Slashdot Mirror

Quick blurb: The Bush Administration has an online pornography law that they previously tried to pass, and now they want to do it again. They have subpoenaed Google for information regarding what users look for through the search engine, in regards to pornography. Google however is refusing to disclose the information, calling it unjustified.

What we have been told is that this program only applies in scenarios where one end of the communication is foreign.

That's true about how an investigation starts. But apparently once a person makes or receives an overseas phone call, the NSA then followed every person that they called, including people within the country. They then investigated those people, etc.

As the NYTimes says:
Officials who were briefed on the N.S.A. program said the agency collected much of the data passed on to the F.B.I. as tips by tracing phone numbers in the United States called by suspects overseas, and then by following the domestic numbers to other numbers called.

To me the biggest issue is not that they were doing it but that they were violating the law while doing it. The way this democracy works (as established by the founding fathers) is through transparency and balance between the executive and legislative branches. Here's a scenario: if the 72 hour retroactive warrants are too limiting, change the law to extend it to another 72 hours. The issue at stake here is not what the administration was seeking to accomplish, and the ends should not be used to justify the means. The ends are fine ends... and it would have been simple enough to change the laws to accomplish them.

Yes I know, the so called "Black Chambers" go way back. It's in Kahn. However, the difference is not the act, it's the legislation.

Here's a free link.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/09/technology/09gam ing.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5088&en=48a72408592dffe6& ex=1291784400&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Gold Farming:

Large numbers of very poorly paid people play WoW for hours with the sole purpose of collecting (in-game) gold. Said gold is then resold to players who dont mind putting $70 worth of WoW gold on their Visa cards. Since the "farmers" are so poorly paid, there is plenty of money left to pay the workers and give the middleman a hefty cut.

The New York Times had an article about this a few months back. I don't remember it being interesting enough to pay for, but you never know :)

Like, have they downloaded/posted credit card numbers, kiddy porn, terrost plots, maybe post a promise to kill the president, and customized ones for several western and radical countries? Maybe send death threats to the head of the CIA, FBI, and NSA? Maybe the russian mafia? Maybe the israli secret police?

A longer article on this in the NY Times says that other astronomers doubt this result.

>Nope, can't say that I do. Could you source it for me?

My first source for this is in German, but you may use Googles ( :-) )translation:
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F %2Fwww.heise.de%2Fnewsticker%2Fresult.xhtml%3Furl% 3D%2Fnewsticker%2Fmeldung%2F67761%26words%3DBush&l angpair=de%7Cen&hl=en&c2coff=1&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&p rev=%2Flanguage_tools

The original article is from the NYT - you may have an account there.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/24/politics/24spy.h tml

BTW: Looks also intersting: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=George_ W._Bush's_domestic_spying

The Washington Post
CNN
The New York Times

I recognize that the life of Joe Schmoe might be less important than, say, airstrikes in Pakistan. Nevertheless, I would expect truly indepedent and free-thinking press staffs to have significant differences of opinion on what's important to run.

Instead, it appears that they steal story ideas from each other.

Before the AP article that mentioned "Like Swift Dead", that phrase (in quotes) returned zero results. That means nobody who ever talked about LSD mentioned "Like Swift Dead" on a web page that got indexed by Google. That's all it means.

There is now a Wikipedia article where the facts can be hashed out and the prior existence of the term can be debated and/or documented. Let's see if the source of that term can come forth and tell us.

You, AC, can't even spell the word "sentence" (nor can I spell "Albert Hofmann")... but I suspect the New York Times got it right [registration-free link].

Robert Kennedy Jr is also against windmills: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/opinion/16kenned y.html?ex=1292389200&en=58e5dd67e381fd58&ei=5090&p artner=rssuserland&emc=rss.

This morning, the NYTimes reports the GSA's website for contract bidding has been shut down due serious security flaws.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/13/technology/13sec ure.html

"The security flaw, which could have permitted contractor fraud, was reported to the agency's inspector general on Dec. 22, but almost three weeks passed before the system was taken offline Wednesday afternoon. The General Services Administration is the federal agency responsible for procuring equipment and services, including computer security technology, making the lapse all the more striking. "This is the government entity responsible for letting contracts for security," said Mark Rasch, chief security counsel for Solutionary, a security firm. "Clearly the people who log in would know about security.""

he New York Times on the Web is currently using and has contracted with Omniture, a third party, to track and analyze non-personally identifiable usage and volume statistical information from our visitors and customers to administer our Web site in order to constantly improve the Web site quality.

