Slashdot Mirror

First Link: http://college.nytimes.com/2001/12/27/technology/c ircuits/27PBOX.html

Second Link: http://college.nytimes.com/2001/12/27/technology/c ircuits/27PASS.html

First Link: http://college.nytimes.com/2001/12/27/technology/c ircuits/27PBOX.html

Second Link: http://college.nytimes.com/2001/12/27/technology/c ircuits/27PASS.html

Posted by chrisd on Tuesday December 11, @08:22PM
from the no-mention-of-peg-legs-and-eye-patches dept.
akiaki007 was among many who wrote in to say: "Check out this article on the New York Times(free reg, blah blah) site. The CmdrTaco have raided 27 cities in 21 states. Raid sites include MIT, UCLA , Purdue, Duke, UofO, all hot-beds of young tender assholes. Their main target was the group DrinkOrDie, an asshole appreciation club. 'This is a new frontier for crime,' Kenneth W. Dam, deputy secretary of the Treasury, said at a news briefing. 'The costs are enormous to both industry and consumers.' I better hide my asshole. They might think it's some weird fucking tool."

Posted by chrisd on Tuesday December 11, @08:22PM
from the no-mention-of-peg-legs-and-eye-patches dept.
akiaki007 was among many who wrote in to say: "Check out this article on the New York Times(free reg, blah blah) site. The CmdrTaco have raided 27 cities in 21 states. Raid sites include MIT, UCLA , Purdue, Duke, UofO, all hot-beds of young tender assholes. Their main target was the group DrinkOrDie, an asshole appreciation club. 'This is a new frontier for crime,' Kenneth W. Dam, deputy secretary of the Treasury, said at a news briefing. 'The costs are enormous to both industry and consumers.' I better hide my asshole. They might think it's some weird fucking tool."

by going to:

http://archives.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http:// www.nytimes.com/2001/12/25/technology/25HACK.html

OR

http://college.nytimes.com/2001/12/25/technology/2 5HACK.html

Editors: please start putting in these links in the stories--you know this crowd is big on privacy.

by going to:

http://archives.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http:// www.nytimes.com/2001/12/25/technology/25HACK.html

OR

http://college.nytimes.com/2001/12/25/technology/2 5HACK.html

Editors: please start putting in these links in the stories--you know this crowd is big on privacy.

Posted by chrisd [dibona.com] on Tuesday December 11, @08:22PM
from the no-mention-of-peg-legs-and-eye-patches dept.
akiaki007 [mailto] was among many who wrote in to say: "Check out this article [nytimes.com] on the New York Times [nytimes.com] (free reg, blah blah) site. The CmdrTaco have raided 27 cities in 21 states. Raid sites include MIT [mit.edu], UCLA [ucla.edu], Purdue [purdue.edu], Duke [duke.edu], UofO, all hot-beds of young tender assholes. Their main target was the group DrinkOrDie [google.com], an asshole appreciation club. 'This is a new frontier for crime,' Kenneth W. Dam, deputy secretary of the Treasury, said at a news briefing. 'The costs are enormous to both industry and consumers.' I better hide my asshole. They might think it's some weird fucking tool."

Posted by chrisd [dibona.com] on Tuesday December 11, @08:22PM
from the no-mention-of-peg-legs-and-eye-patches dept.
akiaki007 [mailto] was among many who wrote in to say: "Check out this article [nytimes.com] on the New York Times [nytimes.com] (free reg, blah blah) site. The CmdrTaco have raided 27 cities in 21 states. Raid sites include MIT [mit.edu], UCLA [ucla.edu], Purdue [purdue.edu], Duke [duke.edu], UofO, all hot-beds of young tender assholes. Their main target was the group DrinkOrDie [google.com], an asshole appreciation club. 'This is a new frontier for crime,' Kenneth W. Dam, deputy secretary of the Treasury, said at a news briefing. 'The costs are enormous to both industry and consumers.' I better hide my asshole. They might think it's some weird fucking tool."

Go to either of these sites to bypass the reg screen:

http://college.nytimes.com/2001/12/19/technology/1 9PIRA.html

http://archives.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http:// www.nytimes.com/2001/12/19/technology/19PIRA.html

Go to either of these sites to bypass the reg screen:

http://college.nytimes.com/2001/12/19/technology/1 9PIRA.html

http://archives.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http:// www.nytimes.com/2001/12/19/technology/19PIRA.html

Apparently Adcritic had a huge bandwidth bill to pay following a spike in interest with last year's Superbowl and they were never able to pay off this debt. NYTimes article...

