IANAL this is opinion, but I think I am fairly correct, obviously take legal advice if you need it, and don't consider this legal advice.
is it my job to test the claim, evaluate it and then pull the comment if its false? No It isn't, if it were an outrageous claim that you, as a reasonable person would see as impossible then by all means take action, you should be able to moderate posts without either stifling genuine negative opinions or allowing flagrant abuse. Remember that that in a case of X in Y causes Z is likely and may or may not be a reflection upon Y, its not your job o deal with that it the job of whoever makes Y. The rule of thumb that I would use is simple, use some common sense and be reasonable, if you do that you are unlikely to run into legal issues except in cases where the person taking the action is being unreasonable, in which case you are fairly safe regardless. Also make sure you have a sensible AUP or TOS to make clear what is acceptable, and do what you can to clarify who is responsible for any content.
The web is global (duh!) and you have to take in to account law in every country As for the web being global, well, that's true, the question is, does it matter? If you get sued in the US, EU, China, Uzbekistan etc.. what does it matter to you? Assuming you are Australian (based on the territory to territory element) and based in Australia, it is local laws that you should be concerned about, if you are being reasonable it is unlikely that any criminal extradition requests would be successful (you should get a hearing). A for civil law, well if you are sued, you can, I believe, simply ignore it, a civil case brought against you by a court that has no jurisdiction should fail, if it doesn't, any sanctions are going to be difficult to enforce anyway.
If you were subject to every law in the world when writing a web site, then no sites could exist. There are countries with rather interesting, complex and draconian laws with regard to religion and political speech, most of us would fall foul of some element of these. Even ignoring these types of absurd laws, there are countless small regulations and laws that would also impact on you if you ran a site, Data protection, Advertising Regulations etc.. and again, if you are not based in a jurisdiction that enforces those laws, you (probably) not be targeted, and if you are it will (probably) have no impact on you anyway.
Having now read the forum, I am intrigued to note that the posts are almost all on-topic an seem well informed, there seems to be little outright bashing of the company in question, the points raised are all points I would feel comfortable raising in a public forum, in addition the info is useful, I would certainly do a fair amount of homework before purchasing the product in question for my company (not that we have a need for another ERM), including making contact with existing users and some of those making negative remarks. Even more interestingly the forum appears well moderated, personal attacks and O/T posts have been removed, and there are other gaps that indicate comments that were inappropriate have been removed. All in all, It will be interesting to see where this goes, I would assume that any legal action will result in a ton of (additional) negative publicity for 2clix, but this time from the (official) global tech-media, and the official media is rather harder to silence than a blog or small site. If you cant express an opinion on the web about an experience just because it is critical of a company or government, the web becomes useless, marketing, spin, lies and FUD will win out.
As for small sites not having the resources to fight legal actions, that is quite right, and that should be where legal assistance/legal aid comes in, it would be a (is a(?)) travesty if large corporations can use the threat of legal sanction to abuse customers and silence dissent.
By the way, with a nick like clickclickdrone, you are not associated in any way with 2clix are you?
The comment as you have described it seems perfectly fair (it is someone's opinion of someone else..) and potentially quite useful to other users of the forum, especially if others add their views. I would be doubtful that it is illegal in almost any (sane) country to express a negative opinion of something. I haven't read the thread so I don't know what comments were made in this case, but in the case you describe I would be more inclined to put the company complaining and the complainant in contact and have them sort the issue out between them, any company that tries to fight negative opinions (however they are formed) about themselves with legal action, is not going to gain any confidence from its potential customers.
Clearly it would be different if someone is claiming something as a fact but is in fact lying i.e. "CarMaker A is EVIL, they skin kittens to make their upholstery!! - Don't buy from them", but an opinion i.e. "I don't like CarMaker A" or "CarMaker A's Cars are not as nice as CarMaker B's" or even "CarMakerA is crap", is always valid (if it is an honest one, and its not really practicable to distinguish an honest opinion from a dishonest one).
The real problem comes when companies can have negative opinions removed from sites under threat of legal action (whether it has merit or not). It gives corporations far too much control over what the public can and do see or read about them. Of course for a small website owner, a hobbyist or simply an enthusiast of some sort, the threat of legal action is almost always poses too much of a risk and the reaction to remove offending material is clearly understandable.