They still have a lot of great bargains on 35mm over at PriceRitePhoto!

Well it's true but let's not forget that a lot of people are COERCED into registering for something when they actually want something else. This IMHO makes the whole "registered users" idea completely useless UNLESS the registration serves only one purpose, which is to play the mentionned MMO.

To download this free 600MB movie of Jenna J. please register for free HERE!

In the article I linked to above, a scientist says: "'We depend entirely on the truthfulness of the scientific community,' Dr. Zoloth said. 'We must believe that what they are showing us and what they say has been demonstrated is worthy of our concern and attention. The South Korean story, Dr. Zoloth added, raises questions about whether the science is good. 'Good as in true and real and morally worthy of our funding," she explained.'"

But isn't that totally incorrect and naive view for a funding agency? Nowhere in Science does anyone "depend on the truthfulness of the scientific community." Science depends on testability, falsifiability (if you're a Popper-ite), repeatability, peer review, etc. These sorts of events remind you that the system is working.

My argument could be twisted around: I'm *not* paradoxically saying we should encourage scientific fraud to somehow lend scientific credibility. But given that we have an intrinsically error-prone system, error detection and correction (a strength of the modern scientific process) should be a regarded as a *good* thing.

Sadly, money was wasted on this fraudulent work. But there is no recipe *a priori* to know 100% of the time if research hypotheses are fraudulent without examining the results in a peer-reviewed and reproducible way.

U.S. Office Joins an Effort to Improve Software Patents

Btw, why are such areas as that so low-res on Google Map while so good on Google Earth? Also, why are some governmental building edited out in Google Maps, while apparently (didn't check all) not in Google Earth??

I imagine the resolution on Google Maps is restricted because of the sheer number of pre-cached tiles at every possible resolution it would take to make it available to a huge number of users simultaneously. It's simpler to just restrict that and keep the data set smaller. Now in Google Maps, I imagine they can predict where to pre-cache imagery based on where the user is browsing with direct feedback from the client.

As for "governmental building edited out", check out this article at NYTimes, where Andrew McLaughlin, a senior policy counsel at Google rebuffs this idea. "Nor, he said, has the United States government ever asked Google to remove information."

And more specifically, "For a brief period, photos of the White House and adjacent buildings that the United States Geological Survey provided to Google Earth showed up with certain details obscured, because the government had decided that showing details like rooftop helicopter landing pads was a security risk. Google has since replaced those images with unaltered photographs of the area taken by Sanborn, a mapping and imagery company, further illustrating the difficulty of trying to control such information."

I wouldn't call landing a spot with EA the most awesome job.

How many companies do you call 'awesome' that have workers suing their employer?

doesnt anyone remember his article from a couple years ago? we have a way to mass-produce hydrogen with newer nuclear plants.

http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/2 8/1921233&tid=126&tid=99&tid=14&tid=1
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/28/politics/28hydro gen.html

You said: "It's almost impossible for a US based company (or any company based in the West) to go to some third world nation for a launch." The problem is that even if they're not really third world nations - the possibilities for terrorists and the like are always present.

Virgin Galactic could always move their operations to another launch site - so let's look at the contenders:

The European Space Agency (ESA) launches it's missions from their French Guiana base which is in South America. Not exactly a third world nation since it's "part of" France - but the area itself is hardly developed. I imagine they could more easily bribe and conspire in that environment [outside the base itself].

The only other serious launching site are the Russian ones (Baikonur etc) - they're already in the business of serving the rich space tourists. Now, the Russians have lived through more terrorism than the US ever will - they know their stuff. Still a few extra dollars will get you far...

On another note NASA used an African site in Gambia as backup for several missions - I imagine the Gambians would welcome the business. They would certainly accept a few extra dollars - and we all know where that leads...

On a final note there's always SeaLaunch - though I hardly think that they're going to launch SpaceShipOne from there!

In the last two years the Weather Channel has been making a big push in this direction. They have been a technological innovator in the cable world especially in the way they push the local forecast to every individual head end that carries TWC. Leveraging that technology they have begun regional targeting and weather specific targeting.

An example of this is a tire company. On any other network when they buy national time one commercial for one tire is aired. With regional targeting rain tires can been served to the northeast and good weather tires to the south - in the same :30 seconds two spots run simultaneously in different parts of the country. Take that a step further and you really begin to see the value in the premium price TWC gets for these spots.

