Slashdot Mirror

To combat this spate of missing-in-action machines, the Defense Ministry plans to outfit their absent-minded workers with secret-agent-style briefcases that protect national secrets by automatically destroying the contents of lost laptops' hard drives.

To combat this spate of missing-in-action machines, the Defense Ministry plans to outfit their absent-minded workers with secret-agent-style briefcases that protect national secrets by automatically destroying the contents of lost laptops' hard drives.

Although this miniature pharmacy is promising, it still isn't ready to run independently. The voltage on each reservoir must be controlled by an external power source connected to the chip via wires threaded through the animal's tissue.

including squeezing up to 100 drug reservoirs onto some versions. Since each reservoir can hold only minute amounts of either powder or fluid, the company is focusing on using the chips for delivering potent drugs such as pain medications, anticancer agents, hormones and steroids.

Or a radio-controlled chip that would allow a doctor to reprogram the device remotely after implantation, should the patient need a new dosing schedule.

By feeding the wasps sugar water as he exposed them to the odor of di-nitro toluene, an explosive akin to dynamite, he was able to teach the insects to seek di-nitro toluene in the field.

But having trained his "miniature bloodhounds," Bromenshenk had to be able to track them electronically. Radio transmitters were too heavy, and although scientists had had some success gluing microchips on the bees, the process took too long.

Bromenshenk is waiting for someone to produce a "spray-on" chip.

more dumb startups got funding (and huge PR) in 1999-2000, and now more of them are toast now.

Here in SF everyone wants to dump on the dot-coms, because they brought too many of the "wrong" (smart, educated, young) people into a city that the locals think is exclusively theirs.

Certainly many of the stupid startups were a waste of time, money, and office space.

What I would like to know is, who will be the first to create an online "Hall of Fame(shame)" for the Internet.

Would be nice to reminisce about the failures that plagued the late 90's and early millenium. It could also provide a framework for newcomer businesses to reflect on some of the failures that plagued some of the dead.dot.com's, and how they can avoid going that route.

It's rather sad to see businesses go down, since it shows us that nothing is secure, nothing is given/free, and we shouldn't take anything for granted when dealing with the technology field.

Personally I also think its a huge wake up call to remind many, the Internet is not a neccessity no matter what arguments you care to give, life worked fine without it in the past, and life will continue to work without it, although it has made things better, its still not a fundamental need in life. (not yet at least)

who'd of thought?

"All three pilots died during the flights, and their names were never officially published,"

Doesn't mean this is any sort of conspiracy by any agency. Have you ever thought that Russian officials were probably embarassed by losing 3 astronauts, and did not want to release their names to avoid bad publicity?

Or perhaps they never released their names at the time to avoid what they saw as threats, finding out what they were doing in the great space race times. Jumping to conclusions, is like jumping off a cliff, whereas even the great conspiracies have some form of paper trial be it legitimate or not.

This story just claims Russia lost three astronauts..

printf "\aShit Happens\n";

Electro Magnetic Pulse

phunk, for instance, writes: "Swamped with thousands of complaints from users, Yahoo! Inc. said Friday it will stop selling X-rated videos and other pornographic material on its Web pages.

Well it looks like they are going to have to go back to using good old-fashioned soap and water. No more money and they where oh so close to shipping."

These independent efforts to develop web-based services come at just the right time, when defensive business managers are seeking to find ways to preserve their bottom lines, while simultaneously staying astride their customers' and partners' rapidly growing expectations for service quality and technical flexibility in their trading relationships.

Bottom line, UDDI will succeed because its technical underpinnings work for the geeks, and the geeks will use SOAP, UDDI, and other layers of the emerging web services stack to bridge a wide range of heterogeneous collaboration, supply chain, and EAI solutions. These bridges will make good on B2B e-commerce's promise to help companies trade and make products more efficiently than ever before.

For some reason, I can't find the higher-end one on the site -- am I alone? With 64MB, this beats all but my most recent computer. Pop in my Merlin wireless card, and I can roam the city talking to myself all day? Excellent.

The way this post sounded, one would think this dude is a basehead on a binge or something. 64mb on your PC? Well for the price of that little toy you could jack your pc's mem up easily.

I never understood why one would rush out to buy the latest hardware or even software, especially when their brand spanking new, when as tech shows up, next month something more high powered is about to hit the big screen and so called "blow your mind." So why the big hooplah over this.

As you were

When you add into that mix internet usage and e-mails - neither of which are remotely secure unless you go out of your way to make sure they are - it becomes easy to build up staggeringly detailed pictures of the lives and habits of almost anybody.

