Ahem, Carnivore, Echelon, DMCA, facial recognition cameras... the U.S. has been pioneering a heck of a lot more of surveilance on the public than a lot of these European countries.
We're not pioneering it, we're just talking about it more. We fight the things that most Europeans take for granted.
The real danger is a standardized usernaming scheme + a standardized default password scheme (e.g., "password", or same as username). The "It won't happen to me" mindset takes over, and a majority of users never change their passwords. It's easy enough to get into anyone's account on systems like that.
The spectrum of government goes from free and chaotic to secure and restricted. You trade structure for freedom -- the two aren't compatible.
In the US, though we're fond if whining about our government, we tend to be more on the free and chaotic side of the spectrum. Not all the way, of course, but at least on that side.
Europeans have been so accustomed to the idea of trading freedom for security, though, that they willingly allow these things to happen. It's just another day in the life for them.
Our country may not be as good as it could be, but thank God we're not socialists.
So the Supreme Court thinks that "free speech" means "free if the majority of the populace likes it or agrees with it" (community standards). Isn't the First Amendment sort of nullified by a reading like that? If you're not allowed to make a statement or produce an artwork (including photographs) that the general populace doesn't agree with, then your speech isn't really free. It's just allowed or banned under the will of the government, which is the sort of situation that the original constitutional amendments were meant to put a stop to.
Dimwit, it doesn't mean that they agree with what you're saying, it means that each community gets to decide for themselves what is legal and what's not, instead of having Big Brother force it down their throats. The liberals get to be liberals, and the conservatives can be conservatives. If you disagree with the standards of the community in which you leave, you're free to move, but don't expect the government to create laws to pamper your beliefs at the expense of others'.
That's what cracks me up about liberals. You want to defend people's rights, but you want to do it by having one massive tyrannical government declare what each and every place must do, regardless of the individual character of that town, city, or area. What kind of screwed up thought processes lead to those conclusions?
The author points out that while gcc is cool because you can (A) compile the kernel, and (B) view the source code, a typical C++ developer probably doesn't need to do those things on a daily basis, and when they do -- well, gcc is always available.
The fact that online news sites can quickly change mistakes, update stories as information arrives, etc., seems to make it a better medium for accurate news than traditional print media. If Slashdot would occasionally patch up one of their erroneous stories, I think we'd all consider it A Good Thing, but somehow if CNN does it, it's cause for hysteria and sermons about Big Brother?
It's not very difficult to implement one from scratch. On the pages you want to track, just call a function that sends the HTTP server variables (and other desired information) to a database. You can then use the IP address as an identifier and track a reader's history through the site. Trace the IPs, and you can get even more information. I've implemented a system on my site that basically tells me that folks from Los Angeles spend less time on a certain page than folks from Newark.
What exactly is the legal definition of "hacking"?
Gaining access to someone's computer system through deceptive means, and using their resources and information for personal gain? Something like that, perhaps?
This means that the CEO of Brilliant is practicially Osama bin Laden! (or something like that...)
Well, it is. Now, whethor or not a threat to capitalism is a good or bad thing is left to the reader to determine. The bottom line is, there is still no proven way for coders to make money off of GPL's software. Red Hat makes money, true, but little of that money makes it to the major contributers of Linux. Capitalism is about making money. The GPL is about programming for fun and community innovation. They are logical opposites.
May the best man win. If it's Windows, so be it. I'm not going to use Linux out of a pointless sense of blind optimism. But if Linux is going to be the winner, someone needs to get cracking soon, because Linux as is just isn't cutting it for home use.
Personally, I don't see how Microsoft -- a closed and proprietary company -- could ever cooperate with Open Source Software. Their shared sorce program is a weak attempt, not at opening up, but increasing market share in one area where they're lacking. Yeah, that's a real open source attitude: present some code to the public to get more money.
Personally, I don't see the drive behind trying to get the Windows source code.
The open source kids who want it are exactly the ones who complain so bitterly about it. What's inside that they're so desparate to get a look at? It's like a preacher who rants about pornography one day, then checks out porn mags the next day for "research".
The Windows source code is (supposedly) bloated, convoluted, and notorious for its instability. Why then, are there such feverish discussions about how people can get it?
ActiveWeb, a German company, has a great content management system that covers digital assets as well as content management. Its granular workflow and security features allow you to fully customize who sees what, and templates, preferences, and other features let you dynamically change how they see it. A great product for the money.