What is needed is a mechanism whereby any person or organisation who receives a legal threat is able to evaluate its merit, and if it is totally worthless and/or malicious, to take action against the originator.
scrhinge.conf - Configuration File for Laptop Screen Hinges
Introduction
ScrHinge is the Linux Screen hinge management utility, providing support for raising and lowering laptop LCD screens. Please note that incorrect configuration can lead to unexpected case colour changes, unexpected changes in laptop size, death in near relatives, cracked plastic or pregnancy. ScrHinge supports several mechanisms for supplying/obtaining configuration and run-time parameters: command line options, environment variables, the scrhinge.conf configuration file, auto-detection, and fallback defaults. When the same information is supplied in more than one way, the highest precedence mechanism is used. The list of mechanisms is ordered from highest precedence to lowest. Note that not all parameters can be supplied via all methods. The available command line options and environment variables (and some defaults) are described in the Screen(1x) and ScreenHinge(1x) manual pages. Most configuration file parameters, with their defaults, are described below. Driver and module specific configuration parameters are described in the relevant driver or module manual page.
Description
ScreenHinge uses a configuration file called scrhinge.conf for its initial setup. This configuration file is searched for in the following places when the service is started as a normal user:.....
This is not intended to be inflammatory nor is it a prediction.
It would be interesting to watch what happens if we start seeing more use of TrustedComputing type technologies. If your machine will only execute trusted code (presumably signed), then your options of using any boot mechanism to recover data may well disappear, obviously you should be left with the possibility of using the hardware somewhere else, but then that could be prevented through "anti-theft" technology too..
Oh and as far as the "police impound" vs "technical measure to disable your computer", the difference is that the police need a reasonable amount of evidence to impound your car, you get to put your case to someone who will listen, and who should catch any glaring mistakes made by the police. That is not an option available if you are summarily declared a pirate because some former employee decided to stick your VLK or a copy of all your media on some disreputable web site or other.
Both parent posts are largely valid. What they fail to address, and what I believe the the GGP Post was trying to point out is that if a Key is *incorrectly* marked as invalid then they have done nothing wrong and nor has the OEM. Worse, the customer will suspect the OEM and presumably Microsoft will suspect both the OEM and the Customer. That is a quick way for Microsoft's customers, the OEM's, to lose both credibility and trust in the eyes of their customers, the consumer and businesses. Microsoft could hurt their customers by potentially hurting their customers customers. That will lead to a re-evaluation of the risks involved when dealing with Microsoft, as highlighted by recent issues with their WGA servers.
I agree with the sentiment of your post, this is News, maybe not front page, but if there is nothing else, why not. Saying that,the sociological element of this is probably not all that important, I am sick and tired of people
1)..Creating on-line versions of real life things (like social networks) and then claiming them as innovative and new. They are not, the technology may be, the speed of intercommunication may be, but the concept is not new, novel or otherwise innovative.
2)..Being surprised that on-line versions of real life things tend to create activity and patterns that are similar to those of their real world counterparts. Just because you have taken something and put it "on the net" does not mean that it will be drastically different that in the real world. Communications are faster and the scope is larger, that's all. It is not magic.
Anyway, on a less serious note:
I defy any of the self-righteous posters to tell me they've never installed Windows with the same CD twice, or Office, etc. You're right. Always download a clean CD image before installing, never use the same Windows or Office CD twice.
Well that's the policy I use for my Debian CD's, 100+ NetInstall CD's and counting, they don't seem to work for more than one install.... on account of them being used as coasters afterwards usually. The down side of this activity is that I seem to have gotten into the mindset that CD's are easily replaceable and readily downloadable, it comes as a shock every time I destroy a Music CD or DVD, that I can't just replace it. Damn you open source!!.
You can get monthly contracts if you don't need or want a "free" phone, the issue is that all the high street retail shops will try to push a phone plus contract deal (to the point where some of the third party suppliers will tell you its the only way to do it). If you call a given carrier and tell them you have a phone and want to use it on their network with terms similar to one of their contracts they will set it up for you.
