Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Slashback: Eldred, Cruise, SOAP

timothy posted more than 11 years ago | from the just-where-is-maxwell-afb dept.

Slashback 181

Slashback tonight with several updates, ranging from patent encumbrances to SOAP 1.2 to the transcript for Eldred v. Ashcroft, with more bits in the middle on the recent Geek Cruise in the Caribbean, the all-important cable TV lineups, and more. Read on below for the details!A little light reading. hayek writes "The transcript of oral argument at the Supreme Court in Eldred v. Ashcroft is now available online."

And then we saw the sharks. a9db0 writes "Part II of Doc Searl's travelogue recounting his experiences on the Geek Cruise has been posted here by the fine folks over at the Linux Journal"

In an earlier report from Geek Cruise, Linus predicted 2.6 by June 2003. If you liked the list of features being considered for 2.6, you can thank puriots0 for "the list of what's been included in time for the feature freeze for Linux 2.6", as found at kernelnewbies.org.

Peel back your eyelids and let these images flood your brain. strredwolf writes "I think we had half the story when Cartoon Network said they were going to remove Zoids and G Gundam in their Toonami block. It was more like remove Zoids, move G Gundam to Midnight Run with GI Joe, put HeMan and Transformers on full weekdays, and double up on DB and DBZ. The website and broadcast prove it now. (This report was done while watching to Toonami live.)"

And Stalke writes "Recently, rumours about Stargate SG1 7th season included it both being renewed as well as speculation that it might be cancelled. MGM and Scifi put those rumours to rest today by officially announcing a 7th season. It will begin filming next year with a full 22 episodes ordered. No word about Daniel Jackson returning though :("

Cracking down on alien fraudsters. yep writes "Administrators of the alien-hunting distributed computing experiment SETI@home have announced they will crack down on cheats who rort statistics on computing power lent to the project. The announcement follows a united protest from the chief contributors. SETI@home director David Anderson announced SETI@home would do its best to investigate users returning suspiciously high amounts of work and delete their accounts if it uncovered solid evidence of cheating."

Sure they're not. tiltowait writes "The Hartford Courant article "The FBI Has Bugged Our Public Libraries" has been retracted (this was mentioned here - but the older article has been removed). Even if the retraction can be trusted, this doesn't change the fact that the FBI can still bug libraries as freely as the CIA can assasinate with impunity, or that more McCarthyism is on the way."

This story retracts the claims of bugging made in the previous one. Since the FBI has little incentive to tell the truth on this count, I don't see what incentive anyone has to believe their denial.

Cleaning up the future for SOAP. Makarand writes "A major hurdle in finalizing the SOAP 1.2 specification has been removed. Both Epicentric, a subsidiary of Vignette, and WebMethods, which makes integration software, had said in earlier statements that they may have patents that cover the technology used in the SOAP 1.2 specification which would have made SOAP 1.2 non royalty-free hindering approval by W3C. Epicentric has now amended its earlier statement saying they no longer believe they hold any such patents, and even if they did, they are interested in making them available on a royalty-free basis. WebMethods has made no comments yet."

cancel ×

181 comments

webmethods (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621451)

webmethods is old.

Your (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621794)

Assvagina is old. Scrub that shit, nigga...

Direct link to a 50 page PDF file? (5, Funny)

ekrout (139379) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621458)

If I were you guys I'd probably avoid Slashdotting the Supreme Court...

Just a thought, though, not a sermon ;-)

Re:Direct link to a 50 page PDF file? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621493)

Yeah and the logs will show that the majority of connections are from IE

Re:Direct link to a 50 page PDF file? (3, Informative)

RudeDude (672) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621524)

Reposting, I screwed up my own HTML previously

If their site DOES get Slashdotted...
The 144KB (*ahem* KiB) PDF is also here [mrhostbot.com] .

Why is this marked troll? (2)

Chairboy (88841) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621765)

I don't understand, why is the above marked troll? It appears to be a legit link. Am I just naive?

Re:Direct link to a 50 page PDF file? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621861)

If I were you guys I'd probably avoid Slashdotting the Supreme Court...

Or at least hold off until January, when the Republican Senate, Republican house and Republican Idiot President start confirming the right winger judges to steal our rights away...

SciFi (3, Interesting)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621466)

"MGM and Scifi put those rumours to rest today by officially announcing a 7th season. It will begin filming next year with a full 22 episodes ordered."

Yea? I remeber when SciFi and Jim Henson annouced more seasons of Farscape and full seasons ordered.

Re:SciFi (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621764)

"Yea? I remeber when SciFi and Jim Henson annouced more seasons of Farscape and full seasons ordered."

When dead people say stuff, you damn well listen!

Re:SciFi (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4622318)

"Yea? I remeber when SciFi and Jim Henson annouced more seasons of Farscape and full seasons ordered."