Indeed, there is an automated global system code-named Echelon, operated by the US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, which is believed to intercept up to 3 billion communications a day, trawling through them for sensitive words that might indicate a security threat - it may well pick up this article in transit. Some claim that 90% of internet traffic is scanned by Echelon. The exact figures are unknown, because the system is top secret. Indeed, Britain, alone among these countries, does not even admit it exists. Simon Davies, head of the pressure group Privacy International and a self-confessed cypherpunk, describes Echelon as "black-helicopter" Mulder-and-Scully stuff". As in The X Files, the truth is out there, but so is somebody who doesn't want you to know.

Even by just collating all the addresses of your e-mail correspondents, the security services can construct "friendship trees", patterns of association that, whether you are guilty or not, may connect you to terrorists or criminals.

"We have far more of these cameras that any other country," Graham tells me, "though Germany and the US are now catching up. Why? Well, I suppose we have fewer constitutional and political fears about invasions of privacy.

We have a huge fear of crime and we have no totalitarian past like almost all the other countries in Europe."

When you add into that mix internet usage and e-mails - neither of which are remotely secure unless you go out of your way to make sure they are - it becomes easy to build up staggeringly detailed pictures of the lives and habits of almost anybody.

Indeed, there is an automated global system code-named Echelon, operated by the US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, which is believed to intercept up to 3 billion communications a day, trawling through them for sensitive words that might indicate a security threat - it may well pick up this article in transit. Some claim that 90% of internet traffic is scanned by Echelon. The exact figures are unknown, because the system is top secret. Indeed, Britain, alone among these countries, does not even admit it exists. Simon Davies, head of the pressure group Privacy International and a self-confessed cypherpunk, describes Echelon as "black-helicopter" Mulder-and-Scully stuff". As in The X Files, the truth is out there, but so is somebody who doesn't want you to know.

Even by just collating all the addresses of your e-mail correspondents, the security services can construct "friendship trees", patterns of association that, whether you are guilty or not, may connect you to terrorists or criminals.

"We have far more of these cameras that any other country," Graham tells me, "though Germany and the US are now catching up. Why? Well, I suppose we have fewer constitutional and political fears about invasions of privacy.

We have a huge fear of crime and we have no totalitarian past like almost all the other countries in Europe."

The software is not commercially available for use by the taxpayer (as where the software cannot be purchased, leased, or licensed)

Wouldn't the GPL or whatever the hell Open Source "License", just kill all those thoughts of geeks getting a tax break.

Primarily for internal use. All relevant facts and circumstances are to be considered in determining if computer software is developed primarily for the taxpayer's internal use. If computer software is developed primarily for the taxpayer's internal use, the requirements of this paragraph apply even though the taxpayer intends to, or subsequently does, sell, lease, or license the computer software.

Suggestion would be to honestly ask a CPA or so, someone is likely going to end up shafting themselves if they think that program they just wrote for SourceForge qualifies for a break.

boobs

So, what experiences have you had with code reviews in an open source project? What was the process? Did it work? If it didn't, what went wrong? How would you go about starting a code review process in an open source project?"

Well thankfully I'm not a coder (although I try and succeed and actually succeed when I need something for myself) but here is my take on certain issues.

I think the overall Open Source arena is the best thing to happen in computerland, however I also see a lack of focus, and direction when it comes to Open Source. Too many great programmers with kick ass ideas, but no true skills from many to follow up on those ideas, and directions.

One of the things that benefit "profiting corporations" is, their business needs to survive on it which is why they pay people to produce, whereas in the Open Source arena, many do it for the love of it, insight, hobby, etc., but there is nothing that is obligating anyone to do anything.

Using SourceForge as an example, its a nice idea, but its horrendous as all hell looking for anything, and provided you find something neat, chances are many of the ideas are often in limbo. Undeveloped for any reason, programmers too busy, they don't care, etc. These instances I guess is what many corporations use to attack the ideaology of the Open Source arena. "It will fail because no one can come to terms, follow up, etc." and sometimes you have to look at it from their perspective in order to understand why commercialism will always outperform (martket wise) Open Source.

Another quirk is the lack of assistance surrounding Open Source projects, for instance, many know their projects will likely (85%) of the times be a free project, so many don't think about executing a plan on assisting those who end up using their software, which is another reason corps. have the upper hand. Maybe if some got together with non geek marketing people, they could document things in better fashion and provide assistance to companies at a set price, which I'm sure would give programmers more incentive to do better work, and at least finish some of it for a change.
But like I said I'm not a programmer ;)

Ghost in the Shell"

Elizabeth Taylor is starting the "Diamond Admirers Against Astronautical Misuse" or DAAAM to protest this action.

boobs

I must disagree with with this statement, "Those sound like pretty good things to encourage anyhow to me." Encouraging people to break laws is not a joking matter especially in a strict system in a 3rd world country.

