There is also the small matter of the prosecution sending one of their witnesses home to Washington State because he was ill.
This witness was also on the defense list. The prosecutors sent him home without notifying the defense, which is such an obvious abuse that the judge nearly stopped the trial right then and there.
But no matter. The prosecution got what they wanted - Stevens is no longer a Senator. That can't be rectified.
Remember, the rules apply to all of us. When they come to accuse you of something, will you be so trusting of the prosecutors?
And would a determined botnet herder be able to 'take down' the Internet by launching a worldwide DNS cache poisoning attack and redirecting to a botnet-based DNS server farm? How much of the Internet would die?
Probably much easier to coordinate multiple botnets to DDOS the root servers, and also nail a few prominent servers at larger ISPs.
Naww. That's been pretty much fixed. Attacking BGP is so much more effecient. Nevermind.
What you should do is pay someone less clever than you to do the job for you - your 'technical analyst'. Let them make the grunt stuff up, and you present, gather accolades, and crank up your WoW armies in your spare time. Obviously, they will be paid less, but this could be an offshoring or out-of-work PhD opportunity.
Just don't get caught. And don't let them figure out how to get your job out from underneath you. Energetic types have a way of beating you at your own game.
Or, as an alternative, you could consider going into meaningful employement. Wall St is pretty much in the crapper right now. You shoudl be able to get by on your bonu---wait, you're a consultant. You spent your obscenely inflated income already on fast cars and alternative energy schemes. Wow, suxs 2 b u.
My G1 has about a one day battery life. I work around that fine now, but it was scary at first.
And I have a Toshiba Gigabeat S60. If the battery runs down, you need the clunky AC charger to revive it, though I haven't bothered to wire up a USB-coax adapter to see if that would make me AC-independent. For those of you who don't have an S60, one way to run the battery down is to leave it out of 'hold' mode and put it in your laptop case. It dies overnight. Lock it, and it lives for a few days. I don't get it, it's all I can frakking do to turn the thing on when it's in my armband, but somehow out of hold it dies fast. I can't recommend the S60 for that reason alone.
But I would have bought an OpenMoko phone if they brought it out to production. Look, I bought a G1. I'll buy almost anything that isn't from Apple...
Oops, forgot about Siemens. No phones from Siemens. The S46 was enough.
If Verizon does as well with this as they did with Net Day and E-Rate, they'll get all $7B+ and deliver some moderately-broadband service to some of rural America.
And get rural Americans to pay for it all over again. And again.
I worked 12+ hours a day for 7 years, no vacation, and missed 3 days total. Startups do that to you.
I had time for beer, thank you. And no medals. My boss worked more.
Time to set the bar higher, guys. Long hours were the 90s.
Linux recognizes criticism as either damage or censorship and either routes around it or blames the reporter. Blaming the reporter also deflects apparent Statement Of Truth attacks, which are resolved in a few weeks/months/years by patches, new distributions, or kernel updates. Failing a resolution, these SOT attacks are resolved by personal attacks on the reporter. For reference, look up posts on the Interweb related to WiFi on Linux, MythTV, or IPv6. That should hold you until next April 1.
Most newspapers don't need to make an explicit endorsement of a candidate. They just slant, suppress, or edit stories. Or choose 'letters to the Editor' that favor or oppose candidates, or plain make stuff up.
Don't get all righteous and claim it doesn't happen, ok? We're family here, and we know better.
So denying newspapers the opportunity to make explicit endorsements doesn't mean anything to me. NPR exerts as much influence as it possibly can within the bounds of non-profit status, and it is influential despite that limitation. I expect newspapers to continue that, though they may find their influence waning because of the marketplace, not because of corporate not for profit status.
I'm more interested in how other media will react. Some are still making money, and may be asking that this be canned, as the problem isn't that newspapers are unfairly failing because they are required to be profitable, but that they can't seem to compete with other media. Giving them a tax break doesn't seem like the right thing to do.
And I get a few newsletters from outfits that are 501(c)(3) nonprofits. Doesn't stop them delivering information. Why not just reorganize as a 501(c)(3) and move on. Oh, wait, there's the issues of becoming a 501(c)(3) and still acting like you're not. Darn. Stupid rules. Shouldn't apply to newspapers. They're special.
As my former boss said, we were not a 'not-for-profit' organization, though if we didn't pay attention, we would be a 'non-profit' one. The distinction was vitally important to himm but we weren't a newspaper. Just a bunch of guys trying to earn a profit.
We didn't think of asking for special tax status. We went out and competed.
Best by far. The key modules were almost 2 inches tall not counting the cap. Second only perhaps to the OS/6, the system with the inkjet that would tattoo you!
