IANAL, but 18 USC 1343, makes it a Federal crime or offense for anyone to use interstate wire communications facilities in carrying out a scheme to defraud.
Since bidirectional cable networks are commonly used for transmission of network data in- and interstate pretty it is pretty much guaranteed that it falls under this criterium. From a legal standpoint it doesn't really matter if the fraud actually took place across state lines, just that a facility suitable for this purpose was used.
However, due to the rather global nature of internet it is highly unlikely that anyone using such a scheme would actually not invoke interstate (never mind intercontinental) communications. Thus pretty much making a waterproof case.
I think you are wrong on this one. The crime was LOCAL. The ISP is within the state and so was the alleged uncapper.
Let's take a hypothetical case. I live in Canada and like most Canadians, I am close to the Canada/U.S. border (20 miles). I use my cell phone to call someone in another location in Canada but even closer to the border. The cell call gets routed through some US based cellular provider for part of the trip. The call discusses some matter that is legal in Canada but illegal in the United States. Extending your example, I am now a wanted person in the US.
Amercia, land of free and home of the brave. Think again about the meaning of FREE and BRAVE.
The only GUI you should ever need on a REAL OS is VI!
Re: It certainly is more evil than commercials
on
The Economics of Spam
·
· Score: 1
I am not sure about ROI, I do know things cost more because of advertising. There are other sources of product information not funded by the manufacturer. There are MANY sources of information that I will gladly pay for that provide much more valuable information relating to a product/service.
To repeat myself, all advertising is evil whether it is spam, television commercials, billboards whatever.
Re: It certainly is more evil than commercials
on
The Economics of Spam
·
· Score: 1
I disagree. Neither is more or less evil than the other. Both are equally evil.
Advertising, in any form, is an expense. Prices of products are, to a certain extent, determined by the cost of producing and selling the product.
So let's take a look at things from a slightly different perspective. I am in the market for a new car. I have done a great deal research to determine the best vehicle to suit my needs. The manufacturer has decided to the best place to advertise their vehicle is during the baseball season. A television network has contracted with MLB to obtain the broadcasting rights and will charge advertisers a rate that will cover their costs and turn a profit. The vehicle manufacturer has to charge more for the vehicle because their expenses are higher. Guess who gets stuck with the bill?
I guess you call this a general rant against advertising in any form. Whether you pay higher costs for connectivity/inbox space or in final cost of a product, it really doesn't matter. In the end, it just plain costs more.
Your ISPs job is to provide you an internet connection that you pay for - it is NOT their job to secure your computer for you.
Boy that was one tough conclusion to arrive at. It is also the ISP's JOB to ensure the "Acceptable Use" policies are being followed.
To quote from the End User Agreement from my ISP:
7. Use of the Service(s). You agree to comply with all policies regarding permitted and prohibited uses of the Service(s) that may be posted by Rogers on the Rogers Help Website from time to time (collectively, the "Acceptable Use Policy" or "AUP") or that may be conveyed to you pursuant to Section 9(b) of this Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, you agree that you will not use any Equipment or other feature of the Service(s) to, directly or indirectly:
[SNIP]
c. access any computer, software, data, or any confidential, copyright protected or patent protected material of any other person, without the knowledge and consent of such person, nor use any tools designed to facilitate such access, such as "packet sniffers";
[SNIP]
g. restrict, inhibit or otherwise interfere with the ability of any other person to use or enjoy the Internet, any Equipment or other feature of the Service(s), or create an unusually large burden on our network, including, without limitation: posting or transmitting any information or software that contains a virus, lock, key, bomb, worm, trojan horse or other harmful or debilitating feature; distributing mass or unsolicited email; or otherwise generating levels of traffic sufficient to impede others' ability to send or retrieve information;
Perhaps I don't share your particular/pecular taste in was constitutes an "enjoyable" Internet experince, but personally, SMB popups only lower my "enjoyment" level. In the specific case of my ISP, I believe they are LEGALLY bound to take action against the offending parties once a complaint has been lodged.
