Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Slashback

Slashback: Smallness, Blackouts, South Australia 118

Posted by timothy
from the why-doesn't-the-donut-write? dept.
Slashback is back this evening with more on censorship down under, games that you'll brag to your grandchildren you were glad to be beaten with a hot iron while playing, and more. Enjoy with care.

"Luxury!" DagBot writes: "TW2002 is still alive and can also be played as TCPIP telnet No BBS need to log into. Its called TWGS (Trade Wars Game Server). There is Still TW2002 communities going strong and I run a TWGS server now and have about 40 regular players playing. There is no large time-wasting BBS to log into, but its quick and easy to get into a game and get back to the good old days where you had to know how to read and have quick fingers to play.

There are also 2 TW2002 helpers that will run right out of the box with full telnet and ANSI support along with user-edited and scripts. Both are great programs Attac uses REXX scripts and Swath uses a Java based script for user defined scripts. Both will get you up and playing in a few minutes thinking about the good old days. My TW2002 stand alone server can be found [here] login, play, get a feel for the good old days."

Until everyone has one, it will keep being submitted, and maybe even then. azephrahel writes: "I am sure almost all of Slashdot's readers have drooled over the possibilities that many of the pc-on-a-stick products now offer. You can buy the uCsimm for $300, the matchbox PC for only $1,495, from emj you can get a 386 on a stick for $130 but you have to fit all your os & code & drivers into .9 Megs. Still that is probably the most reasonable, and made by Jumptech. They make fun toys, but there hard to buy peicemeal at a decent price.

Anyway after all that rambling, I just found this companies site, there called i-Button. They sell java computers called TINI, in a 72 pin simm format, and little button shaped devices called i-buttons (yes the thing in the java ring featured on slashdot in March) The important part, they sell peicemeal, reasonably. I just blew $120 bucks on their site and ended up with a java computer on a stick (TINI, complete with an ethernet controller onboard), a javabutton, a tempterature probe, and a project board to hook up and play with these toys on.
I figured that a few others here would like to hear they can get these toys without selling a spleen."

All these things have been mentioned on Slashdot before, but it looks like the era of ubiquitous little tiny parts has arrived, and at a price level sustainable by occasional weekend medical experiments, too.

Fraidja can't see that w'out p'mission, bub. For those of you unhappy with the apparent moves toward censorship in South Australia, Danny Yee writes: "Electronic Frontiers Australia has put online analysis of the South Australian legislation and suggestions for action."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Slashback: Smallness, Blackouts,

Comments Filter:
  • The constitution has a part in it that says that the constitution can be modified. Either by amendment or constitutional conventiom. However once ratified the Bill of Rights became a full fledged member of the constitution.
  • Australians not only swear a lot, they also drink a lot too. And their ancestors were all criminals.
  • I really think the US forefathers were enlightened. They made some very strong declarations, that make everyone's absolute rights very clear.

    Australia as a society doesn't have the same rights to the letter - but we have a constitution that in a very blurry way; and with thanks to precedents set in court over time, as well as the absolute resposibility of the gov. general - appointed by the prime minister, and the high court of Australia; we have freedom of speech.

    IANAL - but I have read our constitution many times, but most people here have not - so we tend to submit more easily to censorship than most countries because we are more politically unaware than, say, the US.

    But in any case - I have been to America - your freedoms also have responsibilities associated with them - and I think most Americans do not understand those. That is - you have the absolute right to free speech - but so does the other person next to you. You have no right to retaliate legally to anything said to you that is incorrect or offensive - all you can do is try to reason with the public and expose the populist bollocks that they have said - and hope to god that the population is a)listening, b) understanding, c) actually caring.

    Here the laws restrict some speech, but it usually has to go through quite a lot of debate before some idiot looser spreading lies about certain fact can be made to shut the hell up - personally I believe our system is the one I want my kids to grow up in - simply because IMHO most people are too stupid to see through some of these (often very good) liars. Its a choice that our forefathers made - and we all democratically agrees on, and if any US "freedom fighter" tried to change it - we'd die defending it.

    The values are self evident, but the implementation of those truths doesn't have to be uniform.

    Just my 2c
  • by Anonymous Coward
    *All your base are belong to my wife* well my brother wake me at break of the dawn he say we get signal main screen turn on my wife, she done us wrong she set up us the bomb and said all your base are belong to us she spent my last nickel and my only dime you have no chance to survive so make your time she say I am a pig so take off every Zig and all your base are belong to us oh yeah she done me wrong she set up us the bomb and say all your base are belong to us I don't want a scene So please don't make a fuss 'cause all your base are belong to us
  • by Anonymous Coward
    this meme is getting so out of hand it makes 'hot grits' look like a fart in a hurricane. can we get "ALL YOUR BASE" added to the lameness filter?
  • Hmm... Based on your statements I am forced to draw one of three conclusions:

    • I have completely misunderstood the meaning of the first amendment.
    • The first amendment is actually not part of the consitution, despite the fact that it is regularly cited in consitutional law cases, and it it's described as an amendment to "the Consitution".
    • You got it wrong.

    FYI,the War Powers Act of 1917 is considered by most to be a bill which effectively suspends the Consitution during a declared national emergency. There are certainly many who consider it to be unconsitutional, and therefore, illegal.

  • Since the TWGS that is up there is most likely .\ then go to my bbs..

    telnet://clockworkorangebbs.org



    - Xabbu
  • Note also that, if I remember correctly, we have not left a state of emergency for something like forty years. I read an article back in the 80's that talked about how every president for the past twenty years or so had extended the state of emergency by either issuing new executive orders or extending the old ones. I don't remember what triggered the original declaration.

    Wouldn't surprise me a bit if it were still true.

  • No. No. NO. All religions will teach you that you MUST respect the views of others. You have NO right to disrespect me, and this is the cause of so much strife in the world.

    Are you living in some sort of parallel universe? On the planet I'm from, people have huge wars over religion, often torturing and killing other people because they worship a different god, or worship the same god in a slightly different way. If those are religious teachings, then I want no part of religion. Religious tolerance is a great ideal, but there are plenty of worldwide religions which do not have a history of practicing religious tolerance. You even go on to give examples of religions which are intolerant, so I'm afraid I can't take your argument very seriously.

    Also, it is still possible to be religiously tolerant but disagree with a particular religion. For example, I have the freedom of speech to point out that I disagree with the way women are treated in some hard-line Islamic countries. I don't hate Muslims or wish to destroy them, but I will point out my disagreement with their views in some regards. This is a rational viewpoint for me to have IMHO, but one which you would silence in the name of "religious tolerance". Why should I be prevented from speaking just because it makes some people uncomfortable? And what if it turns out that a religion really was wrong about something; won't you feel bad about having prevented me from speaking then?

    Once you accept that society is an organism, you will understand why sometimes individuals need to be silenced for the good of the group as a whole. Its like removing a cancerous tumor.

