I'm sure the billion or so people in India would love to hear you speak about their inability to cook during the day. You might get a bit of disagreement, though.
Well considering that god then goes on to tell the Israelites to murder other tribes and rape their women, I'd say the translation is pretty much irrelevant anyway. The Ten Commandments should have been called "The Ten Things You Should Not Do, Unless You Really Want To".
The question posed was whether this was the future of TV. I can't see it, there just isn't enough security in it for all those people working in TV to bet their working lives on.
But that wasn't the question. When Henry Ford created the assembly line and started pumping out cars, there wasn't much security in it for the blacksmiths and carriage-makers, but it still became the future of transportation.
And, as I suggested, the law forbids every individual element of such an effort simply because this way there is no need to prove that a concerted effort was ever attempted.
Yep, the old guilty-until-proven-innocent approach. Governments LOVE being given that kind of power. Why bother proving that the accused had malicious motives and did something worth punishing, when you can just make laws that are so broad that EVERYONE will violate them.
In other words, it is illegal for you to give me a non-fatal dose of a poison (even though it won't kill me) because if you do it several times I will die.
So if I give you a bag of apples, I'll go to jail. Makes sense.
The SSID is public information (like a name plate on the door,) and as far as I know Windows doesn't capture anything else.
I agree, but so is everything else that you put outside your door, or anything you do with your door or curtains open. If you're broadcasting unencrypted data over the airwaves, that IS public information. You don't get to complain when someone with a CB accidentally picks up a conversation being transmitted by your baby-monitor, or when someone intercepts a conversation you're having over a short-range radio with your poaching buddies, about how many illegal kills you've made this season (and yeah, both examples are something I've been a part of). If you're beaming data through the air without taking even the slightest precautions, then you clearly either don't consider the information particularly private, or are too stupid to be using that technology in the first place.
However a closed door means "do not enter," and anyone who ignores this norm of the society is behaving antisocially.
Sure, but an unencrypted access-point is an OPEN door. To extend your analogy - you're arguing that it doesn't matter if the door is closed or open, because some people are too stupid to close their door.
Yeah, except solar cookers could be used for other things, too. Like, you know, maybe... cooking?
They're also something which can be constructed using basic tools and materials, by a third-world potato farmer who dropped out of school in grade 3. Solar panels and battery chargers... not so much.
So... more energy efficient... because it takes no energy at all to boil potatos?
Thanks, that made me chortle:) At first I agreed completely - it seems silly to waste energy boiling potatoes just to increase battery efficiency. Now that I think about it, though, you could boil them easily enough using a solar-cooker type device. I'm not sure what the availability of those is in the third-world, though. If they're not in wide use, I'd say teaching people how to make them would be a lot more useful than showing them how to make potato batteries.
It may well be that one day I paid with my c/c and you noted first two digits. Indeed nothing you can do with them. Next day I again paid with my c/c and you noted next two digits. Now it makes four. Next day... [repeat until the logical end.] This is how you can get my entire c/c record. Any single observation is useless; but when combined they are very much useful.
Yep, which would require a concerted effort to gather the required data, not just a single drive-by capture of a small portion of your CC number. If I came back enough times, then yes, I could get the info, but why would I bother? If I were interested in your CC, I'd just copy down the whole damn thing the first time.
Anyway, if google wanted access to the data you were sending back-and-forth between your computer and router, it'd be pretty pointless for them to go grab a few dozen packets every couple weeks since the data is unlikely to be related. It would be like me coming over to your house every few weeks, writing down 2 numbers from a random document that you have lying around, and hoping to eventually construct a CC number from the jumble I've gathered. The CC analogy is a fun one, but doesn't really reflect the situation.
The society instead decided to prohibit all intercepts since they have hardly any social advantages to begin with.
If that were true, I could go to jail every time windows picks up a new access point.
Besides, there is an easy way to have an unlisted phone number.
I get that. But why is one irrational decision (to reject life saving treatment) OK but another irrational decision (to go outside the approved course of medical treatment at your own risk) not OK? The dysfunctional mental state is the same, both people are under the stress of approaching death.
Heh. Why is it ok for a teenager to make a decision to NOT have sex with a 30 year old, but not ok for them to decide they want to do it?
