Slashdot Mirror

We win.

The old gaurd always tries to stifle innovation and dictate technology. If you substitute "songwriters" for "media companies", you could add player pianos in 1906 to your list. I kid you not.

Hopefully, the market and the public will triumph again.

In an interview hastily organised by Microsoft public relations staff after they learned APC was planning to run this story, Riley was at pains to point out that Blu Ray and HD-DVD were storage media and you could put an MPEG-4 movie on them and play them on a 32bit Vista PC just fine.

But he conceded that a commercially-produced BluRay or HD-DVD movie with next-generation high definition protected content wouldnt play on a 32 bit PC.

http://tor.eff.org/

IP is out. How do they trace it now?

Yes, but that is irrelevant. The lawsuit against Napster was for contributory infringement and vicarious infringement.

Yes, but I asked for citations of where somebody was sued by the RIAA (though I'd be just as happy with a suit from a member or a similar organization) for downloading and not uploading. You provided one citation that matched my criteria (which is one more than I expected, so well done. Usually when I ask somebody for a citation like that, I don't get it.)

Most of the furor over this was the court denying the defendant a jury trial since it felt that there were no disputed facts or damages.

You must be looking at different furor than I am. From what I've read, the reason it didn't go to a jury for damages determination is that that the suers were only asking for the minimums, so a jury wouldn't change anything except maybe make the award go even higher than what was asked for.

Remember that the defendant downloaded music which she didn't own a copy of

Strange. This EFF paper/release says that

Ironically, Gonzalez primarily downloaded songs she already owned on CD--the downloads were meant to help her avoid the labor of manually loading the 250 CDs she owns onto her computer

but maybe they weren't suing her for those songs. (And of course, the EFF does have an agenda here, so perhaps this isn't entirely accurate.)

It's because uploaders are easier to find than downloaders

It's trivial to find downloaders. You put something up for download, and log who downloads it.

Of course, if you put up the actual songs in question, then you're distributing them, which is probably illegal. And if you don't put up the actual songs but something else (like 5 minutes of your cat screaming in a file called Madonna-Vogue.mp3) then it would be hard to argue that the law was broken, unless your sound file was copyrighted, and you didn't OK it for distribution, which would be a bit ... odd.

Of course, it's also trivial to find uploaders. You do a search, see what it matches, and then download the songs, and then listen to them and make sure that they're what the names say they are (and aren't five minutes of some guy's cat screaming.) Apparantly the RIAA has been skipping this last step, probably just because the burden of proof isn't very high in a civil case. That, and it takes some time.

And it's because RIAA, MPAA, et al, have made a strategic decision to prefer to sue downloaders rather than uploaders, due to the network effects. If you shut down an uploader, then anyone leeching off of that uploader will have to go elsewhere.

(You made a typo, getting downloaders and uploaders backwards. But I know what you meant ...)

In any event, I don't agree with your analysis. It would make almost exactly as much sense if you just swapped `uploaders' with `downloaders' throughout that paragraph.

I suspect that the reason they go after uploaders rather than downloaders is possibly numbers (there's fewer uploaders than downloaders, so each uploader has a larger effect on things (you did sort of say this, but in a roundabout way), but also that it'll just be easier to make a strong case against an uploader.

If you're going after downloaders, and put up your warez and log who downloads it, well, somebody is likely to download only one or two files from you, with the rest of his downloads going to other people and you can't see the logs for those downloads.

If you're going after uploaders, you can identify a few interesting people by doing some searches on music that you can protect the rights to, then list everything they have. Then you can make arguments like `and it's likely that each of those songs will be downloaded by

My Linksys WRT54G (not GS) is a transparent Squid proxy already. I don't see why this ASUS machine can't do the same.

It points to a secondary FreeBSD machine for that, because I have a 5GiB cache on the Squid side. Everything is anonymized through Privoxy + Tor, with no configuration changes on the client side.

Users don't even know (or care) that their traffic is being proxied or anonymized at all.

For user data stored on the FreeBSD machine, I also use rsnapshot to do backups of another disk slice that is GELI encrypted as well, which works out very nicely for the overall solution.

Everything that goes out port 80 (or comes back in on the response) through the Linksys is redirected through the Squid server on the FreeBSD machine. iptables(1) on the Linksys does all the magic for me, as follows:

iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -i br0 -s ! 10.0.1.6 -p tcp --dport 80 -j DNAT --to 10.0.1.6:3128
iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o br0 -s 10.0.1.0/24 -d 10.0.1.6 -j SNAT --to 10.0.1.2
iptables -A FORWARD -s 10.0.1.0/24 -d 10.0.1.6 -i br0 -o br0 -p tcp --dport 3128 -j ACCEPT

There's more to it, but that should get you started. Its really easy to implement, and I'd trust my FreeBSD machine to process those packets faster than the processor on the Linksys ever could (not even considering the storage requirements for such a caching mechanism).

The Squid cache on the FreeBSD side resides on a partition that is GELI encrypted. Do I have anything to hide? No, but I do have a right to protect the identity of my users, their browsing habits and their data.

Everyone else should do the same (or similar).