When dead people say stuff, you damn well listen!
I assume he means Jim Henson Studios

Interesting, but (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621472)

I called ashcroft just a few minutes ago at 956 972 0032 and he said those documents were falsified, sorry.

FBI Conspiracy Theory (5, Funny)

CatWrangler (622292) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621476)

OK... The FBI may or may not be bugging libraries. The FBI is closely in alliance with the Secret Service. The Secret Service is run by the Treasury Department. The Treasury Department is run by Paul O'Neil, who used to run Alcoa. Alcoa is the largest producer in the world of Tin Foil.

It all makes sense folks. The truth is out there.

Re:FBI Conspiracy Theory (2)

Loki_1929 (550940) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621545)

"It all makes sense folks. The truth is out there."

No, you are "out there". ;)

Re:FBI Conspiracy Theory (2)

meatspray (59961) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621773)

pshhhaww, why would they go through the trouble to bug the computer directly? Wouldn't that be a horrible waste of their time?

I mean why not just keep an eye on the internet traffic for the whole library, I'm sure they all get their service from some place fairly standard and traceable.

They most likely tap network at some point where they can watch whole library system with one sniffer.

just my 2 cents

Re:FBI Conspiracy Theory (2)

lactose99 (71132) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621831)

They're already doing this... with Carnivore.

Re:FBI Conspiracy Theory (1)

da007 (242994) | more than 11 years ago | (#4622166)

Yeah it's easy to tap all libraries. I used to work at the Dothan, AL public library and all libraries in Alabama get their bandwidth through the Alabama Supercomputer Authority [asc.edu] . I'm sure other states have a similar setup.

Re:FBI Conspiracy Theory (3, Funny)

aero6dof (415422) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621847)

So what does this have to do with Kevin Bacon?

Re:FBI Conspiracy Theory (2)

maggard (5579) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621862)

OK... The FBI may or may not be bugging libraries. The FBI is closely in alliance with the Secret Service. The Secret Service is run by the Treasury Department. The Treasury Department is run by Paul O'Neil, who used to run Alcoa. Alcoa is the largest producer in the world of Tin Foil.

Umm, where does Kevin Bacon [virginia.edu] fit in?

Re:FBI Conspiracy Theory (2)

shorti9 (307602) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621982)

Actually, Tin Foil has been a key part of the catering teams for most of Mr. Bacon's movies.

Unfortunately, hollywood always screws the little guy, so he doesn't get the recognition he so deserves.

Re:FBI Conspiracy Theory (1)

vandemar (82106) | more than 11 years ago | (#4622387)

Umm, where does Kevin Bacon fit in?

As we know, the FBI has been monitoring online communications to gain leads on terrorist cells. From the Onion: Kevin Bacon linked to Al-Qaeda [theonion.com] .

Re:FBI Conspiracy Theory (2)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 11 years ago | (#4622339)

Alcoa sold a bunch of aluminum to Japan before WWII which was subsequently made into a lot of very dangerous airplanes called Zeros.

Leave it to Neal Stephenson to write a story about Japanese gold when what's really interesting is a story about Japanese aluminum.

Vulernability of SETI@home to cheats (4, Insightful)

Samir Gupta (623651) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621479)

Why don't they use a standard principle of distributed systems: just send out the same work unit to multiple machines and teams, and use some cross-comparison scheme to detect anamolies? Work units that disagree with the majority are flagged as invalid.

Re:Vulernability of SETI@home to cheats (1)

IEEEmember (610961) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621529)

I thought the original article said that team members were massively sharing nearly completed work units so that every machine on the team would complete the work unit and submit it.

Re:Vulernability of SETI@home to cheats (4, Interesting)

cduffy (652) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621537)

They do that -- but one of the methods of cheating is copying the results of that one completed work unit and returning it without recomputation when another machine on the same team is asked to double-check it.

One obvious solution -- distributing a work unit only once to each team -- comes to mind, but without being on the team I can't comment as to relevant practical concerns.

Re:Vulernability of SETI@home to cheats (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621543)

Because what MANY of the cheats are doing is to take an *almost* finished work unit, then distribute that to a whole bunch of machines to finish and subsequently report. Thus, they flood back a tremendous number of identical (and valid) work units and get credit for many more work units than could possibly be done with the actual hardware that they have.

These cheats aren't diluting the validity of the results, only getting credit for huge quantities of work units. (Though one could argue that they are disrupting things by chewing up bandwidth) Credit is one of the reasons that folks volunteer to do SETI@Home, so this could also cause people to loose interest and drop out if not corrected.