Obviously there are key differences between an action and the lack of an action. I'm not sure that I want to get into a debate about those differences.
Also, I wouldn't say ANY irrational decision is "ok". However, choosing to refuse treatment isn't necessarily irrational - it depends on the circumstances. In some cases, parents have gone to jail for making decisions such as refusing medical treatment for their child on religious or "spiritual" grounds. We can and do hold people responsible when their irrational thought-process leads to the death of another. On the other hand, if I had the choice between dying 6 months from now, or spending vast amounts of money to pay for treatments which would result in horrible pain, constant vomiting, physical deformity and other types of suffering... while allowing me to live for another year? I'd say the rational choice would be to say screw it. I'd rather live my last 6 months as best as I can, go out without a fuss, and leave some extra money for my family.
I never suggested taking action against the victim, just like we don't take action against underage teens who have sex with older partners. When someone who is unable to make an informed decision gets taken advantage of, you prosecute those who are taking advantage of them.
The age of consent laws demonstrate that we as a society believe that consent cannot be given under some circumstances. We have other such laws - consent given under duress is not considered valid, and consent given under the affect of alcohol or narcotics can, likewise, be considered void. Given the above, I see no reason why we can't say that meaningful consent cannot be given by a person who is under extreme psychological and emotional stress due to the prospect of having to suffer through a painful and drawn-out death.
So you say a law making it illegal to capture, store and distribute personal data is bogus
That depends on how you define the words "personal" and "data". If I copy down 2 digits from your credit card number, I've "captured" your "personal data", but there's dick-all I can do with it. Likewise, if I copy down your full name and address from the phone book, I've "captured" a chunk of your "personal data" which may actually be useful, but did I do anything wrong?
And little Suzie doesn't get to go to college because Daddy blew the family savings buying quack treatments in Bangcock. Yep, I don't see anything wrong with your approach. Nothing at all!
Ensuring that corrupt and abusive cops are discovered and held accountable would go a long way toward repairing the sense of distrust and the view that the police are unwilling to hold their own people accountable for their actions. That seems to me to get to the heart of the issue.
Then you picked the wrong comment to respond to since, as I made clear, that's just a small subset of a larger issue which I'm interested in correcting.
I'd say the answer is more transparency and accountability for the police. No more of this bullshit about not videoing police. They record us, we should be able to record them, after all, they're obeying the law, right? They don't have anything to hide.
That would help in this particular case, although it wouldn't eliminate the problem - you'd be treating the symptoms rather than the root cause.
I know it's just a few of the law enforcement officers I need to worry about and it may be flawed logic, but I really do not give a shit.
Of course; irrational people cling to irrational beliefs/fears. You're not telling me anything I don't know. The real question is how do we go about changing that. The fact that it's happening on slashdot tends to suggest that education isn't a sure fix.
It might be a different story is there was some trust surrounding the officers enforcing the laws, but a fe bad apples spoiled that a long time ago and continue to keep it rancid today. The problem is that you cannot tell which are the good cops and which are the bad cops and it's best to just not take chances.
That's the same kind of flawed logic which has parents in a tizzy about "stranger danger". It's an irrational paranoia which is more likely to harm than to help you.
I hear ya. That's also why I oppose any kind of medicine. It's so much more efficient to just make a new human than to fix the ones we have. Where's the benefit? Do you have ANY idea how wasteful it is to train doctors and send them out to treat people?
It's all good though - one of these days we'll replace the human race with machines, and then we won't have to worry about all these wasteful expenditures. Long Live the Matrix!
Ah, thanks. I was starting to get worried. When the usual talking points don't get trotted out, I start wondering what kind of crap you're coming up with now.
I'm shocked that it's been almost 2 hours since you commented, and NOBODY has butted in to spout some nonsense about how the manned program is unnecessary because it would have just been cheaper to launch a new Hubble.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure the billion or so people in India would love to hear you speak about their inability to cook during the day. You might get a bit of disagreement, though.
Same thing.
Well considering that god then goes on to tell the Israelites to murder other tribes and rape their women, I'd say the translation is pretty much irrelevant anyway. The Ten Commandments should have been called "The Ten Things You Should Not Do, Unless You Really Want To".
