Re: Re: I would rather jump into a swimming pool of razer blades then.......
Having worked in IT for 15 years...
Obviously not in programming, else you would know the difference between "then" and "than."
There are quite a few programming languages that do not include "then" statements in the lexicon. It is entirely possible he has been programming using those languages.
I always thought the "then" statement was entirely redundant and inefficient, and that languages that strived to remove these redundancies were better overall than those that left them in. Sure, as a programmer you understand the if ... then ... else construct, but it is not necessary for a programming language to be so rigid in its lexicon.
Instead, I'll simply state that in 1997, 22.5% of all injury deaths age 1-19 were firearm related [National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Web site].
I'd assume this statistic is all injury deaths (huh?), including those caused by accidental discharge by themselves, accidental discharge by someone else, stray fire (which could be accidental or on purpose,) discharge during the commission of a crime (gang related, murder, during commission of robbery, kidnapping, etc.,) and discharge during a suicide or suicide attempt, and that firearm, as defined here, is the legal definition which involves more than pistols/handguns, to also include air/pneumatic guns, rifles, shotguns, and dangerous/illegal firearms?
See, the statistic is entirely too broad to make any sort argument to the statement you are making. If 22.5% of all injury deaths age 1-19 were caused by the negligent discharge of a firearm by themselves or by someone they were related to, then I could say...wow, that number seems high, and someone should do something about it. However, it still doesn't help the problem, which is that the NRA is concerned that doctors may not be qualified to teach on matters of gun safety, or that they may use the information they obtain (which isn't necessarily relevant to health and welfare,) to further the goals of those who seek to outlaw firearms.
I certainly agree that more education is needed...but are doctors the best people to be teaching gun safety, or should law enforcement/gun salespeople be the best folks to teach it? I certainly agree that if doctors scope the question as "would you like to know more about gun safety," and hand them off to a specialist, this may be the better way than a doctor who may never have held a gun asking a parent if they have a gun.
@ltlw0lf, Thanks. I'm going to up my video editing skills for the next one.
I'd love to see your upcoming videos (and I'd even say that if I didn't agree with your video because it was very informative and well reasoned) -- I think you have a really good argument on collaboration among artists, even when they don't realize they are collaborating with one another. Practice always makes perfect, and part of the hardest part of doing anything creative is the implementation of an idea. Sure, you'll get critics, but you got your message out there. Value constructive criticism and discount everything else.
I think your video is a good approach, but like eldavojohn and I said, a few less transitions and a little clean-up on the quantity of pictures might help making the video better. It looked like some of the video came from a VCR rip which used Macromedia protection (hence the jumping of the video.) Not sure exactly how to fix this -- there might be some programs out there to dejittter the video (maybe something that takes still shots of the video and realigns them.) Also, some of the video seemed to be out of phase with the audio.
Overall, though, I thought the video was a good attempt and I could see this as becoming a feature length documentary if you were looking to go that route.
Your privacy rights don't have much to do with whether you have protected your data but more about your reasonable expectations.
Your privacy rights disappear when the signal enters the public domain. If you want it private, don't put it in the public domain.
There should be no expectation of privacy for unencrypted wireless, or unencrypted radio, television, etc. If you don't want something shared, keep it private.
An uneducated computer user (most people) probably does not understand how their wifi works and they probably don't understand concepts such as packet-sniffing.
Every wifi device I've purchased in recent months have come with documentation warning the person using the device that they need to turn on encryption. If you are a moron in a hurry, you shouldn't have a computer, or a car, or a house, or anything else. The law should not protect the foolish (why, oh why, do we have to put warning labels on everything.)
Plus, going wireless has inherent risks, regardless to whether you use encryption or not. As we say in EVE Online...you aren't completely safe anywhere in space...and this includes life in general. If you are broadcasting, you are transmitting your data to everyone around you, whether it is encrypted or not, and people may be able to discover what you are transmitting, whether or not the law is on your side. Build a faraday cage and condition all wires entering and leaving your site if you are worried about your data, or realize that you aren't safe, and do what you can to increase the difficulty/decrease the payoff of compromise.