    I disagree on the basis that society is better off when views are expressed and debated openly. I'd much rather have the local Nazis out on street corners where people can point and laugh at them (I'd encourage throwing vegetables too, but that's just me) rather than hiding from the government in some basement plotting to blow up a court house. By suppressing the parts of society that you don't like, you just make them turn their anger inwards and focus it more, becoming even more cancerous and harder to root out. Why risk that, when we can just laugh them out of town today and have it done with?

    The problem is who is being censored. Currently far too much freedom is given to right wingers (Insane NRA Gun nuts, pro-lifers, KKK Neo Nazis etc) and not enough is focussed on more socially aware groups.

    So what "socially aware" groups don't have the freedom to speak right now? Can you name some? Bonus question: did you mean "socially aware" in the sense of the People's Republic of China from your other post? (I'm still chuckling about that one, btw.) Heck, the last time I checked the communists were free to publish pamphlets, get on Oprah or the evening news, or hold rallies, just the same as the KKK, the NRA, or any other vocal and opinionated group.

  • As others have pointed out the whole Constitutional amendment thing, I won't go into it.

    In the same vein as the War Powers Act, though, my understanding (possible urban legend alert) was that President Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus during the Civil War and it was never reinstated. This would probably be unconstitutional if true, although good luck fighting off anything like that in wartime. A nation at war is a whole different thing; when the survival of the whole country is at stake, people will give up almost any right that might adversely affect the war effort. That being said, the U.S. is still probably more liberal than some other countries while in the middle of a war, mostly from never having a serious fear of invasion.

  • Farbeit from me to interrupt a good rant, but isn't threatening to repost because you've got extra karma considered "abusing the mod system" :)

    But seriously, you've formed your opinion of Americans based on all the scary stories you've seen on /. and Jerry Springer, and somehow the Americans are myopic and intolerant? Lots of countries do dumb stuff and have dumb citizens, and unfortunately megacorporations are a global plague. True, the U.S. military has some issues, but then again, if you were spread all over the globe on a dwindling budget, you might shoot yourself (or the locals) in the foot from time to time as well. Almost any nation, magnified to the same position on the world stage, would have similar issues; probably the last nation to have so benignly controlled so much of the globe (in an economic, cultural, and/or political if not military sense) was Imperial Rome.

    Not that that makes it OK, of course, I'm just trying to supply some perspective and exercize my native American argumentativeness (argumentativity?).

  • I would contend that internet cafes are a sign of technological backwardness.
    Point taken--but I'll contend even further, that given the time frame (approaching the Olympics) and the tourism industry, that the Internet cafes also served the scads of backpackers and other scum (like myself) that were roaming the beautiful land and couldn't stop themselves from staying in touch with the latest developments in Linux-land...

    Any natives or recent vistors care to comment whether there are still clusters of Internet cafes alive and kicking in Australia?

  • The top Australian newspaper (The Australian) has a weekend magazine lift-out that will print "fuck" unbleeped.

    Sex in the City does air on a free-to-air major network, and have aired "cunt" unbleeped.

    *shrug*

  • Here's what I want for general fun and happiness:

    • Reasonable processing power
      • Not mega-steroidal processing power, not nonexistant processing power. Enough to saturate a 100Mbps link with some amount of processing work. (Say, URL scanning for web caching, firewall packet rewriting). We're talking 486 at 100Mhz; a StrongARM-1100 @ 233Mhz would be nice.
    • Low Power Consumption
      • I don't want to have to actively cool the unit; the unit should be whisper-quiet, and shouldn't feel like a miniature furnace.
    • 1 100Mbps RJ45 out standard
      • This isn't a PDA, it's an appliance doing useful things on the network.
    • Additional 100Mbps RJ45 out optional
      • Gotta be able to firewall with it. And while we're at it, let's NAT/DHCP/DNS Cache and webcache. Be I need that second port!
    • Serial port
      • Need a console, don't want to put it on a monitor. 'nuff said.
    • Connector/mounting for 1 hard drive, preferable a portable
      • Disk space is cheap. If I'm doing any serious caching/serving, I'm going to want lots of it. So give me somewhere to put in my own hard drive. Flash is too expensive and not up to a server duty cycle. I'd prefer a laptop hard drive because they tend to be quieter, less power hungry, and more shock resistant.

    Space for lots of standard memory

    • I want 2 standard DIMM slots. I want to be able to blow $200 and put 512MB of ECC SDRAM in there, so that I can keep the aforementioned hard drive spun down 90% of the time.

    Sub $200 price tag

    • For the bare unit. No Hard drive, no memory, I'll add those myself. It's not that much hardware, really.

    That's my wish list for a linux appliance. There are similar products in existance (The Cobalt Qube springs to mind) but they are overpowered and overpriced for individual use. I've also looked through a fair bit of PC/104 stuff, and found one product that would have done all of the above...for $1200.

    When someone does all of the above in a good, high-quality unit, I'll jump in line to buy one.

  • How ironic. It's been taken down.
  • ... yeah, but the USA has the MPAA... the masters of hypocritical censorship
  • First there was the ridiculously wrong Aussie accents in Point Break, now we have this headline:

    Fraidja can't see that w'out p'mission, bub

    I just wanted to point out that noone in Australia calls anyone `bub'.
  • > Does anyone out there know how to get ANSI graphics working under an xterm/telnet?

    If you're speaking about basic VT100 graphics characters (such as box drawing characters) the answer is yes. My xterm installation even supports color, but I'm aware that some old xterms don't.

    If you're speaking about VT220 user defined characters (like those that Minitel uses a lot), the answer is no.

    > Is linux limited to 7 bit ASCII?

    That's just plain stupid. Anything limited to 7 bit in the 21st century must be shutdown, burned and thrown away to the trash.

    Maybe the problem is in your network connection. Try doing a stty pass8 or try running telnet with the -8 option.

    At the time of this writing, I couldn't resolve olgn.homeip.net, so I can't check it myself.
    --
    Luis González M.
  • Movies aren't legally censored in the US, the movie companies voluntarily use ratings and the theaters voluntarily enforced them. There are no laws about movie censorship.
  • erm..<BR><BR>
    who cares, since when was this a competition australia -v- canada?
  • Censorship is only cultural across federal borders. Within it's always political.

    As for the Constitution, bah. The Constitution also says states have rights. But is that what the current system allows? No. If Oklahoma wants to ban movies like the Tin Drum, fine but fucking stay in Oklahoma then.
  • On my reading of the whole article from EFA Australia, the most pervasive issue is the notion that online content should be assessed at stricter levels of censorship than offline content. Or, in other words, if I wanted to publish my personal erotic fantasy writing as an online magazine, I would be subject to stricter censorship than if I published them as a commercial magazine, or as a street 'zine. I would have to tone them down more, I would be subject to stricter fines if I didn't, and after all that, I'd still not be able to publish them without getting them classified.

    Strange, really, when you consider that an online provider can place much stricter controls on who gets access to their material than an offline provider. I can certainly remember getting a quick peek at the "naughty" photos in Playboy and Penthouse as a kid. Oddly enough, I seem to have grown up to be a relatively sane and sensible adult - about my only quirk is a deep and thorough dislike of the type of thinking which regards anything sexual as "dirty" or "nasty". But try accessing an online p0rn site without having the right credit card number. Unless you really have superior skills and knowledge, you aren't likely to be able to see even a picture of a woman in full chador.