Sadly, running MS-DOS 2.11 on an 8-inch floppy wasn't very practical... And having the 5215 Selectric printer going off next you isn't pleasant either.
Had you RTFA, you would know that the CIA is apparently claiming that the recount was rigged, and that the e-voting systems were so flawed as to make it both possible to do and impossible to determine the true votes.
Which of the other agencies at the time had the ability or inclination to examine the e-voting systems?
Are you assuming the the e-voting systems in use then were accurate and secure? If not, you just agreed with the CIA. If so, you are probably so wrong that you might as well stop now. There is little evidence to support trusting those systems, much less now than at the time of the election.
I have no reason to trust e-voting systems of any kind. Brazil's system seems to be the best of the lot.
But I didn't need the CIA's study to come to that conclusion.
As I'm not entirely sure someone has already pointed out, but should have; no matter the hardware you're using now, you have no assurance that your calls aren't being monitored by the NSA or any other sufficiently advanced or funded agency anywhere in the world, if you use public IP transport. And probably^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hmost likely if you use something you consider 'private' transport.
ANY Agency
NO assurance whatsoever.
Now, are they terribly interested? Maybe, probably not. Will they divulge the info to a competitor? Doubtful, but what is not imnpossible must, therefore, be considered possible. Am I worried about my communications? Nope. If they want me, they don't need my phone calls.
But it's still wrong. Just unavoidable right now. We'll have to work on this in The Future.
"risking reliance on something controlled by someone else"
Oh, but your explanation makes sense to me, and now I get it. And I'm still not the least bit worried or concerned. Maybe even less so now that I grok the real issue here.
You see, the reality is, that if you aren't skilled enough to change the code or app that you use, you are de facto trapped into using whatever is provided. And if you aren't able to both change the code of the web app you use, and most importantly host your modified version, then you are indeed 'trapped' into using whatever is provided.
If I use OO, I'm pretty much stuck with whatever the developer cloud surrounding OOO decides to release. I'm just not a real programmer, not even a fake one. If I use Google apps (GMail I assume fits this category), then not only am I stuck with what Google releases for the app, but I'm also stuck with the server, spam filter, and all that goes with it.
This is not new.
And I understand Stallman's point of view, I think, that those who *can* actually change things should be able to, and free/open software supports that. Mixing free/open software with closed/controlled apps negates the free/open part of the equation.
Was there ever a time when you could not find a compiler for free, somewhere, and create your own apps?
Actually, the question Stallman won't answer straight is more compelling, to me. I think I can register a domain for free, and I can surely acquire the software to run my own web apps for free. But I can't yet hook up to the Internet for free in a reliable way that permits me to host my web app, even if for my own benefit. So is there anything as totally free software? What would be the point if it couldn't be executed for free, or the service delivered for free, as in free to the provider?
There are some things that just aren't free. And some of them are necessary. Even on the Internet.
Purists tend to focus on what they can bind up to understand and declare. Stallman, as uaual, is entirely focused on his world of free/open software, while I am focused on my world of paying for a server to host my sites. Free that ain't.
I don't even get an assurance that I can post ANYTHING I want; if it offended enough people, or caused enough disruption, I could get connected.
...it saeems as if this is a case over whether or not a search engine can be held responsible for making it possible to find illegal content.
And doesn't that mean that search engines would then be liable for the content of sites they list?
And doesn't that mean that search engines need to know the nature of the content they index?
And doesn't that mean that Google, for instance, needs to decipher if the results in a 'Watchmen' search are lawful previews, generic fanboi blog noise, press releases about the opening night receipts, or a torrent of the flick?
And doesn't that mean that the torrent sites will just obfuscate their pages to let Google and the others off the hook?
This does have the impact of either criminalizing search results for illegal content, or more likely rehashing the argument over 'offering' and 'providing'.
Which I think we have prcedent in the US that 'offering' is not the same as 'providing' or distribution, and so not infringement.
Didn't we settle this once? Will Canada agree?
Of course, if this were about ch1ldpr0n, we wouldn't be *allowed* to question this - anything is permissible to eradicate ch1ldpr0n.
feh. I'm still appreciating my 70s rock too much to bother buying anything new. And if I want to hear something new, which happens about twice a year, there are plenty of great artists out there giving their stuff away. And the irony? I PAY them! they don't even have to ask!
I just feel a little guilty over stiffing the artists who mistakenly signed on to the Dark Side. Most didn't know better.
First, he said he got one of his vendor codemonkeys (emphasis on monkey here) to say that he understood why people did what they did, it always annoyed him to have to wait for data to write so his applicaiton could get on to the important stuff. His application is an inventory management system that runs on RPG midrange machines.