Sony doesn't seem to agree with you on the idea that you can still keep music if your CD was stolen. EFF has a breakdown of the EULA that comes with some Sony CD's: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004145.php/

Today's ruling quoted from Judge Walker's ruling in the EFF lawsuit. The EFF lawsuit is still going strong : they filed in January, and Judge Walker ruled against an automatic State Secrets dismissal.

Your best bet would be to read MGM v. Grokster where the standards for secondary liability for someone else's copyright infringement are laid out.

Being a parent, or being the person who paid for the household's internet access account, would not satisfy those standards.

daveschroeder writes: "....In this case, the father (the dead man) was probably the one legally responsible for the internet connection and was likely also a legal guardian of his stepson. Whether you agree with it or not, there can certainly be legal culpability on the part of someone who is legally responsible for a particular item (such as an internet connection). I have literally no idea how this holds up in the context of music sharing; just pointing out that fact."

I think you may be a victim, possibly subliminally, of RIAA propaganda.

You happen to be incorrect on both points. Neither (a) being the person who pays for the home's internet access account, nor (b) being a legal guardian of someone who might have committed a copyright infringement, makes one "responsible", under the law. (By the way he was not the guardian of the stepson, the stepson is an adult.).

The RIAA has done much to create the impression that you are operating under, that parents are automatically liable for copyright infringements which might take place through the internet access account they pay for; but this is not the law.

I would recommend that you read the brief submitted by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, ACLU, and others, in Capitol v. Foster, where they discuss how the RIAA has, in a calculated way, attempted to give you that impression.

daveschroeder writes: "....In this case, the father (the dead man) was probably the one legally responsible for the internet connection and was likely also a legal guardian of his stepson. Whether you agree with it or not, there can certainly be legal culpability on the part of someone who is legally responsible for a particular item (such as an internet connection). I have literally no idea how this holds up in the context of music sharing; just pointing out that fact."

I think you may be a victim, possibly subliminally, of RIAA propaganda.

You happen to be incorrect on both points. Neither (a) being the person who pays for the home's internet access account, nor (b) being a legal guardian of someone who might have committed a copyright infringement, makes one "responsible", under the law. (By the way he was not the guardian of the stepson, the stepson is an adult.).

The RIAA has done much to create the impression that you are operating under, that parents are automatically liable for copyright infringements which might take place through the internet access account they pay for; but this is not the law.

I would recommend that you read the brief submitted by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, ACLU, and others, in Capitol v. Foster, where they discuss how the RIAA has, in a calculated way, attempted to give you that impression.

How about if those who would render Tor ineffective have the capability to record traffic passed by an isp to any node in the USA? How about if that same adversary has intelligence-sharing agreements with foreign intelligence agencies? It's not just hostile nodes you have to worry about, but also the possibility of the insfrastructure on which Tor is built being hostile.

http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/CALEA/
http://usinfo.state.gov/dhr/Archive/2003/Oct/15-98 5918.html

• the "Electronic Frontier" is woven into everyone's life: what happens electronically can be more real, longer lasting, than any real-world event, and
• "Foundation" doesn't mean the same as "Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation" (it can buy countries), or the "Ford Foundation" (it can casually sponsor a year of PBS). The EFF, unless it wins the trillion-dollar lawsuit, is a small donor-supported non-profit.
• And in some cases, the ACLU doesn't do as well. The EFF's AT&T lawsuit is still going strong. The EFF filed in January to get that amazing 'not automatically dismissed on state secrets' ruling. I admit I'm biased- I know people there and am a supporter- but damn, they're good.

Consider voter disenfranchisement. In the old days, you had to physically block people from voting, one by one. Now you can do badly-designed joins on voter-rolls and stop thousands of people from voting in an afternoon.

Consider Free Speech. In your world you have to hire goons- expensive at overtime- to physically intimidate speakers. In the actual world automated intimidation, expensive intimidation, exists. In the actual world, entire subjects can be disappeared from view, thousands in one software installation.

Or maybe you really don't worry about building innovative tech companies, music CDs, publishing electronically. You really don't worry about credit scores, credit card records, HIPAA, test results, university records, voter data, flight records, VoIP calls... in your world. Funny, I didn't think they'd let you online in Supermax, Mr. Kaczynski.

• the "Electronic Frontier" is woven into everyone's life: what happens electronically can be more real, longer lasting, than any real-world event, and
• "Foundation" doesn't mean the same as "Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation" (it can buy countries), or the "Ford Foundation" (it can casually sponsor a year of PBS). The EFF, unless it wins the trillion-dollar lawsuit, is a small donor-supported non-profit.
• And in some cases, the ACLU doesn't do as well. The EFF's AT&T lawsuit is still going strong. The EFF filed in January to get that amazing 'not automatically dismissed on state secrets' ruling. I admit I'm biased- I know people there and am a supporter- but damn, they're good.

Consider voter disenfranchisement. In the old days, you had to physically block people from voting, one by one. Now you can do badly-designed joins on voter-rolls and stop thousands of people from voting in an afternoon.