    It's rather scary - just about any restriction on adult rights or priveleges these days can be excused with the note that it's either to protect the children, or that its for the benefit of the children. Makes me wonder how I managed to survive to adulthood, really it does. Obviously I'm just a statistical fluke - as is everyone else of my generation who managed to survive through our non-child-obsequious environment.

    Meg Thornton.
  • Unfortunately other countries are not the same as us.

    Hmmmm.... on the whole a top comment, but it seems even an enlightened (US)American is still a (US)American.

    Buckets,

    pompomtom
  • I think internet cafes are mainly a sign of a large number of tourists/travellers/backpackers who want access to their Hotmail accounts.
  • The Computer Science House at RIT (http://www.csh.rit.edu) uses a tini board as the telnet server for our Drink machine (http://www.csh.rit.edu/projects/drink) and it works very well cheap stable and nice. and the one wire technolgoy and i-buttons have been a huge help in keeping the size/price to a minimum.
  • Its all very well as Americans for us to think freedom of speech is an absolute. We are fortunate enough to have something called a 'Constitution' which guaruantees that we will always be free to say whatever we like, whereever we like, whenever we like.

    This is bullshit. While your Constitution may speak in absolutes, your Courts do not. Americans have freedom of speech unless that speech offends enough people. In that case, the speech is "obscene" and you, as an American, can be arrested.

    See, for example, U.S. v. Thomas [loundy.com].

  • And our movies are also censored, and nobody would argue that this is not a good thing

    I would argue that it's not a good thing. If I as an adult want to watch graphic portrayals of sex and violence, why do your children get to stop me?

    (I stopped watching American TV in part because the censorship was so infuriatingly dumb. An episode of "Politically Incorrect" after midnight had the word "hummer" bleeped out when referring to oral sex, but "Hummer" the vehicle was let through a few seconds earlier.)

  • What you say !!
  • Informative? I'm not sure whether to be amused or offended :)
  • This just in...

    After an exhaustive search of the street corners on my block I am pleased to report that I have found no evidence of gun toting crack dealers.

    Now back to your regularly scheduled programming

  • I hate to nitpick, but Good Will Hunting was on network TV this past week.

  • I want an embedded system. Literally. Embedded into my HEAD!

    Something similar has been discussed already on Everything [everything2.com].


    All your hallucinogen [pineight.com] are belong to us.
  • I want an embedded system. Literally.

    Embedded into my HEAD!

    Soemthing about this size could probably be fit to a skullcap, no problem. Add a few buttons say on the palm of my hand, and some kind of retinal projection system, and i'd have a private, personal computer that i could use simultaneously while doing anything, like walking around or watching a movie.

    Add a cell phone held in your hand, connected to the wrist USB port, and you have instant internet.

    I'm only talking Palmtop level functionality, so i could read Avantgo stuff in green glowing text in the dark. But tiny, solid state systems are definatly a must... and then we need them funky retina displays.

    So you scientist people, there's a free unpatented idea, retinal projection displays. Courtesy of me. Make them and I'll buy.
  • On the contrary, just because other governments think that censorship is responsible behavior doesn't make it any less abhorrent. We have an obligation to raise a hue and cry about any behavior that deprives people of their basic human rights. The right to speech is most certainly one of these. So is the right to life. Just because some cultures see it as responsible behavior to put people of a particular faith in a gas chamber doesn't mean that we shut up about it in deference to their sensitivities.

  • Notice that it doesn't say "all Americans" - our heritage considers these rights universal.

    Australians, or Arabs, or Chinese, are just as entitled to the rights we enjoy as Americans are.
    So THAT explains America's Cultural Imperialism...

  • The Bill of Rights are a series of amendments to the Constitution. Legally they have as much force as the Constitution itself. The Bill of Rights is in especially high regard because it's almost considered integral to the Constitution; had the Bill of Rights not been drafted, the Constitution itself would not likely have been ratified.
  • Flabdabb stated:

    The United Kingdom for example has draconian laws outlawing hate-speech, and IRA "terrorists" (freedom fighters) are not allowed to be interviewed on TV.

    Sinn Fein/IRA have been allowed access (if it can be called such) to the British (and Irish) airwaves since 1993.

    Sinn Fein/IRA were censored for many years but this is no longer the case.

    Link pertaining to an Australian discussion in which the Sinn Fein/IRA censorship issue is discussed:

    http://jinx.sistm.unsw.edu.au/~greenlft/1993/122/1 22p3.htm [slashdot.org]

    As for censorship being a cultural issue? Let me assure the original poster that in this case it was most certainly a political issue... else the politicians would not have found it as easy, as convenient, nor as expedient, to remove the "gag" to allow Sinn Fein/IRA to 'begin' to negotiate on the terms of thehttp://www.irelandstory.com/today/good_friday/m ain.html [slashdot.org] agreement.

    In that instance... a political removal of censorship was a precursive move towards "peace".

    cheers

    front

    P.S. I am Irish, resident in Ireland.
  • pardon my dweebness in regards to html on Slashdot. Mea Culpa.

    The links are:

    Sinn Fein/IRA censorship Australian article [unsw.edu.au]

    and

    Good Friday agreement [irelandstory.com]

    cheers

    front
  • I appoligize for my misstep - I should have said it went into effect a decade later. In any event, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are separate documents written under very different circumstances. Obviosly, the Bill of Rights and subsequent amendments modify the constitution, but they really are separate law based on different philosiphies. If you read them, they even sound different.

    As for things like the 1917 War Powers Act, it's clear that they arn't really enforcable. I was merely pointing out that the laws exist, and are technically in effect. The fact that they woudln't make feasable arguments in a court today is a good thing, but doesn't change the fact that such laws are still around. They represent a threat to free speech, even if the threat is empty.

    As for the expiration of the War Powers Act, I'm a little dubious. I've read the bill, and it doesn't itelf provide for an expiration, and I haven't found any evidence that it's been repealed. My guess is that it was simply thrown on the pile of other outdated, unenforced laws. I suppose there is a legal precident for deciding when a law is useless. For instance, in Massachusetts, you are technically required to obtain a license to wear a beard. Fortunatly for the unshaven, if a DA tried to prosecuete unlicenced beard-wearers, they would probably be laughed out of their jobs. No judge in his or her right mind would allow anyone to be procecuted for wearing an unlicensed beard. So, there must be some kind of precident for allowing a law to lapse without an actual legislative act.

    Anyway, the way I wrote my origional post made it flamebate anyway. That's what I get for writing under the influence of sleep-deprivation ;-).

    --

  • If it was hooked up into your brain (as in "This might feel a little weird" --Morpheus), why would you need some cumbersome retinal projection?

    On the other hand, on such a wetware-embedded system I'd like as much memory/HD as possible. That is one thing where we could all use some augmentation. Of course a FPU for all the boring math would come in handy, but the point is, these beasts are particularly poor in terms of storage capacity.