So while it is not their JOB to protect my computer, it is their JOB to ensure policies are being adhered to.
Joe User deserves to get as much out of his computer as the beowulf people.
He can right now. I don't recall ever seeing an option like "Boewulf Expert, increase bogomips" in any of the current kernel build tools.
When it comes to painting, I am your typical, probably even less, Joe User. Simply because I go to the local Home Depot and buy the "professional" grade tools (paint brushes, rollers...) should I then be able to paint a house with the expertise of a seasoned professional?
Hypothetically, I have enough money to buy the Ferarri Formula-1 team, cars, pit crew, the whole shebang. Does that mean I have now acquired the driving skill and acumen of Mike Schuemacher?
I've got a dual P3 system that is on 24/7. Half of its processing capacity is sitting idle since I don't run the S@H screen saver.
Why not run two instances of the command line version, binding each one to a specific processor. Just remember to start each instance from a different directory.
With a comment like that it is not suprising you were rejected.
Your comment leads to two possible explanations.
1) The system is flawed and is rejecting "good ol boys" out of hand simply because they are "good ol boys". Great attitude, I am sure wollowing in self pity will go a long way to you getting into grad school and even further once you leave academia and enter the "commercial" world.
2) You are not capable enough to continue in this area. Life sucks don't it.
IANAL but AFAIK, you cannot enforce a contract for commiting a crime. In other words, if two parties enter into an agreement where one party pays the other party to kill someone, this contract is not binding on either party (yeah I know, the parties will have other ways of dealing with a breach). As far as I understand the situation, the party that is supposed to receive the commission will not because of nasty P2P scum. Since the P2P guys have no direct involement with the "charity" and the P2P scum are diverting money from the "charity", this is at the very least FRAUD! As a crime is being commited, the EULA is no longer binding on either party.
In a truly civilized world these bastards would die a very prolonged, extremely painful public death.
Bottom line is there's a tool for every job, pick one that works for you and be happy with yourself.
Quite correct. I have several vehicles, a mini van (three kids), a small, very economical to-and-from work car, and rather quick, not-street-legal Porsche. Each has a very definite use and satisfies specific requirements. RDBMS's are the same.
Analyze your requirements then use the tool best suited. If you don't you get what you deserve.
that will show enthusiasm for amateur astronomy rather than computers.
Sorry but you are wrong on this one. This type of setup shows an ethusiasm for both astronomy and computers. Who but an ethusiast would devote the time and effort for such a setup.
Look, you want to attack people, why don't you go after the idiots that do case mods and install neon lights so they can show off their computers' guts?
Because their logic isn't flawed.
I'm just a software engineer who understands the need for a responsive, fast computer in my line of work.
Perhaps you do need a responsive system, I never said you didn't.
That said, I recognize that a 300-and-something mhz Socket 7 system is just too slow.
For what task(s)? I agree, things like GUI/Java development would be tedious. Fortunately, computers can and, believe it or not, are used for other purposes. For example, my current employer has provided me with an older Thinkpad (600E). For my current situation, this is more than sufficient. After all, how much horsepower do you need to run eight or nine xterms.
The "enthusiast" is capable of recognizing the requirements of the task at hand, the resources available to complete the task and then making an informed descion to upgrade or not.
Your assertion of yearly hardware upgrades equating to enthusiasm is not correct. Upgrades should only be performed when there is NEED to upgrade, not merely to maintain a false perception of self-importance based on newness of one's toys.
I happily use a P75 (16MB and a 1.2GB hd) to control a telescope and digital camera as part of my astronomy hobby. The telescope is positioned by servos controlled by an RS232 conection to the PC. The camera is digital and controlled via USB (add-on card). I consider this system to be far more idicative of my ethusiasm than the 800Mhz PIII or 1.4Ghz Athalon sitting in my den.