Consider Free Speech. In your world you have to hire goons- expensive at overtime- to physically intimidate speakers. In the actual world automated intimidation, expensive intimidation, exists. In the actual world, entire subjects can be disappeared from view, thousands in one software installation.

Or maybe you really don't worry about building innovative tech companies, music CDs, publishing electronically. You really don't worry about credit scores, credit card records, HIPAA, test results, university records, voter data, flight records, VoIP calls... in your world. Funny, I didn't think they'd let you online in Supermax, Mr. Kaczynski.

• the "Electronic Frontier" is woven into everyone's life: what happens electronically can be more real, longer lasting, than any real-world event, and
• "Foundation" doesn't mean the same as "Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation" (it can buy countries), or the "Ford Foundation" (it can casually sponsor a year of PBS). The EFF, unless it wins the trillion-dollar lawsuit, is a small donor-supported non-profit.
• And in some cases, the ACLU doesn't do as well. The EFF's AT&T lawsuit is still going strong. The EFF filed in January to get that amazing 'not automatically dismissed on state secrets' ruling. I admit I'm biased- I know people there and am a supporter- but damn, they're good.

Consider voter disenfranchisement. In the old days, you had to physically block people from voting, one by one. Now you can do badly-designed joins on voter-rolls and stop thousands of people from voting in an afternoon.

Consider Free Speech. In your world you have to hire goons- expensive at overtime- to physically intimidate speakers. In the actual world automated intimidation, expensive intimidation, exists. In the actual world, entire subjects can be disappeared from view, thousands in one software installation.

Or maybe you really don't worry about building innovative tech companies, music CDs, publishing electronically. You really don't worry about credit scores, credit card records, HIPAA, test results, university records, voter data, flight records, VoIP calls... in your world. Funny, I didn't think they'd let you online in Supermax, Mr. Kaczynski.

• the "Electronic Frontier" is woven into everyone's life: what happens electronically can be more real, longer lasting, than any real-world event, and
• "Foundation" doesn't mean the same as "Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation" (it can buy countries), or the "Ford Foundation" (it can casually sponsor a year of PBS). The EFF, unless it wins the trillion-dollar lawsuit, is a small donor-supported non-profit.
• And in some cases, the ACLU doesn't do as well. The EFF's AT&T lawsuit is still going strong. The EFF filed in January to get that amazing 'not automatically dismissed on state secrets' ruling. I admit I'm biased- I know people there and am a supporter- but damn, they're good.

Consider voter disenfranchisement. In the old days, you had to physically block people from voting, one by one. Now you can do badly-designed joins on voter-rolls and stop thousands of people from voting in an afternoon.

Consider Free Speech. In your world you have to hire goons- expensive at overtime- to physically intimidate speakers. In the actual world automated intimidation, expensive intimidation, exists. In the actual world, entire subjects can be disappeared from view, thousands in one software installation.

Or maybe you really don't worry about building innovative tech companies, music CDs, publishing electronically. You really don't worry about credit scores, credit card records, HIPAA, test results, university records, voter data, flight records, VoIP calls... in your world. Funny, I didn't think they'd let you online in Supermax, Mr. Kaczynski.

• the "Electronic Frontier" is woven into everyone's life: what happens electronically can be more real, longer lasting, than any real-world event, and
• "Foundation" doesn't mean the same as "Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation" (it can buy countries), or the "Ford Foundation" (it can casually sponsor a year of PBS). The EFF, unless it wins the trillion-dollar lawsuit, is a small donor-supported non-profit.
• And in some cases, the ACLU doesn't do as well. The EFF's AT&T lawsuit is still going strong. The EFF filed in January to get that amazing 'not automatically dismissed on state secrets' ruling. I admit I'm biased- I know people there and am a supporter- but damn, they're good.

Consider voter disenfranchisement. In the old days, you had to physically block people from voting, one by one. Now you can do badly-designed joins on voter-rolls and stop thousands of people from voting in an afternoon.

Consider Free Speech. In your world you have to hire goons- expensive at overtime- to physically intimidate speakers. In the actual world automated intimidation, expensive intimidation, exists. In the actual world, entire subjects can be disappeared from view, thousands in one software installation.

Or maybe you really don't worry about building innovative tech companies, music CDs, publishing electronically. You really don't worry about credit scores, credit card records, HIPAA, test results, university records, voter data, flight records, VoIP calls... in your world. Funny, I didn't think they'd let you online in Supermax, Mr. Kaczynski.

• the "Electronic Frontier" is woven into everyone's life: what happens electronically can be more real, longer lasting, than any real-world event, and
• "Foundation" doesn't mean the same as "Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation" (it can buy countries), or the "Ford Foundation" (it can casually sponsor a year of PBS). The EFF, unless it wins the trillion-dollar lawsuit, is a small donor-supported non-profit.
• And in some cases, the ACLU doesn't do as well. The EFF's AT&T lawsuit is still going strong. The EFF filed in January to get that amazing 'not automatically dismissed on state secrets' ruling. I admit I'm biased- I know people there and am a supporter- but damn, they're good.

Consider voter disenfranchisement. In the old days, you had to physically block people from voting, one by one. Now you can do badly-designed joins on voter-rolls and stop thousands of people from voting in an afternoon.