Sure Asia has some strict laws, but telling people to break them is not the solution, and will only enforce their government's petty stance on regulations. What the students should do is protest, make the world aware of the harsh sentences being imposed in their countries. Lobby to get them removed

If some states in the US started trying to circumvent drug laws by hiding their "stashes" their breaking the laws just as well so you can't have it one way and not the other. Fsck yea I disagree with someone like the government's bs, but at the same time a rule is a rule no matter how you cut it.

Now on the flip side of things, I hope their doing a good enough job of ridding their songs. If not they could use BCWipe to rid them, or if their laws allow for encryption, they could write an hourly cron script to tar then pgp them without destroying evidence.

Personally some of those students who are protesting, should look into getting into politics to ease things for their future kin.

use the source!

You could do your work outdoors when sunny

You could play Quake outdoors when sunny

You could use your PC's @ the beach

You could set up a bikinicam @ the beach

You could do your banking outdoors

Power a fridge to cool your beer on the beach

Power your trailer (for all the trailer trah "folk")

California has finally found a fix for their issues

Cons:

You forget sundown time and work gets lost

You forget sundown and get fragged @ Quake

Your PC becomes filled with sand and useless

A sexy bikini chick kicks sand on your can fscking it up

You forget sundown and wire someone else all your money

A glitch turns your fridge into a heater so you suffer with warm beer

You could live in a trailer

Californian Power authority passes high taxes on solar powerd clothes

use the source luke!!!

If someone can't see the problem with a private sector group secretly selling personal information they've got issues.

However to be fair, the FBI wouldn't neccessarily need to use the private sector to gather information, as they could just check out DMV records, credit records, etc., with or without a warrant.

Oh sure cry up a storm, they MUST have a warrant to get these records, but you have to understand FBI agents, are people with the same resources without as anyone else. e.g. FBI agent calls his ex classmate who works at DMV, "hey do my a favor, and get me this information." shit happens.

So I wouldn't cry up a storm thinking the spooks are turning to private sector companies for information as a standalone method. I do however have issues with the company giving the information away, the FBI is nothing more than an agency nothing more, sure they have power, but if people took the initiative to learn a smidgeon of law, you would know the FBI isn't all that. In fact fuck em

Now the CIA... (whoa) ;)

Ghost in the Shell

After using assorted Linux distributions, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Solaris, and other operating systems for the past few years, I've started tinkering with RTOS' (Real Time Operating Systems) such as QNX, dabbled with ChorusOS for a month or two, and have looked into a few others (Nucleus, ThreadX).

Some RTOS' can be used, for a typical production server running http, mail, etc, often faster and more productive than most other OS', and I'm sure there has to be advocates of RTOS' with a comment or two. There are benefits to making a switch or are RTOS' a high tech OS solely geared for companies needing higher computing standards, but I can see many here trying to advocate Linux, Linux, and oh yea Linux, and I'm sure there are those who will mod unfairly. whatever

Don't get them confused, a lot of THESE OS's are not free to download, and they're not the same as using redcrap, or dumbian progeny. The article itself though didn't mention that some of these are pricey OS' it seems like they just jumped on another "Oh ... OpenSource" for attention.

Is our soldiers forthcoming homecoming?

You shouldve followed the link to know what that was all about Is our soldiers home coming?

After reading the above post on "advertising to geeks" I'll just add this. Its /.'s site, their bandwidth, and as I learned, don't like it, don't visit its that simple. Your not the one paying the bandwidth bill so ... håll kaft

On to the subject now. I think word of mouth is one of the better routes to go until the company has enough to pursue advertising since it does come out rather expensive.

Bartering a banner with a similar venture, or partner or friend is another method that comes in handy many times. It sucks to be sucked dry by PR firms, but I strongly feel companies should do their own marketing concepts before seeking a PR firm anyway. An idea is created, the concept laid down for the PR firm beforehand, so money is saved.

Getting attention is not that difficult there are plenty of websites that'll do a write up if they find the product useful. Visit some of the more known sites, jot an address down its not that hard.

p.s. don't bother flaming I won't rsvp. Is our soldiers homecoming?

Pluggable linux security module framework

Sounds rather ironic when you think about, but here's my <rant> on it all.

Supposed I was CTO of a company, what would make the Linux developers think for a second, that I would want an add on for security. This may sound as flamebait to most, but think about it for a quick second, without getting into an OS envy thread.

With the BSD's per se, security has been improved on the FreeBSD side of things, and Open is a martyr of security, without having to "add on" any modules.

Thinking os the LKM I think that the developers are slipping when programming and this is their solution for this miscalculations on security.

So the OS is not secure, but if you download X patch add on for rev XXX of version XXX, you may maintain a level of security for a while.

