Justice Robert H. Jackson wrote, "the very purpose of the Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities... One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote.
Comcast + Verizon accounts for approximately 5.5% of the WORLDS connected users. Comcast + AT&T accounts for approximately 7.2% of the WORLDS connected users.
The top 10 ISPs account for 39% of the WORLD connected users, so this story is backwards. One would expect the top 50 ISPs to have much more than 50% of the spammers.
TOP 10 ISP's in the world (accurate to +- 2 million): China Telecom (55 million) China Unicom (41 million) NTT (18 million) Comcast (18 million) AT&T (15 million) Deutsche Telecom (12 million) Time Warner (10 million) Verizon (9 million) France Telecom (8 million) KT (7 million)
Spoken like a gmail/yahoo/hotmail web user. Sorry, I actually use a real email client, and send/receive emails to and from multiple email accounts all from my one email client.
See there is this thing called an email standard, and that standard specifies port 25 is used for that purpose. Maybe a better standard needs to be made, but until then I want my ISP to leave port 25 alone. If they catch me sending spam from it, feel free to send me an letter and email and block the port temporarily.
So then do I have a right to ride my rocket car anywhere I want because I made a lunch appointment in China in 2 hours? No. Sorry, you don't have the right to travel by any means you want.
I would say that yes, you/we have no right to travel by car without restriction. For example, you can't drive on other people's lawns. You must have a valid drivers license. You must have car insurance. If you are under 18, you may not drive after curfew.
Your car can also be searched at any time, without warrant.
So you automatically trust the underdog more? Quite interesting. I suppose you naturally believe all the crackpots that try and sue famous people for child support because they had a kid and it's obviously theirs.
Actually, there is other examples of dead-code being eliminated in that thread. One uses adding foo and setting it in and out of the loop, one of which does get eliminated.
Actually, from the look of what I am seeing, and I haven't done that much an analysis yet, it appears to me that the loop is getting eliminated as dead code, but only in certain cases. On the other hand, the two "simple" examples that shouldn't affect the performance may in many cases, and is not quite so "simple". First of all, no one SHOULD be putting 'true;' as a statement in javascript it just doesn't make sense to do so, so it's quite possible that statement would make the dead code analyzer fail to see the rest of the loop as being dead code.
Also functions that have a return statement may also be excluded from dead-code analysis, as then you have to analyze what is being returned and any local variables in the function are being returned.
A third possibility is that since sunspider actually uses code taken from real live libraries, that Microsoft did optimize this type of loop. That would include the real usage of the loop not only in sunspider but any other application that uses it. Sorry, but I don't know exactly where this piece of code came from, so I can't be more exact than that. If that is the case, that would make sense since Microsoft does optimize for the top x% of REAL websites, and it's possible sunspider duplicates part of that.
students are people, but they aren't the same. As such, students may or may not have special restrictions placed upon them. It's possible a court may deduce that students can't waive their rights, but that's not an absolute.
"their house" is not the same as "student housing". Students do not own student housing, and there are already many legal cases that allow non-students to enter the premises (landlords, etc). Again, this is a huge stretch that would contradict many current laws.
"papers" are not the same as "network activity". It would be more accurate to say "network activity" is more like listening to a conversation that is taking place when they occupants knowingly left the window open to their house and are shouting at thier neighbors a few houses down than "papers".
You also assume they are "gathering all information all the time" which isn't necessary. They can gather information at random, or it may also just be triggered (specific port, going over a specified number of connection attempts per minute, etc).
Forwarding information to police is not the same as seizure. I don't believe you can "seize" an network packet as it's not physical and unable to be seized. In any case, they didn't say they were giving the police the original packets that were on the network, nor even an exact copy of them, just that they suspect the student may be involved with illegal activities based on the fact they were doing P2P.
--
Just because you think something is unfair/unjust/wrong doesn't mean it's illegal.
Apparently not what you think it does. It means that they aren't (usually) legally responsible for what goes on in their network. It doesn't mean that they can't inspect what goes on in their network if they so choose. Even UPS, FedEx, USPS *CAN* and *DO* inspect packages sent through their services. You also aren't allowed to use their services however you see fit, and they CAN refused to send any package they don't want to.