Or read the NYT article without registration by going to:
http://archives.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http:// www.nytimes.com/reuters/technology/tech-tech-sonic blue.html
OR
http://college.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http://w ww.nytimes.com/reuters/technology/tech-tech-sonicb lue.html

The editors should be changing the links, in my opinion, to bypass that reg. screen.

Or read the NYT article without registration by going to:
http://archives.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http:// www.nytimes.com/reuters/technology/tech-tech-sonic blue.html
OR
http://college.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http://w ww.nytimes.com/reuters/technology/tech-tech-sonicb lue.html

The editors should be changing the links, in my opinion, to bypass that reg. screen.

The Times article sums it up well: "Verizon has long argued that this competitive business model was flawed."

Verizon doesn't want competition, not to provide better service to the consumer, but to reap greater monopoly profits.

The editors should just include the registration-free link...

Posted by chrisd
on Tuesday December 11, @08:22PM

from the no-mention-of-peg-legs-and-eye-patches dept.

akiaki007 was among many who wrote in
to say: "Check out this
article
on the New York Times (free reg, blah
blah) site. The CmdrTaco have raided 27 cities in 21 states. Raid sites include
MIT, UCLA,
Purdue, Duke,
UofO, all hot-beds of young tender assholes. Their main target was the group

DrinkOrDie, an asshole appreciation club. 'This is a new frontier for
crime,' Kenneth W. Dam, deputy secretary of the Treasury, said at a news
briefing. 'The costs are enormous to both industry and consumers.' I better hide
my asshole. They might think it's some weird fucking tool."

Posted by chrisd
on Tuesday December 11, @08:22PM

from the no-mention-of-peg-legs-and-eye-patches dept.

akiaki007 was among many who wrote in
to say: "Check out this
article
on the New York Times (free reg, blah
blah) site. The CmdrTaco have raided 27 cities in 21 states. Raid sites include
MIT, UCLA,
Purdue, Duke,
UofO, all hot-beds of young tender assholes. Their main target was the group

DrinkOrDie, an asshole appreciation club. 'This is a new frontier for
crime,' Kenneth W. Dam, deputy secretary of the Treasury, said at a news
briefing. 'The costs are enormous to both industry and consumers.' I better hide
my asshole. They might think it's some weird fucking tool."

Posted by chrisd on Tuesday December 11, @08:22PM
from the no-mention-of-peg-legs-and-eye-patches dept.
akiaki007 was among many who wrote in to say: "Check out this article on the New York Times (free reg, blah blah) site. The CmdrTaco have raided 27 cities in 21 states. Raid sites include MIT, UCLA, Purdue, Duke, UofO, all hot-beds of young tender assholes. Their main target was the group DrinkOrDie, an asshole appreciation club. 'This is a new frontier for crime,' Kenneth W. Dam, deputy secretary of the Treasury, said at a news briefing. 'The costs are enormous to both industry and consumers.' I better hide my asshole. They might think it's some weird fucking tool."

Posted by chrisd on Tuesday December 11, @08:22PM
from the no-mention-of-peg-legs-and-eye-patches dept.
akiaki007 was among many who wrote in to say: "Check out this article on the New York Times (free reg, blah blah) site. The CmdrTaco have raided 27 cities in 21 states. Raid sites include MIT, UCLA, Purdue, Duke, UofO, all hot-beds of young tender assholes. Their main target was the group DrinkOrDie, an asshole appreciation club. 'This is a new frontier for crime,' Kenneth W. Dam, deputy secretary of the Treasury, said at a news briefing. 'The costs are enormous to both industry and consumers.' I better hide my asshole. They might think it's some weird fucking tool."

Posted by chrisd on Tuesday December 11, @08:22PM
from the no-mention-of-peg-legs-and-eye-patches dept.
akiaki007 was among many who wrote in to say: "Check out this article on the New York Times (free reg, blah blah) site. The CmdrTaco have raided 27 cities in 21 states. Raid sites include MIT, UCLA, Purdue, Duke, UofO, all hot-beds of young tender assholes. Their main target was the group DrinkOrDie, an asshole appreciation club. 'This is a new frontier for crime,' Kenneth W. Dam, deputy secretary of the Treasury, said at a news briefing. 'The costs are enormous to both industry and consumers.' I better hide my asshole. They might think it's some weird fucking tool."