TWC links it's ad serving to it's local forecasts at each head end. If it's raining in your county you'll see a rain tire commercial, while your buddy up north on another cable system where it's snowing will see a spot for snow tires. An hour later when the snow turns to rain he's see a spot for rain tires.

While conceptually the idea of Google leveraging these trailers is conceivable Cringely's prediction is flawed. Google will not be able to sell targeting to the networks. National network commercials are still carried over the air. Cable operators simply retransmit them. The minute or two of local time is sold by the local affiliate, also over the air and then retransmitted. Neither the nets nor the affiliates would let a cable operator insert commercials over the ones they've sold and no technology exists to legally insert them over the air interrupting the original signal. There may be some room in the cable only universe for cable MSO's to sell national advertisers more targeted spots in the 2 minutes an hour then get but the idea of Joe's Restaurant down the block spending money on production of a TV ad and then paying extra to target me seems a little far fetched.

I think the prediction in today's NY Times http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/06/technology/06onl ine.html makes more sense. Downloads an convergence of the TV and PC are where it's going to be at.

Or we could just wait and see what the announcement is. What is the point of specualting anyway besides driving traffic to /. everyday? :)

"We say it frankly that God is great and is able to exact revenge on this butcher. We thank God for this gift he presented to us on this new year."

-- Ahmed Jibril, Palestinian political leader, describing his people's views on Ariel Sharon's near-death condition [link]

It is speculated that both Toshiba and Sony will sell their players at a loss at the beginning. They have more to lose from supporting a dead format, than from the cost of losing money on their first generation of players.

Has anyone else noticed the media constantly writing about how Wikipedia is blocking ALL editing to the site from anonymous editors? This is just one example of them getting it wrong. And lest you think it was a minor online paper that makes this mistake: the first paper to get it wrong was the UK's Guardian. The other big mistake they constantly make is that they believe that we are going to accept advertising, soemthing that Jimmy Wales has been repeatedly misquoted on.

I also noticed the NYTimes mention a difference in dating between EB's article and our own on Hwang Woo-Suk. I agree with the way that we correct things is modest: we listened to the NYTimes writer, George Johnson, and explained that it was a difference between the Korean calendar and the Gregorian calendar in a footnote.

In Nevada, among other security measures, the state has a copies of the code used in all slot machines and audits machines to make sure they haven't been modified from the reference versions. Gamblers can request an immediate investigation of any machine they believe may have cheated them. After all, money is at stake. It would be nice to have at least the same level of security for our vote.

  Links to NY Times article "MAKING VOTES COUNT - Gambling on Voting",
  contrasting slot machine and voting machine security

http://theory.lcs.mit.edu/~rivest/voting/press/nyt /2004-06-13%20NYT%20Gambling%20on%20Voting.pdf (PDF)
http://www.ejfi.org/Voting/Voting-31.htm (no registration required)
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/13/opinion/13SUN1.h tml (registration required)

And don't forget to mention it to ESPN, ABC Sports, Fox Sports, and all the other networks who use them for their sports coverage.

Not for long. Every game that rated a blimp will have a mobile aerial camera soon.

Article via a non-stupid-NY-times-signup-site

I'm pretty much there with you.

There is no way that President Bush would ask, say, the NSA to do anything illegal is there?

And, although there may be a few renegades, there isn't much of official Washington that would use secrets for political gain.

But then there is the press which has recently developed some badly misplaced priorities, actively supporting and publicizing leaks of sensitive ongoing intelligence and military operations against the enemy over and over again. You would think it would be easy to understand that this harms our national security, yet much of the mainstream media passes over the issue in silence. On the other hand, they have endless energy and interest in a kerfuffle involving no crime.

Maybe the media will start taking the war more seriously if Al Qaeda makes significant progress in their announced goal of killing four million Americans. Or maybe not. If there are more successful large scale terrorist attacks in the United States, aided by the media's disclosure of on-going military and intelligence operations, I expect that the majority of the media won't engage in self-examination, but will rather most likely start banging the drums from the fever swamp. The fever swamp runs deep, and support for the President among the media is thin.

Well, if the other party gains power, maybe things will change... or maybe not.

Thank goodness we are a country where you can still engage in dissent against the mainstream.

enough weapons of mass destruction, and did we find enough terrorists by eavesdropping innocent citizen's phones that the most important left to do is bash NSA on having persistent cookies vs session ones?