Maybe their approach should be as that of the anals of the OpenBSD team with regards to security. If you check it before releasing it, your bound to have less issues in the future. Sure many are gonna bitch, but think about it, with the analness of source code checking done by the developers at OpenBSD, there hasn't been a remote compromise for 3 years on a default install, and thats hellishly good.

What should be implemented is an in-depth code audit of the kernel before its released. Instead of attempting to release a new kernel revision every other week, they should take an extra step, and some extra time to weed out the issues instead of focusing on an add on module for security purposes. This defeats the whole security scope of thinking Linux will be secure, since there are many administrators who wouldn't know a patch if it hit them upside the head.

For those who do their best to maintain a level of security on a Linux based network, it must at times be hard to address security issues when they come out many at a time. Its unfair to think that an administrator under pressure in a large Linux based environment has the time to address everything at once, and many times things will slip by.

Again if the audits were done prior to the releases, the problems would be solved, and once someone began an in-depth review, and got it over with, it would be easier to maintain second, and third times around.

Patching a hole in a tire will only get you so far until you'll eventually will have to replace it.

George Bush's secret meetings with Japanese officials

Melanie Griffith, the star of Crazy in Alabama and the founder of MelanieGriffith.com, tells Paper Magazine, "I don't care if people think I'm a dumb blond or stupid or an overage actress or over the hill. I don't care because I'm gonna have a very successful Internet company, and I'm gonna have $100 million in the bank and I don't really give a shit what anybody thinks!"

• Stupidity (perfume) 29.95
• Dumb Jeans (a shirt) 79.95
• Assinine Shirts (jeans) 59.95
• Retarded socks (underwear) 19.95

Man ever landed on the moon

In other news...

Anyone with info on the Matrix 2? ... What I would like to see is a definitive guide on special effects starting from Battlestar Galactica, all the way up to Tron, the Matrix, Jur. Park, etc., something of an encyclopedia, with 10 cd's full of trailers, clips, reviews, etc.

Now that would be a book worth dishing out 150.00 for!!!

authentic Original draft of Bush's apology to China

To accomplish this goal, Aldridge has used a variety of illegal tactics. Those tactics include: (1) using his computer to trespass on Free Republic?s web site under anonymous names without authorization;

(2)?posting? (i.e., publishing) lewd and defamatory messages on the web site, often under someone else?s name; (3) using his computer to harass authorized Free Republic users; (4) using his computer to intimidate Free Republic authorized users by surreptitiously obtaining and posting private information regarding them;

(5) using Free Republic?s electronic message services without authority to disseminate his messages to millions of users on the Internet; (6) bombarding, in concert with others, Free Republic?s web site with bulk electronic messages (commonly called ?spam?) in order to tie up its bandwidth and disrupt its operations; and (7) counseling others on how to disrupt Free Republic?s web site. This conduct violates the Virginia Computer Crime Act (?VCCA?), Virginia Code 18.2-152.1, et. seq., the Virginia conspiracy statute, Virginia Code 18.2-499 and 18.2-500, and common law.

Turn your 1ghz box into a 386 that bluescreens

Upside
Linux running this would:

Create its own code for its own kernels

FreeBSD running this would:

spin off and create a port for something other than i386 arch

OpenBSD running this would:

Not allow anything to ever be installed because it may be deemed insecure

NetBSD running this would:

Create another port, then wait a year or two to let you use it

view the source Luke!

There are three main issues of VoIP security. One is authentication: Is the party who answered the call the intended destination? Another is nonrepudiation: Once a destination accepts a call, is there anything in place that prohibits it from denying receipt of the connection? Finally, there's privacy: Is the call content secure? Authentication and nonrepudiation are important.

Without gateway-to-gateway encryption, VoIP packets are vulnerable to sniffingng. All it takes to intrude is one IP packet monitor sniffing somewhere on the network, watching for VoIP packets and storing them on a hard drive for playback later on.

In addition to commercial devices for monitoring and troubleshooting IP traffic streams, sniffers are available as free software and most come with source code (or as source code) that can be easily modified for tapping.

It's kind of like the early days of cordless phones. It took a while for users of those to realize they were being tapped. FCC regulations prohibiting the sale of the scanners that pick up certain bands allocated to wireless telephony didn't provide much of a barrier. And the information necessary to modify common scanner models was widely available. Later, the same became true with regard to analog cell phones.

IP packet monitors are much like those scanners. Few of the commercially available devices snoop VoIP streams right out of the box. Neither can most of the free software tools available enable VoIP snooping without modification. But either can become a fully automated, programmable VoIP tap. Why aren't VoIP calls encrypted? Because on-the-fly encryption and decryption takes time, and time is at an utter premium in a VoIP connection. The overall latency of a VoIP call must be less than 250 mSec to approximate toll quality. Add milliseconds, and the perceived quality of the call drops. For an industry still working for broad acceptance, call quality is paramount.

