The summary says they are trying to preserve data into the next century. It seems to me if you want to ensure the availability of information into the next century, the least efficient thing you could do is lock it in a highly-protected vault deep under a mountain that nobody can get to. Instead you ought to be distributing the information far and wide in as many formats as possible. Post it on Wikipedia and various other sites that are likely to be preserved and distributed themselves. Print lots of physical copies and put them in all the libraries around the world. Otherwise you're just hoarding it.
This is how liberty dies. First they claim that terrorists don't have rights, then they claim sex offenders don't have rights. Before you know it, nobody will have any rights.
I know this is INCONVENIENT to the Anti-corporate, anti-petroleum, liberal crowd.
It's easy to sit back and bash a straw man but how about a little bit of respect for those of us who INCONVENIENCE ourselves so that we can walk the walk and not just talk the talk? We refuse to own or need a car, we pay a premium for renewable electricity, we buy locally-made products made with materials that are also locally-produced, and we support businesses and causes that share our values as much as we can. You have us to thank for ethanol fuel, wind farms and solar power, electric companies that pay customers for power put back into the grid, locally-grown/sustainable/organic/etc, I could go on and on.
Until you actually make an honest effort to reduce your demand for petroleum products, directly and indirectly, how about a little bit of respect for those of us who have been doing it for decades? We are actually doing something about it.
Assuming the verdict is correct, Venezia writes, 'shouldn't the letter of the law be applied to other "denial of service" problems caused by the city while they pursued this case?
Childs wasn't convicted of "denial of service", that's just rhetoric. He was convicted of computer tampering, as the linked Slashdot story explains in the summary.
How exactly can the device be considered stolen property?
My understanding of the adventure of the lost iPhone 4G/HD is thus: 1) Someone loses Apple property 2) Someone else finds it 3) Finder attempts to return it 4) Apple rebuffs finder and does not attempt to recover or claim the property (at this point how can it be considered stolen???) 5) Finder sells property to Gizmodo 6) Gizmodo blabs about it 7) Apple contacts Gizmodo and asks for their property back 8) Gizmodo promtly returns property to Apple
"I'm not looking to charge any teachers, I've got enough work to do."
Bullshit. That's exactly what he just threatened to do by sending those letters.
Teachers are in a very tough position, especially now that they are being threatened with arrest if they do what the law requires of them. This guy has a political agenda that is in opposition to the law. He is intimidating teachers into violating the law because of it. He is corrupt and doesn't deserve to be a district attorney.
Some quotes from his letter (via TFA)
"If a teacher instructs any student aged 16 or younger how to utilize contraceptives under circumstances where the teacher knows the child is engaging in sexual activity with another child -- or even where the 'natural and probable consequences' of the teacher's instruction is to cause that child to engage in sexual intercourse with a child -- that teacher can be charged under this statute" of contributing to the delinquency of a minor....
"Forcing our schools to instruct children on how to utilize contraceptives encourages our children to engage in sexual behavior, whether as a victim or an offender," he wrote. "It is akin to teaching children about alcohol use, then instructing them on how to make mixed alcoholic drinks."
Note the second quote where he is clearly proselytizing against the law. This is completely inappropriate for a district attorney.
Selling a console that does X and Y and then removing X, post-sale, sounds like very reasonable grounds for a lawsuit. Has no one filed for one yet? Or is it too soon, this being the first day since they posted the update?
Sony deserved to be smacked down for this behavior, I hope I hear more about legal action against them that I can join in order to get my functionality back. Or, barring that, a hack that restores the functionality that Sony thinks they have the right to take away.
The US won't nuke you unless you aren't in compliance with nuclear agreements. How many of our enemies *are* in compliance? Is the US in compliance? Who gets to determine who is in non-compliance anyway? Why should anyone believe the US wouldn't nuke someone it that it really wanted to anyway?
These are meaningless words from a belligerent rogue state.
Countries like the US enforce it against smaller, less powerful countries on a regular basis, even today. However, nobody enforces it against the US when the US refuses to self-regulate. Ultimately what made it work until now was the presumption that the mightiest states were moral. However, the system falls apart when the mightiest are immoral and instruments of civilization such as the Geneva Conventions become "quaint."
The Geneva Conventions and similar instruments of civilization are not "quaint." Such statements only reveal the fundamentally uncivilized nature of those making them.
Slashdot Mirror
The summary says they are trying to preserve data into the next century. It seems to me if you want to ensure the availability of information into the next century, the least efficient thing you could do is lock it in a highly-protected vault deep under a mountain that nobody can get to. Instead you ought to be distributing the information far and wide in as many formats as possible. Post it on Wikipedia and various other sites that are likely to be preserved and distributed themselves. Print lots of physical copies and put them in all the libraries around the world. Otherwise you're just hoarding it.
This is how liberty dies. First they claim that terrorists don't have rights, then they claim sex offenders don't have rights. Before you know it, nobody will have any rights.
