It makes sense, really. Anything you send to WikiLeaks you intend to be told to everyone.
I think what they mean by "provides proof of intention to conceal" is that they don't want people leaking something and then saying "aha! You just told everyone something that I meant to be kept private, I'm going to sue! Why would I have encrypted it if I had meant you to release it?"
And that person would have a point. It's hard to think how someone could post something to WikiLeaks, so that it can be publicly posted, but desire that their information be transmitted encrypted. The assumption should always be anything you send to WikiLeaks is public, and allowing encrypted submissions may make this unclear.
If they need to submit the information anonymously they should do it anonymously, PGP can't help with that.
If you make a point to only download films that are more than 20 years old then I'll take that argument seriously, otherwise to be honest I think you're just making excuses.
Pretty impressive argument once you have replaced "Film" with "Idea"..
Films are owned by society. They are what make up our culture. Sometimes we, as a society, have seen fit to let their creator exercise some limited degree of control over them. That does not mean any one person can own a film any more than they can own a sunset. This is where I'd usually start talking about what "ownership" means with respect to films and ideas, the incentive to create media, maybe an analogy of patenting ideas to copyrighting digital media.. But I know people just want to hear any sort of justification for their piracy, no matter how weak, so there's not much point.
No, it wouldn't! Prices would only go up by about 5%. Internet service is not like heating oil or tap water; it doesn't cost more to provide just because you use it more. If everyone suddenly started using twice as much bandwidth, they'd have to upgrade some routers, and that would be it. Routers are cheap. Mmm, I'm not sure where you're connecting, but here in Australia 120GB costs significantly more than 60GB. In fact I think 120GB costs more than double 60GB, because if you get 120GB you're likely going to try and use the full 120GB, whereas if you're on a lower plan you're more likely to only use what you happen to need.
Also the ISPs here have been upping the prices, I had to move ISP because the price hike was so large, and the reason given was that now with all the YouTubing and Torrenting people are actually using their bandwidth, and that does mean significantly more costs.
I'm in West Australia, and what you say about bandwidth not costing more is true locally. Downloading stuff that's connected the WA exchange costs nothing, and I have 120GB extra bw for the WAIX. However international or even cross-country bw comes with a price per GB, and if everyone doubled the GBs someone's gonna have to double the fee paid to the carriers.
The ISP isn't going to pay the extra 100%, and your WiFi thief/user/wardownloader isn't either, it's going to be you.:-(
Why can't I use a negligible amount of bandwidth when you are not using it? The same reason you can't use my car when I'm not using it. I pay for it and I don't want to share with strangers. I've got a better reason; ISPs factor in the average bandwidth use when deciding prices. If 1/2 the bandwidth used by the average connection was stolen through WiFi the average person's internet bill would double, whether or not he had actually secured his connection.
Is there even a niche for a new web browser to fill? Since when do AT&T do freeware?
One thing not mentioned (in the summary, ahem) is whether the browser is just a new front end to Trident(?)/Gecko/KHTML, or if it actually has its own renderer.
I used to be one of MySQL's vociferous defenders, arguing that speed, ease of use, quality of documentation, and the size of the community made up for its limitations relative to PostgreSQL. But this is pretty much the end. Sun is clearly determined to destroy whatever's good about it. PostgreSQL is definitely better in terms of being free.
No one company owns it; it's added to by individual companies which need additions, so no-one can buy it out and stomp it out
No one company dominates support; you can go wherever you get the best price/service, and there's no incentive to try and get you to need support
No dual licensing; it's all BSD licensed, which means if you want to take it and close the source for a commercial project you can. If you think you can take Postgres, close source it, and improve it to the extend that people would pay for it, then good luck to you (but I don't see it happening;) ). More likely you'd want to embed Postgres, or extend it somehow and not have to worry about licensing or pay fees, and with Postgres (as with SQLite) you can.
So from a licensing perspective PostgreSQL is definitely a good deal safer.
For the web I started off with Postgres but eventually had to move to MySQL because it has such wide support, but as I use InnoDB I've grown more and more uneasy at seeing Oracle and Sun buy off chunks of MySQL.
Even putting aside any arguments about performance/features (not that Postgres is bad in this regard), PostgreSQL would be better as an FOSS DB standard, just because there wouldn't be any worries about license/ownership instability.
However, before we go nuts with Postgres love, I think it's safe to say Sun won't be close sourcing MySQL to a damaging degree; that'd be like killing the goose that lays the golden egg.
The reason MySQL is so valuable is because of its wide usage, and they'll want to use that to their advantage in more subtle ways than close sourcing and cashing in. The comments so far have been a bit OTT.
It's well known that the flavor in a coffee bag sinks to the bottom over time, and that a bag of coffee beans needs to be shaken up and down and turned upside down repeatedly to make the flavor more consistent.
I'd rather die than drink unshaken coffee, so I still say this is a nice toy, but not for a true discerning taste.
The weird effects that relativity is famous for come into play when you're comparing clocks between two reference frames that are moving relative to each other at relativistic speeds. Not actually true: they are larger at those relative speeds but are certainly present and noticeable at far lower velocities e.g. atomic clocks on Concord, GR corrections to GPS satellite clocks etc. True but not really relevant; relativistic effects matter for the tiny differences in time which make atomic clocks and GPS satellites possible, but for 300 years the relativistic effects talked about here aren't significant.