How long until a bench seat on the Supreme Court is for sale?
It's been for sale for a very long time (at least since early of last century.) Presidents who have justices die or retire from the Supreme Court replace them, and they usually choose justices in their best interest (and their best interest is usually the interest of those who put them in power to begin with.) District judges go through the same process as the Justices of the Supreme Court, where district judges are appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the Senate.
Sure, Justices have to be vetted by the Senate, which of course work their best to try and approve justices that meet their best interests too. But in the end, they are all bought and paid for by someone. The good thing is that, for the most part, the system works because there are too many chiefs and not enough indians...the competing conflicts in interest keep the process neutral. But that doesn't mean that it is perfect (and it never will be so long as humans are involved in the process.) Because there is less of an impact with district judges, there is likely to be less scrutiny and thus more people get through...but since the RIAA/MPAA owns most of the Senate (and at least one person in the White House,) it isn't surprising that the normal conflict wasn't there to vet this individual.
The only reason I haven't created it yet is because I'd probably get sued for Copyright infringement.
Knowing Kevin Smith (I don't know him personally, but I've listened to a great many interviews with him,) and the folks behind Dogma...I think they would be happy with your effort. Kevin doesn't seem to be the type of guy who gets overly upset with people taking his ideas and running with them, and he seems to be a fan himself of a number of different genres that he has borrowed from (just look at his shameless parody of Star Wars in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back.) If anything, I would think he would acknowledge the fact that your church would result in more sales of his movies (just look at Scientology, which singlehandedly bought the production of Battlefield Earth, and then kept it alive in the box office and DVD sales. Just have your congregation buy multiple copies of the Dogma DVD and Kevin will be happy.
If a plane makes an emergency landing on your lawn, it doesn't make the plane yours, you can't take any part of it, you can't take anything from people inside. It is a limitation of your property law, sure. And if it harms you because you wanted to make a party on that lawn (or because the lawn is destroyed), you can seek damages - by negotiations or in court, not by taking what you feel should be yours.
Really, really flawed analogy...but your like 0 for 30 in the analogy department so far.
If you and I share a fence, and I have a tree growing on my side which produces lemons. If my tree crosses over the shared fence into your yard, under most property laws, the tree may belong to me but the lemons on your side of the fence belong to you (as does the branches, so if you wanted, you could go and cut down the branches on your side of the fence if you wanted to.)
Mine is an equally crappy analogy, because a wifi device is an access device, and theoretically I could press charges if you accessed my wifi router without my permission, but since I am broadcasting my traffic to you (like playing a radio in my house or standing nude in my front room,) it certainly shouldn't be illegal for you to sniff my traffic, listen to my radio, or accidentally see me standing nude in my front room.
What may not be original are the ideas, the themes, the chord progressions, the melodies, and the lyrics.
So, it is not entirely original. Sure, the songs/pieces here are what I'd call "original", but they all have their roots from other things the author has experienced which may not be "theirs." I am not saying that this author/musician shouldn't receive just payment for their works, they need to realize that there has to be limits, and calling out the lawyers to sue someone else for "borrowing" upon you work leaves you open to other lawyers suing you for "borrowing" upon someone else's works.
It is nearly impossible to create something completely new that doesn't build off of something. Culture, religion, music, movies, books, relationships these are all things that shape us and the thing we create. Nothing happens in a vacuum and we all stand on the shoulders of the giants.
Exactly what I believe and am saying, and what I believe the person who generated this video is saying too. Everything is built off of something else. Claiming it isn't (which I've seen more than a few commenters here say in recent months,) only shows someone's ignorance about how the system works. All too often Copyright Maximalists believe that anything they come up with is sacred and unique...but then they look the fool when someone else comes along and sues them for copying. This is why ideas shouldn't be subject to copyright. And we need to look at the whole work and not just bits of it to determine if infringement occurred. And there has to be a lower limit (a floor) on the number of ideas in a work before it qualifies for copyright. Infringement of a word, phrase, or 6 notes should be impossible to enforce.