As an ethusiast, I should know and understand the capabilities of the hardware I have available. Blindly upgrading on a yearly basis as you advocate, implies "band-wagonism" NOT enthusiasm.
OK, against whatever "better" judgement I have, it's time to jump into the fray.
I look for enthusiastic employees that genuinely love their line of work.
Good idea. But how are emthusiasm and monetary expenditure linked in the computer world?
IMHO, based on a few decades of experience, the best employees are not those who merely have the latest toys but those who understand the concept of "a computer is a tool" and can best utilize the tool(s) available to perform a task(s).
I believe your previous posts are indicative of a person with a very narrow mind and an even smaller penis.
You are quite correct, I was remiss in not expanding on what "better" is.
So in no particular order:
Better is not requiring reboots for unknown reasons or because an application crashed.
Better is ability to vet an application installation prior to installtion. (Querying an RPM, expanding a.deb, reading a configure script.)
Better is the ability to use tools to, at the very least, begin problem determination.
Better is the ability to use a CLI, GUI or both.
Better is having a genericly installed system that is functional, while at the same time being able to exercise fine-grained control over any aspect of the system that I deem significant.
Better is having a choice of server type applications.
Better is multi-user system. Can two remote users concurrently run Word?
Better is not being forced to use a binary system configuration file.
I hope this sheds a little light on what I think is required for a "better" system. Sorry to stir up a hornets nest with technical equivalent of Coke or Pepsi.
Definitely have to agree. The install experience is VERY different from one distro to the other, just look at a few others like Debian, Gentoo or LFS.
Like most/.ers I have installed my share of distributions and there are unquestionably major differences in installs/hardware detection is performed. Some are very easy, some require a fair bit of knowledge about the hardware you have installed.
The one thing that is consistant across all recent (post 2.2.15) based distros is the strenght of the finished product. I have yet to find a Windows version (pick a version, any version), installed on the same hardware, that provides a better platform than a Linux install.
PLEASE mod this one UP. It is one of the better replies I have seen on/. in the recent past. It is accurate, both theoretically and practically, and well written.
Sorry, but north of the 49th, we have Krispy Kreme and several other doughnut vendors (one of the reasons we were ranked 3rd best place to live by the UN while the U.S. came in at 6th, less choice of dougnut vendors). Being somewhat of a doughnut aficionado, Krispy's are pretty good but the ONE TRUE doughnut comes only from Tim Horton's
The mere fact that a software company is attempting to dictate hardware specifications, to the extent that they can determine what software is run (OS's included) sends shivers up my spine.
I hope you realize that many people, myself included, do not always run a standard OS. There are times were a PC can be and is used non-standard ways. Sorry, you can claim whatever openness you want, but I refuse to allow someone, anyone, how I use tools. If I want to hammer a screw, that is MY choice, not anyone elses.
I truly hope all of my fears turn out to be totally unfounded. However, in the mean time, I see no reason to stand idly by while someone acquires a gun and ammunition with the stated future objective of holding it to my head to ensure I do what they want, how they want, when they want.
Please continue to trust Microsoft to do what is best for all of us.
Everything here is in the details. With hardware enforced security, MS *could* use it to take complete control over your PC - allowing only MS tested and approved code. But that doesn't benefit them, and so, it won't ever happen.
Are you on acid? You are entirely wrong about the focus of Palladium. Do you really think that if MS could control all content on your system, they wouldn't?
We are all quite aware of the "embrace and extend" stance from Redmond. They now have a monopoly (federal court ruling, not just my opinion) that was allowed to flourish do the closed nature of the OS API, would not the next logical step (not a leap of faith) be an even more tightly closed API that gives MS OS's total control over which software can run on which hardware?
If this is allowed, all new PC's will, in short order, become the equivalent of an X-Box. Adn if you think this is a good thing from a corporate point of view, you are sadly mistaken. This is will allow MS to do what they please with licensing fees.