My buddy would howl at this. Um, excuse me, but the data *is* the important stuff. One of many reasons my bud ended up re-writing much of the canned software he was saddled with a few years ago when he took his current position. Some stuff he just 'tweaks', he says.
And he then related many a story of older systems and newer systems, from PDP-11s through the whole IBM System3x range and E-Series, and the infamous Windows servers he had on those processor cards and all, and the flaky stuff he saw.
He throughly understands the temptation to cache writes, and considers it pure poison. He says, "If your data isn't important enough to write out, it isn't important. Send it to/dev/null, that'll improve performance too!"
Of course,/dev/null isn't an option. But he recognizes the OS is not always going to optimize yout app.
And he didn't joke much about this EXT4/EXT3 issue. Something about being there before, or something. But he's weirderer than I am anyways.
"Oh, the humanity! Football games drive me nuts when the AI does stupid things no real person would ever do. Why the hell did my fullback just brush by the linebacker that's right in my RB's way?! Why can't I get my linebacker to stay in his lane on running plays?!"
Gee, you sound like a real life coach. Certainly like my High School coach.
I'm thinking the AI is working like it should here. You got your disgruntled, not getting paid enough FB who isn't taking the hit, and your linebacker who thinks he's smarter then your Defensive Coordinator and is freelancing with visions of stardom in his head.
Realistic this is, I think. Patience, padiwan. Trade you must. Draft you will. Beware of anger.
Slashdot Mirror
There is also the small matter of the prosecution sending one of their witnesses home to Washington State because he was ill.
This witness was also on the defense list. The prosecutors sent him home without notifying the defense, which is such an obvious abuse that the judge nearly stopped the trial right then and there.
But no matter. The prosecution got what they wanted - Stevens is no longer a Senator. That can't be rectified.
Remember, the rules apply to all of us. When they come to accuse you of something, will you be so trusting of the prosecutors?
And would a determined botnet herder be able to 'take down' the Internet by launching a worldwide DNS cache poisoning attack and redirecting to a botnet-based DNS server farm? How much of the Internet would die?
Probably much easier to coordinate multiple botnets to DDOS the root servers, and also nail a few prominent servers at larger ISPs.
Naww. That's been pretty much fixed. Attacking BGP is so much more effecient. Nevermind.
What you should do is pay someone less clever than you to do the job for you - your 'technical analyst'. Let them make the grunt stuff up, and you present, gather accolades, and crank up your WoW armies in your spare time. Obviously, they will be paid less, but this could be an offshoring or out-of-work PhD opportunity.
Just don't get caught. And don't let them figure out how to get your job out from underneath you. Energetic types have a way of beating you at your own game.
Or, as an alternative, you could consider going into meaningful employement. Wall St is pretty much in the crapper right now. You shoudl be able to get by on your bonu---wait, you're a consultant. You spent your obscenely inflated income already on fast cars and alternative energy schemes. Wow, suxs 2 b u.
hmmm... sounds familiar.
My G1 has about a one day battery life. I work around that fine now, but it was scary at first.
And I have a Toshiba Gigabeat S60. If the battery runs down, you need the clunky AC charger to revive it, though I haven't bothered to wire up a USB-coax adapter to see if that would make me AC-independent. For those of you who don't have an S60, one way to run the battery down is to leave it out of 'hold' mode and put it in your laptop case. It dies overnight. Lock it, and it lives for a few days. I don't get it, it's all I can frakking do to turn the thing on when it's in my armband, but somehow out of hold it dies fast. I can't recommend the S60 for that reason alone.
But I would have bought an OpenMoko phone if they brought it out to production. Look, I bought a G1. I'll buy almost anything that isn't from Apple...
Oops, forgot about Siemens. No phones from Siemens. The S46 was enough.
If Verizon does as well with this as they did with Net Day and E-Rate, they'll get all $7B+ and deliver some moderately-broadband service to some of rural America.
And get rural Americans to pay for it all over again. And again.
Our patriotism at work, finally!
Absolutely yes!
I worked 12+ hours a day for 7 years, no vacation, and missed 3 days total. Startups do that to you. I had time for beer, thank you. And no medals. My boss worked more. Time to set the bar higher, guys. Long hours were the 90s.
Linux recognizes criticism as either damage or censorship and either routes around it or blames the reporter.
Blaming the reporter also deflects apparent Statement Of Truth attacks, which are resolved in a few weeks/months/years by patches, new distributions, or kernel updates.
Failing a resolution, these SOT attacks are resolved by personal attacks on the reporter.