    --

  • A few things wrong with this argument, but before launching into that, let me clear up one point. X-rated material is not illegal in Australia. It is illegal to sell it in most places, but not all, such as Canberra (The seat of Australia's parliament) and the Northern Territory. The X-rated industry is a $50million industry (largely mail-order) in Canberra. But as to your argument for consistency (a) There is no merit in consistency if the law is bad. Censorship is simply evil. I am offended by the idea and embarrassed to live under a government that makes such laws. (b) It ain't consistent. X-rated stuff is *not* illegal in Australia. So, if it's not illegal in video, magazine, book or cd-form then why so on the internet? Explain that.
  • Anyone see the grammy's last night, I caught the last bit and eminem said "shit" at least 4x - in the clear btw. Every grammy awards seeems to "enhance" the quality of language used on network tv. Seems to me, only 1 word can't be said on TV, I'm waiting for Regis to stand up and say "FUCK!", he won a million... that and that survivor babe to say "fuck me hard!" Oh well, we can all dream and buy HBO instead.

    I have a shotgun, a shovel and 30 acres behind the barn.

  • Just moved down,
    Fuck this place is backward, internet service is $40-50 a month - if you can get it, slow, shit speeds.
    4 - 5 month install times, 2x that for repairs.
    Medical care is horrible.
    The internet cafes smell like the fat american teenage fudgepacking fucks which drip sweat by the gallons onto the keyboards while they play quake 3 with their friends.

    Getting a good cup of tea is impossible, the best you'll get is that "stash" shit.

    And the people, so fucking rude.

    Oh.. forgot, never saw somebody masturbating in a internet cafe here to anime porn in Canada. What the fuck is up with that?

    Though taxes and money is better here (gotta admit).

    Oh well...

    I smell a flame war brewin' . . . read my sig before you post.


    I have a shotgun, a shovel and 30 acres behind the barn.

  • Cultural relativism is a classic argument that repressive regimes use to try and exempt themselves from international human rights standards. The argument usually holds "social order" over the needs of the individual. How is this "social control" not political?
  • plutocracy

    Government by the wealthy.
    A wealthy class that controls a government.
    A government or state in which the wealthy rule.

    You are right on - America is one of the most backwards, puritan, myopic, intolerant, arrogant, ignorant groups of people on the planet.

    They rave about how 'free' they are and how they are the height of democracy - while corporations subvert their democracy (RIAA,MPAA,DMCA,BonoCopyrightextensions etc etc etc), Religious wackos censor libraries (for the children), Political Debate is a McDonalds Commercial, the courts decide elections, their media Corps lie to them (propaganda machines), they put up with legislated morality (drug prohibition, prostitution law, nudity law, gambling law), there military is universally hated & runs wild (kills Japanese high-school kids, invades country after country (Granada, Cuba, DM, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq), meddles in other countries to no end (Cuban blockade and pay for the 'Brothers for Freedom (whatever those assholes in Florida call themselves)' from seized Cuban funds)... etc etc ETC.

    They are obese, ignorant and loud. Americans are universally loathed - but Americans keep rambling on about how 'they've got it right' and everyone else is simply jealous.

    95% of Americans are fat-trailorpark idiots on Jerry Springer - a Goddamned display of stupidity.

    Dont worry moderators - mod me down all you want - this is not flamebait - I am serious... this is not a trolls attempt at eliciting excited responses. If you mod me down - ive got 50 mod points to repost, so don't bother abusing the mod system just because your American-self image has been insulted.

  • Austrialian bill 1043, passed in 1956, banned pornography and violent material from the media. On several occasions, porno companies have been taken to court, but their cases have been dismissed because bill 1043 doesn't clearly state what is considered pornography. Same thing goes for violent material.

    This new bill passed by the Austrialian Government is just a modification of the 1956 bill, defining pornography as "anything whose sole purpose is sexual stimulation", and violent material as "any situation where a person is intentionally harmed by another person."

    --
  • If it is possible to legislate in regard to a certain matter then that matter is political. Many political matters have a cultural dimension.
  • You can just about manufacture chips at home. Not directly in sicilon but by using an FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array) you can effectively create your own chips. They consist of a matrix of logic gates, which can be blown with an EPROM programmer and will make a rather good digital semicinductor. You can use them as finite state machines with either Moore or Mealy models which is ideal for robotics or basic computing applications. And best of all, software is available such as PALASM which can minimise your logic down to fit on the chip without the need for Karnaugh maps!
  • Log (at September 22, 2012)
    Sector 1022 {StarDock, Fedspace, FedSpace Protected}

    >Helios warps into the sector

    >Helios is powering up weapon systems!

    >Helios launches a wave of fighters at you!

    >Console reports 1963 points of damage!
    >Your ship's shields absorb the brunt of the attack!

    >Helios is powering up weapons systems!

    >Helios launches a wave of fighters at you!
    >Console reports 2015 points of damage!
    >Your trusty escape pod is functioning normally.

    [This was my sector which he then obliterated with a Photon Missile. The limit was set to 60 seconds.]

    >Message from Fighters at 10:25:16 A.M.
    >Helios warps into the sector

    >Helios is powering up weapons systems!

    >Helios destroyed 503 fighters

    >Helios warps out of the sector

    >Photon Missile detected!

    >Helios captures your planet (WHICH HAD A L4 CITADEL ONE DAY AWAY FROM LEVEL 5!!!!)

  • Dallas Semiconductor Corporation Announces Death of C.V. Prothro, Chairman of the Board, President and CEO (see link) [dalsemi.com]

    This happened a while ago, but some of the avid Dallas Semi fans on /. may not have heard yet (Dallas Semiconductors products are a popular among hardware hackers). Maxim will acquire Dallas Semi (based on their product line this looks like a good match). It will be interesting to see what direction they will move after the acquisition.

  • Luxury, that is...
    In my day we had censorship and Mach 7 scramjets raining on our heads [slashdot.org].
  • It seems to me that you could have a very compact and large Beowulf cluster pretty cheap. Just think, six thousand processor cluster in a box the size of your standard tower. Hoo wee.
  • TW2002 is child's play! You got it easy
    with ANSI support and..."scripts." My Empire
    game server is running the Empire game
    that was originally developed on an
    HP2000C in 1973. No scripts, only the
    program. No Java! Type you fingers raw!
    Telnet or NS/VT protocol only, with
    a real session log on. Instructions
    at http://198.190.228.6/index.html
    See what the good ol'd days were REALLY
    like.
  • To think! An Australian centered link, two of them even.
    ... but hang on the first one goes to /. and the second one is using the new 'lets put in http:// twice just to make sure'

    Hmmmm perhaps some simple checks?

  • Don't you hate it when they edit behind your back as you are posting?

  • Ah yes - the old "'America' has free speech" balony. You can't even say fuck on the radio and you have the gall to lecture away about having the right to say anything anytime?

    sigh.....
  • Have a read of Peter F. Hamilton's 'The Reality Dysfunction' trilogy (disappointing ending but hey, the rest was good...) for some very cool investigations into wetware - he calls it 'Neural Nanonics'...rather good name.