The question posed was whether this was the future of TV. I can't see it, there just isn't enough security in it for all those people working in TV to bet their working lives on.
But that wasn't the question. When Henry Ford created the assembly line and started pumping out cars, there wasn't much security in it for the blacksmiths and carriage-makers, but it still became the future of transportation.
And, as I suggested, the law forbids every individual element of such an effort simply because this way there is no need to prove that a concerted effort was ever attempted.
Yep, the old guilty-until-proven-innocent approach. Governments LOVE being given that kind of power. Why bother proving that the accused had malicious motives and did something worth punishing, when you can just make laws that are so broad that EVERYONE will violate them.
In other words, it is illegal for you to give me a non-fatal dose of a poison (even though it won't kill me) because if you do it several times I will die.
So if I give you a bag of apples, I'll go to jail. Makes sense.
The SSID is public information (like a name plate on the door,) and as far as I know Windows doesn't capture anything else.
I agree, but so is everything else that you put outside your door, or anything you do with your door or curtains open. If you're broadcasting unencrypted data over the airwaves, that IS public information. You don't get to complain when someone with a CB accidentally picks up a conversation being transmitted by your baby-monitor, or when someone intercepts a conversation you're having over a short-range radio with your poaching buddies, about how many illegal kills you've made this season (and yeah, both examples are something I've been a part of). If you're beaming data through the air without taking even the slightest precautions, then you clearly either don't consider the information particularly private, or are too stupid to be using that technology in the first place.
However a closed door means "do not enter," and anyone who ignores this norm of the society is behaving antisocially.
Sure, but an unencrypted access-point is an OPEN door. To extend your analogy - you're arguing that it doesn't matter if the door is closed or open, because some people are too stupid to close their door.
Yeah, except solar cookers could be used for other things, too. Like, you know, maybe ... cooking?
They're also something which can be constructed using basic tools and materials, by a third-world potato farmer who dropped out of school in grade 3. Solar panels and battery chargers ... not so much.
If this takes on, this means another group of people who are going to starve so that others can use more energy.
Yep. Isn't evolution wonderful?
So... more energy efficient... because it takes no energy at all to boil potatos?
Thanks, that made me chortle :) At first I agreed completely - it seems silly to waste energy boiling potatoes just to increase battery efficiency. Now that I think about it, though, you could boil them easily enough using a solar-cooker type device. I'm not sure what the availability of those is in the third-world, though. If they're not in wide use, I'd say teaching people how to make them would be a lot more useful than showing them how to make potato batteries.
It may well be that one day I paid with my c/c and you noted first two digits. Indeed nothing you can do with them. Next day I again paid with my c/c and you noted next two digits. Now it makes four. Next day ... [repeat until the logical end.] This is how you can get my entire c/c record. Any single observation is useless; but when combined they are very much useful.
Yep, which would require a concerted effort to gather the required data, not just a single drive-by capture of a small portion of your CC number. If I came back enough times, then yes, I could get the info, but why would I bother? If I were interested in your CC, I'd just copy down the whole damn thing the first time.
Anyway, if google wanted access to the data you were sending back-and-forth between your computer and router, it'd be pretty pointless for them to go grab a few dozen packets every couple weeks since the data is unlikely to be related. It would be like me coming over to your house every few weeks, writing down 2 numbers from a random document that you have lying around, and hoping to eventually construct a CC number from the jumble I've gathered. The CC analogy is a fun one, but doesn't really reflect the situation.
The society instead decided to prohibit all intercepts since they have hardly any social advantages to begin with.
If that were true, I could go to jail every time windows picks up a new access point.
Besides, there is an easy way to have an unlisted phone number.
There is an easy way to encrypt your packets.
I get that. But why is one irrational decision (to reject life saving treatment) OK but another irrational decision (to go outside the approved course of medical treatment at your own risk) not OK? The dysfunctional mental state is the same, both people are under the stress of approaching death.
Heh. Why is it ok for a teenager to make a decision to NOT have sex with a 30 year old, but not ok for them to decide they want to do it?
Obviously there are key differences between an action and the lack of an action. I'm not sure that I want to get into a debate about those differences.
