranoid government hating - all of this comes across as little more than the excited imaginations of people who are bored with their lives and looking for some noble cause to get behind in order to spice things up.
So convinced 9/11 was a coverup? that Bush and crew staged it all and are formenting a dictatorship?
Go out and buy a rifle and save us all. You still have the right to do that. For a dictatorship in the making, you'd think the first thing they'd have done was disarm the citizenry...
Too radical? Maybe work within the (corrupt since the beginning) system? Ok, impeach Bush. Put Cheney in power.
Whatever the idea, post -something- besides endless paranoid griping and let it be judged on its merits. If you really feel so strongly about these things, realize that basing your ideology on the contents of conspiracy theory websites is not going to gain you the support of the masses at large. Offer up a practical solution or simply stfu.
If we get attacked again, it's just the government solidifying it's position by faking another disaster.
If we don't get attacked again, it has nothing to do with the men and women trying hard to keep it from happening, it's just that the government feels comfortable in their position and there is no need for further selfmade disasters on their part.
Pretty interesting. Especially the part where the NSA, most secret organization in the country, can't run a program without it ending up in the headlines of the post but 'the government', composed of millions of people, can run this massive scam involving every law enforcement, millitary, intelligence, congressional, judicial, etc, etc body and have managed to keep it a secret for half a decade.
Which one of your freedoms has been taken away? I don't remember reading in the Bill of Rights that "no one shall know what phone numbers your phone numbers communicates with". This whole argument is assinine. People should be equally outraged that the government can see -> all the fucking time - where you drive your car simply by watching traffic cameras and monitoring electornic toll booth data.
Difference between the Brits and the 'terrorists' that are so easily dismissed by the slashdot crowd? The brits wore uniforms and didn't make civilians the primary target of their millitary operations.
Choosing to try and prevent another attack, even if as another fool posted 'america gets such a small share of the terrorist attacks in the world', is a good thing. Politicizing it is the real danger. The people leaking this information should be getting shot.
If Bush & Company find some reason for elections not to be held in a couple of years, I'll start worrying about the erosion of American freedoms. Until that happens - which it won't - everything is fine, my life hasn't changed at all and neither has yours, and there are more important things to concern yourself with.
Mod me down, the herd commands you.
Since he was dealing with a known user base, he could have actually put some teeth in his acces spolicy with a one line firewall rule only allowing DIX subnets to access the box.
Taping a note to your front door that reads 'only enter if you live here' doesn't accomplish a lot if you leave the door open all the time.
I've tried a number of these monitoring apps as they've come out. To date, I still can't find a combination better than MRTG and Nagios. If you know a bit about SNMP and how to find the OID of what you are interested in (and where to get mibs), it's hard to find a simpler, cleaner pair of monitoring products.
Although in all honesty, Nagios' only real benefit is the ability to send out alerts. I'm more fortunate than others, I know, in that I've had the resources available to build redundancy in at every level of our production networks so when something does die (and with modern platforms this is becoming a once every two years event) it doesn't create a major catastrophe.
Other than that, all the trending info I want/need on bandwidth, cpu, disk space, user loads, etc, etc, I can pull out of any device via snmp and track it with MRTG. Plus each MRTG release doesn't require me to rewrite umpteen config files to match the author's latest greatest idea of how they should be formatted (my only real gripe about nagios/netsaint).
In the end I guess you use what you are familiar with, and I cut my teeth on these.
First off, clarity will always die a bloody death at the pen of someone with poor grammar. You can not dismiss grammar. If they have poor grammar by college, you have to wonder what they've been doing with their education to date. Odds are they aren't going to make the best engineers. Unless you are some engineering genius, no company is going to let you design systems which you can't document well on your own. I haven't seen many engineers with personal secretaries that do their technical writing.
Obviously this would beg a title change for a lot of programmers who deem themselves 'software engineers'. The minority who actually spend as much time on design and documentation as punching in code are worthy of the name. The rest are glorified date entry clerks. I'm not trolling, just calling a spade a spade.