That may be a criminal act, anyway if the couple used in this example were into bondage etc.. then would it still be assault (actually in some areas it probably would be a crime of some sort.. but that's not the point here.) ? I am not suggesting that the act of copying didn't take place, what I am saying is that the act took place but it isn't seen as a crime (civil or otherwise) until the rights holder takes issue with it. I would assume that if you were arrested (for something unrelated) and found to be carrying an ipod full of downloaded music the police wont charge you with anything (relating to that music) because its not their responsibility and because no one has made a complaint.
This is where problems will start to arise as (or if) copyright infringement falls more and more under criminal rather than civil law.
So Mattel are not responsible because they went to the cheapest possible supplier and then failed to do adequate QA? Mattel created a dangerous prooduct through various action and inaction on their part, so its utterly their responsibility and *any* negative effects are their fault.
"the act or practice of extorting especially money or other property"
and using the following defenition for extort
to obtain from a person by force, intimidation, or undue or illegal power
also : to gain especially by ingenuity or compelling argument
You could argue that an organised religion like Christianity carries out extortion, its tenuous as hell, but here we go:-
Members of an organised religion are often asked as part of their membership to give time (in the way of voluntary work) and money (in the way of donations) to the organisation. This is coupled with the fact that members are often told that failure to continue their membership will lead to some fairly adverse consequences (eternal damnation etc..). As such it could be said that failure to participate and continue your membership, and provide work or funds as appropriate will lead to negative consequences from the head of that organisation ($deity).
As I said its tenuous but not entirely baseless, it largely depends on the way any given organisation is run. Some of the Televangelists that I have seen (I found some insane Church TV channels when trying to find decent Internet TV - hey I'm in the UK you don't see much stuff like that over here) should be guilty of something (probably not extortion though), but local churches that pass around a collection tray should certainly not be.
Whilst looking at that you should also note that people who are subject to extortion are also often subject to fraud at the same time, (think schemes where you buy in with a little amount and then more and more is demanded...), it is also fairly likely that the person in question is not aware of the fraud or the extortion, that is especially true with cults and could be true in the context of religion.
Anyway, that said, I don't think that normal mainstream religion can be compared to Scientology in this regard (or any other), nor would I agree that there is much in the way of extortion or fraud going on inside organised religion in general.
I should say I am not religious, as such I see quite a large proportion of religious beliefs as something of a fraud (in fairly lose terms), albeit one perpetuated in good faith by generally good people, who believe in what they are doing. There is nothing inherently wrong with that as long as it doesn't cause harm to others, something most world religions seem to espouse now, but have been poor at in the past.
Mainstream religions tend to decry the actions of their most radical or divergent factions, that is why there is not a single unified Christian or Islamic faith (not sure about Judaism). As such, just as you would call for the arrest of and disassociate yourself with a Christian criminal/terror organisation so would (and have) the catholic church and the church of England etc.. in the same way Islamic groups have disassociated themselves from and called for the disbandment and arrest of Islamic criminal/terror organisations.
The problem here is as always the definition of criminal group or terror group. It would be relatively easy to justify the actions and existence of some of Islamic groups that operate in the middle east, in the same way it would have been easy to justify the actions of catholic and protestant terror groups in the UK or Europe.
Somehow even given all that I cannot see any justification or explanation that makes sense when I am looking at the actions, activities or scriptures of the church of Scientology as described in this forum and others.
If the copyright holder decides not to prosecute someone is it still a copyright violation? after all many people distribute copyright material they do not explicitly own. Surely a copyright violation can only be deemed to have happened once the rights holder decides to take action.
Thinking about it you may be right, except I would be hard pressed whether it would be Russia or the US in the lead this time, after all the Russian space program is seemingly more robust than the American one, not to mention ahead of it in terms of environmental systems. All that is missing is the cash to fund it, maybe with russias large oil and gas reserves coupled with the weak dollar it will be the US paying the Russians to beat them this time.
I agree almost with everything you say, except for the fact that I cannot see it happening in 50 years, nor can I see private enterprise getting over the rather large barrier to entry into a space based resource collection industry. Some of this will happen if there is a need for it, or if it is required for a bit of political posturing.