Re:Vulernability of SETI@home to cheats (3, Informative)

Alsee (515537) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621608)

Why don't they use a standard principle of distributed systems: just send out the same work unit to multiple machines and teams, and use some cross-comparison scheme to detect anamolies? Work units that disagree with the majority are flagged as invalid.

That is PRECISELY what that they are said to be abusing. One machine completes 99% of a work unit, that unit is then passed on to a hundred other machines. They each complete the last 1% and all hand in correct units. The cross-check program verifies that they all agree and flags them all as valid, they all get credit.

The good news it that this does not currupt any of the results. The bad news is that the "work done" figures are hosed and that worthless data is burning up bandwidth and processor time on the central servers.

-

Mirror (-1, Troll)

RudeDude (672) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621484)

If their site DOES get Slashdotted...
The 144KB (*ahem* KiB) PDF is also here [slashdot.org] .

Mirror provided by Mr HOSTBOT [mrhsotbot.com] .

Can we trust the Supreme Court? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621502)

After their horrendous ruling on the Microsoft Antitrust case, I'm not so sure I have much faith in our Supreme Court anymore. Even the highest judiciary station in the land is flooded with corporate cash and corrupt puppets. *sigh* say goodbye to the public domain...

Re:Can we trust the Supreme Court? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621578)

Even the highest judiciary station in the land is flooded with corporate cash and corrupt puppets.

WTF are you saying? Do you mean to imply that the Supreme court is accepting bribes from Microsoft? Where can I view your proof?

Or are you just talking out of your ass?

Idiot.

Re:Can we trust the Supreme Court? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621701)

Definitely talking out his ass, especially since the Supreme Court didn't rule in the Microsoft Antitrust case.

Re:Can we trust the Supreme Court? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621763)

Right, and this f*cking moron is currently sitting at +2 insightful. /. crowd is getting dumber by the day. This jerk's idea of insightful is a bellybutton lint collection.

INSIGHTFUL?!? (4, Informative)

MacAndrew (463832) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621762)

Please, there is no Supreme Court ruling re MS. Not even close. The case was settled, so if you want to blame someone, blames the Bush Administration Justice Department for the weak terms it sought, or more importantly the portions of the case it simply dropped after winning on them (e.g., tying).

But, anyway, NOT insightful.

Re:INSIGHTFUL?!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4622005)

Betcha 5 bucks that he makes it to +5 before you do.

Re:Can we trust the Supreme Court? (4, Insightful)

ajakk (29927) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621798)

Of course you know that the Supreme Court has never ruled on the Microsoft case except to deny the appeal by Microsoft from the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit and to deny the fasttrack from Judge Jackson. The Supreme Court is not flooded with corporate cash at all. The justices are very open about all of their money, and it is stupid to claim that they are corrupt puppets.

Not so insightful... (2)

schlach (228441) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621820)

This post and subsequent moderation is why there is M2. Don't rubberstamp moderation results, take the time to investigate. Warning: under the current consensus system, you may never moderate again for insightfully metamoderating. =) I M2 twice a day, and haven't moderated in a month.

Re:Can we trust the Supreme Court? (2)

elmegil (12001) | more than 11 years ago | (#4622088)

The ruling on the MS case is not a primary reason to lose faith in the Supreme Court. Things like their ruling in Bush V Gore (or was it Gore V Bush? I forget), and all the interesting political bs documented as going on in Closed Chambers [amazon.com] by Ed Lazarus are all much more damning than that. For the record, while Ed documents thoroughly the inconsistencies of the alleged "strict constructionists" on the court, the liberals are just as much at fault, so don't construe me as having a particular agenda.

Library (4, Interesting)

teamhasnoi (554944) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621504)

Couldn't some /.er go to the library in question and investigate the computers? See if there is something running in the background or a keylogger on the keyboard? *That* would be interesting, indeeeeed. I would be interested to see what library patrons have been doing to circumvent and/or expose any attempts at skullduggery by the feds.

Re:Library (5, Interesting)

ender81b (520454) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621625)

Allright I work at a university research library so I can possibly answer this for you. For one, no we haven't had the FBI knocking on our door so that is good. But, as to how they would do this i have a few theories.

I doubt they would run anything on the computers themselves using a program or a keylogger, mainly because it is too much work and ALOT of people would have to know about. I mean, we have 176 public computers and around 200 staff computers throughout all our branches they would have to bug. And to do that they would have to involve at least 3 people PLUS the student techs who administer the machines and work in the labs. I would doubt they would bother with it, considering the work to log 500 some machines. Doesn't seem worth their time.