Consider Free Speech. In your world you have to hire goons- expensive at overtime- to physically intimidate speakers. In the actual world automated intimidation, expensive intimidation, exists. In the actual world, entire subjects can be disappeared from view, thousands in one software installation.

Or maybe you really don't worry about building innovative tech companies, music CDs, publishing electronically. You really don't worry about credit scores, credit card records, HIPAA, test results, university records, voter data, flight records, VoIP calls... in your world. Funny, I didn't think they'd let you online in Supermax, Mr. Kaczynski.

• the "Electronic Frontier" is woven into everyone's life: what happens electronically can be more real, longer lasting, than any real-world event, and
• "Foundation" doesn't mean the same as "Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation" (it can buy countries), or the "Ford Foundation" (it can casually sponsor a year of PBS). The EFF, unless it wins the trillion-dollar lawsuit, is a small donor-supported non-profit.
• And in some cases, the ACLU doesn't do as well. The EFF's AT&T lawsuit is still going strong. The EFF filed in January to get that amazing 'not automatically dismissed on state secrets' ruling. I admit I'm biased- I know people there and am a supporter- but damn, they're good.

Consider voter disenfranchisement. In the old days, you had to physically block people from voting, one by one. Now you can do badly-designed joins on voter-rolls and stop thousands of people from voting in an afternoon.

Consider Free Speech. In your world you have to hire goons- expensive at overtime- to physically intimidate speakers. In the actual world automated intimidation, expensive intimidation, exists. In the actual world, entire subjects can be disappeared from view, thousands in one software installation.

Or maybe you really don't worry about building innovative tech companies, music CDs, publishing electronically. You really don't worry about credit scores, credit card records, HIPAA, test results, university records, voter data, flight records, VoIP calls... in your world. Funny, I didn't think they'd let you online in Supermax, Mr. Kaczynski.

While I'm demonstrating my support, I thought I'd suggest some of you do the same.

Have you shown your support? EFF

Torpark is really just a convenient flavor of Firefox with Tor-circuit proxy connectivity built in. Prolly Windows only because it's Windows users that need the extra help.

*nix and Mac users can just set up Tor itself and get the same privacy features:
http://tor.eff.org/
http://tor.eff.org/download.html.en

Torpark is really just a convenient flavor of Firefox with Tor-circuit proxy connectivity built in. Prolly Windows only because it's Windows users that need the extra help.

*nix and Mac users can just set up Tor itself and get the same privacy features:
http://tor.eff.org/
http://tor.eff.org/download.html.en

The claim that this service provides anonymity and immunity to logging is only true in a very limited sense! This is basically a simple one level proxy which keeps access records which the authorities can get their hands on if they "suspect" a crime is being committed. Sweden is signator to various levels of intellegence sharing deals on international crime and terrorism so none of the Swedish laws on privacy have effect if some outside government presents "reasonable suspicion" of a crime being committed. And no, you don't have to be a terrorist or kiddy pron baron to be concerned here - tyrannical governments have been known throughout history to use any means to available to them suppress and oppress their citizens...

Tor on the otherhand can claim to provide a level of true anonymity because of the 'onion routing' concept. A potential adversary would have to infiltrate the network with enough fake nodes to get to both the input end (to get the ip) and the the exit node (to get the traffic) and then do some traffic analysis to match these two together in order to figure out who is doing what. This being very resource intensive, such capability would only be available to the highest levels of intellegence gathering and even then only for a limited set of survaillance targets.

It appears our previous announcement was accidentally modded down below the default viewing threshold. To correct this problem, we are reposting. We apologize for any inconveniences this may cause and we promise to hunt down and tea-bag the moderators reponsible for this error. Thank you!

EFF Supports GNAA Campaign Against Slashdot

DiKKy Heartiez - Berlin, Norway

In response to address bans on Slashdot, the Electronic Frontier Foundation is providing dedicated bandwidth on their Tor network to help the ongoing war against Slashdot by the GNAA. EFF is now the second high-profile organization to ally with the GNAA this week. Just recently, the GNAA and the Anti-Slash jihad joined forces in the fight. With support from the EFF, Slashdot can no longer block important GNAA press releases or castrate further attacks.

"We are incredibly pleased to have their assistance in our struggle," GNAA president timecop stated at the announcement. Before continuing, he whipped out his enormous black cock and sprayed the room with a gallon of semen. "We were extremeley troubled when we discovered Slashdot had rendered our attacks benign by block our addresses and user accounts. Now thanks to Tor, or "The Owl Raper" network, we are able to resume operations in full capasity against CmdrTaco and his abonimation."

Representatives from the EFF offered no comment as their mouths were stuff with the cocks of GNAA representatives.

About EFF

An organization dedicated to protecting homosexual pedophiles. Although closely affiliated with organizations like North American Man/Boy Love Association, the EFF also works hard to protect the actions of software and music pirates, as well as the rights of homosexuals, and now, niggers.

About GNAA:
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

Are you GAY ?
Are you a NIGGER ?
Are you a GAY NIGGER ?