    I know, I know...offtopic :(

    -Nano.
  • For a Pc on a Stick would be for a robot.
    My uncle is Currently building a robot, and is trying to make due with an oopic Chip, but If he could put a 386 on the thing with some miniscule copy of Linux and a programing language running, it would be great.
  • Can you point to some sites that would be useful? I've always wanted to play with something like that.
  • As the AC showed before me, it's very, very easy to get pr()n on the net. Who said anything about needing credit card numbers.

    Now the AC got modded down, but I don't think that was right. He was simply provding evidence in rebutal of the parent posting. I suppose he could have frased it a little better.

    Anyways on top of the lnk he provided there are plenty of others available, which I won't actually link to but will disclose, like crazypasses.com, ampland.com .. and the list goes on

    Basically you have a valid point about the double standards on applying strict controls on online content, but your statement about it being difficult to access porn on the web is way off.

  • afraid your wrong on this one, any goverment anywhere can legislate anything they damn well want too.

    Enforcing it is another matter entirly.

  • Hah! Spell it how you will. The line between hobby and obsessive fetish is sometimes thin. (And often depends whether you share the hobby in question.) :)
  • No. Our cultural imperialism has more to do with commercial interests. If Baywatch is popular in the states, someone will try to see if it's popular anywhere else. Same with jeans, McDonalds, etc. That the US has been really successful for some time helps too. We couldn't be cultural imperialists if the foreigners we sold things to didn't want the stuff.

    Remember "Life of Brian"? The rebellious Jews are griping about all the terrible things that the Romans are doing, while trying hard to ignore some of the more useful things. (e.g. aquaducts, good roads) We don't really take over countries like that anymore (and I personally get pissed off whenever we prop up or overthrow a government - we shouldn't be doing that) but we do sell things to them. Popular things, as it happens.

    Now, our political imperialism (not in the sense of taking over other countries but in spreading our ideas about governance) is what comes from the concept of natural rights.

    And it seems to be a pretty good meme from where I'm sitting. Can you tell me why, absent any government Australians innately have less of a right to free speech than Americans do? Well they don't. Set an Australian down in the middle of nowhere, and he can say what he wants. His mouth doesn't stick shut because there's no government to tell him he can speak. (sadly, it still doesn't mean that anyone will be able to understand what the hell he's talking about ;)

    That right is infringed upon as a matter of course in most places. While always under assault in the US even, we prohibit our government from infringing on it here. We really explicitly prohibit that. As much as a really prohibited thing.

    If Australians refused to put up with that kind of crap, and installed a government that wasn't permitted to censor them it would still not be the creation of a right of free speech, but a limitation on government from screwing with an independently existing right of free speech. They're entitled to do so, certainly. And while we in the states shouldn't force them to, I can't say that we should all pleased that they don't either.

    (one of the traditional problems American foreign relations have faced is our desire to spread our memes and encourage people to establish democratic governments, while still adhering to our high opinion of soverignty)
  • The link to Electronic Frontiers [efa.org.au]
    Australia is misspelled.
  • I find it hard to believe that you can jump from "universal human rights" to the People's Republic of China in the same breath, are you feeling OK after that contortion? Of course human rights don't come into being at will; they must be wrested from the powerful and the wealthy with great struggle, bought often in blood. Like all those students that were killed in that socially advanced nation of China, remember?

    The answer to speech which is disrespectful of your culture or religion is not censorship, but simply more speech from your group. I have a right to not respect your group, and you have a right to not respect mine. We both get to tell as many interested passersby about it as we can, and the population decides who's nuts.

    As soon as government starts telling people which religions we can't poke fun at, there might as well be a state-sponsored religion. And what happens when your government changes from being pro-your group to being anti-your group? Are you quite prepared to muzzle your religious speech at that point? Remember, it's in the interests of social order...

    If you don't like the amount of speech in the U.S., you're quite welcome to move to China, Iran, or wherever. It's possible that they may be more "socially advanced", in that the poor and the old are better cared for; but that's really an issue orthogonal to the freedom of speech. I'm not about to give up my rights to laugh at other people's wacky gods, especially if I'm of the opinion that those gods don't exist.

    Woops, was that disrespectful? Get used to it, buddy.

  • The Bill of Rights says otherwise, but it is a completely seperate document that was written a decade later

    The Bill of Rights was written 2 years after the Constitution, and ratified with about the same difference. It is, 100%, a part of the Constitution (as are the other 17 amendments).

    For instance, the War Powers Act of 1917 allows the government to throw you in jail indefinitely without a trial

    The War Powers Act has also been amended and changed in the years since it first appeared. Most of the "President can throw you in Jail for anything because Lincoln never ended the war!" types of things simply aren't true -- in the 60s and 70s there was a big stink in Congress about all the laws and Executive orders that had built up over the years without ever having ended officially.

    Any crazy law you hear about having to do with Emergency Orders, Lincoln, WW2, or the War Powers Act is most assuredly NOT still in effect. They are all officially expired as of about 25 years ago, the news just hasn't caught up to the conspiracy guys yet...

    ---------------------------------------------
  • See, for example, U.S. v. Thomas

    The defendents never claimed they were exercising any Constitutionally protected right, they claimed that they were prosecuted under the wrong laws and that Congress had not intended to cover computer boards, etc. They made your run-of-the-mill statuatory arguments.

    And no, obscenity is not considered speech, but that does not make the right of free speech contigent on offense. It makes it contingent on speech taking place (or, on speech not directly jeapordizing someone's life, as in the case of screaming "fire" in the crowded theater).

    But in your less direct point -- our rights are contingent on our ability and willingness to respect, defend, and uphold them. If the Supreme Court says Playboy is obscene, then all of a sudden it's not protected speech. Or if we as a society (or just the executive branch) just decide to stop listening to the judicial, and just start hanging people for saying things, then you have government abridging the freedom of speech.

    The Constitution is just a piece of paper to remind us of what believe we deserve, it doesn't have the ability to uphold itself -- so no, it isn't ABSOLUTE in that sense. Yes, it requires us to make it work on a daily basis. Short of God himself handing out magic rings and government-proof vests, I don't know what could be considered ABSOLUTE.

    ---------------------------------------------
  • As for things like the 1917 War Powers Act, it's clear that they arn't really enforcable. I was merely pointing out that the laws exist, and are technically in effect.

    That's what i was trying to say -- they AREN'T in effect any more. The Conspiracy nuts who claim we're still in a state of war from the time of Lincoln are quick to point to the War Powers Act of 1917 as proof -- but fail to point out the War Powers Act of 1976 (which completely replaces it -- after the turmoil of the Vietnam War, having Presidents blatantly lie to Congress, the legislature quickly curbed the President's ability to act unilaterally).

    50 USC 1601 [cornell.edu] officially and legally ended all states of emergency as of two years after the passage of the law (in 1976, again). So really, there is honestly and truly no suspension of Habeas Corpus, no state of war, etc. The Constitution, as of today, is 100% legally in effect and the President has nothing to say about it.