For reference, look up posts on the Interweb related to WiFi on Linux, MythTV, or IPv6.
That should hold you until next April 1.
"A mammoth project is also under way to rewrite the whole of the newspaper's archive, stretching back to 1821"
This would go a lot easier with an enhancement to Apache's mod-rewrite. Or maybe Google's new app, 'NewsReWriter'.
So let's get on that, eh?
You were hoping for 100-Krona notes?
Well, some sort of leather anyways. Maybe something distressed?
Crap, don't listen to me. Man shouldn't say 'maybe' about such things. And snakeskin is the best choice anyways. Not ostrich.
Studs would work, too. Get it pierced!
Just checking. If not, time to reformat. If so, no one talks about this?
I got this URL for the article:
http://www.livescience.com/culture/090324-toddlers-listen.html
Most newspapers don't need to make an explicit endorsement of a candidate. They just slant, suppress, or edit stories. Or choose 'letters to the Editor' that favor or oppose candidates, or plain make stuff up.
Don't get all righteous and claim it doesn't happen, ok? We're family here, and we know better.
So denying newspapers the opportunity to make explicit endorsements doesn't mean anything to me. NPR exerts as much influence as it possibly can within the bounds of non-profit status, and it is influential despite that limitation. I expect newspapers to continue that, though they may find their influence waning because of the marketplace, not because of corporate not for profit status.
I'm more interested in how other media will react. Some are still making money, and may be asking that this be canned, as the problem isn't that newspapers are unfairly failing because they are required to be profitable, but that they can't seem to compete with other media. Giving them a tax break doesn't seem like the right thing to do.
And I get a few newsletters from outfits that are 501(c)(3) nonprofits. Doesn't stop them delivering information. Why not just reorganize as a 501(c)(3) and move on. Oh, wait, there's the issues of becoming a 501(c)(3) and still acting like you're not. Darn. Stupid rules. Shouldn't apply to newspapers. They're special.
As my former boss said, we were not a 'not-for-profit' organization, though if we didn't pay attention, we would be a 'non-profit' one. The distinction was vitally important to himm but we weren't a newspaper. Just a bunch of guys trying to earn a profit.
We didn't think of asking for special tax status. We went out and competed.
"Considering that when a local newspaper goes under a small part of the community is gone,..."
Considering that when an employer goes under...
Considering when a family goes under...
Considering when a...
Really. Newspapers are struggling to be relevant in this maelstorm of new media. How is it that the Television news organizations are surviving>
No locking keys on the Displaywriter. That was done in software.
Best by far. The key modules were almost 2 inches tall not counting the cap. Second only perhaps to the OS/6, the system with the inkjet that would tattoo you!
Sadly, running MS-DOS 2.11 on an 8-inch floppy wasn't very practical... And having the 5215 Selectric printer going off next you isn't pleasant either.
And there is actually one for sale...
wow.
It's not how well the bear dances. It's the fact that it dances at all.
Had you RTFA, you would know that the CIA is apparently claiming that the recount was rigged, and that the e-voting systems were so flawed as to make it both possible to do and impossible to determine the true votes.
Which of the other agencies at the time had the ability or inclination to examine the e-voting systems?
Are you assuming the the e-voting systems in use then were accurate and secure? If not, you just agreed with the CIA. If so, you are probably so wrong that you might as well stop now. There is little evidence to support trusting those systems, much less now than at the time of the election.
I have no reason to trust e-voting systems of any kind. Brazil's system seems to be the best of the lot.
But I didn't need the CIA's study to come to that conclusion.
As I'm not entirely sure someone has already pointed out, but should have; no matter the hardware you're using now, you have no assurance that your calls aren't being monitored by the NSA or any other sufficiently advanced or funded agency anywhere in the world, if you use public IP transport. And probably^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hmost likely if you use something you consider 'private' transport.
ANY Agency
NO assurance whatsoever.
Now, are they terribly interested? Maybe, probably not. Will they divulge the info to a competitor? Doubtful, but what is not imnpossible must, therefore, be considered possible. Am I worried about my communications? Nope. If they want me, they don't need my phone calls.
But it's still wrong. Just unavoidable right now. We'll have to work on this in The Future.
"risking reliance on something controlled by someone else"
Oh, but your explanation makes sense to me, and now I get it. And I'm still not the least bit worried or concerned. Maybe even less so now that I grok the real issue here.
You see, the reality is, that if you aren't skilled enough to change the code or app that you use, you are de facto trapped into using whatever is provided. And if you aren't able to both change the code of the web app you use, and most importantly host your modified version, then you are indeed 'trapped' into using whatever is provided.