Slashdot Mirror
How long has the Linux community been urging Microsoft retaliation? ;-)
Your knowledge of international politics comes from a blurb in a CIA-funded reference that most school children find overly simplistic?
We're not pioneering it, we're just talking about it more. We fight the things that most Europeans take for granted.
The real danger is a standardized usernaming scheme + a standardized default password scheme (e.g., "password", or same as username). The "It won't happen to me" mindset takes over, and a majority of users never change their passwords. It's easy enough to get into anyone's account on systems like that.
In the US, though we're fond if whining about our government, we tend to be more on the free and chaotic side of the spectrum. Not all the way, of course, but at least on that side.
Europeans have been so accustomed to the idea of trading freedom for security, though, that they willingly allow these things to happen. It's just another day in the life for them.
Our country may not be as good as it could be, but thank God we're not socialists.
Dimwit, it doesn't mean that they agree with what you're saying, it means that each community gets to decide for themselves what is legal and what's not, instead of having Big Brother force it down their throats. The liberals get to be liberals, and the conservatives can be conservatives. If you disagree with the standards of the community in which you leave, you're free to move, but don't expect the government to create laws to pamper your beliefs at the expense of others'.
That's what cracks me up about liberals. You want to defend people's rights, but you want to do it by having one massive tyrannical government declare what each and every place must do, regardless of the individual character of that town, city, or area. What kind of screwed up thought processes lead to those conclusions?
Actually, it really is just to educate newbies!
The author points out that while gcc is cool because you can (A) compile the kernel, and (B) view the source code, a typical C++ developer probably doesn't need to do those things on a daily basis, and when they do -- well, gcc is always available.
Well, you can't spell "Queer" (the guy's playing a flute to a pink butterfly, for crying out loud) with an 'S', so the joke would have been lost :P
I'm sorry, there seems to be a typo in that sentence. Shouldn't there be a "not" or "doesn't" in there somewhere?
The fact that online news sites can quickly change mistakes, update stories as information arrives, etc., seems to make it a better medium for accurate news than traditional print media. If Slashdot would occasionally patch up one of their erroneous stories, I think we'd all consider it A Good Thing, but somehow if CNN does it, it's cause for hysteria and sermons about Big Brother?
Who's H.P.Q., and is she cute?
He's pretty good looking for a "he".
Rat Bastard!
It's not very difficult to implement one from scratch. On the pages you want to track, just call a function that sends the HTTP server variables (and other desired information) to a database. You can then use the IP address as an identifier and track a reader's history through the site. Trace the IPs, and you can get even more information. I've implemented a system on my site that basically tells me that folks from Los Angeles spend less time on a certain page than folks from Newark.
Really, computer cases are the least of our environmental worries...
C'mon, get motivated!
127.0.0.1 f*ckedcompany.com
Before the flame war starts, the above post was a joke. It was intended to be sarcastic, not serious. Get a grip, people.
Gaining access to someone's computer system through deceptive means, and using their resources and information for personal gain? Something like that, perhaps?
This means that the CEO of Brilliant is practicially Osama bin Laden! (or something like that...)
Yes, this is a clever idea, but there are *thousands* of clever ideas on Source Forge that are generally neglected?
I guess the arbitrary "news" detector of Slashdot has reared it's ugly head again. :)
May the best man win. If it's Windows, so be it. I'm not going to use Linux out of a pointless sense of blind optimism. But if Linux is going to be the winner, someone needs to get cracking soon, because Linux as is just isn't cutting it for home use.
Personally, I don't see the drive behind trying to get the Windows source code.
The open source kids who want it are exactly the ones who complain so bitterly about it. What's inside that they're so desparate to get a look at? It's like a preacher who rants about pornography one day, then checks out porn mags the next day for "research".
The Windows source code is (supposedly) bloated, convoluted, and notorious for its instability. Why then, are there such feverish discussions about how people can get it?
ActiveWeb, a German company, has a great content management system that covers digital assets as well as content management. Its granular workflow and security features allow you to fully customize who sees what, and templates, preferences, and other features let you dynamically change how they see it. A great product for the money.
Slashdot long ago hit the recursion point, where Slashdot itself became news for nerds, and wound up simply reporting its own stories.