    ---------------------------------------------
  • bash: export TERM=xterm-color (or xterm-debian if you're on a debian box)
    *csh: setenv TERM xterm-color (ditto)

    "If ignorance is bliss, may I never be happy.
  • What a fascinating place... this Canuck had the pleasure of travelling throughout the east coast of Australia last summer and was surprised at how technologically progressive their culture seemed, at least in comparison to Canada. Brisbane, Sydney, and Cairns were brimming with Internet cafes, and even convenience stores had Internet kiosks. (Drifting off-topic: the convenience store kiosks were expensive ($1AUS/5 min.) Win95-based compared to the UN*X-based kiosks ($1AUS/15 min) found in the foyers of public libraries--which allowed even non-residents an hour of free access to their public computers.)

    So it seems like everyone gets it, until this piece of legislation comes up. Let's not tar everyone with the same brush, mind; while Southern Australia cracks down on Net obscenity, Queensland allows prosititution (didn't sample any of that--I was with my girlfriend...) and the entire east coast rakes in the bucks on pokies (electronic gambling machines, often found in the back room of a pub).

  • Many of us would like to know if it's still possible to play LORD (Legend of the Red Dragon). Wow, the memories from playing that game. It was the first time I ever player killed someone. You used to be able to break into the hotel at night, and beat up on the lower level characters. You could also sleep with, and eventually marry, the bartenders daughter. She never stayed your wife for long though.

    LORD isn't dead. If you look hard enough, it's still possible to find free telnet-in bbs' running games. One of my old worldgroup favourites just started back up and now I can get my fill of killing and working up to the next item in King Arthur's Weapons, or even flirting with the lovely Violet...

    I'm not sure the sysop would appreciate a slashdotting of new accounts, so I'll refrain from posting the URL. But from the number of MUD users on there, I'd imagine it wouldn't be too tough to find something free and cool, especially now that all the old sysops are getting cable modems.

    -ck
  • "I want an embedded system. Literally.

    Embedded into my HEAD!"

    Hmmmm. Nothing a small hammer wouldn't fix.
  • You must be from some backwater part of Canada...

    You should try coming to Vancouver. Internet cafes? We have internet laundries, for crying out loud. Besides, who wants internet cafes when everyone has web-enabled cell phones (thanks to Clearnet et al.)?

    Gambling? I was at a casino earlier tonight. As for prostitution, while I have no personal experience, I understand those services can be found on many street corners downtown...

    I might as well turn this into a shameless Vancouver plug. Here goes: Whistler/Blackcomb (the world-class ski resort, not the shit-ass OS) is nearby, the scenery is gorgeous, lots of high-tech, the Canadian dollar is worth $0.0175 US (OK, more like $0.65) so your money goes far, and, if it interests you, BC bud.
  • I got one of those. The only problem is that upgrades are such a headache!

    [rimshot]


    --
  • I tried to connect to the tradewars server and was presented with what I think was ANSI graphics. But this time, just like the last, I got only vt100 graphics. Does anyone out there know how to get ANSI graphics working under an xterm/telnet? Is linux limited to 7 bit ASCII?

  • We've got a filter on sites "unsuitable for University access" and it is lame. For example any URL with the word "sluth" gets blocked because it contains "slut". The BESS software [peacefire.org] has been shown to be just as bad.
  • Sure, it sounds nice, and i'd sure like to have a smaller box, but can you pop a 15" monitor or a zipdrive on one of those babies? I know, they're just portable things but even a laptop can do that =) I think i'll keep my pocket filled with useful things (like a wallet and car keys) until I either see the light of teeny tiny pc's with no disk space or I get hit in the head with one hard enough that I loose all common sense and buy one.
  • Back in '98, another state (New South Wales) also passed laws to protect it citizens from dirty pictures. They even went so far as to ban dirty pictures travelling through their state. For example, if I were to email a dirty picture from my home in Queensland to my grandmother in Victoria, and that email travelled via NSW (which lies between Qld and Vic), then I would be breaking the law.

    The point is, these are nonsense laws, designed to show the voters that the pollies are doing something. The police officers that are charged to enforce these laws haven't a clue what the Internet is about. While being questioned by a cop once, I was asked if my computer had 'one of those Internets' in it'.

    Except of course, when by sheer chance they stumble across a case that they can prosecute, then they will make a big show of it. And pity the poor bastard who this happens to.

    This is what happens in a country where not one single politician even knows who to use email.
  • All religions will teach you that you MUST respect the views of others.

    My religion sure as hell doesn't -- in fact, my religion allows me to say that your views are the deranged rantings of a stupid fathead.

    You apparently want to live in a country where "socially aware" groups have more freedom "focussed" on them, while groups like the NRA would get "less" freedom. Fuck you. I don't want you to decide who gets your shitty brand of "freedom" and who doesn't.

    You're not free if you have to ask permission. Duh.
  • Just a little note here - according to the constitution, cencorship for any reason by any level of government is OK. According to the constitutuion, It's perfectly within the rights of congress to pass a law that would condem you to be desolved alive in sulphuric acid for saying that "the government is bad."

    The Bill of Rights says otherwise, but it is a completely seperate document that was written a decade later.

    Besides, there are plenty of laws on the books right here in the good old US of A that curtail your supposed free speech. For instance, the War Powers Act of 1917 allows the government to throw you in jail indefinitely without a trial (which, by the way, is OK by the constitution, but not the Bill o' Rights) for doing things like critisizing the government, the country's allies, et cetera.

    The fact is, there isn't a place in the world that has legal freedom of speech, with the possible exception of Antarctica, which I don't know very much about. There are even laws specifically limiting free speech in international waters and airspace.

    Just a small point I thought I'd bring up.

    --

  • we have freedom of speech

    We do? WA's Censorship Act 1996 seems to disagree with you... please correct me if I'm wrong.

  • Western Australia's stance on freedom is quite .. umm .. put it this way, I'm not proud to live here.

    From the Censorship Act 1996 [wa.gov.au] :

    10. Refused publications

    A publication will be classified as refused if, in the opinion of the Minister, the publication
    ....
    (c) describes or depicts, in a manner that is likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult
    ...
    (vi) an Act or matter that the Minister has determined, having regard to the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults, is contrary to the public interest.

    Yes, that does mean that a single member of Parliament can arbitrarily ban a publication. No process of appeal beyond that minister, no guaranteed right to speech.

    Ever heard of a Sierra game called Seventh Guest? That's illegal here. Heck, even Dreamweb's illegal here. They had to publish a modified (censored) version of Duke Nukem 3D here because the original was classed as 'obscene' and refused classification. I think the Nine Inch Nails Broken video is banned as well, but I confess I'm not sure.