And guess when they got Congress to do it. Right after the Exxon Valdez spill. That's chutzpah.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_Pollution_Act
They did. They got Congress to grant them a liability limit of $75 million, which is minuscule in comparison to their profits. Risk mitigated.
Flash absolutely requires that the fans in my system turn on and start pushing out hot air. I really don't want an iPhone that has to have a fan.
I wish I could mod you up.
I know this is INCONVENIENT to the Anti-corporate, anti-petroleum, liberal crowd.
It's easy to sit back and bash a straw man but how about a little bit of respect for those of us who INCONVENIENCE ourselves so that we can walk the walk and not just talk the talk? We refuse to own or need a car, we pay a premium for renewable electricity, we buy locally-made products made with materials that are also locally-produced, and we support businesses and causes that share our values as much as we can. You have us to thank for ethanol fuel, wind farms and solar power, electric companies that pay customers for power put back into the grid, locally-grown/sustainable/organic/etc, I could go on and on.
Until you actually make an honest effort to reduce your demand for petroleum products, directly and indirectly, how about a little bit of respect for those of us who have been doing it for decades? We are actually doing something about it.
Nothing a little collusion and price-fixing can't fix.
What was the point of that?
Assuming the verdict is correct, Venezia writes, 'shouldn't the letter of the law be applied to other "denial of service" problems caused by the city while they pursued this case?
Childs wasn't convicted of "denial of service", that's just rhetoric. He was convicted of computer tampering, as the linked Slashdot story explains in the summary.
As a BitTorrent user, I was shocked that anyone with a box connected to the Internet can spy on what everyone is downloading on BitTorrent."
Really? All you have to do is be on the torrent and connect to them.
How exactly can the device be considered stolen property?
My understanding of the adventure of the lost iPhone 4G/HD is thus:
1) Someone loses Apple property
2) Someone else finds it
3) Finder attempts to return it
4) Apple rebuffs finder and does not attempt to recover or claim the property (at this point how can it be considered stolen???)
5) Finder sells property to Gizmodo
6) Gizmodo blabs about it
7) Apple contacts Gizmodo and asks for their property back
8) Gizmodo promtly returns property to Apple
Corporate espionage is a felony?
And here I was hoping I would hear him sing Bilbo Baggins one more time.
Your first statement gave me the impression that you were arguing iAds wouldn't result in the proliferation of ads in more apps. Sorry about that.
So is that all that OS X is good for now? Developers?
"It's for apps that already have ads, such as the NPR app."
"Basically it's a unified ad service for smaller developers who don't have the resources to roll their own."
Which is it? For the apps that already have ads or the apps by smaller developers who didn't have the resources to implement ads before?
That's because your Android doesn't have a manual mute switch like my awesome-but-muted iPhone does.
Unless your smartphone has more than one CPU core, your phone doesn't have TRUE multitasking either.
"I'm not looking to charge any teachers, I've got enough work to do."
Bullshit. That's exactly what he just threatened to do by sending those letters.
Teachers are in a very tough position, especially now that they are being threatened with arrest if they do what the law requires of them. This guy has a political agenda that is in opposition to the law. He is intimidating teachers into violating the law because of it. He is corrupt and doesn't deserve to be a district attorney.
Some quotes from his letter (via TFA)
"If a teacher instructs any student aged 16 or younger how to utilize contraceptives under circumstances where the teacher knows the child is engaging in sexual activity with another child -- or even where the 'natural and probable consequences' of the teacher's instruction is to cause that child to engage in sexual intercourse with a child -- that teacher can be charged under this statute" of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. ...
"Forcing our schools to instruct children on how to utilize contraceptives encourages our children to engage in sexual behavior, whether as a victim or an offender," he wrote. "It is akin to teaching children about alcohol use, then instructing them on how to make mixed alcoholic drinks."
Note the second quote where he is clearly proselytizing against the law. This is completely inappropriate for a district attorney.
Selling a console that does X and Y and then removing X, post-sale, sounds like very reasonable grounds for a lawsuit. Has no one filed for one yet? Or is it too soon, this being the first day since they posted the update?
Sony deserved to be smacked down for this behavior, I hope I hear more about legal action against them that I can join in order to get my functionality back. Or, barring that, a hack that restores the functionality that Sony thinks they have the right to take away.
The US won't nuke you unless you aren't in compliance with nuclear agreements. How many of our enemies *are* in compliance? Is the US in compliance? Who gets to determine who is in non-compliance anyway? Why should anyone believe the US wouldn't nuke someone it that it really wanted to anyway?
These are meaningless words from a belligerent rogue state.
Countries like the US enforce it against smaller, less powerful countries on a regular basis, even today. However, nobody enforces it against the US when the US refuses to self-regulate. Ultimately what made it work until now was the presumption that the mightiest states were moral. However, the system falls apart when the mightiest are immoral and instruments of civilization such as the Geneva Conventions become "quaint."
The Geneva Conventions and similar instruments of civilization are not "quaint." Such statements only reveal the fundamentally uncivilized nature of those making them.
In the long run we're all dead.
Citation? I have not heard of any of this praise.