My final point is, this is not a bad thing from MS's perspective. I know if I was running a business and could exercise this type control, you can rest assured I would. I would also exploit it (in other words gouge the hell out of everyone) to its fullest. The only way to prevent this is through a complete rejection of any and all hardware/software that uses Palladium.
Slashdot Mirror
And the schematics were recorded on what?
IANAL, but
18 USC 1343, makes it a Federal crime or offense for anyone to use interstate wire communications facilities in carrying out a scheme to defraud.
Since bidirectional cable networks are commonly used for transmission of network data in- and interstate pretty it is pretty much guaranteed that it falls under this criterium. From a legal standpoint it doesn't really matter if the fraud actually took place across state lines, just that a facility suitable for this purpose was used.
However, due to the rather global nature of internet it is highly unlikely that anyone using such a scheme would actually not invoke interstate (never mind intercontinental) communications. Thus pretty much making a waterproof case.
I think you are wrong on this one. The crime was LOCAL. The ISP is within the state and so was the alleged uncapper.
Let's take a hypothetical case. I live in Canada and like most Canadians, I am close to the Canada/U.S. border (20 miles). I use my cell phone to call someone in another location in Canada but even closer to the border. The cell call gets routed through some US based cellular provider for part of the trip. The call discusses some matter that is legal in Canada but illegal in the United States. Extending your example, I am now a wanted person in the US.
Amercia, land of free and home of the brave. Think again about the meaning of FREE and BRAVE.
The only GUI you should ever need on a REAL OS is VI!
I am not sure about ROI, I do know things cost more because of advertising. There are other sources of product information not funded by the manufacturer. There are MANY sources of information that I will gladly pay for that provide much more valuable information relating to a product/service.
To repeat myself, all advertising is evil whether it is spam, television commercials, billboards whatever.
I disagree. Neither is more or less evil than the other. Both are equally evil.
Advertising, in any form, is an expense. Prices of products are, to a certain extent, determined by the cost of producing and selling the product.
So let's take a look at things from a slightly different perspective. I am in the market for a new car. I have done a great deal research to determine the best vehicle to suit my needs. The manufacturer has decided to the best place to advertise their vehicle is during the baseball season. A television network has contracted with MLB to obtain the broadcasting rights and will charge advertisers a rate that will cover their costs and turn a profit. The vehicle manufacturer has to charge more for the vehicle because their expenses are higher. Guess who gets stuck with the bill?
I guess you call this a general rant against advertising in any form. Whether you pay higher costs for connectivity/inbox space or in final cost of a product, it really doesn't matter. In the end, it just plain costs more.
Boy that was one tough conclusion to arrive at. It is also the ISP's JOB to ensure the "Acceptable Use" policies are being followed.
To quote from the End User Agreement from my ISP:
Perhaps I don't share your particular/pecular taste in was constitutes an "enjoyable" Internet experince, but personally, SMB popups only lower my "enjoyment" level. In the specific case of my ISP, I believe they are LEGALLY bound to take action against the offending parties once a complaint has been lodged.
So while it is not their JOB to protect my computer, it is their JOB to ensure policies are being adhered to.
Joe User deserves to get as much out of his computer as the beowulf people.
He can right now. I don't recall ever seeing an option like "Boewulf Expert, increase bogomips" in any of the current kernel build tools.
When it comes to painting, I am your typical, probably even less, Joe User. Simply because I go to the local Home Depot and buy the "professional" grade tools (paint brushes, rollers...) should I then be able to paint a house with the expertise of a seasoned professional?
Hypothetically, I have enough money to buy the Ferarri Formula-1 team, cars, pit crew, the whole shebang. Does that mean I have now acquired the driving skill and acumen of Mike Schuemacher?
So why does "Joe User" get a free ride?
Why not run two instances of the command line version, binding each one to a specific processor. Just remember to start each instance from a different directory.