Re: Re: Political Ads? not commercials but political.
Ok now I am convinced you write these things only as a form of sarcastic commentary.
I am still not convinced. I used a robot journalism software package and it came up with a better, more coherent comment than Darryl did. Thus, I believe Darryl is nothing more than a bunch of cats pushing keys on a computer.
And on the topic on engineers' intentions, I'd like to add that Internet was supposed to be a military network.
Sorry sir, but you failed computer history 101, please head back to school. I suggest reviewing the Wikipedia page for ARPANET and History of the Internet.
The "internet" was designed to be a connection of networks (hence the name Internet is a shortened name for Interconnected-Networks,) some of which were run by the military. ARPANET (which was the precursor to the internet,) was a research and development network, created to link the defense research labs with universities which were doing their work. It was not designed to be a military network, as it was not exclusive to the military (if it was, you likely never would have heard about it or would be using it now.) ARPANET was designed to link the military with universities around the country in order to share the few high-powered research machines that existed at the time. As more and more networks were connected to ARPANET, the name was changed from ARPANET to NSFNET to the Internet.
According to you, he goes to jail for eavesdropping. Nice.
The courts would not agree with this (well, maybe they might in this current day, but they hopefully would get struck down by the Supreme Court.)
If you broadcast that you are committing a crime, and the police happen to hear this broadcast, then they can arrest you and the evidence will not be dismissed, whether you are on the street corner, on the radio, or on the internet. It is different if you are having a private conversation, but broadcasting is not private.
What the defense could argue, in the case of an unencrypted wifi transaction is that like cell-phone and wireless telephones, which have special restrictions in the law when it comes to interception of communications, but that is because these channels may be open, but the conversation carried on these channels are considered private. If a wifi device allows anyone to connect and send/receive traffic, the conversation is hardly private.
But this only effects government eavesdropping and rules of evidence...any private person can eavesdrop to their hearts desire (and in most cases unless they record the conversation or listen to cell-phone/wireless telephones, can do so legally.) The only way to be sure your transactions are secure are to use encryption and monitor sessions...and even then you can never be entirely sure the transaction isn't being monitored/recorded by a third party.
Whoever did the video "editing" and the cuts between footage needs to realize that sometimes less is more.
It was a little too much. I would have cut out a lot of the transitions, and would have done the video a little different if I was doing it. However, the message was really good and if you ignored the video and just listened to the audio, the message came along fine.
I didn't realize that Jay-Z did Empire State of Mind and was only aware of Key's version. Then again, I am not into most rap anyway, but I love connections, and wish that there were more of these videos. I'd love to see some music educator come up with a "Music Connections" like Burke's "Connections", where links between classical and modern music is explored (and it doesn't even need to be completely about music...because William Shakespeare is the original rapper.)
The message that no art is entirely created from a vacuum is a good one, and one I believe. Those who scream "he copied my work" have to realize that they copied it from somewhere else too. New ideas come from old ideas, and anyone who wishes to disagree is welcome to provide me with an example of an entirely new idea that isn't based on stuff that came before.
Re: Re: This is the only thing Microsoft is good at
cant u do something better than spend your life bitching abt MS.
You mean like responding to someone else's comment with poor spelling, grammer, and logic?
I work with Microsoft all day long, every day, along with other software vendors. I bitch just as much about the other vendors I have to deal with, but none of them are convicted monopolists like Microsoft is. When I update Microsoft software, there is absolutely no reason that I then have to spend hours trying to fix the compatibility issues between Microsoft and third parties...but yet I do, and it is usually because Microsoft changes their software and doesn't change their published standards, which everyone else has to play catch-up with by reverse engineering the changes. If they didn't use their monopoly to screw other vendors, then I wouldn't have as much to bitch about, would I?