Instead, and much more likely, they would track the people's book browsing habits. Our library uses a third-party system called IRIS (innovative research something something) to handle our online card catalog, which happens to be our only card catalog. Now things become more interesting. Since all queries (seaching for books, journals, etc, etc) are tracked by IP and logged automatically by the IRIS machine in the first place - to see interests in books and what we can keep or send to storage, not part of some grand conspiracy - all the FBI would have to do is ask for the logs. Then, assuming they know which computer the suspect was at, match the IP's with the queries. Also if they wanted stuff like book checkout records, etc, etc, they could just grab it from the IRIS machine. Basically, this would be relatively easy for them and only 1-2 people who have to know. And, even better, the general public would be oblivious. You could also set up the database to only report certain queries for books, and the like. I mean the infrastructure is there, all they have to do is turn it on/customize it to what they need.

The only way you could find out about it is if you had access to the IRIS machine. And, sorry guys, that ain't going to happen unless you work there. So don't go to your local library looking for key loggers you aren't going to find any. Now, personally, I am a lowly student computer tech so I have absolutely no say in this but it is somewhat scary to think of.

Also, they could just deploy packet sniffers, etc, etc on the LAN.

No matter what a stripper tells you (4, Funny)

cscx (541332) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621515)

There's no sex on the Geek Cruise. None. Oh, there's geeks on the Geek Cruise -- but you don't want geeks. You want sex. And there's no sex on the Geek Cruise.

Re:No matter what a stripper tells you (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621887)

damn, and here I thought it was a greek cruise. No sex on a greek cruise?

Eldred Cruise uses SOAP? (0, Offtopic)

McFly69 (603543) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621517)

Wow... that is news worthy. Middle aged Tom Cruise uses SOAP. :)

BAD joke... Ignore this.. do not even mod it.

Oh Great more Advertising (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621521)

Effing Great!

More Advertising, can I wear earplugs and make it go away?

Why couldn't I go on the cruise? (5, Funny)

ekrout (139379) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621527)

Free cruises are a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of free as in free speech, not as in free beer.

Free cruises are a matter of the vacationers' freedom to sail to, study, change and improve cities all across the globe. More precisely, it refers to four kinds of freedom, for the users of the cruise:

- The freedom to ride on any ship, for any purpose (freedom 0).
- The freedom to study how the ship works, and adapt it to your vacationing needs (freedom 1).
- The freedom to redistribute free cruise passes so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
- The freedom to improve the cruise, and release your improvements to the event coordinator, so that the whole community benefits. (freedom 3).

Re:Why couldn't I go on the cruise? (5, Funny)

Dr. Awktagon (233360) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621629)

Remember, boarding a ship without permission from the ship owner makes you a PIRATE.

Re:Why couldn't I go on the cruise? (2, Insightful)

UnknownQ (84898) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621790)

Remember, boarding a ship without permission from the ship owner makes you a PIRATE.

and it makes you a STOWAWAY, which is WORSE.

Re:Why couldn't I go on the cruise? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621929)

Hmm could the music industry use that one?

Last year, $30 billion dollars worth of CDs were illegally PIRATED.

or

Last year $30 billion dollars worth of CDs were illegally STOWAWAYED.

It just doesn't have the same "zing".

Re:Why couldn't I go on the cruise? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4622371)

STOWED AWAY, not STOWAWAYED.

Patents on SOAP? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621554)

Is that why RMS doesn't use it?

LOL (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621643)

Mod this up!

You are a jealous bully (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621840)

I don't find these sorts of comments funny or insightful in any way. And they always show up on Slashdot.

Didn't you get bullied when you were in school? Didn't you have enough of that?

To better understand your comment, I'll rephrase it thusly:

"RMS is funny, and I don't understand him. He says things that cause me to think. He says things that threaten my livelihood. He speaks out where I am afraid to. He is confident in his ideas.

Kick kick kick. I cannot deal with him. Kick Kick Kick.

I am small and by kicking RMS I can be big."

Myself, I wish I could understand and phrase an argument as clearly and succinctly as RMS. I wish I could code as well as RMS. I wish I had made a contribution to my profession 1/1000th as important as either emacs, gcc, or GNU. I wish I had the balls to speak as freely as RMS. I wish I wasn't as enamored of money as I am, maybe then I could follow my dreams of activism, and I thank RMS for following his. I thank RMS for his contributions to our profession and to society, and for making arguments that cause me much grief when I think about them.

Re:You are a jealous bully (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621993)

I wish I had the balls

Well, I couldn't have put it better myself. Congratulations, faggot. Now, get back to pumping your little fucknut brother in the anus.

Re:You are a jealous bully (1)

abe ferlman (205607) | more than 11 years ago | (#4622008)

I'm so torn. I agree with everything you say, and I think RMS may be the most important and influential thinker of our generation.

But here's why I'm torn- if people didn't bash RMS all the time with such petty hatred , that joke wouldn've been pretty funny, like a teasing joke between friends. When taken in the context of the other posts that show up here however, I fear that you are exactly right.