I assume you are referring to this part of the article:
the establishment of a private, interplanetary transportation industry, servicing both the Mars colony and asteroid mines. I have to agree with you to some degree, I really cannot see colonies on any distant planets within 50 years, I'd be surprised if there is even a large, long term presence on the moon by that time.
I would say that in terms of costs, it is going to be politically unjustifiable to push forward these missions, more to the point I am fairly sure we are entering into a period of rather more upheaval on earth, politically, economically and ecologically. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see more work done in space, more opportunity to explore, but I just don't see the will to do so or even the suggestion of the rewards that would be possible by doing so.
If OpenSolaris sees adoption on low end machines, it would provide an incentive to enterprise level customers to go the whole hog and buy Sun hardware to run it on. What could be better from a corporate point of view than having a single vendor to go to for all your support and other issues, not to mention that my experience of Sun support is pretty damn good.
There is a major difference between not knowing the difference and not being able to tell the difference. If you told me to pick out an Irishman or a Swede from a line-up I couldn't, but I wouldn't confuse the two and I know that both exist separately and where their respective countries can be found n a map.
Going by current UI design and the generally usability of some applications I wouldn't be surprised if you had to click on one button to start the scan and another to stop it, Oh and removing the page before you stop it would mean you had to start again..
Utterly ignoring the actual standard being discussed, I have to say that my respect for and general goodwill toward the ISO process has been fairly well shaken. Its a shame really because standardisation (if not of spelling) is one of those things that has driven innovation and allowed our society to progress enormously. Having now seen the process involved in deciding on a new standard, and more importantly how it can or may be manipulated is frankly disturbing.
Well I guess its a good thing to have your faith in something shaken, doubly if it means that from here on in the respect and admiration that I had for international standards bodies must now be earned. (Not that my opinion will matter, but I am sure other more influential voices have also taken note.)
What if they offer a 15% discount and allow you to walk in the shop take what you want and leave without ever having to stop (they bill you later), it would be a fantastic convenience, sure you might not like it but many other people would think its great. I'd bet that if one retail outlet started this then others would follow, the banks would love it as it prevents card fraud, (unless someone has stolen your implanted RFID, after all they will be so secure that they cant be cloned..). Soon enough it would be noted that if people have RFID's implanted for shopping, they could have them implanted for convenient access to the library, or other government project, it could replace your drivers license and any other ID, after all it would be really convenient.
Hmm scary, I doubt it would happen but you can spin anything to sound great to most people if you try, tell everyone else its just a trial, or its voluntary and your 99% of the way there.
They do have legislation that requires you always have ID with you (check travel advice for Germany), however in my experience (again only for Germany) The police are fairly used to people not having their ID at all times (people forget) and are quite happy to ask for details and then verify them. How well these laws are enforced, and under what circumstances they are used is presumably variable, in my experience of Germany the police seem happy just to ask you your name when they talk to you (and even then it seemed to be so that they could address you properly) and the issue of ID never came up.
Slashdot Mirror
If you were subject to every law in the world when writing a web site, then no sites could exist. There are countries with rather interesting, complex and draconian laws with regard to religion and political speech, most of us would fall foul of some element of these. Even ignoring these types of absurd laws, there are countless small regulations and laws that would also impact on you if you ran a site, Data protection, Advertising Regulations etc.. and again, if you are not based in a jurisdiction that enforces those laws, you (probably) not be targeted, and if you are it will (probably) have no impact on you anyway.
Having now read the forum, I am intrigued to note that the posts are almost all on-topic an seem well informed, there seems to be little outright bashing of the company in question, the points raised are all points I would feel comfortable raising in a public forum, in addition the info is useful, I would certainly do a fair amount of homework before purchasing the product in question for my company (not that we have a need for another ERM), including making contact with existing users and some of those making negative remarks. Even more interestingly the forum appears well moderated, personal attacks and O/T posts have been removed, and there are other gaps that indicate comments that were inappropriate have been removed. All in all, It will be interesting to see where this goes, I would assume that any legal action will result in a ton of (additional) negative publicity for 2clix, but this time from the (official) global tech-media, and the official media is rather harder to silence than a blog or small site. If you cant express an opinion on the web about an experience just because it is critical of a company or government, the web becomes useless, marketing, spin, lies and FUD will win out.