While companies like Google come up with new ways to do business, the only thing that Microsoft is good at is buying/borrowing other people's ideas, making subtle but significant changes to them to prevent compatibility, and then introduce FUD to convince customers that their product is superior than the original product they "borrowed." This is the bleeding edge where Microsoft innovates, and they do it well.
People actually believe that Active Directory is the best thing Microsoft ever invented, but Active Directory is LDAP, Kerberos, and a couple other pre-existing services. Novell had been doing the same thing for years before Microsoft entered the game, but Microsoft threw up so much FUD about how Active Directory was so much better than Novell's offerings, and with their market share on the client side and their bastardization of the protocols to push out competitors, they quickly knocked Novell out of the market, as they had done with Netscape and IIS.
That's an average of slightly over 600 KB/s uploaded, right?
It may only be 300 KB/s, which is still fast, but reasonable for a cable modem. My ISP doesn't have a clue as to how to monitor bandwidth, and thus they usually count the data twice. So essentially, the 200GB cap per month really is just 100GB and they even count unsolicited traffic inbound and broadcasts.
I've shown them a number of times my traffic analysis from bandwidthd, which shows all traffic through my router (as well as traffic which was sent to my router and dropped,) and every time they tell me that I am over, I am usually half way through my allowance according to my router. And since I have no control over what is sent to me unsolicited, SMB traffic from my neighbors make up a good 10%-20% of the traffic bandwidthd shows (no smb traffic comes from me to the network, as I only let a few ports and protocols out.)
It has gotten so bad at times that I have to drop the internal interface on my router to prevent myself from going over (at which point I get a nastygram from my ISP telling me that they will block me, but so far, I have yet to be blocked.) Even then, I get flooded with traffic, but at least I am not contributing to my traffic (and the ISP has less of a leg to stand on when they do block me.)
If you sign a contract that says you are not allowed to tether without paying extra and you tether without paying extra, then you've breached the ToS.
But I think that is exactly what some people are saying here. When I signed my contract years ago with AT&T, my contract made no mention of tethering, since that wasn't an option at the time. I have not signed another contract, and yet I am told now that I have to spend an additional $50 to tether a computer to my phone, even though the option within the phone is already available.
The contract changed after I signed it. Now of course, AT&T said on the contract that they could change the terms and conditions at any time, which they have, but is the change onerous or not? I'd say yes, because they are taking away capabilities for no logical/technical reasons, but to just support their monopoly and squeeze a few more bucks out of me because they are greedy.
DIVX (the video rental solution, not the video format, which is unrelated,) was killed because it wasn't what the customer wanted. It was, essentially, a solution to no problem. Customers had no problem renting regular DVDs and returning them to the store when finished, and most customers saw DIVX as a waste of money, resources, and a problem for logistics. The thought Circuit City had was that they could sneak their way in to the rental market and overtake the existing companies, but the problem was that DIVX required a phone line to phone home...and at the time, very few people wired telephone lines to their entertainment systems. Most of Hollywood welcomed DIVX, because it allowed them to charge money each time the movie was played, not just for the rental, used 3DES for the encryption which was stronger than DVD encryption, and some studios switched directly to using DIVX instead of DVD.
If you want a product stymied by big content, you have no further to look than the DAT (Digital Audio Tape.) Industry lobbying (Audio Home Recording Act of 1992) and vendor ham-fisting (by using "copyright bits") killed DAT before it could replace tape and reel-to-reel as a viable alternative since it was lossless, and less prone to media degradation. Of course, it's downfall did usher in CD and CD-writing technology.
On the post: The Music Industry Is Desperate For A Few Good Technologists
Re: Re: I would rather jump into a swimming pool of razer blades then.......
Obviously not in programming, else you would know the difference between "then" and "than."