If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America and the World! You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!

Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

• First, you have to obtain a copy of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE and watch it. You can download the movie (~130mb) using BitTorrent.
• Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA First Post on slashdot.org, a popular "news for trolls" website.
• Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on irc.gnaa.us, and apply for membership.

Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today! Upon submitting your application, you will be required to submit links to your successful First Post, and you will be tested on your knowledge of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE.

If you are having trouble locat

DiKKy Heartiez - Berlin, Norway

In response to address bans on Slashdot, the Electronic Frontier Foundation is providing dedicated bandwidth on their Tor network to help the ongoing war against Slashdot by the GNAA. EFF is now the second high-profile organization to ally with the GNAA this week. Just recently, the GNAA and the Anti-Slash jihad joined forces in the fight. With support from the EFF, Slashdot can no longer block important GNAA press releases or castrate further attacks.

"We are incredibly pleased to have their assistance in our struggle," GNAA president timecop stated at the announcement. Before continuing, he whipped out his enormous black cock and sprayed the room with a gallon of semen. "We were extremeley troubled when we discovered Slashdot had rendered our attacks benign by block our addresses and user accounts. Now thanks to Tor, or "The Owl Raper" network, we are able to resume operations in full capasity against CmdrTaco and his abonimation."

Representatives from the EFF offered no comment as their mouths were stuff with the cocks of GNAA representatives.

About EFF

An organization dedicated to protecting homosexual pedophiles. Although closely affiliated with organizations like North American Man/Boy Love Association, the EFF also works hard to protect the actions of software and music pirates, as well as the rights of homosexuals, and now, niggers.

About GNAA:
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

Are you GAY ?
Are you a NIGGER ?
Are you a GAY NIGGER ?

If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America and the World! You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!

Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

• First, you have to obtain a copy of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE and watch it. You can download the movie (~130mb) using BitTorrent.
• Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA First Post on slashdot.org, a popular "news for trolls" website.
• Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on irc.gnaa.us, and apply for membership.

Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today! Upon submitting your application, you will be required to submit links to your successful First Post, and you will be tested on your knowledge of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE.

If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is NiggerNET, and you can connect to irc.gnaa.us as our official server. Follow this link if you are using an irc client such as mIRC.

If you have mod points and would like to support G

You make a number of good points, Thank you.

I think you're correct in that the record industry will try to block
these changes in anyway they can.

Although when one starts to try to "own" original content through derived work
ie "fair use" etc... you come to the point where you start try to control
thoughts, ideas and their communication.

At this point you start interfering with freedom of speech and other fundamental
democratic rights. In this they play a very dangerous game, as we've already
seen with other uses of the DMCA in suppressing security research
(http://features.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/11 /30/1739226) and
more (http://www.eff.org/legal/victories/more.php).

Although the record industry is powerful, they cannot succeed in taking on everyone,
although as you correctly stated they will try and fight to the last man.

At best they can make a big mess and buy some time.

I've been happily using Privoxy + Tor + i2p together for quite some time now to browse the web, Google and other sites of interest.

I also have 2 transparent Squid proxies in front of my LAN here (on my side) running with squid-prefetch, and they too use the same privoxy and tor and i2p setups for prefetching. This way, duplicate requests from anyone inside my network don't HAVE TO go to the live site, if it already exists in the Squid cache. Since its transparent (done at the router with iptables), the users don't have to configure anything at all on their end.

And I much prefer SwitchProxy over FoxyProxy any day.

"We want to protect our intellectual property."

Isn't that what SCO's been saying for the last few years? Whatever amazon plans to do with this (I promise you they DO have plans), probably won't be good for anybody. Best case scenerio, they'll charge up the ass for someone that wants to do something useful with the data. More likely, it'll be used for really intrusive and annoying "services", or possibly another horrendous secret government-corporation collaboration to "protect" us from "terrorists". Worst, case... nevermind, I don't want to think about it.

Here are two alternate links to the actual version submitted to the Court: http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=capi tol_foster_amicus at Internet Law & Regulation or http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/Capitol_v_Foster/am icus_in_support_of_fees.pdf at Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Here are two alternate links to the actual version submitted to the Court: http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=capi tol_foster_amicus at Internet Law & Regulation or http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/Capitol_v_Foster/am icus_in_support_of_fees.pdf at Electronic Frontier Foundation.

The latest news is that not one of the "terrorists" arrested had a plane ticket for yesterday, or in fact any imminent travel plans, and that one has already been released without charge. [1]

Please note that this comes one day after the Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott, assumed power in Prime Minister Tony Blairs' holiday absence, in spite of a lengthy public campaign to highlight that he was unfit to hold office. The Prime Ministers response so far has been to strip him of all responsibility, leaving him with only "ceremonial" duties. Such as co-ordinating national security while Tony's in Barbados. [2]

It was also, coincidentally (!), the day that MP Jim Sheridan quit his defence post in protest at the governments' stance on the situation in the Middle East, and the circumvention of proper procedure on the part of the US authorities while refuelling aircraft in Scotland carrying weapons to Jewish Palestine. [3]

It was also, coincidentally (!), the day that one-quarter of the elected representatives of the British public (including over 100 members of the incumbent government) are threatening to revolt if Tony Blair does not curtail his holiday and recall Parliament. [4]

What with all these coincidences, the cynical among you might not be surprised to learn that Tony was briefed about it six weeks ago. And chatted to George about it on Sunday. And decided to do something about it on Thursday.[5]

If any uncaptured members of this terror cell are still in any doubt as to who among them is being held, and which aspects of the plot need to fall back to Plan B, please check the official list (including dates of birth and postal codes). Presumably this disclosure is suddenly standard procedure, and the established process of witholding potentially useful information from terrorists has been deprecated.[6]

--
I love freedom. The only thing that makes me feel secure is Tor.