Actually the Brooklyn Bridge terror plot was discoverd by one of the NSA wiretaps of Iyman Faris.

(1) You conveniently ignore the rise to dominance.

Ah but I don't. It's not as if these two antitrust convictions were in the last two years. This has been going on for quite some time, as have Microsoft's illegal tactics.

You equate an anti-trust conviction with the existence of a monopolist market, the former does not imply the later.

From the findings of fact:
" Microsoft enjoys so much power in the market for Intel-compatible PC operating systems that if it wished to exercise this power solely in terms of price, it could charge a price for Windows substantially above that which could be charged in a competitive market. Moreover, it could do so for a significant period of time without losing an unacceptable amount of business to competitors. In other words, Microsoft enjoys monopoly power in the relevant market."

You might enjoy the PDF from http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-380es.html:

You might enjoy this bit of reading about the integrity of the Cato institute. In general it's important to realize that a group like the Cato institute doesn't have anywhere close to the integrity that a federal court does. Here's another choice gem on those guys:
"Not surprisingly, the Cato Institute has been a fierce defender of the tobacco industry, in publications such as 1998's "Lies, Damn Lies and 400,000 Smoking-Related Deaths." which claims that tobacco is "far less pernicious than Americans are led to believe. . . . The government should stop lying and stop pretending that smoking-related deaths are anything but a statistical artifact.""
If you want people to take you seriously, I do not reccommend using them as a source.

In response to the particular sections you quoted:
-The first quote is nonsensical. First it tells me that 70,000 appilcations dependant on windows represent a barrier to entry for other operating systems which do not have this library of applications. This is essentailly true. Next it says that a competing operating system would need a similar suite of applications in order to compete. I think we can agree that this is also true.
Now here comes sentence number four. It's a quote from the judge with the number 70,000 inserted. It's true, but the number is not actually part of the quote and it's inclusion is dishonest. Which we'll come back to later.
Sentence five is a doozy. It's a classic misdirection. The conjecture is the 70,000 applications means that there IS competition in the software industry. This is true, but not in the market we're talking about. It's referring to a different business, similar to the difference between a screw and a screwdriver. Interrelated yes, the same no. This is dishonest. It's garbage.
Next they move on to attack the 70,000 number. The argument is that because there aren't actually 70,000 applications out there I can go out and buy individually, there is no significant barrier. But the thing is, the judge never actually claimed that a competitior needed 70,000 applications. Just like the Cato institute, the judge knows that one doesn't actually need 70,000 applications and never actually claimed that they do. What he did say was that the cost to develop the applications necessary to compete would be high. This they have not managed to rebut.

-The second quote is even worse. The first sentence is just plain false. Section 2 subsection 45 of the findings of fact specfically recognizes these other operating systems.
The rest of the argument doesn't even really make sense. The claim is that MS is not charging enough for their OS therfore the alternatives have not managed to become commercailly viable. This argument does not acknowedge the known facts of the case such as MS forcing OEM vendors to sign exclusive deals in order to get a good price on Windows.

Joe Dogooder is not a criminal, in fact Joe is your average, well do-gooder. Pays his taxes, supports his family, visits his community church, where mind you, he's visited since his days as an altar boy. Normally Joe wakes up around 5:00am in hopes of making some decaffeinated coffee, followed by a quick glimpse at the New York Times Online, while his television is tuned to the news. Today however, Joe woke up at 5:30am - and although he won't be late, he decided not to watch television. Instead he is going to work early in order to catch up with some work.

After his shower, getting dressed, kissing his family goodbye he grabs his trusted cellphone, and heads for his car. "Welcome to OnStar" flares for a quick second before he turns the service off. He'd know his way to work driving blindfolded, he's been there plenty of times. After stopping for some coffee and paying with his credit card at the local 7Eleven at 6:15am, he makes a right on Main Street leading to the turnpike. Joe always has money on his EZ-Pass, and although it has been hacked in the past, his information is now safe. He continues to work and breezes right through the toll-booths it is now 6:21am and he's right on time.

Getting off at the Broadway exit, Joe is running pretty early, 6:41am. Pulling into the Shell gas station at 6:45am, he fills up his car and swipes his credit card again through the machine so he doesn't have to walk an extra 20 feet to pay the cashier. Stops at the local Megasupershopper store and buys some chewing gum, a soda, and some shaving cream. Back in his car, he finally pulls into the corporate garage at 7:00am, swipes his identification card, and continues on his way. This is pretty much a daily routine for Joe, and millions like him.