Short answer on how to become a good writer: read as many books as you can get your hands on. Not the latest D&D mass market paper back. Read Orwell's essays to learn how to write with brevity and clarity for example. Read editorials in major market newspapers to learn how to express a concept in limited space. Look at what you read with a critical eye and identify the mechanical processes the writer uses to accomplish the goal.
Slashdot Mirror
Slashdot | HTML to be 'Incrementally Evolved'
What is QuickSilver?
This topic does not yet exist.
President Abraham Lincoln - suspended Habeus Corpus
President Wilson during WWI - used warrantless searches
President Roosevelt during WWII - used warantless searches as well as interned citizens of the US who might/maybe/could be enemy spies
Clinton's Deputy Atty General in 1994 - "The Department of Justice believes, and the case law supports, that the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes."
One year and one month folks. One year and one month. Till the same thing that has happened before happens again.
Any MS environment built in this decade is most likely running Active Directory and, thus, internal DNS. All workstations are pointing at an internal dns server(s), and that internal DNS box is the only machine configured to point to an upstream (hopefully) or the roots to make queries.
I said 'what some view' as excesses. I did not say all people view current policy as excessive, nor intimate that people blindly accept or reject the entirety of the Bush administration's policy. A lesson for yourself perhaps in cognitive thinking.
Encouraging people to report the activities of their neighbors is not political involvement.
If you disagree that czarist Russia spawned the future facist states, take it up with Richard Pipes or any number of other historians. Better yet, post a plausible and contradicting analysis.
Your rant about Phil Hartman and car accidents does not address the very simple point I made - terrorist attacks have far greater and far reaching consequences than the mundane tragedies of life that you bring up. Even if, oh my gosh, a celebrity is murdered.
The fact that Joe McCarthy was a nut does not mean the United States has no enemies.
I could go on but why bother.
Wipe froth from mouth, take a deep breath, let your mind approach the problem from all angles. As your right to spew babble has clearly not been trampled on, post again when you have a coherent argument.
Nice analogy. However if someone in your family murders you, frankly no one else gives a damn.
As oppossed to, say, a few thousand people getting killed at the same time and witnessed by people around the globe. People who then wonder, can I even count on being safe going to work in the morning. Financial markets that then wonder, exactly how resilient is this supposed super power. Industry leaders who then wonder, maybe I should scale back hiring and investment because who knows what's going to happen next.
So all things considered, the two are not the same and the consequences of one are much greater and reach much further than the other. Thankfully, outside of Slashdot, the nation is not populated by chicken littles and people are willing to take a slight reduction in privacy/anonymity in return for an increased liklihood that the government will be able to prevent more attacks. People also have enough common sense to realize that this is not a dictatorship, GW and friends will be out of power in a few more years, and our system of government will - as it always has - correct what some see as the excesses of current policy.
By the way, facism starts when the populace has its involvement in political life curtailed. The first shadow of the future police states was cast by the policies of Czarist Russia. It was not the czars overreaction to domestic terrorism that spawned it, it was the systematic denial of political involvement to the Russian citizenry for centuries. There have and always will be enemies of the state, and it is foolish to think that they are falsehoods perpetuated by those in power. The key to preventing facism is an engaged citizenry with the political ability to curtail the overreaction of the government when faced with these enemies.
Despite what many here think, we do have a politically active citizenry. How active and what sort of changes they can affect in a two party system is another discussion entirely. Nontheless, just because people are willing to accept what the government is doing does not make them sheep. It means they disagree with your (paranoid) point of view. That is perhaps the most fundamental right of all.
"when the efficiency of the government" No damn worries about America going facist then.
One wonders why the Athenians haven't evolved pollution filtering mechanisms in their respiratory systems or a toxin carried in their blood that wards off these SUPER KILLER INSECTS FROM HELL.