Also, I wouldn't say ANY irrational decision is "ok". However, choosing to refuse treatment isn't necessarily irrational - it depends on the circumstances. In some cases, parents have gone to jail for making decisions such as refusing medical treatment for their child on religious or "spiritual" grounds. We can and do hold people responsible when their irrational thought-process leads to the death of another. On the other hand, if I had the choice between dying 6 months from now, or spending vast amounts of money to pay for treatments which would result in horrible pain, constant vomiting, physical deformity and other types of suffering ... while allowing me to live for another year? I'd say the rational choice would be to say screw it. I'd rather live my last 6 months as best as I can, go out without a fuss, and leave some extra money for my family.
I never suggested taking action against the victim, just like we don't take action against underage teens who have sex with older partners. When someone who is unable to make an informed decision gets taken advantage of, you prosecute those who are taking advantage of them.
The age of consent laws demonstrate that we as a society believe that consent cannot be given under some circumstances. We have other such laws - consent given under duress is not considered valid, and consent given under the affect of alcohol or narcotics can, likewise, be considered void. Given the above, I see no reason why we can't say that meaningful consent cannot be given by a person who is under extreme psychological and emotional stress due to the prospect of having to suffer through a painful and drawn-out death.
So you say a law making it illegal to capture, store and distribute personal data is bogus
That depends on how you define the words "personal" and "data". If I copy down 2 digits from your credit card number, I've "captured" your "personal data", but there's dick-all I can do with it. Likewise, if I copy down your full name and address from the phone book, I've "captured" a chunk of your "personal data" which may actually be useful, but did I do anything wrong?
If we travel down that road, anyone that has had consensual sex should be worried about being charged with rape...
Yeah, next thing you know we might start implementing age of consent laws. The horror!
There may be some international agreement or panel on the subject, but they probably go by another name.
Yeah, I think some guy named Hippocrates helped draft it.
I disagree with his point, but agree with your point.
And little Suzie doesn't get to go to college because Daddy blew the family savings buying quack treatments in Bangcock. Yep, I don't see anything wrong with your approach. Nothing at all!
Ensuring that corrupt and abusive cops are discovered and held accountable would go a long way toward repairing the sense of distrust and the view that the police are unwilling to hold their own people accountable for their actions. That seems to me to get to the heart of the issue.
Then you picked the wrong comment to respond to since, as I made clear, that's just a small subset of a larger issue which I'm interested in correcting.
I'd say the answer is more transparency and accountability for the police. No more of this bullshit about not videoing police. They record us, we should be able to record them, after all, they're obeying the law, right? They don't have anything to hide.
That would help in this particular case, although it wouldn't eliminate the problem - you'd be treating the symptoms rather than the root cause.
I know it's just a few of the law enforcement officers I need to worry about and it may be flawed logic, but I really do not give a shit.
Of course; irrational people cling to irrational beliefs/fears. You're not telling me anything I don't know. The real question is how do we go about changing that. The fact that it's happening on slashdot tends to suggest that education isn't a sure fix.
It might be a different story is there was some trust surrounding the officers enforcing the laws, but a fe bad apples spoiled that a long time ago and continue to keep it rancid today. The problem is that you cannot tell which are the good cops and which are the bad cops and it's best to just not take chances.
That's the same kind of flawed logic which has parents in a tizzy about "stranger danger". It's an irrational paranoia which is more likely to harm than to help you.
Awesome, I'm glad we agree! I'll work on dismantling the medical establishments, while you tear down NASA. Let's get started!
I hear ya. That's also why I oppose any kind of medicine. It's so much more efficient to just make a new human than to fix the ones we have. Where's the benefit? Do you have ANY idea how wasteful it is to train doctors and send them out to treat people?
It's all good though - one of these days we'll replace the human race with machines, and then we won't have to worry about all these wasteful expenditures. Long Live the Matrix!
Ah, thanks. I was starting to get worried. When the usual talking points don't get trotted out, I start wondering what kind of crap you're coming up with now.
I'm shocked that it's been almost 2 hours since you commented, and NOBODY has butted in to spout some nonsense about how the manned program is unnecessary because it would have just been cheaper to launch a new Hubble.