If I use OO, I'm pretty much stuck with whatever the developer cloud surrounding OOO decides to release. I'm just not a real programmer, not even a fake one. If I use Google apps (GMail I assume fits this category), then not only am I stuck with what Google releases for the app, but I'm also stuck with the server, spam filter, and all that goes with it.
This is not new.
And I understand Stallman's point of view, I think, that those who *can* actually change things should be able to, and free/open software supports that. Mixing free/open software with closed/controlled apps negates the free/open part of the equation.
Was there ever a time when you could not find a compiler for free, somewhere, and create your own apps?
Actually, the question Stallman won't answer straight is more compelling, to me. I think I can register a domain for free, and I can surely acquire the software to run my own web apps for free. But I can't yet hook up to the Internet for free in a reliable way that permits me to host my web app, even if for my own benefit. So is there anything as totally free software? What would be the point if it couldn't be executed for free, or the service delivered for free, as in free to the provider?
There are some things that just aren't free. And some of them are necessary. Even on the Internet.
Purists tend to focus on what they can bind up to understand and declare. Stallman, as uaual, is entirely focused on his world of free/open software, while I am focused on my world of paying for a server to host my sites. Free that ain't.
I don't even get an assurance that I can post ANYTHING I want; if it offended enough people, or caused enough disruption, I could get connected.
I'll go back to sleep now....
...it saeems as if this is a case over whether or not a search engine can be held responsible for making it possible to find illegal content.
And doesn't that mean that search engines would then be liable for the content of sites they list?
And doesn't that mean that search engines need to know the nature of the content they index?
And doesn't that mean that Google, for instance, needs to decipher if the results in a 'Watchmen' search are lawful previews, generic fanboi blog noise, press releases about the opening night receipts, or a torrent of the flick?
And doesn't that mean that the torrent sites will just obfuscate their pages to let Google and the others off the hook?
This does have the impact of either criminalizing search results for illegal content, or more likely rehashing the argument over 'offering' and 'providing'.
Which I think we have prcedent in the US that 'offering' is not the same as 'providing' or distribution, and so not infringement.
Didn't we settle this once? Will Canada agree?
Of course, if this were about ch1ldpr0n, we wouldn't be *allowed* to question this - anything is permissible to eradicate ch1ldpr0n.
feh. I'm still appreciating my 70s rock too much to bother buying anything new. And if I want to hear something new, which happens about twice a year, there are plenty of great artists out there giving their stuff away. And the irony? I PAY them! they don't even have to ask!
I just feel a little guilty over stiffing the artists who mistakenly signed on to the Dark Side. Most didn't know better.
... and he had an interesting take on it.
First, he said he got one of his vendor codemonkeys (emphasis on monkey here) to say that he understood why people did what they did, it always annoyed him to have to wait for data to write so his applicaiton could get on to the important stuff. His application is an inventory management system that runs on RPG midrange machines.
My buddy would howl at this. Um, excuse me, but the data *is* the important stuff. One of many reasons my bud ended up re-writing much of the canned software he was saddled with a few years ago when he took his current position. Some stuff he just 'tweaks', he says.
And he then related many a story of older systems and newer systems, from PDP-11s through the whole IBM System3x range and E-Series, and the infamous Windows servers he had on those processor cards and all, and the flaky stuff he saw.
He throughly understands the temptation to cache writes, and considers it pure poison. He says, "If your data isn't important enough to write out, it isn't important. Send it to /dev/null, that'll improve performance too!"
Of course, /dev/null isn't an option. But he recognizes the OS is not always going to optimize yout app.
And he didn't joke much about this EXT4/EXT3 issue. Something about being there before, or something. But he's weirderer than I am anyways.
"Oh, the humanity! Football games drive me nuts when the AI does stupid things no real person would ever do. Why the hell did my fullback just brush by the linebacker that's right in my RB's way?! Why can't I get my linebacker to stay in his lane on running plays?!"
Gee, you sound like a real life coach. Certainly like my High School coach.
I'm thinking the AI is working like it should here. You got your disgruntled, not getting paid enough FB who isn't taking the hit, and your linebacker who thinks he's smarter then your Defensive Coordinator and is freelancing with visions of stardom in his head.
Realistic this is, I think. Patience, padiwan. Trade you must. Draft you will. Beware of anger.
Thys ys as vacuous as yt gets. Honestly, gang, try somethyng substantyve. Lyke fynyshyng Galactyca a season earlyer, wyth a coherent story lyne.
No, wayt, another season of advertysyng? Bryllyant! Keep yt up!
And what server OS back then had adequate documentation?
Oh yeah. Vines.