So who is this average Joe and why should you care? Joe is noone really important, what's important is that you understand how Joe's movements were tracked and how dangerous can be at some point. TiVo recently shoved their foot in their mouths when they announced that Janet Jackson's breast of mass destruction was the most rewound video capture. Meaning? Watch a TiVo, they'll know it, what time, what it was, and who did it - you do after all have your information attached to it.

Joe also decided to check the news via the New York Times, and he had to sign into his account in order to do so, meaning his information was gathered there too. What time he logged in, and from where. Sure he could have registered with false information, after all it's free, but unless he decided to manually change his IP address somehow - whether via proxy or other means - the New York Times has his information. This is not to say in any way the New York Times is selling your information or using it against you, I don't know their policies, I'm simply trying to make you aware of the signs of the 'Times'

We can also average out a time where Joe starts his car every single day for as long as we'd like using his OnStar information, we can determine a definitive pattern of his daily life with ease. What about the chewing gum?, simple, RFID tags gave us that info. Now this may not be a big deal considering Joe Dogooder is an upstanding citizen so he would have nothing to hide. John Cheatman is an altogether different story.

John has been having an affair on his wife of 30 years, and he happens to be a millionaire. Wonder what he'd do if someone threw together a video portrait of his weekly (T

Joe Dogooder is not a criminal, in fact Joe is your average, well do-gooder. Pays his taxes, supports his family, visits his community church, where mind you, he's visited since his days as an altar boy. Normally Joe wakes up around 5:00am in hopes of making some decaffeinated coffee, followed by a quick glimpse at the New York Times Online, while his television is tuned to the news. Today however, Joe woke up at 5:30am - and although he won't be late, he decided not to watch television. Instead he is going to work early in order to catch up with some work.

After his shower, getting dressed, kissing his family goodbye he grabs his trusted cellphone, and heads for his car. "Welcome to OnStar" flares for a quick second before he turns the service off. He'd know his way to work driving blindfolded, he's been there plenty of times. After stopping for some coffee and paying with his credit card at the local 7Eleven at 6:15am, he makes a right on Main Street leading to the turnpike. Joe always has money on his EZ-Pass, and although it has been hacked in the past, his information is now safe. He continues to work and breezes right through the toll-booths it is now 6:21am and he's right on time.

Getting off at the Broadway exit, Joe is running pretty early, 6:41am. Pulling into the Shell gas station at 6:45am, he fills up his car and swipes his credit card again through the machine so he doesn't have to walk an extra 20 feet to pay the cashier. Stops at the local Megasupershopper store and buys some chewing gum, a soda, and some shaving cream. Back in his car, he finally pulls into the corporate garage at 7:00am, swipes his identification card, and continues on his way. This is pretty much a daily routine for Joe, and millions like him.

So who is this average Joe and why should you care? Joe is noone really important, what's important is that you understand how Joe's movements were tracked and how dangerous can be at some point. TiVo recently shoved their foot in their mouths when they announced that Janet Jackson's breast of mass destruction was the most rewound video capture. Meaning? Watch a TiVo, they'll know it, what time, what it was, and who did it - you do after all have your information attached to it.

Joe also decided to check the news via the New York Times, and he had to sign into his account in order to do so, meaning his information was gathered there too. What time he logged in, and from where. Sure he could have registered with false information, after all it's free, but unless he decided to manually change his IP address somehow - whether via proxy or other means - the New York Times has his information. This is not to say in any way the New York Times is selling your information or using it against you, I don't know their policies, I'm simply trying to make you aware of the signs of the 'Times'

We can also average out a time where Joe starts his car every single day for as long as we'd like using his OnStar information, we can determine a definitive pattern of his daily life with ease. What about the chewing gum?, simple, RFID tags gave us that info. Now this may not be a big deal considering Joe Dogooder is an upstanding citizen so he would have nothing to hide. John Cheatman is an altogether different story.

John has been having an affair on his wife of 30 years, and he happens to be a millionaire. Wonder what he'd do if someone threw together a video portrait of his weekly (T

Joe Dogooder is not a criminal, in fact Joe is your average, well do-gooder. Pays his taxes, supports his family, visits his community church, where mind you, he's visited since his days as an altar boy. Normally Joe wakes up around 5:00am in hopes of making some decaffeinated coffee, followed by a quick glimpse at the New York Times Online, while his television is tuned to the news. Today however, Joe woke up at 5:30am - and although he won't be late, he decided not to watch television. Instead he is going to work early in order to catch up with some work.