Alas, people hate him because his ideas threaten the deeply buried contradictions that lay beneath the surface of people's conception of the world.

Re:You are a jealous bully (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4622081)

I wish I wasn't as enamored of money as I am, maybe then I could follow my dreams of activism

Oh you lame little troll baby. This kind of talk makes me sick. You want to follow your stupid little utopian dreams of "activism" Ha! you stupid little winneing 1st world soft puppy you wouldn't know a cause if it bit you in the arse. Your own argument is just the opposite of the parent post instead of kicking RMS you want to lick his balls for lack of your own.

AC vs AC

Re:You are a jealous bully (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4622256)

agreed. the original poster is simply jealous he doesn't share the same powerful musk and aroma as RMS.

the amazing thing is, RMS actually does use soap, but his man-juices are strong enough to penetrate nonetheless.

oh, if only I could be in a room with RMS right now, to share in his essence.

Geek Cruises (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621557)

These "Geek Cruises" seem to be doing quite well. This phenomenon has even attracted the attention of mainstream travel agencies like Orbitz [orbitz.com] .

ISPs and e-mail disclosure (5, Interesting)

wytcld (179112) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621581)

The McCarthyism link is to a Wired story about a law now likely to pass the Senate allowing the FBI to gain ISP e-mail records without warrant. All the more reason to get your own fixed IP and run your own mailserver. If I'm my ISP for mail, can they demand I turn over the records of my e-mail from my own computer in my home without a warrant? For those whose cable services block outgoing port 25 ... tough.

Of course, having read this, Ashcroft's Ashellians will require licenses on mail servers....

Re:ISPs and e-mail disclosure (3, Informative)

brer_rabbit (195413) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621857)

Won't they just tap your inbound/outbound connections upstream? I agree running your own mail server does have it advantages, but security from your upstream ISP doesn't seem like one of them.

FBI, Libraries, and You (4, Funny)

carb (611951) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621585)

Well, if I recall back to David Fincher's "Seven", there's an interesting scene where Morgan Freeman's character explains to Brad Pitt's character that the country has specific books flagged, and that if you're reading them, they know it (or something to that degree).

My point here is - I've never known movies to be wrong.

flicks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621777)

Never wrong? Not even "Armageddon"? :)

Re:FBI, Libraries, and You (2)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 11 years ago | (#4622359)

Homer: "TV Said that? Then it MUST be true!"

A new low... (5, Insightful)

igaborf (69869) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621586)

...even for /.

Let's see... the FBI says the report wasn't true, the city librarian says the report wasn't true, the reporter says the report wasn't true, and the reporter's two anonymous sources say the story wasn't true. And the delusional /. editor's response? "Since the FBI has little incentive to tell the truth on this count, I don't see what incentive anyone has to believe their denial."

Un-fucking-believable.

Re:A new low... (3, Insightful)

abe ferlman (205607) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621653)

... igaborf says it's not true, everyone believes her.

The dear editor's point was that a retraction of a story about espionage is at least as likely to be caused by pressure as by error, and probably more so since there could be serious consequences to making up such a story, so it's not something one enters into lightly.

It's called plausible deniability.

Re:A new low... (4, Insightful)

Alsee (515537) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621725)

Well, there is the little point that any source that did confirm the story would get hit with some serious federal prison time. In case you don't want to bother looking at the original slashdot story, [slashdot.org] it said:

"There's a gag order. When the FBI uses a court order or a subpoena to gain access to library computers or a list of the names of people who have borrowed certain books, librarians can't tell anyone - not even other librarians or you. They face a stiff federal penalty if they do."

It's one of the lovely provisions of the USAPATRIOT Act. If patriotism means locking up librarians then I'm no patriot. Blowing up a handfull of buildings isn't going to destroy America, but gutting the constitution can.

-

Re:A new low... (2)

Skjellifetti (561341) | more than 11 years ago | (#4622036)

You can always confirm it to the reporter and ask that they not reveal your name. Many reporters in the US and other places have gone to jail rather than reveal their sources. Reporters regard this as a fundamental part of a free press.

WHATEVER YOU GAY, G-MAN! (2)

Eric_Cartman_South_P (594330) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621737)

I bet you'll be retracting your post, too, to keep even more secrets from us, Mr. Fed!

Re:A new low... (3, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621867)

Considering the FBI's history, I don't blame /. .
The FBI is not above threatening to put people in jail over these issues.

For me, the FBI needs to go beyond just saying it wasn't true.
No I don't think this is a huge conspiecy, or that the FBI is out to get me, but they have a pretty abusive history, so I take everything they say with a lump of salt.

Re:A new low... (2)

elmegil (12001) | more than 11 years ago | (#4622040)

Let's see; all the parties involved would be under a gag order.... At this point if all they say is "no comment", that basically confirms the premise. You really don't think that there's any chance that everyone involved has been leaned on and threatened with legal action to get them to go along?