Even though encryption is a component of the H.323v2 standard, it's likely to be one of the last features implemented. Although each involves different skills and technologies, the same blackguards who'll tap your PSTN lines are the ones who'll sniff VoIP links. Any data that can be stolen from analog conversations is at risk in a digital link too. The difference, generally, is that analog lines can be tapped only one at a time, VoIP lines can be tapped by a whole T-span or more at once. There's also no real way to detect a VoIP tap, except by locating an unauthorized system on the network.

Internal snooping is easier and more likely than an outside tap, unless your network can be compromised at some outside point.

But the most important thing to remember is that VoIP calls can be tapped. Until you have gateways that encrypt the call end to end, treat VoIP calls as "unsecure" - especially if they leave your private network. And any calls passing through the 'Net should be regarded as no more secure than a CB radio conversation.

Good article on VoIP... RFP: VoIP invasion, are you ready for it?

Be advised, the article is over 10+ pages long, and it gets boring

view the source Luke!

and everyone thinks I'm paranoid

Our society has always stigmatized stuttering. People who stutter are assumed to be nervous, incompetent, and even mentally ill. They are ridiculed, bullied and discriminated against. Because of this social penalty, most people who stutter want desperately to stop stuttering.

Most traditional stuttering treatments aim at helping people control their speech so they don't stutter at all -- or modify their stuttering so that it is more socially acceptable. Even when speech therapy is successful, however, many stutterers still experience significant fear and shame because they're afraid they MIGHT stutter. Some go to great lengths to hide their stuttering -- all because of the traditional mind-set that stuttering is a bad thing to do.

The National Stuttering Association is changing the rules about stuttering. We still want to speak fluently when we can, of course. But we also believe that stuttering is NOT a bad thing -- and that people who stutter have the right to be treated with the same respect and accommodation as people with other developmental disorders.

So we in the NSA are working to promote greater public acceptance of stuttering and to accept ourselves as people who stutter. When we begin feeling free to stutter in public instead of trying to hide our stuttering, we often speak MORE fluently because we're no longer fighting all the fear, guilt and shame that compounds the problem of stuttering.

har har har Fight the Future

• Will make you coffee while you decide whether to go Gnome or KDE
  
• Will recheck kernel.org every 0.000231243 ms for another kernel release
  
• Will offer more LKM security hazards to promote security (secure your shit NOW)
  
• Automated emailing of new Widgets info sent to cmdrtaco via email for /. posting
  
  

Its nice to see companies joining to assist the NSA, however I would never install it, for paranoia reasons. Aside from that its not all that. (read this to back those claims and we can't forget its first security incident)

Its a nice idea, but ask yourself this question... The NSA could have done this a long time ago, why now? With the rising amount of cybercrime, one would think that, _THAT_ would be their motives however, if that were the case they would be strong opponents of crypto for the masses, so why one and not the other?

So again jumping into the paranoia stage, could it be because the typical script kiddiot is using various forms, of Linux, this could be a method to monitor them? If so how do corporations who use this (SELin) fall into the muck of it all, what about employees of the NSA, and NAI, if they were capturing data, that could affect stock markets, integrity of people, confidence. Total PR nightmare...

Anyways it is nice to see a secure (for now) OS on the market, but as for me... I'd take Open over SELinux anytime.

click this link... get fired

Well at least I didn't post it in vain... Ghost in the Shell pseudo informative doc combining steganography, pgp, and some other nifty things.

As for PGP being safe or not, one thing you have to understand, many of the attacks that claim PGP isn't secure, or etc., may sound like there is nothing you can do to protect yourself, their wrong, dead wrong. Many of the vulnerabilities people find when dealing with crypto cannot be achieved by your typical script kiddie, and often not even a Sr. level Admin, so don't be fooled.

Anyways I would love to keep going on this but I have to bounce =( damn =(

Open Source is going to become an increasingly attractive alternative. Sooner or later probably sooner -- at least one innovative politician will claim he or she can save taxpayers millions (on the local or state level) or billions (on the national level) by switching from proprietary to Open Source Software and, especially if the local, state or national economy is in "down" mode at the time, will get additional votes by taking that stance. Other politicians will notice, and suddenly you'll see Linux and Open Source popping up all over the place in government buildings, even (perhaps especially) on office desktops.

I notice how most people want their rights and their "Freedom of Speech" yet many find it inhumane for someone to possess opinions that differ from their own.

I'm far from a racism since, and have friends from all walks of life, including those with racist views, and while they don't appeal to me in any fashion, those with ideas other than my own still deserve the same amount of respect I would ask for to uphold my freedom to say what I want.

How can you honestly think in terms of fairness to say "My ideas are right" when it may be ethical to you but not to others. Sure I despise racism, sites but I will say this, they are entitled to their own opinions and the same right to express it, as I can express my opinions, etc.