There are quite a few programming languages that do not include "then" statements in the lexicon. It is entirely possible he has been programming using those languages.
I always thought the "then" statement was entirely redundant and inefficient, and that languages that strived to remove these redundancies were better overall than those that left them in. Sure, as a programmer you understand the if ... then ... else construct, but it is not necessary for a programming language to be so rigid in its lexicon.
On the post: It May Soon Be Illegal For Doctors In Florida To Ask About Gun Safety
Re: Re: Re:
Well, they might. If you live in a state that requires mandatory registration, or you've had your gun stolen and returned, they know.
Otherwise, you are right.
In California, all hand-guns and all assault rifles are registered. But rifles and shotguns are not. Other states laws vary.
On the post: It May Soon Be Illegal For Doctors In Florida To Ask About Gun Safety
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'd assume this statistic is all injury deaths (huh?), including those caused by accidental discharge by themselves, accidental discharge by someone else, stray fire (which could be accidental or on purpose,) discharge during the commission of a crime (gang related, murder, during commission of robbery, kidnapping, etc.,) and discharge during a suicide or suicide attempt, and that firearm, as defined here, is the legal definition which involves more than pistols/handguns, to also include air/pneumatic guns, rifles, shotguns, and dangerous/illegal firearms?
See, the statistic is entirely too broad to make any sort argument to the statement you are making. If 22.5% of all injury deaths age 1-19 were caused by the negligent discharge of a firearm by themselves or by someone they were related to, then I could say...wow, that number seems high, and someone should do something about it. However, it still doesn't help the problem, which is that the NRA is concerned that doctors may not be qualified to teach on matters of gun safety, or that they may use the information they obtain (which isn't necessarily relevant to health and welfare,) to further the goals of those who seek to outlaw firearms.
I certainly agree that more education is needed...but are doctors the best people to be teaching gun safety, or should law enforcement/gun salespeople be the best folks to teach it? I certainly agree that if doctors scope the question as "would you like to know more about gun safety," and hand them off to a specialist, this may be the better way than a doctor who may never have held a gun asking a parent if they have a gun.
On the post: Music Is Collaborative: Jay-Z To Sugar Hill Gang To Al Jolson And Back Again
Re:
I'd love to see your upcoming videos (and I'd even say that if I didn't agree with your video because it was very informative and well reasoned) -- I think you have a really good argument on collaboration among artists, even when they don't realize they are collaborating with one another. Practice always makes perfect, and part of the hardest part of doing anything creative is the implementation of an idea. Sure, you'll get critics, but you got your message out there. Value constructive criticism and discount everything else.
I think your video is a good approach, but like eldavojohn and I said, a few less transitions and a little clean-up on the quantity of pictures might help making the video better. It looked like some of the video came from a VCR rip which used Macromedia protection (hence the jumping of the video.) Not sure exactly how to fix this -- there might be some programs out there to dejittter the video (maybe something that takes still shots of the video and realigns them.) Also, some of the video seemed to be out of phase with the audio.
Overall, though, I thought the video was a good attempt and I could see this as becoming a feature length documentary if you were looking to go that route.
On the post: Judge In Google WiFiSpy Case Trying To Determine If Packet Sniffing Open Networks Is An Illegal Wiretap
Re:
Your privacy rights disappear when the signal enters the public domain. If you want it private, don't put it in the public domain.
There should be no expectation of privacy for unencrypted wireless, or unencrypted radio, television, etc. If you don't want something shared, keep it private.
An uneducated computer user (most people) probably does not understand how their wifi works and they probably don't understand concepts such as packet-sniffing.
Every wifi device I've purchased in recent months have come with documentation warning the person using the device that they need to turn on encryption. If you are a moron in a hurry, you shouldn't have a computer, or a car, or a house, or anything else. The law should not protect the foolish (why, oh why, do we have to put warning labels on everything.)