After his shower, getting dressed, kissing his family goodbye he grabs his trusted cellphone, and heads for his car. "Welcome to OnStar" flares for a quick second before he turns the service off. He'd know his way to work driving blindfolded, he's been there plenty of times. After stopping for some coffee and paying with his credit card at the local 7Eleven at 6:15am, he makes a right on Main Street leading to the turnpike. Joe always has money on his EZ-Pass, and although it has been hacked in the past, his information is now safe. He continues to work and breezes right through the toll-booths it is now 6:21am and he's right on time.

Getting off at the Broadway exit, Joe is running pretty early, 6:41am. Pulling into the Shell gas station at 6:45am, he fills up his car and swipes his credit card again through the machine so he doesn't have to walk an extra 20 feet to pay the cashier. Stops at the local Megasupershopper store and buys some chewing gum, a soda, and some shaving cream. Back in his car, he finally pulls into the corporate garage at 7:00am, swipes his identification card, and continues on his way. This is pretty much a daily routine for Joe, and millions like him.

So who is this average Joe and why should you care? Joe is noone really important, what's important is that you understand how Joe's movements were tracked and how dangerous can be at some point. TiVo recently shoved their foot in their mouths when they announced that Janet Jackson's breast of mass destruction was the most rewound video capture. Meaning? Watch a TiVo, they'll know it, what time, what it was, and who did it - you do after all have your information attached to it.

Joe also decided to check the news via the New York Times, and he had to sign into his account in order to do so, meaning his information was gathered there too. What time he logged in, and from where. Sure he could have registered with false information, after all it's free, but unless he decided to manually change his IP address somehow - whether via proxy or other means - the New York Times has his information. This is not to say in any way the New York Times is selling your information or using it against you, I don't know their policies, I'm simply trying to make you aware of the signs of the 'Times'

We can also average out a time where Joe starts his car every single day for as long as we'd like using his OnStar information, we can determine a definitive pattern of his daily life with ease. What about the chewing gum?, simple, RFID tags gave us that info. Now this may not be a big deal considering Joe Dogooder is an upstanding citizen so he would have nothing to hide. John Cheatman is an altogether different story.

John has been having an affair on his wife of 30 years, and he happens to be a millionaire. Wonder what he'd do if someone threw together a video portrait of his weekly (T

Joe Dogooder is not a criminal, in fact Joe is your average, well do-gooder. Pays his taxes, supports his family, visits his community church, where mind you, he's visited since his days as an altar boy. Normally Joe wakes up around 5:00am in hopes of making some decaffeinated coffee, followed by a quick glimpse at the New York Times Online, while his television is tuned to the news. Today however, Joe woke up at 5:30am - and although he won't be late, he decided not to watch television. Instead he is going to work early in order to catch up with some work.

After his shower, getting dressed, kissing his family goodbye he grabs his trusted cellphone, and heads for his car. "Welcome to OnStar" flares for a quick second before he turns the service off. He'd know his way to work driving blindfolded, he's been there plenty of times. After stopping for some coffee and paying with his credit card at the local 7Eleven at 6:15am, he makes a right on Main Street leading to the turnpike. Joe always has money on his EZ-Pass, and although it has been hacked in the past, his information is now safe. He continues to work and breezes right through the toll-booths it is now 6:21am and he's right on time.

Getting off at the Broadway exit, Joe is running pretty early, 6:41am. Pulling into the Shell gas station at 6:45am, he fills up his car and swipes his credit card again through the machine so he doesn't have to walk an extra 20 feet to pay the cashier. Stops at the local Megasupershopper store and buys some chewing gum, a soda, and some shaving cream. Back in his car, he finally pulls into the corporate garage at 7:00am, swipes his identification card, and continues on his way. This is pretty much a daily routine for Joe, and millions like him.

So who is this average Joe and why should you care? Joe is noone really important, what's important is that you understand how Joe's movements were tracked and how dangerous can be at some point. TiVo recently shoved their foot in their mouths when they announced that Janet Jackson's breast of mass destruction was the most rewound video capture. Meaning? Watch a TiVo, they'll know it, what time, what it was, and who did it - you do after all have your information attached to it.