As for small sites not having the resources to fight legal actions, that is quite right, and that should be where legal assistance/legal aid comes in, it would be a (is a(?)) travesty if large corporations can use the threat of legal sanction to abuse customers and silence dissent.
By the way, with a nick like clickclickdrone, you are not associated in any way with 2clix are you?
The comment as you have described it seems perfectly fair (it is someone's opinion of someone else..) and potentially quite useful to other users of the forum, especially if others add their views. I would be doubtful that it is illegal in almost any (sane) country to express a negative opinion of something. I haven't read the thread so I don't know what comments were made in this case, but in the case you describe I would be more inclined to put the company complaining and the complainant in contact and have them sort the issue out between them, any company that tries to fight negative opinions (however they are formed) about themselves with legal action, is not going to gain any confidence from its potential customers.
Clearly it would be different if someone is claiming something as a fact but is in fact lying i.e. "CarMaker A is EVIL, they skin kittens to make their upholstery!! - Don't buy from them", but an opinion i.e. "I don't like CarMaker A" or "CarMaker A's Cars are not as nice as CarMaker B's" or even "CarMakerA is crap", is always valid (if it is an honest one, and its not really practicable to distinguish an honest opinion from a dishonest one).
The real problem comes when companies can have negative opinions removed from sites under threat of legal action (whether it has merit or not). It gives corporations far too much control over what the public can and do see or read about them. Of course for a small website owner, a hobbyist or simply an enthusiast of some sort, the threat of legal action is almost always poses too much of a risk and the reaction to remove offending material is clearly understandable.
What is needed is a mechanism whereby any person or organisation who receives a legal threat is able to evaluate its merit, and if it is totally worthless and/or malicious, to take action against the originator.
scrhinge.conf(5) - Linux man page
.....
Name
scrhinge.conf - Configuration File for Laptop Screen Hinges
Introduction
ScrHinge is the Linux Screen hinge management utility, providing support for raising and lowering laptop LCD screens. Please note that incorrect configuration can lead to unexpected case colour changes, unexpected changes in laptop size, death in near relatives, cracked plastic or pregnancy. ScrHinge supports several mechanisms for supplying/obtaining configuration and run-time parameters: command line options, environment variables, the scrhinge.conf configuration file, auto-detection, and fallback defaults. When the same information is supplied in more than one way, the highest precedence mechanism is used. The list of mechanisms is ordered from highest precedence to lowest. Note that not all parameters can be supplied via all methods. The available command line options and environment variables (and some defaults) are described in the Screen(1x) and ScreenHinge(1x) manual pages. Most configuration file parameters, with their defaults, are described below. Driver and module specific configuration parameters are described in the relevant driver or module manual page.
Description
ScreenHinge uses a configuration file called scrhinge.conf for its initial setup. This configuration file is searched for in the following places when the service is started as a normal user:
This is not intended to be inflammatory nor is it a prediction.
It would be interesting to watch what happens if we start seeing more use of TrustedComputing type technologies. If your machine will only execute trusted code (presumably signed), then your options of using any boot mechanism to recover data may well disappear, obviously you should be left with the possibility of using the hardware somewhere else, but then that could be prevented through "anti-theft" technology too..
Oh and as far as the "police impound" vs "technical measure to disable your computer", the difference is that the police need a reasonable amount of evidence to impound your car, you get to put your case to someone who will listen, and who should catch any glaring mistakes made by the police. That is not an option available if you are summarily declared a pirate because some former employee decided to stick your VLK or a copy of all your media on some disreputable web site or other.
Both parent posts are largely valid. What they fail to address, and what I believe the the GGP Post was trying to point out is that if a Key is *incorrectly* marked as invalid then they have done nothing wrong and nor has the OEM. Worse, the customer will suspect the OEM and presumably Microsoft will suspect both the OEM and the Customer. That is a quick way for Microsoft's customers, the OEM's, to lose both credibility and trust in the eyes of their customers, the consumer and businesses. Microsoft could hurt their customers by potentially hurting their customers customers. That will lead to a re-evaluation of the risks involved when dealing with Microsoft, as highlighted by recent issues with their WGA servers.