I don't say it's the most likely possibility, but I think it's naive and bordering on stupid to presume it's impossible.

the FBI has ways of making you believe (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621591)

This story retracts the claims of bugging made in the previous one. Since the FBI has little incentive to tell the truth on this count, I don't see what incentive anyone has to believe their denial.

Early tomorrow morning, around 4:30am, you will receive some surprise guests at your door, and after they let themselves in, you will learn exactly what your incentive is.

Hint: save yourself a lot of trouble and have your computers unplugged and boxed up.

By tomorrow afternoon, I predict you too will retract your statement.

A Friend

Live in fear (3, Insightful)

Tailhook (98486) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621595)

"doesn't change the fact that the FBI can still bug libraries as freely as the CIA can assassinate with impunity, or that more McCarthyism is on the way."

You diminish the tragedy of McCarthy with your excited little exaggerations.

As for the CIA capping terrorists:
"..hey man, nice shot!" - Filter

Until It's You (5, Insightful)

Myriad (89793) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621686)

As for the CIA capping terrorists:
"..hey man, nice shot!" - Filter

Read this [csmonitor.com] , particularly the part about the three peasants.

What if someone were to turn around and declare you a terrorist?

Still finding it such a good idea?

Re:Until It's You (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621723)

Still finding it such a good idea?

Absolutely stupendous.

Re:Until It's You (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4622223)

F----ing A! Let's put the same criteria on the cops too! Shoot to kill on suspicion! Guarantee that will get a lot of lowlifes before they can commit a crime! Woooohoooo! Life sure is exciting once you give up your brain!!!!

CIA shoots... (2)

MacAndrew (463832) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621809)

No, they'd say something like, "Then I said, 'Hey, I wonder what THAT button's for?'"

Pretty scary for the folks on the ground, who have to worry maybe the CIA guy's got bad TV reception, or didn't sleep well last night.

Assassination BS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621627)

Much as I love to criticize the CIA, they're in the clear as far as I'm concerned on that one incident. Assassination is you take out a political leader instead of direct military action or to aid existing military actions. Frankly, what the drone plane did wasn't assassination. It was a military action. Sure it was a small-scale one, but with the enemy scattered all over the world in small groups, that's the way ALL military action against A-Q will look.

But the overall point of the Patriot Act sucking is well taken.

Sad news ... Stephen King dead at 55 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621659)


I just heard some sad news on talk radio - Horror/Sci Fi writer Stephen King was found dead in his Maine home this morning. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you didn't enjoy his work, there's no denying his contributions to popular culture. Truly an American icon.

Re:Sad news ... Stephen King dead at 55 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621724)

In related news, JD Salinger was arrested at his New Hampshire home.

Relevant Information (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621682)

the CIA can assasinate with impunity (1)

snake_dad (311844) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621683)

Well, Timothy, killing combatants with impunity is what happens in wars [cnn.com] ...

Re:the CIA can assasinate with impunity (3, Interesting)

Lucas Membrane (524640) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621803)

Does Bush's position as Commander in Chief make him a combatant and a legit target of the enemy? If not, why not? If so, is he not an 'illegal combatant', since he is usually wearing neither uniform nor conspicuous insignia?

Re:the CIA can assasSinate with impunity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621816)

C'mon, stop vacillating and just shoot him!

I didn't just say that. Anyone who says I did is a liar!

Re:the CIA can assasinate with impunity (1)

viking95 (623977) | more than 11 years ago | (#4622216)

Well, this is dumb. IANAG (I am not a general), but GWB is obviously a legit target. The plane that went down in Pennsylvania was probably headed to the White House. I've also heard conjecture that the plane that hit the Pentagon was headed for the White House or the Capitol, but the terrorists got lost. But the questions of legitimaticy have nothing to do with the terrorists, because they violate just about every point of the "Rules of War". And you don't need to wear a uniform all the time, just when you should reasonably expect to be combating. It is actually for your peoples protection that this rule was invented. If Al-Qaeda and Hezbollah would wear uniforms, many Afganis and Palestinians would be alive today. It's not illegal to use illegal combatants, every one does it and they are called spies. But if you are an illegal combatant, you lose your international rights against torture and execution

Re:the CIA can assasinate with impunity (1)

2short (466733) | more than 11 years ago | (#4622295)

Well, we're defiintely getting OT here, but what the hey...

"The plane that went down in Pennsylvania was probably headed to the White House."

How can this statement be anything but a wild guess?

"I've also heard conjecture that the plane that hit the Pentagon was headed for the White House or the Capitol, but the terrorists got lost"

Have you ever seen DC from the air? It's not exactly hard to find the big landmarks. Quite the oposite really. Given that they crashed into the one side of the Pentagon where there was a big fuel tank next to the building, I think it's a good guess they hit exactly what they wanted to.