    Another little beauty is contained in the Police Act:

    54A. Disorderly assembly
    (1) A disorderly assembly is an assembly of 3 or more persons who assemble in such a manner or who so conduct themselves when they are assembled as to give persons in the neighbourhood of the assembly reasonable grounds to apprehend that the persons so assembled
    (a) will disturb the peace
    ....
    (3) Any member of a disorderly assembly who, after being warned by a member of the Police Force to disperse immediately and go peaceably to his home or his lawful business, neglects or refuses to do so, commits an offence.
    What this particular law means that if there's a group of more than two people and the authorities believe that they may "disturb the peace," they can order you to leave. In 1979, two union officials were arrested at a worker's rally for the simple crime of expressing a sentiment that pissed the government off.

    All sorts of wonderful little things along these lines are buried in West Australian law. For instance, far from having a guarantee against unreasonable search and seizure, police have the right to conduct a full stripsearch of any person on the street. All they have to do is 'suspect' that the person is carrying illicit items, such as drugs, weapons or aerosol cans (you can get done if someone suspects you're a graffiti monkey over here). The grounds for this 'suspicion' need not ever be stated or justified.

    And just to think, the national album Australia's children are trained to sing praises us as "young and free." Personally, I think it's disgusting.

  • The IRA are allowed to talk on TV now and since about 1993. Although I am a republican living in Ireland and do support the political attempts for a united Ireland I and many others find the labeling of the IRA as freedom fighters highly offensive. Calling them freedom fighters just gives legitimacy to on organisation who despite wrong doings against their people have on many occasions blown up town centres on Saturday afternoons. Don't try to tell me that's a military target!! You speak as if the US doesn't censor things. When your government decide that it is in the best interests of the country. For example during the Gulf War pictures of the US airforce blowing up retreating Iraqis was censored until after the war.
  • The article is right about people wanting to get there hands some of these 'embedded' devices. I have been drooling over the items listed here [linuxdevices.com] on LinuxDevices [linuxdevices.com]

    One of the most interesting ive seen is ZFLinux's MachZ System On a Chip - have a look at the a build of their reference implementation shown at at Linux World [cnet.com] (half way down on the right - the thing has a tiny LCD - very cool)

    For extra bonus karma-whorific-ness: Look at this: World's Smallest Web Server - Its just plain cool [linuxdevices.com]

  • I have been to Australia several times

    One thing I found is you are allowed to say swear words on TV. On the evening news they were doing a story about poorly build navy subs. They broadcast the captian of a Sub saying "None of this shit works"

    They had Sex in the City on Primetime on a non-cable channel. They say the word fuck several times. It was never bleeped

    They also showed Good Will Hunting during primetime. That movie had fuck like every 5th word.

    Can't get that in the States basically have to get a Premium channel or pay-per-view or rent it, to watch a movie like Good Will Hunting on TV.

    I thing I found odd they get our late night shows, like David Letterman and Jay Leno. Twords were still bleeped out. Think they get those shows with those words bleeped out.

    Am I allowed to say these words on Slashdot? Guess I am about to find out....

  • Isn't the whole point of Baywatch to corrupt the youth?

    -

  • I just wanted to say that the server has Not been /. All is running fine.

    For all the people that would like to play but dont know how go to http://playground.homeip.net/library/twinstr/ TW2002 Help page all info a Newbie or Pro would need.

    TWhelper Rpograms http://www.swath.net Swath and http://www.tw-attac.com ATTAC both are great programs and will help any new person out alot.

    For TW2002 News check out http://playground.homeip.net/ The Playground

    To Play TW2002 for Free telnet://olgn.homeip.net

  • Your constitution guarantees you rights, but it doesn't guarantee you any rights from the evil megacorporations of America, which are actually the people who run the country, not the elected government. If all the TV stations get together and come up with 7 words you Just Can't Say, even if they're 7 really useful words (like, say, SEMPRINI), then you Just Can't Say them, no matter what some bit of goverment paper says you can do.

    Bite the pillow while your corporations fuck you, Americans!
  • In any case, it's not necessarily a technical issue. Looking at the legislation, I find it's actually not all that technically illiterate. It specifically targets content providers, and exempts ISPs (just as well, otherwise it would be illegal to be an ISP in SA - sucks to be them!). So what it's basically saying is, it's illegal to set up a porn site in South Australia. Like it's illegal to set up a brothel.

    I should think that this quite directly demonstrates a complete failure to grasp the technical issues involved. Otherwise what is the point of the legislation? It doesn't protect South Australians from porn, it protects the rest of the world from South Australian porn. While I have seen enough naked South Australians that I would not take up arms to fight such a law, I fail to see how this is a legitimate objective for such controversial legislation.

    As far as I can tell, the SA legislature's picture of the internet is something like this: There are 15 or 20 companies (Yahoo, MSN, etc.) that produce almost all of the content, and then a few little skanky operators, like the places that make porn videos. I think they've completely overlooked the two-way nature of the internet. Perhaps someone needs to show them just how many Geocities and Angelfire pages there are out there, pages about kittens and puppies and movies and healthcare and - whoops! We've crossed the invisible line into topics that may be objectionable to someone somewhere.

  • I have been to Australia several times One thing I found is you are allowed to say swear words on TV.

    Remember when On Golden Pond was first broadcast in prime time on US network TV? The word "bullshit" was left in - I think it was NBC, around 1983.

    On the evening news they were doing a story about poorly build navy subs. They broadcast the captian of a Sub saying "None of this shit works"

    Not long ago someone on Australian government radio (pleasantly streamed to my desktop) referred to the prime minister as a "dickhead".

    Remember two key things:

    1. Just because they find different things offensive, doesn't mean they're not censoring. TV in the USA shows levels of violence that would be scandalous in Europe, while many European broadcast channels show full-bore naked sausageplay in the wee hours.
    2. Australia is not homogenous. In urban NSW and to a lesser extent in ACT, it's almost anything-goes.

    So, the fact that every magazine on NSW newsstands is pornographic, that people cuss up a storm on TV, does not make the South Australia proposal any less ignorant.

    I thing I found odd they get our late night shows, like David Letterman and Jay Leno. Twords were still bleeped out. Think they get those shows with those words bleeped out.

    Yup, they're bleeped in post-production whenever possible so even foreign markets suffer.

  • this Canuck had the pleasure of travelling throughout the east coast of Australia last summer and was surprised at how technologically progressive their culture seemed, at least in comparison to Canada. Brisbane, Sydney, and Cairns were brimming with Internet cafes, and even convenience stores had Internet kiosks

    I would contend that internet cafes are a sign of technological backwardness. They thrive in places where people do not have ready or affordable access to the internet at home. You think Australia was something, try a trip to a country like Indonesia sometime... Internet cafes on every corner. And they have a per cap GDP that couldn't satisfy my Dr. Pepper habit. In the United States and Canada, on the other hand, the internet cafes largely shut down once everyone had dirt-cheap access in their living rooms.

  • Now I am quite well-travelled and have been to (amongst other places) Iran, Singapore, Saudi Arabia, The Netherlands, The United Kingdom, the People's Republic of China, and the Soviet Union (as was). All these places have something that America lacks, and that is respect for religious and cultural diversity. Which in practice means censorship. We cannot have it both ways. In effect by allowing freedom of speech, our constitution is denying us the right to religious freedom. If someone can denounce my God with no comeback from the state, it just creates an atmosphere of persecution.