With a comment like that it is not suprising you were rejected.
Your comment leads to two possible explanations.
1) The system is flawed and is rejecting "good ol boys" out of hand simply because they are "good ol boys". Great attitude, I am sure wollowing in self pity will go a long way to you getting into grad school and even further once you leave academia and enter the "commercial" world.
2) You are not capable enough to continue in this area. Life sucks don't it.
IANAL but AFAIK, you cannot enforce a contract for commiting a crime. In other words, if two parties enter into an agreement where one party pays the other party to kill someone, this contract is not binding on either party (yeah I know, the parties will have other ways of dealing with a breach). As far as I understand the situation, the party that is supposed to receive the commission will not because of nasty P2P scum. Since the P2P guys have no direct involement with the "charity" and the P2P scum are diverting money from the "charity", this is at the very least FRAUD! As a crime is being commited, the EULA is no longer binding on either party.
In a truly civilized world these bastards would die a very prolonged, extremely painful public death.
Bottom line is there's a tool for every job, pick one that works for you and be happy with yourself.
Quite correct. I have several vehicles, a mini van (three kids), a small, very economical to-and-from work car, and rather quick, not-street-legal Porsche. Each has a very definite use and satisfies specific requirements. RDBMS's are the same.
Analyze your requirements then use the tool best suited. If you don't you get what you deserve.
that will show enthusiasm for amateur astronomy rather than computers.
Sorry but you are wrong on this one. This type of setup shows an ethusiasm for both astronomy and computers. Who but an ethusiast would devote the time and effort for such a setup.
Look, you want to attack people, why don't you go after the idiots that do case mods and install neon lights so they can show off their computers' guts?
Because their logic isn't flawed.
I'm just a software engineer who understands the need for a responsive, fast computer in my line of work.
Perhaps you do need a responsive system, I never said you didn't.
That said, I recognize that a 300-and-something mhz Socket 7 system is just too slow.
For what task(s)? I agree, things like GUI/Java development would be tedious. Fortunately, computers can and, believe it or not, are used for other purposes. For example, my current employer has provided me with an older Thinkpad (600E). For my current situation, this is more than sufficient. After all, how much horsepower do you need to run eight or nine xterms.
The "enthusiast" is capable of recognizing the requirements of the task at hand, the resources available to complete the task and then making an informed descion to upgrade or not.
Your assertion of yearly hardware upgrades equating to enthusiasm is not correct. Upgrades should only be performed when there is NEED to upgrade, not merely to maintain a false perception of self-importance based on newness of one's toys.
I happily use a P75 (16MB and a 1.2GB hd) to control a telescope and digital camera as part of my astronomy hobby. The telescope is positioned by servos controlled by an RS232 conection to the PC. The camera is digital and controlled via USB (add-on card). I consider this system to be far more idicative of my ethusiasm than the 800Mhz PIII or 1.4Ghz Athalon sitting in my den.
As an ethusiast, I should know and understand the capabilities of the hardware I have available. Blindly upgrading on a yearly basis as you advocate, implies "band-wagonism" NOT enthusiasm.
OK, against whatever "better" judgement I have, it's time to jump into the fray.
I look for enthusiastic employees that genuinely love their line of work.
Good idea. But how are emthusiasm and monetary expenditure linked in the computer world?
IMHO, based on a few decades of experience, the best employees are not those who merely have the latest toys but those who understand the concept of "a computer is a tool" and can best utilize the tool(s) available to perform a task(s).
I believe your previous posts are indicative of a person with a very narrow mind and an even smaller penis.
Nice numbers. Did you get them from /dev/random or /dev/urandom ?
You are quite correct, I was remiss in not expanding on what "better" is.
.deb, reading a configure script.)
So in no particular order:
Better is not requiring reboots for unknown reasons or because an application crashed.