Posted by chrisd on Tuesday December 11, @08:22PM
from the no-mention-of-peg-legs-and-eye-patches dept.
akiaki007 was among many who wrote in to say: "Check out this article on the New York Times (free reg, blah blah) site. The CmdrTaco have raided 27 cities in 21 states. Raid sites include MIT, UCLA, Purdue, Duke, UofO, all hot-beds of young tender assholes. Their main target was the group DrinkOrDie, an asshole appreciation club. 'This is a new frontier for crime,' Kenneth W. Dam, deputy secretary of the Treasury, said at a news briefing. 'The costs are enormous to both industry and consumers.' I better hide my asshole. They might think it's some weird fucking tool."

And here is the website of the grad student behind the hoax.

Damn. I went to grade school with that guy...and I'm nowhere near as...well...creative? (Monzy, if you're reading this, congrats, you crack me up.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/03/technology/03ERO S.html?searchpv=nytToday

or copy/paste:

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/03/technology/03E RO S.html?searchpv=nytToday

This could be worthwhile if you have a lot of records to convert; I haven't been able to find any real reviews of it, though (everything's just basically a reprint of the press release).

From the New York Times, December 6th:

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/06/technology/circu its/06GEE2.html (Free reg required, etc.)

Vinyl to CD: There's No Need to Buy the White Album Again
By J.D. BIERSDORFER

Since the advent of recordable compact discs for the home market, humankind has been struggling with the eternal question: How can I get my Grateful Dead concert tapes from 1979 transferred to CD?

Sony has simplified the process with its EZ Audio Transfer and Restoration Kit. Users just need to supply the computer, CD recorder and tunes to transfer, and the EZ Audio kit does just about everything else to copy music from vinyl records, cassette tapes and other audio sources onto compact disc. The kit includes a 10-foot cable for connecting the stereo system to the computer, software to import the audio files and editing software that uses wizard programs to help the novice audiophile clean up the snaps, crackles, pops and hiss that can come along with the music.

The EZ Audio Kit sells for about $50 and runs on Windows 95 and later, although it will not work with some combinations of Windows and U.S.B.- based CD recorders. Users may also notice extra free space around the house once those old Kinks albums are sent to long-term storage.

This could be worthwhile if you have a lot of records to convert; I haven't been able to find any real reviews of it, though (everything's just basically a reprint of the press release).

From the New York Times, December 6th:

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/06/technology/circu its/06GEE2.html (Free reg required, etc.)

Vinyl to CD: There's No Need to Buy the White Album Again
By J.D. BIERSDORFER

Since the advent of recordable compact discs for the home market, humankind has been struggling with the eternal question: How can I get my Grateful Dead concert tapes from 1979 transferred to CD?

Sony has simplified the process with its EZ Audio Transfer and Restoration Kit. Users just need to supply the computer, CD recorder and tunes to transfer, and the EZ Audio kit does just about everything else to copy music from vinyl records, cassette tapes and other audio sources onto compact disc. The kit includes a 10-foot cable for connecting the stereo system to the computer, software to import the audio files and editing software that uses wizard programs to help the novice audiophile clean up the snaps, crackles, pops and hiss that can come along with the music.

The EZ Audio Kit sells for about $50 and runs on Windows 95 and later, although it will not work with some combinations of Windows and U.S.B.- based CD recorders. Users may also notice extra free space around the house once those old Kinks albums are sent to long-term storage.

Has anybody heard about this study? I find this one rather hard to believe.

Absolutely not. Go read up.

• There you have it: celebrities, as we know them, are fictional characters. Sure, yes, there's a real person named Michael Stipe, who says actual things and goes to real restaurants and eats food and does other actual stuff. But there's also a character named ''Michael Stipe'' who exists as a kind of collectively agreed-upon fictive construct. Of course, this character is loosely based on the real-life Michael Stipe. For example, they look quite similar. But according to the Junod Doctrine, ''Michael Stipe'' - the character - is more real than Michael Stipe the person. Further, he exists in the public domain, like the Linux operating system. Everyone is free to tinker at will; we can ascribe actions, ambitions, desires and quotes to him as we see fit. He belongs to all of us. All celebrities do. And not in an obtuse, metaphorical, ''Princess Diana belonged to all of us'' kind of way, but in a direct, hands-on, dance-puppet-dance kind of way.

While the last thing American arcades need is yet another Street Fighter clone, this combination of concepts would almost certainly be different enough to draw in the most jaded fighter fan.

does this arrogant mindless imaginative half-a page constitute relations with anything of an open source nature? naah, hardly, except the woe of churning out virus-like freemindedness ;)

Pardon me while I ramble.

