Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!



When Software Offends

Godeke Re:Well.. (467 comments)

"Words are just labels, neutral representations of concepts."

Words may be, but *names* are selected by people to reflect what they feel is important to convey to the public about a project. Having been involved in several startups and launched a few products, names become contentious issues because they are the very, very first impression of a product to the customer.

Here we have some products where the important thing was clearly the author's inability to score a date, ever, and thus an obsession they have with images of what they can't have. If that is what people want to advertise, I agree they should be allowed to... but probably not on my server. Freedom of association and freedom of speech are a balancing act, and I prefer to associate with mature people. The fact that a package name is being used for trolling isn't a big deal, but clearly nobody needs to *distribute* it and associate with the images being conjured.

But hey, how are your contributions to Pedobear Security Software going?

more than 3 years ago

Mozilla Ships Firefox 5, Meets Rapid-Release Plan

Godeke Re:More work for plugin developers (282 comments)

I'm going to have to agree with you fully on this. The *reason* I still used Firefox was the plugins, otherwise I just use Chrome recently.

Now the plugins I want are disabled, some never becoming *4* compliant and here we are with *5* and even more plugins failing. This is the opposite of progress, unless the goal is to strip the browser of the reasons I use it over the alternatives.

more than 3 years ago

Iceland Taps Facebook To Rewrite Its Constitution

Godeke Re:They cannot possibly get it right (264 comments)

If this "will not happen for the vast majority" then why isn't this happening in parts of the world without a strong state presence? By "this" I mean specifically the use of this proposed "cheap security".

Genocide is far beyond my "taking of land" proposal, but there it is in the news. One would think that in the lawless areas that the raping, pillaging and burning of the communities would make such a "cheap security" a self fulfilling prophecy if it wasn't some Utopian fiction.

So, as Cyber Vandal says, you aren't selling this particularly well. The private security firm that you are paying can very easily be outclassed by a warlord as history and current events related in the stateless (or weak state) areas will attest. Really, there seems to be two outcomes historically: a strong state asserts its presence or small factions vie for domination via violence.

I wish your Utopia the best, but I suspect (even discounting statist action) Galt's Gulch will be razed and burning.

more than 3 years ago

Iceland Taps Facebook To Rewrite Its Constitution

Godeke Re:They cannot possibly get it right (264 comments)

That is quite the Utopian description and quite the bit of typing, but it doesn't address the short, simple question I actually asked.

Someone is in conflict with you over your private ownership of the land. The group who disputes your ownership is not participating in a Utopia but are nothing more than organized criminals (a warlord and his muscle) looking for low hanging fruit to pluck. They are willing to use violence. In keeping with the lack of a state that can threaten violence, who is going to prevent them from taking over your land?

This isn't a theoretical question: during the heyday of the mob there were cities that were effectively ruled by warlords (mobster families). They were rooted out only with the application of force and they used force to fight against being rooted out. Mexico is under siege from internal warlords and stateless regions of our planet are rife with warlords.

Not everyone is going to internalize libertarian principles and without a way to fight those groups, I see those willing to use violence prevailing against those who spout platitudes. Your vision seems to frame criminals as individual actors that traditional (if private) policing can manage. I argue that such a Utopian society will fall prey to those organized groups without such deep thinking and fewer morals.

Returning to the direct question: who prevents your land from being taken over in this scenario?

more than 3 years ago

Iceland Taps Facebook To Rewrite Its Constitution

Godeke Re:They cannot possibly get it right (264 comments)

Assuming as given the premise that the state can only exist if it is non-violent, who prevents the situation from degrading into warlords filling the violence vacuum. If you have a private police on your small chunk of land you live on, what is to stop another from simply taking your land by force? In a traditional state, we rely on the courts, police and laws (rules) thereof to establish the accepted norms and to enforce them.

Are you simply saying that your "private police" will be bigger than the aggressors?

more than 3 years ago

Hypertext Creator: Structure of the Web 'Completely Wrong'

Godeke Control Freak System (357 comments)

I have followed alternative presentations of knowledge for a long time, dabbling in creating systems for pseudo-3D presentation of information, using various types of mind mapping and collaborative knowledge systems. The reality is that the web succeeded and the various competitors failed precisely because of the "poor" implementation choices of the current nightmare of kludged together technologies are "worse is better" type work. Would it be nice to have a better framework? Sure, but not at the cost of paralysis.

