I’ve got a bunch more articles that I wanted to post links to and comment about. Some of this stuff is just so stupid; I’m consistently amazed by the level of idiocy displayed by our government and, by proxy, our citizens.
First off is this story from /. about a new database the government wants to create. They call it a “no-work” database and liken it to the similarly named no-fly list. The idea is that it would be a database maintained by Homeland Security which would hold the names and records people whom it deems ineligible to work in the US. Ah, so we’re back to blacklisting people, eh? “Communist! You’ll never work in this country again!”
Next is this heartwarming tale of the Smithsonian toning down science, in order to appease the Bush administration. The basic idea is that they created an exhibit on climate change, but then removed the scientific conclusions and “[muddied] the displayed data” in order to “ensure that the exhibit would not offend the Congress or the White House”. Really? That’s what science should be concerned about? Jefferson once said, “Liberty is the great parent of science and virtue; and a Nation will be great in both, in proportion as it is free”. In essence, take stifle science and you stifle freedom. Sure, that’s a simplification, but the point is valid. Oh, founding fathers… You say we have a right to bear arms, but who cares what else you said…
Third is this ridiculous case of some guy using free WiFi. Regardless of what he ended up with ($400 fine and 40 hours of community service), he was facing a 5 year felony conviction and a $10,000 fine. That’s just wrong. Reading the story, you find out that the guy parked his car outside a coffee shop and used their free wireless internet. He didn’t know it was illegal, the coffee shop owner didn’t know it was illegal, and the cop didn’t arrest him right away…because he didn’t know it was illegal. Nonetheless, the perp was eventually brought in and charged.
To use a few different analogies, here’s what I find just plain wrong. (Note: Some of these are adaptations of comments that I happen to agree with). In order to get on the network, the guy’s computer had to make a DHCP request. This is, in all actuality, his computer asking if it can get on the network. The router responds by saying, “Yes. Yes, you can. Here’s your IP, a gateway, and some DNS info.” Voila! Permission granted. Case closed. If he had turned off DHCP, routed new users to a page that outlined the rules, or secured his network it would be an entirely different situation.
For instance, I would very much consider an open network with an SSID that is being broadcasted as an invitation to use the network. It would be like leaving your door open. Not broadcasting the SSID would be like shutting the door. Adding some security would be like locking the door. These seem like varying degrees of invitation to me. Bear in mind that even with the door open, the computer is asking the router for permission to “enter” the network. If somebody walks up to my house and asks to use the bathroom, I certainly have the right to say no, whether or not my door is open.
Finally, and perhaps most ludicrous, is this story. It basically talks about some teachers in the UK who don’t teach the holocaust, because their muslim students don’t believe in it. Who the fuck cares? It happened. I’m sick of schools bending to the whims of religion and dumbass parents. I don’t want my kid’s education ruined because you’re a moron. They mention that there’s a similar issue with teaching the Crusades, as it seems the local mosques have different teachings. Honestly, who gives a shit? If I was a teacher and one of my students told me their church said the earth was flat, I’d tell them they’re wrong and not to mention it again. It’d be that simple. The same would go for evolution. As far as science is concerned, it’s the best explanation. Science gave us modern medicine. Science gave us flight. Science gave us computers and the internet. Science gave us radio and phones. Fundamentalist, conservative religion did not.
[Update:] Oh, and Charlie Frye apparently thinks he’s going to be the starter for the Browns. What is he, high? He really believes they drafted Brady Quinn to be a backup? I mean, let’s just say he’s technically right and he starts this year. I still count that as wrong. The Browns have no intention of considering Charlie Frye their “starter”.
Recent Comments