On the subject of Denials of Service, I particularly don't buy that notion any government would partake in that for those reasons. I could however see a U.S. --> China DoS showdown between moronic kiddiots, but I can't see the government wasting their time, and money doing this.

Side note: For those into studying the effects of Denials of Services, and higher protocol based attacks, I wrote a paper on it a while back addressing attacks, fixes, but never finished it. Who knows maybe I'll pick up on it again some time soon

I notice how most people want their rights and their "Freedom of Speech" yet many find it inhumane for someone to possess opinions that differ from their own.

I'm far from a racism since, and have friends from all walks of life, including those with racist views, and while they don't appeal to me in any fashion, those with ideas other than my own still deserve the same amount of respect I would ask for to uphold my freedom to say what I want.

How can you honestly think in terms of fairness to say "My ideas are right" when it may be ethical to you but not to others. Sure I despise racism, sites but I will say this, they are entitled to their own opinions and the same right to express it, as I can express my opinions, etc.

On the subject of Denials of Service, I particularly don't buy that notion any government would partake in that for those reasons. I could however see a U.S. --> China DoS showdown between moronic kiddiots, but I can't see the government wasting their time, and money doing this.

Side note: For those into studying the effects of Denials of Services, and higher protocol based attacks, I wrote a paper on it a while back addressing attacks, fixes, but never finished it. Who knows maybe I'll pick up on it again some time soon

I notice how most people want their rights and their "Freedom of Speech" yet many find it inhumane for someone to possess opinions that differ from their own.

I'm far from a racism since, and have friends from all walks of life, including those with racist views, and while they don't appeal to me in any fashion, those with ideas other than my own still deserve the same amount of respect I would ask for to uphold my freedom to say what I want.

How can you honestly think in terms of fairness to say "My ideas are right" when it may be ethical to you but not to others. Sure I despise racism, sites but I will say this, they are entitled to their own opinions and the same right to express it, as I can express my opinions, etc.

On the subject of Denials of Service, I particularly don't buy that notion any government would partake in that for those reasons. I could however see a U.S. --> China DoS showdown between moronic kiddiots, but I can't see the government wasting their time, and money doing this.

Side note: For those into studying the effects of Denials of Services, and higher protocol based attacks, I wrote a paper on it a while back addressing attacks, fixes, but never finished it. Who knows maybe I'll pick up on it again some time soon

small transmitters on towers could offer a competing and far cheaper service by beaming signals on the same frequencies from the north of their intended subscribers.

Signals travel in a straight line, so those from towers have a limited range on the curved surface of the Earth. But that smaller range would make it easier to offer the local programming that has eluded satellite services, which by their nature broadcast to huge areas.

And because such a system would not require launching satellites or laying cable, it could be offered at a fraction of what is being charged by direct broadcast satellite and cable television services, in rural as well as urban areas.

Six cold fusion type experiments are presented, all of which produced excess power under mild conditions. Pertinent details are presented, such as a description of the apparatus and/or graphs of the measurements/results. The results of some of these experiments have been published in peer reviewed journals.

Department of Energy is responsible for a massive failure to serve the public interest. Rather than budget the funds needed to explore this new, emerging science, our top national energy science officials have adopted what might be called, at best, a policy of benign neglect. At worst, it's a policy of fraud and deceit.

How could this be happening?

The stakes in the debate about cold fusion are enormous. In this case, an unholy alliance seems to have come together. The principle players are the fossil fuel industry, which has no interest in seeing itself eclipsed by a new, non-polluting source of energy, and the mainstream physics community, which wants to protect, seemingly at all costs, the federal funding it relies on to continue its massively expensive hot fusion experiments.

If you look at some of the fines levied against some parties (mainly Howard Stern), you would know the FCC is mainly targeting companies that can dish out money for the hefty fines.

Last I saw NYPD Blue upped their show to include the word asshole, yet they don't get fined, but should Howard say it, the fines would roll in.

Thats the problem with American media (television, radio), they're (the FCC) so strung out on typical bullshit, freedom of speech is equivalent to "Freedom to Pay for your Speech Should it Offend Us". At least Euro television doesn't have anal intentions of fining anyone that uses a word, no matter if people like it or not.

Ghost in the Shell (updated crypto/stegano series)

Meyer told a fascinated jury that the device -- "high quality, something that military and law enforcement uses" -- continually transmitted Bell's exact location using a radio signal to receivers operated by law enforcement. Federal agents used graphical mapping software on a PC to plot Bell's movements in real time.

Political essayist Bell is on trial here this week in a case that involves his alleged use of legally obtained CD-ROMs to compile information about Treasury Department agents.