You mean the fact that Arpanet was already moving from research to deployment when Gore was still in college, right? Because the time discrepancy in my own rambling was caused by the fact that I followed along with the original poster's (aka Cerf's Close Buddy) lies.
You forgot to point out his incredible time management skills. How he was able to co-invent the Internet while at the same time championing his wife's attempt at censoring music she didn't like is a marvel.
It's a shame the guy has more or less fallen out of poilitics. The innovation needed to create a global information sharing network and the moral authority to head censorship committees is a very rare combination indeed.
I notice the Declaration of Independance wasn't signed 'Anonymous Cowards'.
Why is a supposedly neutral standards body worried about releasing updated specifications that are far beyond the capabilities of IE? Do the work and release the standards. If MS can't/won't write an updated browser then that is their problem. It should not prohibit other companies from writing browsers that utilize the new specs. God forbid, one of them might actually innovate and create something that unseats IE as the browser of choice - even with the countless obstacles to that ever happening standing in the way.
I just don't understand what one has to do with the other. Standards creation should have nothing at all to do with the product development of any one company, even the world's most dominant in the field.
Does standing as a bastion of liberty cause other governments around the world to try and emulate?
No, never.
Has an oppressive government ever needed to use another government as an excuse for the way they run their own country?
No, never.
+4 insightful for revealing a fundamental lack of understanding about the nature of nation states. At least you've got company.
1) It's either a free market or it's not. The government should stay out of this issue and let businesses figure it out. Let the telcos set up a tiered pricing structure and start gouging consumers and providers. Market forces would correct it by fostering new connectivity mediums (this would be that innovation thing everyone keeps saying is slowing down) to get around the old boys and new businesses to provide alternative access means to the "angry" (though most likely disinterested) consumers.
2) Since when is the Internet supposed to be a platform of such stability that it can support "emergency services"? There is no guarantee that everyone can access all the time, just that (hopefully) at any time the whole thing will not go down. Emergency communication services in the last 5 years both in the US and Europe have proven to be insufficient in times of crisis (9/11, London bombings) though built on solid, proven, always-on technologies. At what point did it seem like a good idea to take that already bad situation and stick it on top of a historically unreliable structure like the net?
In 33 years the government hasn't been an obstacle to anything I've done, wanted to do, said, written, created. For fun, I can surf the web and read people's opinions on how shitty that situation is. They don't even go to jail for posting fud.
Indeed, it's a nice place to live.
This story is unsubstantiated. ABC will generally report anything to grab some ratings, but this one only made it so far as a blog...
Nontheless, people in DC who are leaking info about classified programs to people who then go and make headlines out of it damn well should be nervous. Treason warrants severe penalties.
If this were whistleblowing, the programs would be being 'leaked' to members of Congress. Last I checked, mass media is not part of the checks and balances system of government.
Sorry, meant to reply to the guy above you who's in desperate need of a thorazine drip.
If that happened it would be too late...
Too late for what exactly?
I have yet to see one of the crowd of chicken littles here offering some sort of solution to this dire, end-of-democracy-as-we-know-it situation they see us in.
Hotbed of dorm room insurrection that Slashdot seems to be, the constant references to 1984, the misguided and naieve allusions to Weimar Germany, the hyper paranoid government hating - all of this comes across as little more than the excited imaginations of people who are bored with their lives and looking for some noble cause to get behind in order to spice things up.
So convinced 9/11 was a coverup? that Bush and crew staged it all and are formenting a dictatorship?
Go out and buy a rifle and save us all. You still have the right to do that. For a dictatorship in the making, you'd think the first thing they'd have done was disarm the citizenry...
Too radical? Maybe work within the (corrupt since the beginning) system? Ok, impeach Bush. Put Cheney in power.
Whatever the idea, post -something- besides endless paranoid griping and let it be judged on its merits. If you really feel so strongly about these things, realize that basing your ideology on the contents of conspiracy theory websites is not going to gain you the support of the masses at large. Offer up a practical solution or simply stfu.