One E-Mail Message Can Change the World struck me as a particular interesting case-in-point (which I hadn't yet heard about because I don't watch opera and live in the cultural backwater that is Manhattan.) Obviously, the code is speech one is more near and dear to all of our slashdotting hearts, but the NYT doesn't have much to say (other than, yes, we've made our case to that reporter's satisfaction) that we haven't heard yet. The one about the afghani guys e-mail raises what really are the interesting questions - since it seems that "commerce" isn't going to choke our medium of culture and communication to shallow and materialistic braindeath - what sorts of things can all our internetworked computers accomplish, and how do they really change things, from the standpoint of culture and communication.

Incidentally, The Lie Detector That Scans Your Brain is utter hogwash. Pseudoscience quackery phrenology revisited crap crap crap. I don't even know where to start. Okay, we're tuning this thing, and we have this guy (under no particular stress) alternately tell the truth and lie. Then, we have this guy, and if he's caught lying his life is destroyed - he spends 15 years in the can - and we compare the activity in the entire brains of these two subjects when they talk, to try and figure out when the really stressed guy is lying. Okay, I'm a bio grad student, but is the problem not obvious? The intense stress alters neurology in the entirety of the brain. The airport security mounted brainscanners are an endearingly dystopic proposition, but are unfortunately totally impractical. You're going to pull people into security based on brain scans taken from them without a background? You're going to train special techs, and then pay them, to stand there and look at the brainscan of every person who enters the airport? You're going to trust a computer to do it? Please.

The reporter who wrote transcending equations obviously has no background in math. I think he read some of the other new york times articles on the proposals of solid state physicists and got confused. Ah well.

Pardon me while I ramble.

One E-Mail Message Can Change the World struck me as a particular interesting case-in-point (which I hadn't yet heard about because I don't watch opera and live in the cultural backwater that is Manhattan.) Obviously, the code is speech one is more near and dear to all of our slashdotting hearts, but the NYT doesn't have much to say (other than, yes, we've made our case to that reporter's satisfaction) that we haven't heard yet. The one about the afghani guys e-mail raises what really are the interesting questions - since it seems that "commerce" isn't going to choke our medium of culture and communication to shallow and materialistic braindeath - what sorts of things can all our internetworked computers accomplish, and how do they really change things, from the standpoint of culture and communication.

Incidentally, The Lie Detector That Scans Your Brain is utter hogwash. Pseudoscience quackery phrenology revisited crap crap crap. I don't even know where to start. Okay, we're tuning this thing, and we have this guy (under no particular stress) alternately tell the truth and lie. Then, we have this guy, and if he's caught lying his life is destroyed - he spends 15 years in the can - and we compare the activity in the entire brains of these two subjects when they talk, to try and figure out when the really stressed guy is lying. Okay, I'm a bio grad student, but is the problem not obvious? The intense stress alters neurology in the entirety of the brain. The airport security mounted brainscanners are an endearingly dystopic proposition, but are unfortunately totally impractical. You're going to pull people into security based on brain scans taken from them without a background? You're going to train special techs, and then pay them, to stand there and look at the brainscan of every person who enters the airport? You're going to trust a computer to do it? Please.

The reporter who wrote transcending equations obviously has no background in math. I think he read some of the other new york times articles on the proposals of solid state physicists and got confused. Ah well.

Pardon me while I ramble.

One E-Mail Message Can Change the World struck me as a particular interesting case-in-point (which I hadn't yet heard about because I don't watch opera and live in the cultural backwater that is Manhattan.) Obviously, the code is speech one is more near and dear to all of our slashdotting hearts, but the NYT doesn't have much to say (other than, yes, we've made our case to that reporter's satisfaction) that we haven't heard yet. The one about the afghani guys e-mail raises what really are the interesting questions - since it seems that "commerce" isn't going to choke our medium of culture and communication to shallow and materialistic braindeath - what sorts of things can all our internetworked computers accomplish, and how do they really change things, from the standpoint of culture and communication.

Incidentally, The Lie Detector That Scans Your Brain is utter hogwash. Pseudoscience quackery phrenology revisited crap crap crap. I don't even know where to start. Okay, we're tuning this thing, and we have this guy (under no particular stress) alternately tell the truth and lie. Then, we have this guy, and if he's caught lying his life is destroyed - he spends 15 years in the can - and we compare the activity in the entire brains of these two subjects when they talk, to try and figure out when the really stressed guy is lying. Okay, I'm a bio grad student, but is the problem not obvious? The intense stress alters neurology in the entirety of the brain. The airport security mounted brainscanners are an endearingly dystopic proposition, but are unfortunately totally impractical. You're going to pull people into security based on brain scans taken from them without a background? You're going to train special techs, and then pay them, to stand there and look at the brainscan of every person who enters the airport? You're going to trust a computer to do it? Please.

