I've got to break a very long lurk to ask, please, how did this logic happen, and how did it get rated "insightful"? Please tell me I'm missing some sort of subtle geek irony, please tell me this was a joke, most of all please tell me the definition of "communism" hasn't been expanded to include anything and everything people might collectively do to improve their lot, in the spirit of cooperation? Communi.ty != Communi.sm
When the two are stuck together like dogs, what then? Where's the constitutional bucket of water?
Then the media shows you a cute fuzzy puppy but soon enough you've got a pit bull with its teeth in your ass.
Me, i don't give a shit/which/ dog has his teeth in my ass. When most of my life is dictated by contractual agreement and administrative law, most of it to my detriment, i'm not making distinctions. The situation is a corruption of both constitutional ideals and capitalism; this mongrel resembles neither so the distinction is lost anyway.
Microwave radiation is non-ionizing, meaning it does not "modify food on a molecular level". If you somehow manage to stick your head inside a microwave oven and close the door, it might be possible you could cook yourself. And i suppose that while so engaged, you could walk into traffic because you can't see with a microwave oven over your head. That could be dangerous too.
The phrase "plausible deniability" ought to put the whole issue to rest. A Truecrypt volume, to outward appearances, is a given quantity of unintelligible gibberish no matter the quantity of encrypted data on it. So you give the cops your password and they can see some of your shameful but perfectly legal smut, but the rest of the volume remains unintelligible gibberish. AFAIK, there's no way to prove otherwise.
If they don't know there's additional encrypted data then they can't know if there's another password to ask for.
+5 insightful to everyone who said "Truecrypt", and let's all go have a beer.
The court in Softman vs. Adobe wrote that the economic reality was that of a sale
Score one for objective reality!
So long as content providers continue turning reality on its head with counterintuitive licensing BS, they will continue to encourage disrespect for their "rights".
I purchase a copy of GTA Vice City, a game based on a series of highly immoral and illegal activities. On the face of it hte EULA very strongly suggests that i don't own the CD, the included promotional material or instructions, or even the packaging. If i violate this EULA i am a criminal. IANAL, so it looks to me like i broke the law already when i tore open "their" shrink-wrap. It hurts in my irony bone, but worse than that, hypocrisy breeds disrespect. As does silliness.
What they're trying to do is to brainwash their values into the next generation, and it won't work. Kids can smell hypocrisy from miles away, and they will rebel against it. Meanwhile try telling my Dad that he doesn't "own" every single goddam thing he bought with his money, or for that matter try pulling it off on me... it doesn't work for/anyone/ because it's counterintuitve.
Digitalized content and content distribution has made for a whole new reality, one which is difficult for the content providers to address. Sorry about that. But inventing a whole different reality with no objective basis isn't gonna work either. For something to be "reality", a majority of people have to agree it is so. That won't happen if it doesn't agree with their common sense.
I Am Not An Entomologist, but my wife found this ant bait recipe online:
Mix a half teaspoon each of honey, borox, and aspartame (Equal, Nutrasweet, etc.), in small bottles. Place bottles on their sides, with lids off, in areas of most ant activity. Ants will carry the bait back to their colonies.
I thought ants liked "sweet" and any sweetener would do, but anyway my wife took the recipe literally and it worked fine...
the telcos want the power to implement (via legislation) before they tell anyone how they're actually going to implement it.
Dammit i got here after everyone left, and i'm very very confused. I can't find exactly how this whole thing got started, and the only proposed legislation i see are the various Net Neutrality bills.
Who, wants to legislate, what? Please? If anyone is still around please help me understand. I'm sorting through layers of bullshit and there's something in here that smells worse than the bullshit.
I'm told in no uncertain terms that my ISP has every right to shape traffic, block ports, etc., ostensibly in the common interest; i.e. i don't have the right to massive downloads of porn videos and stolen music, at the expense of everyone else's bandwidth. And it doesn't matter what the real motives might be, e.g. if Clearwire wants to implement its own VOIP service then they can block Skype.
Is this not the same issue on a macro level, and if so don't the telcos have the same rights as my local ISP?
Seems both sides are spreading FUD, and thanks very much, now you all have my innner Libertarian fighting viciously with my inner Democrat. The first screaming "Leave it alone" and the latter whining "There ought to be a law".
*Sigh* It's always this way, easy to have Libertarian principles until some assholes take advantage. In other words, if the/lack/ of Net Neutrality legislation will harm small enterprise, then there's nothing for me but to go along with my whining Democrat, for the greater good. And yet i can't feel good about it.
I dunno... i carry a PDA in one pocket and a cell phone in the other, so i'm shopping for a smartphone.
I mean, given if you use a PDA, then a Bluetooth-enabled smartphone would seem perfect. All your "phone" need consist of is the little bitty headset goes in your ear. How much simpler can it get?
Every day i discover at least a half-dozen things that i don't know, but should, and i just ask my computer. And thanks to the magic of unsecured routers, i can do that just about anywhere with my PDA.
My life is infinitely enriched by the Internet. The further i get from a computer the stupider i feel.
Given the amount of valuable information i download to my cerebral cortex every day, it's difficult to even imagine the exponential value to the target market of this device.