Plus, going wireless has inherent risks, regardless to whether you use encryption or not. As we say in EVE Online...you aren't completely safe anywhere in space...and this includes life in general. If you are broadcasting, you are transmitting your data to everyone around you, whether it is encrypted or not, and people may be able to discover what you are transmitting, whether or not the law is on your side. Build a faraday cage and condition all wires entering and leaving your site if you are worried about your data, or realize that you aren't safe, and do what you can to increase the difficulty/decrease the payoff of compromise.
On the post: RIAA Lawyer In Limewire Lawsuit Recommended As A Federal Judge
Re:
It's been for sale for a very long time (at least since early of last century.) Presidents who have justices die or retire from the Supreme Court replace them, and they usually choose justices in their best interest (and their best interest is usually the interest of those who put them in power to begin with.) District judges go through the same process as the Justices of the Supreme Court, where district judges are appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the Senate.
Sure, Justices have to be vetted by the Senate, which of course work their best to try and approve justices that meet their best interests too. But in the end, they are all bought and paid for by someone. The good thing is that, for the most part, the system works because there are too many chiefs and not enough indians...the competing conflicts in interest keep the process neutral. But that doesn't mean that it is perfect (and it never will be so long as humans are involved in the process.) Because there is less of an impact with district judges, there is likely to be less scrutiny and thus more people get through...but since the RIAA/MPAA owns most of the Senate (and at least one person in the White House,) it isn't surprising that the normal conflict wasn't there to vet this individual.
On the post: The Pirate Party Not Pirate-y Enough For You? Maybe You Need Kopimism, The Official Pirate Religion
Re: Re: Re: I'm in
Knowing Kevin Smith (I don't know him personally, but I've listened to a great many interviews with him,) and the folks behind Dogma...I think they would be happy with your effort. Kevin doesn't seem to be the type of guy who gets overly upset with people taking his ideas and running with them, and he seems to be a fan himself of a number of different genres that he has borrowed from (just look at his shameless parody of Star Wars in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back.) If anything, I would think he would acknowledge the fact that your church would result in more sales of his movies (just look at Scientology, which singlehandedly bought the production of Battlefield Earth, and then kept it alive in the box office and DVD sales. Just have your congregation buy multiple copies of the Dogma DVD and Kevin will be happy.
On the post: Judge In Google WiFiSpy Case Trying To Determine If Packet Sniffing Open Networks Is An Illegal Wiretap
Re: Re:
Really, really flawed analogy...but your like 0 for 30 in the analogy department so far.
If you and I share a fence, and I have a tree growing on my side which produces lemons. If my tree crosses over the shared fence into your yard, under most property laws, the tree may belong to me but the lemons on your side of the fence belong to you (as does the branches, so if you wanted, you could go and cut down the branches on your side of the fence if you wanted to.)
Mine is an equally crappy analogy, because a wifi device is an access device, and theoretically I could press charges if you accessed my wifi router without my permission, but since I am broadcasting my traffic to you (like playing a radio in my house or standing nude in my front room,) it certainly shouldn't be illegal for you to sniff my traffic, listen to my radio, or accidentally see me standing nude in my front room.
On the post: Music Is Collaborative: Jay-Z To Sugar Hill Gang To Al Jolson And Back Again
Re: Re: Re: Video Editing
So, it is not entirely original. Sure, the songs/pieces here are what I'd call "original", but they all have their roots from other things the author has experienced which may not be "theirs." I am not saying that this author/musician shouldn't receive just payment for their works, they need to realize that there has to be limits, and calling out the lawyers to sue someone else for "borrowing" upon you work leaves you open to other lawyers suing you for "borrowing" upon someone else's works.
It is nearly impossible to create something completely new that doesn't build off of something. Culture, religion, music, movies, books, relationships these are all things that shape us and the thing we create. Nothing happens in a vacuum and we all stand on the shoulders of the giants.