1)
2)
Anyway, on a less serious note: I defy any of the self-righteous posters to tell me they've never installed Windows with the same CD twice, or Office, etc. You're right. Always download a clean CD image before installing, never use the same Windows or Office CD twice.
Well that's the policy I use for my Debian CD's, 100+ NetInstall CD's and counting, they don't seem to work for more than one install.... on account of them being used as coasters afterwards usually. The down side of this activity is that I seem to have gotten into the mindset that CD's are easily replaceable and readily downloadable, it comes as a shock every time I destroy a Music CD or DVD, that I can't just replace it. Damn you open source!!.
A stopped clock is accurate twice a day.
You can get monthly contracts if you don't need or want a "free" phone, the issue is that all the high street retail shops will try to push a phone plus contract deal (to the point where some of the third party suppliers will tell you its the only way to do it). If you call a given carrier and tell them you have a phone and want to use it on their network with terms similar to one of their contracts they will set it up for you.
That may be a criminal act, anyway if the couple used in this example were into bondage etc.. then would it still be assault (actually in some areas it probably would be a crime of some sort.. but that's not the point here.) ? I am not suggesting that the act of copying didn't take place, what I am saying is that the act took place but it isn't seen as a crime (civil or otherwise) until the rights holder takes issue with it. I would assume that if you were arrested (for something unrelated) and found to be carrying an ipod full of downloaded music the police wont charge you with anything (relating to that music) because its not their responsibility and because no one has made a complaint.
This is where problems will start to arise as (or if) copyright infringement falls more and more under criminal rather than civil law.
So Mattel are not responsible because they went to the cheapest possible supplier and then failed to do adequate QA? Mattel created a dangerous prooduct through various action and inaction on their part, so its utterly their responsibility and *any* negative effects are their fault.
Chechnya is officially an administrative division of Russia, so that doesnt count as invading a foregin country.
d -factbook/print/rs.html
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-worl
I don't agree with Russia's actions here but it is hardly the same as invading Iraq or Afghanistan.
Using the following defenition for extortion,
"the act or practice of extorting especially money or other property"
and using the following defenition for extort
to obtain from a person by force, intimidation, or undue or illegal power
also : to gain especially by ingenuity or compelling argument
You could argue that an organised religion like Christianity carries out extortion, its tenuous as hell, but here we go:-
Members of an organised religion are often asked as part of their membership to give time (in the way of voluntary work) and money (in the way of donations) to the organisation. This is coupled with the fact that members are often told that failure to continue their membership will lead to some fairly adverse consequences (eternal damnation etc..). As such it could be said that failure to participate and continue your membership, and provide work or funds as appropriate will lead to negative consequences from the head of that organisation ($deity).
As I said its tenuous but not entirely baseless, it largely depends on the way any given organisation is run. Some of the Televangelists that I have seen (I found some insane Church TV channels when trying to find decent Internet TV - hey I'm in the UK you don't see much stuff like that over here) should be guilty of something (probably not extortion though), but local churches that pass around a collection tray should certainly not be.
Whilst looking at that you should also note that people who are subject to extortion are also often subject to fraud at the same time, (think schemes where you buy in with a little amount and then more and more is demanded...), it is also fairly likely that the person in question is not aware of the fraud or the extortion, that is especially true with cults and could be true in the context of religion.
Anyway, that said, I don't think that normal mainstream religion can be compared to Scientology in this regard (or any other), nor would I agree that there is much in the way of extortion or fraud going on inside organised religion in general.
I should say I am not religious, as such I see quite a large proportion of religious beliefs as something of a fraud (in fairly lose terms), albeit one perpetuated in good faith by generally good people, who believe in what they are doing. There is nothing inherently wrong with that as long as it doesn't cause harm to others, something most world religions seem to espouse now, but have been poor at in the past.
Mainstream religions tend to decry the actions of their most radical or divergent factions, that is why there is not a single unified Christian or Islamic faith (not sure about Judaism). As such, just as you would call for the arrest of and disassociate yourself with a Christian criminal/terror organisation so would (and have) the catholic church and the church of England etc.. in the same way Islamic groups have disassociated themselves from and called for the disbandment and arrest of Islamic criminal/terror organisations.