(Physics degree speaking here). Physics professor speaking here:-). God speaking here *condescending look*
Yes, I know there's an urban legend about this. I have the photos. It really did happen. I'm gonna have to call your bluff here; please post these, I really can't believe that's true.
I wonder what happens as windows7 is supposed to break the binary compatibility They'll include a way to run old Windows apps, they know that it'd be suicide not to.
He didn't say CGPUs are toys, just that they won't fare better than integrated graphics.
He's saying Intel's CGPU offerings are as much a threat to nVidia as their existing integrated graphics offerings, so your quote doesn't fit the situation.
In less time than it would take a beam of light to travel from your knuckle to your fingertip, the new IBM chip would complete one task and start looking for the next, he said The catch is that, unless you're double jointed, light can't travel from your knuckle to your fingertip in a straight line
It's a hypothesis that they're testing.. Why does everyone on Slashdot think that they know better than the people who spend their free time studying this stuff?
Slashdot Mirror
It makes sense, really. Anything you send to WikiLeaks you intend to be told to everyone.
I think what they mean by "provides proof of intention to conceal" is that they don't want people leaking something and then saying "aha! You just told everyone something that I meant to be kept private, I'm going to sue! Why would I have encrypted it if I had meant you to release it?"
And that person would have a point. It's hard to think how someone could post something to WikiLeaks, so that it can be publicly posted, but desire that their information be transmitted encrypted. The assumption should always be anything you send to WikiLeaks is public, and allowing encrypted submissions may make this unclear.
If they need to submit the information anonymously they should do it anonymously, PGP can't help with that.
If you make a point to only download films that are more than 20 years old then I'll take that argument seriously, otherwise to be honest I think you're just making excuses.
All these new "reforms" on internet "interception" have been coming, faster and faster, since the new Rudd Labor government got voted in.
To all Australian readers; vote a Liberal govt back next round!
Also the ISPs here have been upping the prices, I had to move ISP because the price hike was so large, and the reason given was that now with all the YouTubing and Torrenting people are actually using their bandwidth, and that does mean significantly more costs.
I'm in West Australia, and what you say about bandwidth not costing more is true locally. Downloading stuff that's connected the WA exchange costs nothing, and I have 120GB extra bw for the WAIX. However international or even cross-country bw comes with a price per GB, and if everyone doubled the GBs someone's gonna have to double the fee paid to the carriers.
The ISP isn't going to pay the extra 100%, and your WiFi thief/user/wardownloader isn't either, it's going to be you.
Is there even a niche for a new web browser to fill? Since when do AT&T do freeware?
One thing not mentioned (in the summary, ahem) is whether the browser is just a new front end to Trident(?)/Gecko/KHTML, or if it actually has its own renderer.
- No one company owns it; it's added to by individual companies which need additions, so no-one can buy it out and stomp it out
- No one company dominates support; you can go wherever you get the best price/service, and there's no incentive to try and get you to need support
- No dual licensing; it's all BSD licensed, which means if you want to take it and close the source for a commercial project you can. If you think you can take Postgres, close source it, and improve it to the extend that people would pay for it, then good luck to you (but I don't see it happening
;) ). More likely you'd want to embed Postgres, or extend it somehow and not have to worry about licensing or pay fees, and with Postgres (as with SQLite) you can.
So from a licensing perspective PostgreSQL is definitely a good deal safer.For the web I started off with Postgres but eventually had to move to MySQL because it has such wide support, but as I use InnoDB I've grown more and more uneasy at seeing Oracle and Sun buy off chunks of MySQL.
Even putting aside any arguments about performance/features (not that Postgres is bad in this regard), PostgreSQL would be better as an FOSS DB standard, just because there wouldn't be any worries about license/ownership instability.
However, before we go nuts with Postgres love, I think it's safe to say Sun won't be close sourcing MySQL to a damaging degree; that'd be like killing the goose that lays the golden egg.
The reason MySQL is so valuable is because of its wide usage, and they'll want to use that to their advantage in more subtle ways than close sourcing and cashing in. The comments so far have been a bit OTT.
It's well known that the flavor in a coffee bag sinks to the bottom over time, and that a bag of coffee beans needs to be shaken up and down and turned upside down repeatedly to make the flavor more consistent.
I'd rather die than drink unshaken coffee, so I still say this is a nice toy, but not for a true discerning taste.
I'm not sure how old you are, but I'd guess that euthanasia will be legal by then given the circumstances you describe.
When trying to boost a stock's price it's best not to tell people you own that stock beforehand. ;-)
He didn't say CGPUs are toys, just that they won't fare better than integrated graphics.
He's saying Intel's CGPU offerings are as much a threat to nVidia as their existing integrated graphics offerings, so your quote doesn't fit the situation.
I'm sure they have a good reason for it; they're not stupid
Yup the terrorists could shut down the power grid; it'd be like 9/11 but with light bulbs instead of people!
Since OTT security costs OTT money I think they should stick with sane security checks, and not worry about headline grabbing pranks like these
I can think of a nice new catchphrase to go along with the new acronym:
Google App Engine: It's just like regular web-hosting, but with developer and user lock-in!
They were buying for market share less than the employees, there were obviously going to be redundancies, there always are in these mergers.
It's a hypothesis that they're testing.. Why does everyone on Slashdot think that they know better than the people who spend their free time studying this stuff?
April fools?
It must be an april fools joke.... Another one... I appreciate the effort but I don't like this kind of humor.