Joe also decided to check the news via the New York Times, and he had to sign into his account in order to do so, meaning his information was gathered there too. What time he logged in, and from where. Sure he could have registered with false information, after all it's free, but unless he decided to manually change his IP address somehow - whether via proxy or other means - the New York Times has his information. This is not to say in any way the New York Times is selling your information or using it against you, I don't know their policies, I'm simply trying to make you aware of the signs of the 'Times'

We can also average out a time where Joe starts his car every single day for as long as we'd like using his OnStar information, we can determine a definitive pattern of his daily life with ease. What about the chewing gum?, simple, RFID tags gave us that info. Now this may not be a big deal considering Joe Dogooder is an upstanding citizen so he would have nothing to hide. John Cheatman is an altogether different story.

John has been having an affair on his wife of 30 years, and he happens to be a millionaire. Wonder what he'd do if someone threw together a video portrait of his weekly (T

Oh, there's a great deal more he could do even within the law to vilify his political opponents.

You don't get credit, or blame, for the things you don't do, for the inverse of the infinite set of unexplored potential. You get them for the things you do, er, do.

I apologize for that remark. I get worked up on this topic at times.

As do we all sometimes. Don't worry about it.

Ooookaaay. Maybe you could get a little more specific here. I really don't see it, especially given the situation.

Really? You don't see anything about his administration's callous approach to citizen eavesdropping? The ludicrous "Do Not Fly" list? Guantanamo? The recent reports about the Department of Transportation looking into putting GPS bugs in new cars? How the EPA's Draft Report on the Environment was edited to fit administration viewpoints on global warming? (That link's on a Democrat website, but it's well substantiated.) Hiding shill voices in the media to support him (Armstrong Williams, Jeff Gannon)?

I could go on -- the potential length of this list seems limited only by the amount of energy I put into making it, and to be honest thinking about things like that too much is soul-deadening. Suffice to say, there's enough that it seems less like a bunch of isolated instances, and more like there's a culture of this kind of thinking in Washington at the moment, and the closer you get to the White House, the thicker the air gets.

The real reason we invaded Iraq was a combination of 1) sanctions were crumbling as a result of bribes in Europe and economic pressure in Asia, 2) His behavior in the past, and 3) He would have had nuclear weapons within a couple of years, removing the option. I'm glad we don't have a third of the set to go with North Korea and Iran. I supported the war for that reason.

That was not the story Bush gave at the time. Unless I've missed a major recent press conference, even now, when questioned about Iraq, he talks about terrorists! We probably read different websites, but what I've seen is that Saddam was rather unlikely to have aided Al-Qaeda, due to their differing goals.

War is a serious thing, it requires a tremendous positive action to do something like that, even if wars these days aren't declared unless they're "on terror." Mentally rewind back to the days before the war, and it sounds funny to invade a nation because "sanctions were crumbling." The details of Iraq's nuclear weapons program are unproven to this day. Afganistan did happen, it is true, it didn't catch anyone but it did happen. It's something of a shame, perhaps, that after that, Bush diluted our military resources in attacking Iraq instead of choosing some other action.

Concerning Lincoln: well I will admit that I am not particularly well-read in that area. However, a lot of people seem to really like Lincoln, that proves nothing but is perhaps indicative concerning a relatively uncontroversial figure, and war is a funny thing in that you don't always get your way even if you do things perfectly (which is a good reason to avoid it if possible). I will say that Wikipedia's entry on the American Civil War states that the Confederacy left the union even before Lincoln's inaugration, so avoiding the war would have left the country split.

Now that's just gratuitous.

Yeah, but ya know, when the urge of the joke overcomes you.... My responsibility is to laughs, first and foremost. Nyuk nyuk nyuk.

I agree he's hardly in Tony Blair's league when it comes to public speaking, but I think at least some of that is a deliberate attempt to separate himself p

Second, stop beating the shit out of that straw man. Nobody is saying that the government isn't or shouldn't be wiretapping. We have laws, however, that govern how it's done. Those weren't followed. That's against the law.

The rest of your post is just a bunch of crap to distract from what utter bullshit the premise is and how intellectually dishonest you are.

"But the partners will continue their 50-50 ownership of the MSNBC Web site, which, partly as a consequence of its affiliation with Microsoft, is the most-used news site on the Internet."

Of course, the New York Times and Slashdot stories that have referenced MSNBC's news surely helped too.

Pricing of Downloaded Songs Prompts Antitrust Subpoenas

The New York attorney general, Eliot Spitzer, is investigating whether the four record companies that dominate the industry have violated antitrust laws in the pricing of songs that are sold by Internet music services, according to people involved in the inquiry.