• Use different search engines--spread the love.
• Scrub the Google cookie, change IPs early and often if your ISP makes it easy.
• Use TOR or JAP when possible. (Don't forget, fresh cookie every time.) They're not perfect, but makes it less likely you'll be in the dragnet unless you're a specific person of interest--good intel isn't exposed chasing small fry.
• Don't vanity search or search on identifiers for people close to you on a machine you use regularly.
• Salt your searches with misinformation. Interested in motorcycles? Search for flower gardening. Arabic? Search for German. Search for random stuff now and then.
• Don't tip search engines off to your plans. Don't do searches containing the words "how" and "to" unless you're looking for HOWTOs. They're common words anyway, and don't really help.
• Don't use services like Gmail and search at the same time. (The wisdom of providing Gmail with personally identifying information and using it at is questionable given Google's aggressive data gathering.)

That's a stupid excuse, though. They could always isolate the SGI-laden parts, LGPL the rest,

Hell, they could spend $5 and buy it from SGI who need every dollar they can get to make it out of Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

In fact, the "trade secret" and "intellectual property" argument is almost certainly the biggest reason for closed-source driver code.

It's the patents. They worry that by disclosing how they talk to the hardware they might provide sufficient proof that their hardware onboard the card violates some obscure patent that they may or may not be aware of. They figure that by not disclosing that information, they completely avoid the entire minefield of surprise patent litigation.

Effing lawyers (and yes, I do wish they would all get the EFF religion)

Or use something like Tor which is free/open for all and can proxy most anything (socks). Too bad Slashdot blocks Tor proxies (please complain, everyone).

The real privacy killer is not the cookie or even your gmail account, it's your IP address. That is what ties everything you do back to the physical you. Dynamic IP adresses are no safegaurd as your provider knows who has which IP address. Anonymizing proxies are the only way to go. The more people that use things like Tor, the faster they will run.

Yes, and if you have an always-on computer, please consider running a TOR server. TOR includes mechanisms for limiting bandwidth usage and blocking certain connections at your choice.

Also, keep the cookies down. I personally block google cookies and those of a bunch of other ad vendors - these are the data that would give the most away about me. I really ought to run something like Privoxy

Hey, I wonder if NSA/AT&T used Chinese boxes to wiretap citizens?

Warrants or no warrants, but as a patriot, I sure hope they use 100% American?

The government of the USA has already shown a proclivity towards watching its citizens. To be fair, this phenomenon isn't limited to the USA, but Bush has taken it to new levels.

We now know that the government secretly had printer manufacturers embed hidden ID codes on printer's output, thereby removing any possibility of anonymous document creation.

I wouldn't be surprised if some enterprising Bush-ite didn't see the possibility here of having *every* keyboard manufactured with some form of this technology embedded. Imagine if the government could tell what you were typing just by listening to your traffic.

Think of the terrorists we could stop! Think of the children!

The government of the USA has already shown a proclivity towards watching its citizens. To be fair, this phenomenon isn't limited to the USA, but Bush has taken it to new levels.

We now know that the government secretly had printer manufacturers embed hidden ID codes on printer's output, thereby removing any possibility of anonymous document creation.

I wouldn't be surprised if some enterprising Bush-ite didn't see the possibility here of having *every* keyboard manufactured with some form of this technology embedded. Imagine if the government could tell what you were typing just by listening to your traffic.

Think of the terrorists we could stop! Think of the children!