The problem here is as always the definition of criminal group or terror group. It would be relatively easy to justify the actions and existence of some of Islamic groups that operate in the middle east, in the same way it would have been easy to justify the actions of catholic and protestant terror groups in the UK or Europe.
Somehow even given all that I cannot see any justification or explanation that makes sense when I am looking at the actions, activities or scriptures of the church of Scientology as described in this forum and others.
Interesting thought.
If the copyright holder decides not to prosecute someone is it still a copyright violation? after all many people distribute copyright material they do not explicitly own. Surely a copyright violation can only be deemed to have happened once the rights holder decides to take action.
Thinking about it you may be right, except I would be hard pressed whether it would be Russia or the US in the lead this time, after all the Russian space program is seemingly more robust than the American one, not to mention ahead of it in terms of environmental systems. All that is missing is the cash to fund it, maybe with russias large oil and gas reserves coupled with the weak dollar it will be the US paying the Russians to beat them this time.
I agree almost with everything you say, except for the fact that I cannot see it happening in 50 years, nor can I see private enterprise getting over the rather large barrier to entry into a space based resource collection industry. Some of this will happen if there is a need for it, or if it is required for a bit of political posturing.
I would say that in terms of costs, it is going to be politically unjustifiable to push forward these missions, more to the point I am fairly sure we are entering into a period of rather more upheaval on earth, politically, economically and ecologically. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see more work done in space, more opportunity to explore, but I just don't see the will to do so or even the suggestion of the rewards that would be possible by doing so.
If OpenSolaris sees adoption on low end machines, it would provide an incentive to enterprise level customers to go the whole hog and buy Sun hardware to run it on. What could be better from a corporate point of view than having a single vendor to go to for all your support and other issues, not to mention that my experience of Sun support is pretty damn good.
Since when is Sun Tzu Japanese? Last I looked he was Chinese.
Have I been misinformed?
There is a major difference between not knowing the difference and not being able to tell the difference. If you told me to pick out an Irishman or a Swede from a line-up I couldn't, but I wouldn't confuse the two and I know that both exist separately and where their respective countries can be found n a map.
Going by current UI design and the generally usability of some applications I wouldn't be surprised if you had to click on one button to start the scan and another to stop it, Oh and removing the page before you stop it would mean you had to start again..
Utterly ignoring the actual standard being discussed, I have to say that my respect for and general goodwill toward the ISO process has been fairly well shaken. Its a shame really because standardisation (if not of spelling) is one of those things that has driven innovation and allowed our society to progress enormously. Having now seen the process involved in deciding on a new standard, and more importantly how it can or may be manipulated is frankly disturbing.
Well I guess its a good thing to have your faith in something shaken, doubly if it means that from here on in the respect and admiration that I had for international standards bodies must now be earned. (Not that my opinion will matter, but I am sure other more influential voices have also taken note.)
What if they offer a 15% discount and allow you to walk in the shop take what you want and leave without ever having to stop (they bill you later), it would be a fantastic convenience, sure you might not like it but many other people would think its great. I'd bet that if one retail outlet started this then others would follow, the banks would love it as it prevents card fraud, (unless someone has stolen your implanted RFID, after all they will be so secure that they cant be cloned..). Soon enough it would be noted that if people have RFID's implanted for shopping, they could have them implanted for convenient access to the library, or other government project, it could replace your drivers license and any other ID, after all it would be really convenient.
Hmm scary, I doubt it would happen but you can spin anything to sound great to most people if you try, tell everyone else its just a trial, or its voluntary and your 99% of the way there.
They do have legislation that requires you always have ID with you (check travel advice for Germany), however in my experience (again only for Germany) The police are fairly used to people not having their ID at all times (people forget) and are quite happy to ask for details and then verify them. How well these laws are enforced, and under what circumstances they are used is presumably variable, in my experience of Germany the police seem happy just to ask you your name when they talk to you (and even then it seemed to be so that they could address you properly) and the issue of ID never came up.
Bravo.