Yeah... Riigggghhhhhhtttt... (3, Interesting)

Lokni (531043) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621689)

IMO, the fact that the librarians refused to discuss the matter of the FBI tapping the computers and stuff like that is solid evidence that the FBI is IN FACT doing it. If the FBI was NOT doing it, the Librarian would have said straight up the FBI has not contacted us and is not bugging anything. IMO, the fact that the librarian refused to talk about it, shows that she has been briefed by the FBI on what to say if questioned about the bugging.

Re:Yeah... Riigggghhhhhhtttt... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621806)


And it had absolutely nothing to do with the B-3 bomber.

Eldred's Question Time (2)

serps (517783) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621706)

I'm only a quarter of the way through the Eldred arguments, IANAL, insert disclaimer here, but it seems to me that many of the judges asking these questions just don't have an understanding of Eldred's arguments, yet are interrupting him with questions from all directions so as not to let him completely answer it.

That's just my take on it, but it just seems like they didn't buy his argument, and they're just being deliberately obtuse about it.

Re:Eldred's Question Time (2, Interesting)

The_Steel_General (196801) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621844)

It was Lessig who was discussing the case, but given that nit:

I think that they wanted to look at the two halves of his argument separately, while he kept referring to one as supporting the other. I think they wanted to see if either of them supported the claim individually, and I'd guess they were more interested in looking at the First Amendment issue. (As I understand it, going to the First Amendment for copyright issues isn't normally supported. They might have been looking for an easy out on that side...)

Further, based on their questions to Olson, they may have been so in favor of the Section 8 limitation argument that they didn't see the need to go any more down that path. (They gave him a *lot* of opportunities to describe the effective limits of the Copyright Clause, and he kept coming back to "Well, that's up to Congress." They didn't seem to like that answer, much.) Which, if true, is a good sign. And might mean that their questioning of Lessig was an attempt to see what help the First Amendment might give them.

It is a tricky problem for them: They don't like to overrule Congress, but also don't let Congress run wild with its own interpretation of the Constitution. Maybe we'll get lucky.

TSG

Re:Eldred's Question Time (2)

serps (517783) | more than 11 years ago | (#4622051)

Good post. (someone mod this guy up :) I finished reading the transcript and noticed that the Govt side of the arguments seemed to be a lot weaker than Lessig's. (Appeal to authority in the form of the EU, neglecting the fact that the EU changed its copyright terms to match the US, not the other way round, the argument that the previous extensions weren't challenged before, so of course they're correct, and so on)

I think that they wanted to look at the two halves of his argument separately, while he kept referring to one as supporting the other.

Yeah, I gathered that. I think Lessig realised that there was a fair amount of synergy in the parts of his argument, but I think it turned out passably, despite the questioning. He was right to have reserved a few minutes for the end, IMO. His summation really highlighted the holes in the opposition's arguments.

btw thanks for pointing out it's Lessig, not Eldred, doing the argument. I am teh suck.

Re:Eldred's Question Time (5, Insightful)

Anomalous Canard (137695) | more than 11 years ago | (#4622045)

Not at all.

First of all, it's difficult to tell which way the Justices are leaning from the questions. They've done their homework and read all thr briefs. They know Lessig's argument. What they are doing in the questioning is testing the argument to find its weaknesses. The stronger the argument, the harder the questions.

When you get down to SG Olsen's questioning, you'll see how thoroughly they demolish his position. "Whatever limit Congress sets as long as its finite" is a non-starter. Later on the Justices joked about theatre boxes in England being leased for 900 years. It's finite in mathematical terms, but unlimited in practical terms.

The real question for the court is how too define appropriate limits to Congressional powers that give meaning to the phrase "limited times" without usurping the Congressional function of setting the limit. They don't want to be in a position of having to say x years is OK, but y years is too long. Lessig has offered them a meaningful place to put that limit. SG Olsem has not.

They are also concerned that the argument which defeats the CTEA defeats the 1976 act as well. Lessig's own brief distinguishes the two and the clerks know this if the Justices don't.

Reading the transcript gave me hope. Several of the Justices got the point that Lessig was making. There is a real liklihood of a positive outcome. Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy and Breyer are likely yesses. There's only one more needed.

It's a little more informative to read the transcript which was posted to the web a few weeks ago. Someone put in the names of the Justices which this official transcript lacks. Also read Lessig's blog. I think he has real reasons to feel confident.

what a good slashback! (4, Insightful)

sweatyboatman (457800) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621719)

this is like the best slashback ever. so much interesting stuff. wow. I feel so in the know.

no, I'm not kidding.

in all seriousness. good job /. people

Geek Cruise? (1, Redundant)

fobbman (131816) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621781)

That boat must have looked like a ghost ship from the outside.