Bold steps! Bold steps, anonymous coward.
Let me make sure I've got this right...
If we get attacked again, it's just the government solidifying it's position by faking another disaster.
If we don't get attacked again, it has nothing to do with the men and women trying hard to keep it from happening, it's just that the government feels comfortable in their position and there is no need for further selfmade disasters on their part.
Pretty interesting. Especially the part where the NSA, most secret organization in the country, can't run a program without it ending up in the headlines of the post but 'the government', composed of millions of people, can run this massive scam involving every law enforcement, millitary, intelligence, congressional, judicial, etc, etc body and have managed to keep it a secret for half a decade.
Stunning stuff.
All of which the government has always had assuming you drive a car, pay taxes, register for the draft, etc. There is no right to anonymity.
Which one of your freedoms has been taken away? I don't remember reading in the Bill of Rights that "no one shall know what phone numbers your phone numbers communicates with". This whole argument is assinine. People should be equally outraged that the government can see -> all the fucking time - where you drive your car simply by watching traffic cameras and monitoring electornic toll booth data. Difference between the Brits and the 'terrorists' that are so easily dismissed by the slashdot crowd? The brits wore uniforms and didn't make civilians the primary target of their millitary operations. Choosing to try and prevent another attack, even if as another fool posted 'america gets such a small share of the terrorist attacks in the world', is a good thing. Politicizing it is the real danger. The people leaking this information should be getting shot. If Bush & Company find some reason for elections not to be held in a couple of years, I'll start worrying about the erosion of American freedoms. Until that happens - which it won't - everything is fine, my life hasn't changed at all and neither has yours, and there are more important things to concern yourself with. Mod me down, the herd commands you.
Since he was dealing with a known user base, he could have actually put some teeth in his acces spolicy with a one line firewall rule only allowing DIX subnets to access the box.
Taping a note to your front door that reads 'only enter if you live here' doesn't accomplish a lot if you leave the door open all the time.
I've tried a number of these monitoring apps as they've come out. To date, I still can't find a combination better than MRTG and Nagios. If you know a bit about SNMP and how to find the OID of what you are interested in (and where to get mibs), it's hard to find a simpler, cleaner pair of monitoring products.
Although in all honesty, Nagios' only real benefit is the ability to send out alerts. I'm more fortunate than others, I know, in that I've had the resources available to build redundancy in at every level of our production networks so when something does die (and with modern platforms this is becoming a once every two years event) it doesn't create a major catastrophe.
Other than that, all the trending info I want/need on bandwidth, cpu, disk space, user loads, etc, etc, I can pull out of any device via snmp and track it with MRTG. Plus each MRTG release doesn't require me to rewrite umpteen config files to match the author's latest greatest idea of how they should be formatted (my only real gripe about nagios/netsaint).
In the end I guess you use what you are familiar with, and I cut my teeth on these.
First off, clarity will always die a bloody death at the pen of someone with poor grammar. You can not dismiss grammar. If they have poor grammar by college, you have to wonder what they've been doing with their education to date. Odds are they aren't going to make the best engineers. Unless you are some engineering genius, no company is going to let you design systems which you can't document well on your own. I haven't seen many engineers with personal secretaries that do their technical writing.
Obviously this would beg a title change for a lot of programmers who deem themselves 'software engineers'. The minority who actually spend as much time on design and documentation as punching in code are worthy of the name. The rest are glorified date entry clerks. I'm not trolling, just calling a spade a spade.
Short answer on how to become a good writer: read as many books as you can get your hands on. Not the latest D&D mass market paper back. Read Orwell's essays to learn how to write with brevity and clarity for example. Read editorials in major market newspapers to learn how to express a concept in limited space. Look at what you read with a critical eye and identify the mechanical processes the writer uses to accomplish the goal.