No, your tuition isn't for the network. The network is a benefit of being a student (in most cases). And yes, actually your ISP does have the right to go through your data if you broadcast it on their network. Perhaps you need to read your ISP agreement sometime.
Your definition of private is flawed. It is indeed a private network. A private network used by a state school does not make it public. I can't, as a non-student, demand that I be able to connect to it. They can cut off any access to it to whomever they choose.
The ACLU wouldn't take it because it's clearly NOT a breach of the 4th Amendment. "They" aren't searching your private property for anything. You are using their network which they have every right to monitor, examine, dissect, analyze, stop, change, modify, rebroadcast, or anything else they want to do with data on their network. If you don't like it, you are free to not broadcast your dirty laundry on their network.
Perhaps you should re-read the entire ATT and bush claims. It was (supposidly) illegal for the government to demand it from ATT under the pretenses that they did. Even in that case, it would not have been illegal for ATT to supply the data to the government if they did so willingly. It may have been a privacy issue, but only if there was an assumed privacy to the data on their network. If they disclosed it to their users beforehand then that would not have been an issue either.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, I guess I'm still amazed at how little people actually know that read slashdot these days.
No, I am not running an email server, I'm using an email client that uses SMTP/POP3 for sending and receiving email.
Not knowing what/how POP3/SMTP work, what are you? In preschool? Or are you one of those people that think the blue e is the internet?
You really shouldn't try to correct someone when you don't even begin to understand what you are talking about.
Port 110 is for POP3, which is for RECEIVING email from a server.
Port 25 is for SMTP, which is for SENDING email (from a client OR another server).
I suggest starting to read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_Mail_Transfer_Protocol
Justice Robert H. Jackson wrote, "the very purpose of the Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities ... One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote.
Comcast + Verizon accounts for approximately 5.5% of the WORLDS connected users.
Comcast + AT&T accounts for approximately 7.2% of the WORLDS connected users.
The top 10 ISPs account for 39% of the WORLD connected users, so this story is backwards. One would expect the top 50 ISPs to have much more than 50% of the spammers.
TOP 10 ISP's in the world (accurate to +- 2 million):
China Telecom (55 million)
China Unicom (41 million)
NTT (18 million)
Comcast (18 million)
AT&T (15 million)
Deutsche Telecom (12 million)
Time Warner (10 million)
Verizon (9 million)
France Telecom (8 million)
KT (7 million)
Spoken like a gmail/yahoo/hotmail web user. Sorry, I actually use a real email client, and send/receive emails to and from multiple email accounts all from my one email client.
See there is this thing called an email standard, and that standard specifies port 25 is used for that purpose. Maybe a better standard needs to be made, but until then I want my ISP to leave port 25 alone. If they catch me sending spam from it, feel free to send me an letter and email and block the port temporarily.
That could be a new 2012 presidential platform... "I have never inhaled marijuana outside a space-time invisibility cloak."
So then do I have a right to ride my rocket car anywhere I want because I made a lunch appointment in China in 2 hours? No. Sorry, you don't have the right to travel by any means you want.
Actually, that is covered in the first Amendment. "One’s right to life".
So I have a right to build a rocket propelled car and drive it on the sidewalks because it isn't specifically denied me?
"nonroutine" searches must be supported by "reasonable suspicion"..
These pat downs are routine, therefore you don't need reasonable suspicion.
I would say that yes, you/we have no right to travel by car without restriction. For example, you can't drive on other people's lawns. You must have a valid drivers license. You must have car insurance. If you are under 18, you may not drive after curfew.
Your car can also be searched at any time, without warrant.
No, it isn't. That does not mean you have the right to travel any way you wish without restriction.
Sorry, but you getting from MD to California so you can attend a meeting on Friday is not a right.
So you automatically trust the underdog more? Quite interesting. I suppose you naturally believe all the crackpots that try and sue famous people for child support because they had a kid and it's obviously theirs.