Mr. Spitzer's office recently began serving subpoenas on the major record companies - the Universal Music Group, a unit of Vivendi Universal; Sony BMG Music Entertainment, a joint venture of Sony and Bertelsmann; the EMI Group; and the Warner Music Group, according to people involved.

Warner Music disclosed yesterday in a regulatory filing that it had received a subpoena on Tuesday in connection with "an industrywide investigation" into whether the companies colluded in the pricing of music downloads.

Representatives for Warner and Sony BMG said their companies would cooperate with the investigation. Representatives for the other major companies could not be reached or declined to comment.

Bush authorized taps on international calls. There is no wholesale wiretapping of citizens.

Wow, such monumental ignorance is hard to rebutt, but I will try. First, FISA specifically states that the govt has freedom to wire tap ANY electronic transmissions that happens inside or outside our borders. However, it also states CLEARLY that if a US citizen is involved in that communication, you MUST GET A WARRANT.

Bush has ALREADY ADMITTED that he ordered NSA to break this rule and wire tap calls made by US citizens. But he tried to weasel out of some of that saying it was "only for international calls". Less than a day later now we have officials coming out and saying "well, it was MOSTLY for international calls" (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/21/politics/21nsa. html?pagewanted=print).

Until we get a FULL list of calls intercepted, we have NO IDEA how widely this order was used. And frankly, the current administration has no credibility whatsoever right now.

"Congress authorized Bush to use "all" means. Sounds pretty authoritative to me.

Oh really? I didn't realize that giving authority to Bush to wage war in Afghanistan and Iraq means all other laws go out the door. So you are basically arguing that Bush is, in fact, a DICTATOR. You are arguing that as long as he can justify (in his mind) that his action has ANYTHING to do with terrorism (which I think you would agree comes in almost limitless flavor), he can pretty much choose to do whatever he wants. No matter what Constitution or the law says.

You sir, should leave your citizenship at the door and move to Cuba.

IDIOT!!!

Revelation of the program last week by the New York Times also spurred considerable debate among federal judges, including some who serve on the secret FISA court. For more than a quarter-century, that court had been seen as the only body that could legally authorize secret surveillance of espionage and terrorism suspects, and only when the Justice Department could show probable cause that its targets were foreign governments or their agents.

Robertson indicated privately to colleagues in recent conversations that he was concerned that information gained from warrantless NSA surveillance could have then been used to obtain FISA warrants. FISA court Presiding Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who had been briefed on the spying program by the administration, raised the same concern in 2004 and insisted that the Justice Department certify in writing that it was not occurring.

"They just don't know if the product of wiretaps were used for FISA warrants -- to kind of cleanse the information," said one source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the classified nature of the FISA warrants. "What I've heard some of the judges say is they feel they've participated in a Potemkin court."

I can't wait for the graphical ads google is going to start placing because of the agreement:

Google's Graphical ADs

Here's a link to back you up:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/20/politics/20fbi.h tml?ei=5065&en=0384c4fe8724565d&ex=1135746000&part ner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print

Another thing to consider, for all those who might raise the hell-cry of "Activist Judge!", is the fact that the Judge is hardly the usual candidate for a so-called activist judge. In fact, the man is probably the last person who would ever be given that title by the neo-cons. From an article in the NY Times from several days ago:

Now this political hot potato has fallen into the lap of a judge who is highly attuned to politics. He is a lifelong Republican appointed to the federal bench in 2002 by President Bush.

He ran for Congress 10 years earlier (he lost by one percentage point) and later considered running for governor. His supporters include Senators Arlen Specter and Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, and his mentor is Tom Ridge, the former governor of Pennsylvania and homeland security secretary.

"We find that the secular purposes claimed by the Board amount to a pretext for the Board's real purpose, which was to promote religion in the public school classroom," he wrote in his 139-page opinion.

The link to the NY Times article

Don't cry bloody murder every time something happens that you don't 100% approve of (and that goes for the grandparent just as much as you)

Sorry, I learn by immitating, and when all of my "leaders" in society exhibit this behavior I'm inclined to do just the same. Dear Google, the tides they are a changing. Hang on tight.

Google agreed to special placements/treatments of AOL in their Search that Microsoft during the negotiations refused as unethical. That's interesting.

Link.

Why should he have to, when he can just ignore them?

-Eric

Learn the sordid story behind the porn that you so naively support.