He is not accused of directly threatening them, but the government says that by collecting information about agents by driving to their suspected residences and by refusing to renounce his writings about how to assassinate unethical federal employees, Bell is guilty of violating stalking laws.

Now suppose that along every major strip there were cameras everywhere, with the US already with 2% of its own population in jail, the criminal ustice system would be overloaded with criminals.

Lets look at the way the justice system works now, we can say the Rockerfeller laws are a joke that need to seriously be revamped, for one.

Lets have officers arrest people for things that they would normally turn away from at times in big cities per se... Disorderly Conduct, a man and woman arguing, someone horseplaying, someone fixing a flat where their not supposed to. And don't dare say it doesn't happen, recently an 8 year old was arrested for pointing a paper gun and classmate while horseplaying. So don't think the law wouldn't stoop so low to just conduct sweeps for stupid actions, e.g., political race heats up, "Lets use the cameras and go after everyone."

Thats the harsh reality of it all. Those concerned with putting in cameras are not going to monitor who views what, and what should or shouldn't be viewed, and in the fairness of justice someone jaywalking (although not a crime that can do much) should be equally treated as breaking the law as any other law breaker. You can't it a single sided issue.

So if cameras were to go up, try arguing that in a court of law, "Your honor my client was caught on top urinating somewhere, but on the camera you could clearly see the officers turn a blind eye to 30 jaywalkers." Is it fair? No

Now what would happen is, criminals (hardcore) would take greater risks to avoid getting caught which is more likely to signal they'd adapt and perform sneakier, possibly even more dangerous crimes.

George Bush's dirty secret

Fry says it's high time that Americans jumped on the surveillance bandwagon. "They're bloody everywhere in England," Fry said. "It's been working over there and we feel the technology has an application here as well. We're good at what we do and we're going after the markets."

Fry suggested multiple applications for mobile video monitoring: Restaurant patrons could dial into their favorite eateries to check who's there and how busy the joint is; transportation agencies could use it to analyze traffic bottlenecks; paramedics could use it in ambulances to beam images of trauma victims to physicians for guidance.

Several studies by Jason Ditton, the director the Scottish Centre for Criminology and one of the few criminologists to research the effectiveness of CCTV, suggest that the cameras have neither the public support nor the crime-reducing power attributed to them.

"The cameras were no assistance in stopping the crime, but the images were repeated so often that the average citizen linked cameras to stopping the murder of babies," Davies said. "They believed that if we have enough cameras and the cameras are better, next time we could have stopped this horrible crime. It's a hysteria here."

Nevertheless, in the decade following James' death, the British government has spent an estimated $350 million installing 300,000 cameras around the country, making it the world leader in video surveillance use.

{paragraph CURL is pretty neat to use, and extremely simple to write in however, for someone to think it can do much to compete with JAVA... your wrong} (by the way, thats more or less how you would write for an applet)

Simplicity, ease of use, is not enough to compete with the marketing resources of Sun, so its going to be a difficult obstacle to overcome.

Now should they actually go over Sun, they would also have to hope company's would be willing to switch over from JAVA to CURL, and it can be difficult to convince a company to switch technologies altogether. Not only that, but you also run into issues such as, just how great this is on x platform running x backended to x, and when I say x I don't mean X as in the desktop environment. It does not have much by way of experience.

I like it though, its pretty neat.

curl free

Linus Torvalds has been described as a benevolent dictator; the modifications he likes are added. (taken from Daemon News)

One would figure someone like Linus would embrace the OS X concept, or abide by the old saying... "If you don't have anything good to say don't say it at all." or maybe he read articles like this and was offended.

Or maybe its because some authors claim OSX is a threat to Linux users somehow... I dont see how it could be a threat, but maybe he just needed to vent some frustration. I also don't know how he managed to make time to say that since he seems so busy releasing kernels every week

powered by OpenBSD

With limited financial support, Mr. Gildred and his team of 50 open-source community developers, volunteers, and employees are now finishing a working console prototype. That's all he can promise at this point.

He estimates that an Indrema system will be available in limited quantity by the end of 2001. Of course, that depends on somebody coming through with more money. And, as Mr. Gildred himself admits, the chances of that are slim.

Would be really useful if they could find a material that the sails could withstand damage done by getting hit by meteors, maybe people at NASA could actually put them to extreme uses and send them billions of years in space.

It would've also been nice if included in the article, there was a link to show how astronomers at places like NASA control these things when they're so damn far. I know they would pre-program directions, but what if something was spotted close by, how the heck do they manage to change the course of something millions of miles away to investigate it?

millions of bandwidth bits away

This legislation includes $535 million in pork-barrel spending. This is an unacceptable amount of money to spend on low-priority, unrequested, wasteful projects. Congress must curb its appetite for such unbridled spending.