Exactly what I believe and am saying, and what I believe the person who generated this video is saying too. Everything is built off of something else. Claiming it isn't (which I've seen more than a few commenters here say in recent months,) only shows someone's ignorance about how the system works. All too often Copyright Maximalists believe that anything they come up with is sacred and unique...but then they look the fool when someone else comes along and sues them for copying. This is why ideas shouldn't be subject to copyright. And we need to look at the whole work and not just bits of it to determine if infringement occurred. And there has to be a lower limit (a floor) on the number of ideas in a work before it qualifies for copyright. Infringement of a word, phrase, or 6 notes should be impossible to enforce.
On the post: Canadian PM Copies Campaign Commercial, Doesn't License Hockey Clips
Re: Re: Political Ads? not commercials but political.
I am still not convinced. I used a robot journalism software package and it came up with a better, more coherent comment than Darryl did. Thus, I believe Darryl is nothing more than a bunch of cats pushing keys on a computer.
On the post: Judge In Google WiFiSpy Case Trying To Determine If Packet Sniffing Open Networks Is An Illegal Wiretap
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Sorry sir, but you failed computer history 101, please head back to school. I suggest reviewing the Wikipedia page for ARPANET and History of the Internet.
The "internet" was designed to be a connection of networks (hence the name Internet is a shortened name for Interconnected-Networks,) some of which were run by the military. ARPANET (which was the precursor to the internet,) was a research and development network, created to link the defense research labs with universities which were doing their work. It was not designed to be a military network, as it was not exclusive to the military (if it was, you likely never would have heard about it or would be using it now.) ARPANET was designed to link the military with universities around the country in order to share the few high-powered research machines that existed at the time. As more and more networks were connected to ARPANET, the name was changed from ARPANET to NSFNET to the Internet.
On the post: Judge In Google WiFiSpy Case Trying To Determine If Packet Sniffing Open Networks Is An Illegal Wiretap
Re: Re: The FBI
The courts would not agree with this (well, maybe they might in this current day, but they hopefully would get struck down by the Supreme Court.)
If you broadcast that you are committing a crime, and the police happen to hear this broadcast, then they can arrest you and the evidence will not be dismissed, whether you are on the street corner, on the radio, or on the internet. It is different if you are having a private conversation, but broadcasting is not private.
What the defense could argue, in the case of an unencrypted wifi transaction is that like cell-phone and wireless telephones, which have special restrictions in the law when it comes to interception of communications, but that is because these channels may be open, but the conversation carried on these channels are considered private. If a wifi device allows anyone to connect and send/receive traffic, the conversation is hardly private.
But this only effects government eavesdropping and rules of evidence...any private person can eavesdrop to their hearts desire (and in most cases unless they record the conversation or listen to cell-phone/wireless telephones, can do so legally.) The only way to be sure your transactions are secure are to use encryption and monitor sessions...and even then you can never be entirely sure the transaction isn't being monitored/recorded by a third party.
On the post: Music Is Collaborative: Jay-Z To Sugar Hill Gang To Al Jolson And Back Again
Re: Video Editing
It was a little too much. I would have cut out a lot of the transitions, and would have done the video a little different if I was doing it. However, the message was really good and if you ignored the video and just listened to the audio, the message came along fine.
I didn't realize that Jay-Z did Empire State of Mind and was only aware of Key's version. Then again, I am not into most rap anyway, but I love connections, and wish that there were more of these videos. I'd love to see some music educator come up with a "Music Connections" like Burke's "Connections", where links between classical and modern music is explored (and it doesn't even need to be completely about music...because William Shakespeare is the original rapper.)
The message that no art is entirely created from a vacuum is a good one, and one I believe. Those who scream "he copied my work" have to realize that they copied it from somewhere else too. New ideas come from old ideas, and anyone who wishes to disagree is welcome to provide me with an example of an entirely new idea that isn't based on stuff that came before.