NTM the Internet represents the essence of freedom; this device could help spread "democracy" more effectively than costlier forms of invasion.
Slashdot Mirror
My apologies... my knee is twitchy because I've heard much more outrageous stuff without a trace of irony present or intended.
I've got to break a very long lurk to ask, please, how did this logic happen, and how did it get rated "insightful"? Please tell me I'm missing some sort of subtle geek irony, please tell me this was a joke, most of all please tell me the definition of "communism" hasn't been expanded to include anything and everything people might collectively do to improve their lot, in the spirit of cooperation? Communi.ty != Communi.sm
When the two are stuck together like dogs, what then? Where's the constitutional bucket of water?
/which/ dog has his teeth in my ass. When most of my life is dictated by contractual agreement and administrative law, most of it to my detriment, i'm not making distinctions. The situation is a corruption of both constitutional ideals and capitalism; this mongrel resembles neither so the distinction is lost anyway.
Then the media shows you a cute fuzzy puppy but soon enough you've got a pit bull with its teeth in your ass.
Me, i don't give a shit
Microwave radiation is non-ionizing, meaning it does not "modify food on a molecular level". If you somehow manage to stick your head inside a microwave oven and close the door, it might be possible you could cook yourself. And i suppose that while so engaged, you could walk into traffic because you can't see with a microwave oven over your head. That could be dangerous too.
The phrase "plausible deniability" ought to put the whole issue to rest. A Truecrypt volume, to outward appearances, is a given quantity of unintelligible gibberish no matter the quantity of encrypted data on it. So you give the cops your password and they can see some of your shameful but perfectly legal smut, but the rest of the volume remains unintelligible gibberish. AFAIK, there's no way to prove otherwise.
If they don't know there's additional encrypted data then they can't know if there's another password to ask for.
+5 insightful to everyone who said "Truecrypt", and let's all go have a beer.
Score one for objective reality!
So long as content providers continue turning reality on its head with counterintuitive licensing BS, they will continue to encourage disrespect for their "rights".
I purchase a copy of GTA Vice City, a game based on a series of highly immoral and illegal activities. On the face of it hte EULA very strongly suggests that i don't own the CD, the included promotional material or instructions, or even the packaging. If i violate this EULA i am a criminal. IANAL, so it looks to me like i broke the law already when i tore open "their" shrink-wrap. It hurts in my irony bone, but worse than that, hypocrisy breeds disrespect. As does silliness.
What they're trying to do is to brainwash their values into the next generation, and it won't work. Kids can smell hypocrisy from miles away, and they will rebel against it. Meanwhile try telling my Dad that he doesn't "own" every single goddam thing he bought with his money, or for that matter try pulling it off on me... it doesn't work for /anyone/ because it's counterintuitve.
Digitalized content and content distribution has made for a whole new reality, one which is difficult for the content providers to address. Sorry about that. But inventing a whole different reality with no objective basis isn't gonna work either. For something to be "reality", a majority of people have to agree it is so. That won't happen if it doesn't agree with their common sense.
http://rip.mozdev.org/
http://www.litepc.com/
http://www.chmaas.handshake.de/delphi/freeware/xvi 32/xvi32.htm
I Am Not An Entomologist, but my wife found this ant bait recipe online:
I thought ants liked "sweet" and any sweetener would do, but anyway my wife took the recipe literally and it worked fine...
:/
Dammit i got here after everyone left, and i'm very very confused. I can't find exactly how this whole thing got started, and the only proposed legislation i see are the various Net Neutrality bills.
Who, wants to legislate, what? Please? If anyone is still around please help me understand. I'm sorting through layers of bullshit and there's something in here that smells worse than the bullshit.
I'm told in no uncertain terms that my ISP has every right to shape traffic, block ports, etc., ostensibly in the common interest; i.e. i don't have the right to massive downloads of porn videos and stolen music, at the expense of everyone else's bandwidth. And it doesn't matter what the real motives might be, e.g. if Clearwire wants to implement its own VOIP service then they can block Skype.
Is this not the same issue on a macro level, and if so don't the telcos have the same rights as my local ISP?
Seems both sides are spreading FUD, and thanks very much, now you all have my innner Libertarian fighting viciously with my inner Democrat. The first screaming "Leave it alone" and the latter whining "There ought to be a law".
*Sigh* It's always this way, easy to have Libertarian principles until some assholes take advantage. In other words, if theMeh. :/
I dunno... i carry a PDA in one pocket and a cell phone in the other, so i'm shopping for a smartphone.
I mean, given if you use a PDA, then a Bluetooth-enabled smartphone would seem perfect. All your "phone" need consist of is the little bitty headset goes in your ear. How much simpler can it get?
Every day i discover at least a half-dozen things that i don't know, but should, and i just ask my computer. And thanks to the magic of unsecured routers, i can do that just about anywhere with my PDA.
My life is infinitely enriched by the Internet. The further i get from a computer the stupider i feel.
Given the amount of valuable information i download to my cerebral cortex every day, it's difficult to even imagine the exponential value to the target market of this device.
NTM the Internet represents the essence of freedom; this device could help spread "democracy" more effectively than costlier forms of invasion.