Actually, there is other examples of dead-code being eliminated in that thread. One uses adding foo and setting it in and out of the loop, one of which does get eliminated.
Actually, from the look of what I am seeing, and I haven't done that much an analysis yet, it appears to me that the loop is getting eliminated as dead code, but only in certain cases. On the other hand, the two "simple" examples that shouldn't affect the performance may in many cases, and is not quite so "simple". First of all, no one SHOULD be putting 'true;' as a statement in javascript it just doesn't make sense to do so, so it's quite possible that statement would make the dead code analyzer fail to see the rest of the loop as being dead code.
Also functions that have a return statement may also be excluded from dead-code analysis, as then you have to analyze what is being returned and any local variables in the function are being returned.
A third possibility is that since sunspider actually uses code taken from real live libraries, that Microsoft did optimize this type of loop. That would include the real usage of the loop not only in sunspider but any other application that uses it. Sorry, but I don't know exactly where this piece of code came from, so I can't be more exact than that. If that is the case, that would make sense since Microsoft does optimize for the top x% of REAL websites, and it's possible sunspider duplicates part of that.
students are people, but they aren't the same. As such, students may or may not have special restrictions placed upon them. It's possible a court may deduce that students can't waive their rights, but that's not an absolute.
"their house" is not the same as "student housing". Students do not own student housing, and there are already many legal cases that allow non-students to enter the premises (landlords, etc). Again, this is a huge stretch that would contradict many current laws.
"papers" are not the same as "network activity". It would be more accurate to say "network activity" is more like listening to a conversation that is taking place when they occupants knowingly left the window open to their house and are shouting at thier neighbors a few houses down than "papers".
You also assume they are "gathering all information all the time" which isn't necessary. They can gather information at random, or it may also just be triggered (specific port, going over a specified number of connection attempts per minute, etc).
Forwarding information to police is not the same as seizure. I don't believe you can "seize" an network packet as it's not physical and unable to be seized. In any case, they didn't say they were giving the police the original packets that were on the network, nor even an exact copy of them, just that they suspect the student may be involved with illegal activities based on the fact they were doing P2P.
--
Just because you think something is unfair/unjust/wrong doesn't mean it's illegal.
Sorry, that isn't covered in the 4th Amendment. Please read it.
Sorry, you mistyped your URL to get here, please go back to slashdot.co.shitcountry.
Apparently not what you think it does. It means that they aren't (usually) legally responsible for what goes on in their network. It doesn't mean that they can't inspect what goes on in their network if they so choose. Even UPS, FedEx, USPS *CAN* and *DO* inspect packages sent through their services. You also aren't allowed to use their services however you see fit, and they CAN refused to send any package they don't want to.
I would be surprised if the University System didn't up their tuition fees at least 5 times in the last 5 or so years.
No, your tuition isn't for the network. The network is a benefit of being a student (in most cases). And yes, actually your ISP does have the right to go through your data if you broadcast it on their network. Perhaps you need to read your ISP agreement sometime.
Your definition of private is flawed. It is indeed a private network. A private network used by a state school does not make it public. I can't, as a non-student, demand that I be able to connect to it. They can cut off any access to it to whomever they choose.
The ACLU wouldn't take it because it's clearly NOT a breach of the 4th Amendment. "They" aren't searching your private property for anything. You are using their network which they have every right to monitor, examine, dissect, analyze, stop, change, modify, rebroadcast, or anything else they want to do with data on their network. If you don't like it, you are free to not broadcast your dirty laundry on their network.
Perhaps you should re-read the entire ATT and bush claims. It was (supposidly) illegal for the government to demand it from ATT under the pretenses that they did. Even in that case, it would not have been illegal for ATT to supply the data to the government if they did so willingly. It may have been a privacy issue, but only if there was an assumed privacy to the data on their network. If they disclosed it to their users beforehand then that would not have been an issue either.
Actually. It is easier to just upgrade ubuntu to windows 7. Sync works great then and you can even play games again.
Sure thing. Oh wait, Microsoft already paid it for anyone running a Windows OS. Too bad, so sad... for you.