On the post: Microsoft's Bizarre And Misleading Statement About Google In Gov't Procurement Fight
Re: Re: This is the only thing Microsoft is good at
You mean like responding to someone else's comment with poor spelling, grammer, and logic?
I work with Microsoft all day long, every day, along with other software vendors. I bitch just as much about the other vendors I have to deal with, but none of them are convicted monopolists like Microsoft is. When I update Microsoft software, there is absolutely no reason that I then have to spend hours trying to fix the compatibility issues between Microsoft and third parties...but yet I do, and it is usually because Microsoft changes their software and doesn't change their published standards, which everyone else has to play catch-up with by reverse engineering the changes. If they didn't use their monopoly to screw other vendors, then I wouldn't have as much to bitch about, would I?
On the post: Microsoft's Bizarre And Misleading Statement About Google In Gov't Procurement Fight
This is the only thing Microsoft is good at
People actually believe that Active Directory is the best thing Microsoft ever invented, but Active Directory is LDAP, Kerberos, and a couple other pre-existing services. Novell had been doing the same thing for years before Microsoft entered the game, but Microsoft threw up so much FUD about how Active Directory was so much better than Novell's offerings, and with their market share on the client side and their bastardization of the protocols to push out competitors, they quickly knocked Novell out of the market, as they had done with Netscape and IIS.
On the post: Bandwidth Caps Forcing Users To Police Their Own Household Internet Usage
Re: Re: Re:
It may only be 300 KB/s, which is still fast, but reasonable for a cable modem. My ISP doesn't have a clue as to how to monitor bandwidth, and thus they usually count the data twice. So essentially, the 200GB cap per month really is just 100GB and they even count unsolicited traffic inbound and broadcasts.
I've shown them a number of times my traffic analysis from bandwidthd, which shows all traffic through my router (as well as traffic which was sent to my router and dropped,) and every time they tell me that I am over, I am usually half way through my allowance according to my router. And since I have no control over what is sent to me unsolicited, SMB traffic from my neighbors make up a good 10%-20% of the traffic bandwidthd shows (no smb traffic comes from me to the network, as I only let a few ports and protocols out.)
It has gotten so bad at times that I have to drop the internal interface on my router to prevent myself from going over (at which point I get a nastygram from my ISP telling me that they will block me, but so far, I have yet to be blocked.) Even then, I get flooded with traffic, but at least I am not contributing to my traffic (and the ISP has less of a leg to stand on when they do block me.)
On the post: Is Tethering Stealing Bandwidth?
Re: Re: Re: Devil's advocate
But I think that is exactly what some people are saying here. When I signed my contract years ago with AT&T, my contract made no mention of tethering, since that wasn't an option at the time. I have not signed another contract, and yet I am told now that I have to spend an additional $50 to tether a computer to my phone, even though the option within the phone is already available.
The contract changed after I signed it. Now of course, AT&T said on the contract that they could change the terms and conditions at any time, which they have, but is the change onerous or not? I'd say yes, because they are taking away capabilities for no logical/technical reasons, but to just support their monopoly and squeeze a few more bucks out of me because they are greedy.
On the post: Harvard Business Review Explains How Big Content Is Strangling Innovation
Re: Re: Re:
Nope, you were mistaken...I was the one wearing the brown jacket.
On the post: Harvard Business Review Explains How Big Content Is Strangling Innovation
DIVX Stymie
If you want a product stymied by big content, you have no further to look than the DAT (Digital Audio Tape.) Industry lobbying (Audio Home Recording Act of 1992) and vendor ham-fisting (by using "copyright bits") killed DAT before it could replace tape and reel-to-reel as a viable alternative since it was lossless, and less prone to media degradation. Of course, it's downfall did usher in CD and CD-writing technology.
On the post: AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile Hit With Dumbest Antitrust Lawsuit Ever
Re: Re: Re:
Finally, a troll that calls themselves out for what they are.
Next >>