• Oki's printers use linear LED arrays rather than a laser scanner. This makes them smaller (especially for color), quieter, and produces better print quality. (Compare clarity of very small text on an Oki to HP or Samsung color lasers to see a *huge* difference.)
• The noise of other color laser printers is a big deal, unless they live in an printer room where no one has to hear. While the Oki is far from silent while printing, it's *way* quiter than the horrible jangling, clunking noise of HP's ferris wheel of toner cartridges.
• A significant benefit of the Oki LED imager technology is that all colors are applied and fused in a single pass - so colors stay perfectly in register. After two years, the colors in my Oki are still perfectly aligned - friends with HPs and Samsungs can't say that. Streaks, splotches, and stripes have simply never happened. This single-pass technology is also many times faster and a big part of the reason why it's quieter - it simply doesn't need complexities like the kludgey toner cartidge ferris wheel HP's design requires.
• Oki's toner is pretty amazing stuff - a special ultrafine polymer powder far more durable than the competition's - I even use my printer to produce outdoor-use labels on Avery's weatherproof label stock. So far, I can say it lasts at least two years outdoors and not only does it still look good, it looks like the label material is going to go away before the printed image. That same durability makes it impossible to smudge an Oki-printed document, and produces a medium-glossy finish that looks much more like an offset-printed document than a laser printer. This professional look is handy, since I originally bought it to do print-on demand product brochures and the like.
• It's networkable, of course, and uses a delightfully open lpr print queue, so it works with any computer or OS, and probably will forever.
• Cost per page is surprisingly low - this is one of the big reasons to seriously consider a printer like this instead of an inkjet, which is *much* more expensive over the long haul on a per-page basis. At what good quality ink cartridges cost, you can pay for a nice color LED printer like this pretty quickly. Plus, Oki gives you decent 3000-page toner cartridges to start out with (they sell 3K and 5K sizes), unlike the HP ripoff factory cartridges that are much smaller and force you to spend hundreds more for toner before very long.
• Oh, and so far as anyone knows, Oki printers do NOT encode ID information in your printouts like many others do: http://www.eff.org/Privacy/printers/list.php

My Oki C5150n printer is one of the best products I've ever owned - it's *only* flaw is in not correctly using the manual bypass feeder tray without having to tell the driver you want to do that. (The manual says if there's paper there, it should use that by default, but it doesn't.) There are ne

You obviously did not read the link. An ISP is _not liable_ for transit traffic. Ever. Even if you write the complainant back and say "LOL YA RIGHT" or flat out ignore them. Even if the notice is sent certified mail, says 'DMCA NOTICE' in the subject line, follows your takedown proceedures to the letter and threatens (e)legal action. DMCA takedown procedures (or even court subpoenas for that matter) do not apply to transit!

If you really feel that way, then visit The Electronic Freedom Foundation. They *are* taking the initiative, and you can join them if they match your values.

Even if you don't donate money, they're on top of the issue and can tell you when a call to your congresscritter be most effective.

Sony pulled the CLIE from the US market, despite the fact they where making a profit, just because they had no hope of dominating the PDA market in the US.

Sony Connect music store remains poorly implimented and under marketed.

Sony demostrated no loyality to it's Playstation 2 consumers resulting in a class action lawsuit.

Sony demostrated no loyality to being able to install a hard drive in future iterations of the Playstation 2. If a consumer's PS2 breaks down and they get the latest version of the PS2 then Final Fantasy XI unusable and ensuring that companies would not port other classically computer style games to the PS2.

Sony demostrated no loyality to it's audio CD consumers resulting in a class action lawsuit.

Current reviews of HD-DVD's than Blu-Ray disks indicate that HD-DVD is preferable.

There is currently more HD-DVD titles available than Blu-Ray.

Sony's first priority for the design of Blu-Ray seems to be the triple copy-protection instead of any consumer friendly priorities.

If you don't learn from history then you are doomed to suffer when Sony again pulls an anti-consumer move.

Nintendo and Microsoft seem more interested in this latest round of consoles of delivering features to the consumer than pulling a fast one over on them and then excusing themselves from responsiblity.

One which wasn't on http://www.eff.org/Privacy/printers/list.php would be my choice...

I have now added a link to my journal entry but it does not appear here as yet. I hope that it does but in the meantime the case history can be found HERE.

You couldn't get yourself into too much trouble because everyone in town knew you on sight

You're confusing privacy with anonymity.

And you're wrong about anonymity, too. Larger cities, the prerequisite of anonymity, did exist even in the old ages. In 50 B.C. for example, Rome had at least 450,000 inhabitants (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Rome#Roman _Empire), and 400 years before that Athens had about 300,000 inhabitants (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Athens#Ori gins_and_setting).

But like it or not, there really wasn't ever any such thing as privacy.

100 years ago, Alice could meet with Bob, walk into some field, and have a conversation that none could overhear. That is called privacy, and it did exist.

Today, Alice cannot have a conversation with Bob that couldn't be overheard, nowhere.

These days, you only wory about them because they can pass the information to the feds whom you're really worried about. [Emphasis mine.]

Not only they can, but they do.

100 years ago, it was hard work for an investigator to collect and correlate all this information. It did occur, but it was expensive to breach the privacy of a person. This ensured that it was done only for relatively few suspects.

Today, the privacy of the entire populance is breached on a regular basis.

Sorry, you can't have a credit card if you want privacy because it isn't your money, it's theirs, and so they have an interest in what you buy.

Last time I checked my credit card bills, it was my money all right. It was just tunnelled through their network.

It is likely that the Senate will overturn this ban considering that Facebook.com is intertwined with many college, university, high school, and stand-by military activities.

My university in particular uses Facebook to announce many event that occur on campus through the help of the dean's office.

What this ban means to these institutions is that you can't promote the campus carrier fair or the special guest speaker who has come to school to give an enlightening lecture. And forget about parties, club meetings, sports, communicating with your classmates.

Secondly, this bill may threaten Net Neutrality, another bill the House passed that the Senate is likely to toss out.