    Having lived and worked in most of the places you list, I'm not sure I can agree.

    First of all, only Singapore even tries to do what you describe in your thesis (specifically forbidding statements derogatory to any religion in order to preserve the peace).

    Religion-baiting is a national sport in the Netherlands and the UK, though it's practiced on an equal-opportunity basis. In Iran, Saudi Arabia, and PRC, whether your anti-religious statements earn you a plum job or a trip to the hoosegow depends entirely on which religion it is you're slinging mud at.

    My rationality strains to sympathize with the Singaporean approach: On one level, I think it idiotic, since 100% of the power of anti-religious statements is created by the receiver. It only bothers you if your faith is so shallow, and your religion so uncompelling to you, that you allow it to. On the other hand, it has been very effective in keeping down the sort of clashes that occur with depressing regularity across the straits in Malaysia.

    So whose system really has more respect, the US' or Singapore's? The Singapore system implies that religious people are weak and manipulable; the US system asserts that they are smart enough to take words as words and get on with their lives.

  • Quite correct. And our movies are also censored, and nobody would argue that this is not a good thing, since it protects our children from graphic portayals of sex and violence.

    Are you talking about the United States? The government quite specifically does not practice prior restraint. You can show/play/say anything you want. If it was illegal based on the law (common and legislative) in place at the time, then you get in trouble for it later.

    In Australia, for instance, the government looks at materials before they are published or performed, and makes a determination as to whether publication or performance will be permitted. This is censorship, and is the exact opposite of how it works in America.

  • Censorship is both a cultural and a political issue ... but you are right to observe that events in the ROTW can't always be understood in a USA'n context

    In any case, it's not necessarily a technical issue. Looking at the legislation, I find it's actually not all that technically illiterate. It specifically targets content providers, and exempts ISPs (just as well, otherwise it would be illegal to be an ISP in SA - sucks to be them!). So what it's basically saying is, it's illegal to set up a porn site in South Australia. Like it's illegal to set up a brothel.

    Probably useless, yes, considering how many are still going to be available from the next state, not to mention across the water, but not that much more illogical than, say, the UK banning dope smoking, when it's easy to hop across the Channel to Amsterdam.

    In any case, the legislation certainly sucks in various non-computer-related ways - like requiring content providers to guess whether they "would be" rated R by an independent panel, but that's politicians for you.

    (and whatcha mean "Baywatch doesn't corrupt youth". Check that crappy dialogue...)

  • by volsung (378) <stan@mtrr.org> on Thursday February 22, 2001 @03:20PM (#409423)
    The TINI and friends are really for hobbyists and small-scale embedded systems manufacturers. You don't use these things like personal computers or handhelds. You use them to control things like robots, sprinkler systems, or other gizmos you want to operate, attach to the internet (built-in ethernet), or control in other ways.

    Unless electronics and programming make you happy, or you work for someone making webcams, sensors that attach to ethernet, etc., you won't care much.

  • by Silver A (13776) on Thursday February 22, 2001 @03:41PM (#409424)
    So I think we can see that we need to be sensitive to other cultures before we go on screaming about censorship. What would be called censorship in the USA would be viewed as responsible government in many countries, especially in Europe, the Middle East, and Singapore/China.

    The Declaration of Independence says:

    We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights...
    Notice that it doesn't say "all Americans" - our heritage considers these rights universal. Australians, or Arabs, or Chinese, are just as entitled to the rights we enjoy as Americans are.

    By saying that censorship may be one part of responsible government, you're saying that those people being "responsibly governed" are somehow less worthy than Americans. Or you believe that censorship in America may also be a part of "responsible government" here. Because you're in the U.S., you're free to believe either, or both, of those positions, but I'm free to say you're wrong.

  • So I think we can see that we need to be sensitive to other cultures before we go on screaming about censorship.

    Riiiiight. I guess we shouldn't condem slavery, religious intolerance, or ethnic cleansing in other nations either. After all, their ways are different from our own.

    Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | http://www.infamous.net/

  • by technos (73414) on Thursday February 22, 2001 @03:36PM (#409426) Homepage Journal
    Dallas has been making the buttons and the TINI for a few ywars now; I remember reading about the TINI in some trash Java mag in Sep 1999, and I know the i-Button has been in production since early 1996 cuz I've had one on my key ring since then..

  • by raju1kabir (251972) on Thursday February 22, 2001 @05:44PM (#409427) Homepage
    Saudi Arabia beleive it or not banned 'Baywatch' because it was thought it would corrupt their youth.

    I believe Batwatch would corrupt almost anyone.

    But nevermind. Some Saudi censorship fun:

    • The "Beetle Bailey" comic strip has a character - the General's secretary - who characteristically wears short dresses. In the Riyadh English-language newspaper, she shows up with a long-sleeve, full-length black muu-muu (crudely hand-drawn onto the strip prior to printing)
    • If a crossword puzzle answer is something shocking like "wine" or "beer", the clue is deleted from the puzzle. Of course, this leaves an obvious gap which prompts everyone to rush to solve the clues around it so they can figure out what the offensive word was.
    • (My personal favorite) On a dopey British kids' game show which was shown daily, the prize one day was a trip to Finland; specifically, Lapland. The announcer said, "And you might even meet --BLEEP--!". The name bleeped out, of course, was Santa Claus.

    So count your lucky stars, Adelaideans: It could be a lot worse.

    As for the Baywatch story, I suspect that's apocryphal or at best misleading. Nothing even close to Baywatch makes it on TV. They wouldn't even show My Three Sons (the early ones, before Mrs. Pfeiffer got all trampy). It's highly unlikely that anyone would have wasted time trying to get that particular show on.

  • by fhwang (90412) on Thursday February 22, 2001 @04:55PM (#409428) Homepage
    This reminds me of an article written after the Tiananmen Square massacre. Caspar Weinberger was trying to excuse the actions of Deng Xiaopeng by pointing out that Deng's son had been paralyzed during the Cultural Revolution in the 1960's, so Deng had a good excuse to be afraid of change, and to overreact. Weinberger was trying to excuse Deng's political actions ("Let's run over college students with tanks") by pointing out his cultural history ("Don't judge him; those Chinese folks have been through some fucked-up shit"). And numerous other commentators have tried to excuse China's appalling human rights record by pointing to its culture. That may explain it, but it doesn't excuse it. There were Chinese dissidents who were shot in the head after Tiananmen, and then their families were billed for the cost of the bullet -- but those dissidents are somehow less Chinese than the cadres in power? Sheesh.

    On a more personal note, I'm of South Korean descent, and I occasionally hear cultural explanations for South Korea's poor practices of democracy. (Corruption, repression of the press, etc., etc.) I often find those excuses condescending -- you think just because I was born in a different country that I can't understand the Bill of Rights? I'd rather you hate the oppressive leadership in South Korea along with me.

"Most of us, when all is said and done, like what we like and make up reasons for it afterwards." -- Soren F. Petersen

Working...