Correct capitalization. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621810)

This isn't really relevant, but I've been needing to make this rant for all the time I've worked at webMethods...

It's "webMethods". Not "web methods". Not "WebMethods". Not "Webmethods".

Just "webMethods".

Thank you.

(And, no, I don't know anything about the patent)

Re:Correct capitalization. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4622116)

Oh you mean webmethods

Geek Cruise.. What?? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4621912)

I know that here on Slashdot we all like to pile on the flaming when it comes to the Church of Scientology, but doesn't anyone care about the "Church" and its actions when they sponsor something like the Geek Cruise? Is this another case where Slashdotters are willing to look the other way because they are basically being bribed off? How many times do we see this with the RIAA/MPAA-love/hate relationship on this message board?

Here's the scoop. Geek Cruises Inc. is operated by Neil Bauman [newsforge.com] who is a OT6-level Scientologist. Not to mention that he has deep contacts with anti-semite Bobby Fischer.

The geek cruise format, from the time of leaving port is identical to that of the Freewinds OT5 training [scientology.org] . The early seminars and late "social activities" are designed to loosen your mind from its pinnings, allowing external suggestion to become much easier.

This isn't done to "brainwash you into loving Linux", that's already done and there's no need to be redundant. However, the point of the cruise is to open your mind to the possibility of joining their other cruises like Mindscape: Clear your mind in Alaska [geekcruises.com] and Celebrity Slam (this year featuring Nicholas Cage) [geekcruises.com] . These other cruises are specifically geared towards getting people hooked into Scientology. For whatever reason, it works a hell of a lot better than the weirdo movie they like to show to "IQ test takers" at their normal temples.

It's because the company Geek Cruises Inc does so many nice things for the geek community and provides really interesting cruises that Scientology likes it as a means of recruiting so much. Don't be fooled, please. If you are interested in Scientology, please visit their website and read up about it. Then visit Operation Clamback and read up about the things they don't want you to know.

Scientology is one of the most devious "religions" around. Don't be sucked in by promises of meeting geek celebrities or viewing beautiful scenery and stopping at exotic ports of call. It is all a scam. You may get what you pay for, but you will get much more that you simply don't want.

Re:Geek Cruise.. What?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4622136)

I hate all churches

When does the Eldred decision come? (1)

sgarrity (262297) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621947)

Does anyone know when a decision is expected on the Eldred case?

SETI blocks computed: take out the brag factor (2)

brer_rabbit (195413) | more than 11 years ago | (#4621966)

One of the brag factors about SETI seems to be "number of block computed" or whatever they call it. I wonder if the amount of cheating / falsifying data would decrease if the competitive nature of who's processed the most blocks were taken away.

Publishing aggregate results is fine, but posting individual results begs people to find ways, sometimes malicious, to "get ahead".

A Little Less DBZ Please... (2)

Greyfox (87712) | more than 11 years ago | (#4622044)

Dragonball and Dragonball Z are the twinkies of Anime. Lots of empty calories. I'd hesitate to even call them Anime. Any "plot" exists simply to get you to the next fight scene. It's a pity Bebop is too "mature" for that timeslot. It's got much more meat to it. Personally I'd fill those slots with Ranma 1/2 but I wouldn't object to seeing more Courage the Cowardly Dog and/or Powerpuff Girls in those slots.

Re:A Little Less DBZ Please... (2)

bgarrett (6193) | more than 11 years ago | (#4622352)

Ranma 1/2, in ANYTHING like its original animated form, will probably never be seen on Cartoon Network. The problem? In a word, "breasts".

LinuxworldExpo (OT) (1)

ACNeal (595975) | more than 11 years ago | (#4622118)

This is really offtopic, but se4emed like a good place to put it.

I just got a flyer in the mail for LinuxWorldExpo.

I normally just throw these away, they aren't worth my time or energy to go.

Of note were the sponsors.

The cornerstone sponsor was HP, the former employer of pundit Bruce Perens, until he slighted MS too much. Also the company that can't decide how to distribute Linux (or did they resolve that?) on their PC's.

Also, the silver sponsor was Macrovision.

I just thought it was appropriate that these two companies were sponsoring an expo. Neither of these two companies really are anti-Linux, but the /. crowd doesn't really have any use for them, do they? Just struck me as funny, thought I would make the observation out loud.

Cancelled (4, Funny)

Sloppy (14984) | more than 11 years ago | (#4622151)

MGM and Scifi put those rumours to rest today by officially announcing a 7th season.
Yes, but then they cancelled when they realized they wouldn't get the full 95 years of copyright protection to recover their investment. 75 years just wasn't enough.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...