It is quite clear that the lobbyist from AT&T and other large communications and mass media companies, are in full force buying out elected officials and government agencies in Capitol Hill. This story should be paid close attention to over the next few weeks.

http://tor.eff.org/

2. What does TC do, in ordinary English?

TC provides a computing platform on which you can't tamper with the application software, and where these applications can communicate securely with their authors and with each other. The original motivation was digital rights management (DRM): Disney will be able to sell you DVDs that will decrypt and run on a TC platform, but which you won't be able to copy. The music industry will be able to sell you music downloads that you won't be able to swap. They will be able to sell you CDs that you'll only be able to play three times, or only on your birthday. All sorts of new marketing possibilities will open up.

TC will also make it much harder for you to run unlicensed software. In the first version of TC, pirate software could be detected and deleted remotely. Since then, Microsoft has sometimes denied that it intended TC to do this, but at WEIS 2003 a senior Microsoft manager refused to deny that fighting piracy was a goal: `Helping people to run stolen software just isn't our aim in life', he said. The mechanisms now proposed are more subtle, though. TC will protect application software registration mechanisms, so that unlicensed software will be locked out of the new ecology. Furthermore, TC apps will work better with other TC apps, so people will get less value from old non-TC apps (including pirate apps). Also, some TC apps may reject data from old apps whose serial numbers have been blacklisted. If Microsoft believes that your copy of Office is a pirate copy, and your local government moves to TC, then the documents you file with them may be unreadable. TC will also make it easier for people to rent software rather than buy it; and if you stop paying the rent, then not only does the software stop working but so may the files it created. So if you stop paying for upgrades to Media Player, you may lose access to all the songs you bought using it.

For years, Bill Gates has dreamed of finding a way to make the Chinese pay for software: TC looks like being the answer to his prayer.

There are many other possibilities. Governments will be able to arrange things so that all Word documents created on civil servants' PCs are `born classified' and can't be leaked electronically to journalists. Auction sites might insist that you use trusted proxy software for bidding, so that you can't bid tactically at the auction. Cheating at computer games could be made more difficult.

There are some gotchas too. For example, TC can support remote censorship. In its simplest form, applications may be designed to delete pirated music under remote control. For example, if a protected song is extracted from a hacked TC platform and made available on the web as an MP3 file, then TC-compliant media player software may detect it using a watermark, report it, and be instructed remotely to delete it (as well as all other material that came through that platform). This business model, called traitor tracing, has been researched extensively by Microsoft (and others). In general, digital objects created using TC systems remain under the control of their creators, rather than under the control of the person who owns the machine on which they happen to be stored (as at present). So someone who wri

2. What does TC do, in ordinary English?

TC provides a computing platform on which you can't tamper with the application software, and where these applications can communicate securely with their authors and with each other. The original motivation was digital rights management (DRM): Disney will be able to sell you DVDs that will decrypt and run on a TC platform, but which you won't be able to copy. The music industry will be able to sell you music downloads that you won't be able to swap. They will be able to sell you CDs that you'll only be able to play three times, or only on your birthday. All sorts of new marketing possibilities will open up.

TC will also make it much harder for you to run unlicensed software. In the first version of TC, pirate software could be detected and deleted remotely. Since then, Microsoft has sometimes denied that it intended TC to do this, but at WEIS 2003 a senior Microsoft manager refused to deny that fighting piracy was a goal: `Helping people to run stolen software just isn't our aim in life', he said. The mechanisms now proposed are more subtle, though. TC will protect application software registration mechanisms, so that unlicensed software will be locked out of the new ecology. Furthermore, TC apps will work better with other TC apps, so people will get less value from old non-TC apps (including pirate apps). Also, some TC apps may reject data from old apps whose serial numbers have been blacklisted. If Microsoft believes that your copy of Office is a pirate copy, and your local government moves to TC, then the documents you file with them may be unreadable. TC will also make it easier for people to rent software rather than buy it; and if you stop paying the rent, then not only does the software stop working but so may the files it created. So if you stop paying for upgrades to Media Player, you may lose access to all the songs you bought using it.

For years, Bill Gates has dreamed of finding a way to make the Chinese pay for software: TC looks like being the answer to his prayer.

There are many other possibilities. Governments will be able to arrange things so that all Word documents created on civil servants' PCs are `born classified' and can't be leaked electronically to journalists. Auction sites might insist that you use trusted proxy software for bidding, so that you can't bid tactically at the auction. Cheating at computer games could be made more difficult.

There are some gotchas too. For example, TC can support remote censorship. In its simplest form, applications may be designed to delete pirated music under remote control. For example, if a protected song is extracted from a hacked TC platform and made available on the web as an MP3 file, then TC-compliant media player software may detect it using a watermark, report it, and be instructed remotely to delete it (as well as all other material that came through that platform). This business model, called traitor tracing, has been researched extensively by Microsoft (and others). In general, digital objects created using TC systems remain under the control of their creators, rather than under the control of the person who owns the machine on which they happen to be stored (as at present). So someone who wri

If I recall right there already has been a fair use case... Here is EFF's webpage on Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), and at least one of these cases deals with fair use, MGM v. 321 Studios.