Pork-barrel spending today not only robs well-deserving programs of much needed funds, it also jeopardizes social security reform, potential tax cuts, and our fiscal well-being into the next century.

enhance digital information security by publishing an advanced encryption standard and guidance for federal agencies on its use; by extending the public key infrastructure testbed to support industry development of interoperable digital signatures and encryption applications; and by developing, extending, and disseminating standard reference guidelines for emerging biometric authentication techniques;

support business use of electronic commerce by developing and disseminating a software translator that will convert a company's internal dictionary of product terminology into the industry-standard format, thus enabling engineers and designers to compare products and check their compatibility.

The idea is that peer-to-peer is exciting because it harnesses all this unused space, power and connectivity, draws from the basic Net/hacker, free software/Open Source idea of reversing the flow of information, giving more power to individuals to control their own information lives, escaping government or corporation control and domination. Nodes of thought, conversation and data-sharing can flourish far from control of corporate lawyers, FBI agents or copyright snitches, and communications are more lateral and anonymous.

So nice for peer to peer to be marketed this way, as such a rogue technology, then we always run back and cry foul when regulatory rules, or laws come into the picture. In an instance like this, where someone was pointing out just how good of a technology this is to circumvent laws, just shy of saying "Hey kid come here... wanna break the law and sell warez? Use peer to peer".

So peer-to-peer is being championed as a technology, a business opportunity and an investment, as well as a revolutionary new means of empowering people and protecting their civil liberties and sense of individualism. Sounds pretty good.

Actually at this point it doesn't sound good. How could anyone with enough common sense to say "your totally anonymous, and free" think that investing in this technology won't cause them the heartaches of having many people who could wander anonymously free from "government", etc., (as he states) run around commiting white collar crimes such as credit card fraud using this system. Sure now there is "cracker (not to be confused with hacker) insurance" so why not make them a fortune with the possible problems I can forsee based upon the authors comments?

Peer-to-peer is useful where "the goods you're trying to get at lie at many endpoints; in other words, where the value of information lies in the contributions of many users rather than the authority of one." It's obvious that this could be valuable in research and some kinds of business development.

Again referring back to the top comments, why would I, or should I trust someone down the line if I probably won't be able to determine exactly who the person is, if that person is trustworthy. At least via a website you have limited means of determining this, based on the quality of the website, most business will probably throw on a "customers" or "partners" link, etc., as opposed to me just looking for anonymous joe in west bubblefuck to do business with.

P2P threatens to make censorship impossible. But governments have little to fear from P2P. Since everyone is an equal content provider, goes the theory, it would be almost impossible for any significant mass of people to ever see the same message.

Hell yea it will likely introduce all kinds of horrible censorship, and again the author is dead wrong by stating all is an equal content provider. What about those offering illegal things, why would I want to be equal to their actions?

Privacy links (well suited for this article)

• Those who cannot afford to go to MIT can still learn their courses.
• Current students of MIT can get an example of what to study, intensifying their skills leading to higher learning.
• Other universities can adapt to the higher levels (not saying other uni's are substandard) of teaching.

• Students may be able to cheat on exams.
• Teachers may slack off on their intensity since students can just go online to learn.
• Students can skip more classes referring to the web and how they already "learned" something.
• Learning something with the assistance of a vocal teacher is not the same as reading it.
• MIT can lose students since they could go to other universities and still learn at their level.
• Upkeep may be hellish

For the past five years, he and his company, Name.Space, have been seeking to overthrow the U.S.-sanctioned monopolies that govern the Web.

So are we to leave one for profit company, and jump to another? I could see if this was a non profit complaining and campaigning, but you have a domain registrar bringing this up, which begs questioning about the true intentions. So this company would stand to profit from a break up, which doesn't impress me, so his gripes are bascially he can't make any money with Verisign in the picture, hardly worth My Rights Online.

Why should an aspiring artist have to scrap to be www.sculptor.com when she could just as easily be www.erotic.sculptor or www.heavenly.form?

I noticed how this turd is obfuscating politicians knowledge about technology with some of his gripes such as the above. For one its not up to any "root" servers to determine these naming convetions its up to ICANN, so why doesn't he gripe to them. The article to me is sort of a bit of snake oil written to beg for sympathy, by an author trying to get a nice sized bite of what he calls the enemy (Verisign).

Should Verisign be the sole holder of root name servers, probably not, but at least aside from occassional issues of domain squatting, the net isn't out of control with fights from domain registrars attempting to introduce tons of new names daily, simply because they're registrars. Here's a solution, create a body to handle it, but make those in charge professors at the most prestigous universities around. This way there can be no commercial control of the domain naming system, nor root servers. Maybe things will be handled ethically instead of morons bringing out suit after suit claiming infringements, unfair play, etc.,.

Ghost in the Shell