Xanadu wants to give strict copyright enforcement with a pay-as-you-eat system for consumption. The implementations have been plagued by pulling the rug out from under any implementer who gets "close" to a solution, usually with accusations that the implementer was trying to steal his technology. The Xanadu system is intended (as far as I have seen: the implementations never got far enough to tell for sure) to allow distributed content, but always with verification of the original source material's permissions and state. In short: the project is surrounded by control freak symptoms.

Maybe we will have such systems in the future, but they will stand along side the chaos that is the open Internet and I'm glad for it. For every neat feature I like about Xanadu, there is a control freak feature that takes away from the free-form nature of the existing Internet. Xanadu would make a great academic knowledge system, perhaps a real authoritative online Wikipedia where people with actual knowledge contributed and could avoid random yahoo intervention on their work. But I would never want to live with it as the only implementation of hyperlinking.

more than 3 years ago

Does A Company Deserve the Same Privacy Rights As You?

Godeke Re:Citizens United (379 comments)

This is the heart of the matter. Corporations are *better* off than people under the law because the people inside a corporation can commit crimes and the *corporation* suffers the consequences of their crimes. Piercing the corporate veil is hard and generally only possible when "an example" is being made.

Using the "funding a movie" context from another branch of this thread, a corporation can be formed to create a movie which is nothing but libelous nonsense about someone disliked by the founders. Properly structured, this corporation won't have any money left once the movie has been released. This is done by paying other corporations excessive amounts for all of the production costs. (Those other companies usually have overlapping owners to the primary company, but buried under a few layers of shell company registrations.) When the victim "wins" the lawsuit, the corporation folds and the people behind it are free to form a new corporation to continue their harassment campaign, untouchable by law.

Perhaps some expendable hire who was used to write the script is fed to the legal machine, but the actual malcontents are free to go.

This example can be extended to all kinds of things that, as an individual would land one in jail, but as a corporation simply causes "another unfortunate corporate failure which drains the economy of jobs".

more than 4 years ago

Future Ubisoft Games To Require Constant Internet Access

Godeke Ubisoft vs. the deployed. (497 comments)

Maybe after Steam gave an online mode to allow the military to use their stuff while deployed, the cheese eating surrender monkeys (it is a French company) decided to strike back by making an even worse arrangement for those who serve.

about 5 years ago


Godeke All you need to know: (359 comments)

I know of only two instances where I've ever definitely been infected with spyware. I don't do stupid things like downloading and running strange programs from third-party sites, so I think both infections were probably caused by a site exploiting a security hole in Internet Explorer, or in a plug-in like Adobe Acrobat or the Flash player. Both times, once I noticed I was infected, I got rid of the infection with Malwarebytes, but I don't know how much damage the spyware did in the meantime.

Malwarebytes is good software, but as you point out you don't know how much damage was done. Secondary infections can easily be missed, and many malware programs open your machine to further exploitation. As tired as the suggestion is, you needed to do what you did with your website: revert the machine to a known good backup of the system state, formatting first. Anything less and you *should* have that nagging doubt that you haven't actually cleaned everything up. There are ways to diminish the concern: inspecting the machine for unexpected packet flows, using anti-rootkit tool, etc... but only by formatting and restoring a know clean state or formatting and just restoring your data files will you be confident).

more than 5 years ago

Battle Lines Being Drawn As Obama Plans To Curb Tax Avoidance

Godeke Re:two ways to solve the tax "scam" (1505 comments)

"That's the second thing that's wrong with it. It punishes success."

How right you are. We should return to the model where the failures pay for everything. Just rename the poor as peasants, set the various city, county, state and federal tax collectors up with cool names like the Baron, Duke and Lord and we will have returned to a classic system that didn't punish success.

Of course if that is too extreme, you could always try to be successful in a failed state. I hear that openings for local warlord are surprisingly common.

more than 5 years ago

Obama Recommends Delay In Digital TV Switch

Godeke Re:Switching to OTA digital could destroy video DR (589 comments)

Where do I get all these magical digital freedoms? You make it sound like the Broadcast Flag and DMCA magically vanish with over the air transmission, and the content providers are going to sing Kumbaya with us as we rip their content in the ways we want to.

I have my doubts.

about 6 years ago

Verdict Reached In RIAA Trial

Godeke Re:Unfortunately inevitable... (1001 comments)

"There are plenty of things I consider inherently immoral- (the law against murder, to take a random example)"

I think I will just go away now, nothing here to discuss.

more than 7 years ago


Godeke hasn't submitted any stories.


Godeke has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?