Better is ability to vet an application installation prior to installtion. (Querying an RPM, expanding a
Better is the ability to use tools to, at the very least, begin problem determination.
Better is the ability to use a CLI, GUI or both.
Better is having a genericly installed system that is functional, while at the same time being able to exercise fine-grained control over any aspect of the system that I deem significant.
Better is having a choice of server type applications.
Better is multi-user system. Can two remote users concurrently run Word?
Better is not being forced to use a binary system configuration file.
I hope this sheds a little light on what I think is required for a "better" system. Sorry to stir up a hornets nest with technical equivalent of Coke or Pepsi.
Definitely have to agree. The install experience is VERY different from one distro to the other, just look at a few others like Debian, Gentoo or LFS.
/.ers I have installed my share of distributions and there are unquestionably major differences in installs/hardware detection is performed. Some are very easy, some require a fair bit of knowledge about the hardware you have installed.
Like most
The one thing that is consistant across all recent (post 2.2.15) based distros is the strenght of the finished product. I have yet to find a Windows version (pick a version, any version), installed on the same hardware, that provides a better platform than a Linux install.
PLEASE mod this one UP. It is one of the better replies I have seen on /. in the recent past. It is accurate, both theoretically and practically, and well written.
Congrats Photon!!!
First and foremost is VIM http://www.vim.org. There are ports to MANY environments including a Windows OLE version that integrates with Visual Studio.
Next UltraEdit. It works, has a lot of features (many I don't use but I do know others who do).
This is ONLY based on personal preference not some detailed analysis of the actual code. Have fun.
Sorry, but north of the 49th, we have Krispy Kreme and several other doughnut vendors (one of the reasons we were ranked 3rd best place to live by the UN while the U.S. came in at 6th, less choice of dougnut vendors). Being somewhat of a doughnut aficionado, Krispy's are pretty good but the ONE TRUE doughnut comes only from Tim Horton's
Actually, isn't six eights better than five nines? 6x8=48 and 5x9=45 ;)
The mere fact that a software company is attempting to dictate hardware specifications, to the extent that they can determine what software is run (OS's included) sends shivers up my spine.
I hope you realize that many people, myself included, do not always run a standard OS. There are times were a PC can be and is used non-standard ways. Sorry, you can claim whatever openness you want, but I refuse to allow someone, anyone, how I use tools. If I want to hammer a screw, that is MY choice, not anyone elses.
I truly hope all of my fears turn out to be totally unfounded. However, in the mean time, I see no reason to stand idly by while someone acquires a gun and ammunition with the stated future objective of holding it to my head to ensure I do what they want, how they want, when they want.
Please continue to trust Microsoft to do what is best for all of us.
Everything here is in the details. With hardware enforced security, MS *could* use it to take complete control over your PC - allowing only MS tested and approved code. But that doesn't benefit them, and so, it won't ever happen.
Are you on acid? You are entirely wrong about the focus of Palladium. Do you really think that if MS could control all content on your system, they wouldn't?
We are all quite aware of the "embrace and extend" stance from Redmond. They now have a monopoly (federal court ruling, not just my opinion) that was allowed to flourish do the closed nature of the OS API, would not the next logical step (not a leap of faith) be an even more tightly closed API that gives MS OS's total control over which software can run on which hardware?
If this is allowed, all new PC's will, in short order, become the equivalent of an X-Box. Adn if you think this is a good thing from a corporate point of view, you are sadly mistaken. This is will allow MS to do what they please with licensing fees.
My final point is, this is not a bad thing from MS's perspective. I know if I was running a business and could exercise this type control, you can rest assured I would. I would also exploit it (in other words gouge the hell out of everyone) to its fullest. The only way to prevent this is through a complete rejection of any and all hardware/software that uses Palladium.
Colosal Cave.....XYZZY
IIRC, it was TOS - according to legend "Trameil Operating System". The ST was released after Jack (of Commodore fame) bought Atari.