The reporter who wrote transcending equations obviously has no background in math. I think he read some of the other new york times articles on the proposals of solid state physicists and got confused. Ah well.

Oh, Stanley? Oh, HAL? Aren't we supposed to be in the year of 2001: A Space Odyssey? The newspaper of record may not be savvy to the undercurrents of Technological Singularity, but futurists and prophets know that Kubrickian Artificial Intelligence has arrived right on time to meet the dawn of the age of intelligent machines.

In only a short while, Ray, we will see artificial intelligence for robots go through the JavaScript Tutorial Implementation and beyond the Visual Basic Mind.VB and Mind.JAVA manifestation into a pre-Cambrian explosion of artificially intelligent life forms.

SlashDot is a far better barometer of revolutionary new ideas than an adverttisement-driven media mag -- even the grand Old Lady of New York.

This was my favorite. You can read about it here . Apparently in France you now have a right not to exist and can sue for damages. What are those crazy Europeans going to make up next?

is here: http://www.nytimes.com/library/magazine/home/

Today, before the Senate, John Aschroft, the Attorney General of the United States, stated in plain terms that any criticism of Ashcroft's policies of extrajudicial military tribunals and other suspensions of civil and human rights will help terrorism. (LINK) .

is a great book on that time period. It's mostly source texts from the Aurora -- a leading newspaper in the (then) capital of Philadelphia. The editors were arrested under the sedition laws which Adams signed. The book also describes the arguments between the camps of Adams and Jefferson. Paine belonged to the latter. Basically, a populist: he wanted a single house of representatives. In Common Sense he cited many biblical quotes against monarchies. No senate or president. Power to the people. Adams especially hated Paine's polemics against kings, and tried to write his own pamphlet to counteract the politics in Common Sense. He was convinced -- along with Hamilton, Madison, and Washington (our first millionaire) -- that democracy was a horrible form of government, and that the main job of govt was to ensure that the masses don't get powerful, while at the same time preventing a dictatorship. Hence the divide and conquer strategy which is our constitution. As originally implemented, only the House of representatives was elected. The senate was appointed by the states, and the presidency by "electors" who were the "better men" (ie. rich) in each states. In fact, after the revolution, the property requirements for voting in Massachussetts doubled.

So there are these two camps, one side a bit radical and arguing for a popular republic -- the other wanted to model itself on England. Their genius was to involve a large number of common people into the system of govt. -- but with the stakes against them. They gave an outlet for individuals to protest and have some influence, but mostly dealth with the business at hand.

I'd suggest reading Federalist paper no. 10 for Madison's views on keeping "factions" in check. Like it or not, Paine, Franklin, and Jefferson were outmanoeuvred during the earliest and most formative parts of our history. Sure, Paine's Common Sense rallied the troops and Jefferson's speeches moved the tradesmen during the revolution -- but the dominant voices during the constitutional convention belonged to people such as Madison who claimed "[this] country ought to be run by those who own it." Hey...maybe there is an analogy with the internet.

Evidently you could do enough of the sort of thing you'd do with a crossbow with a long gun that it the difference wasn't fatal to England, and the guns must have seemed gee-wiz modern and cool, at least. But the change in technology didn't really gain anything for the English, beyond the psychological, until guns improved to a point past prior crossbow technology in the 19th Century. The realities in the field remained much the same - except you had to get closer to hit anything with the gun, and it made noise that more easily gave away your position.

So in networked computers we've got this new weapon with which to penetrate people with our ideas. But does it penetrate better than the front page of the Times or a well-printed book? Or is the advantage more purely psychological - "Look, I've got the new thing!"

In any case you've still got to marshall your troops, engage the enemy, retain the support of your hinterland ... and have a strategy that actually can conquer and govern. A change in weaponry doesn't compensate for weakness of strategy and execution, even when the weapons are better. Building a free land is no more a matter of just giving everyone computers than it was of just giving everyone guns.

However, given the right strategy and leadership, computers and guns have their obvious place in social transformation. Since Ashcroft refuses to match gun purchase records with arrested terrorist suspects - claiming that would infringe on gun rights - but wants to closely monitor the Net - it's clear which he and his friends are more scared of. Thinking that a computer is scarier than a gun is about as rational as prefering a musket to a crossbow. Isn't it?

but AOL-Time Warner having a new Chief Executive isn't? See the NYT article here. I'm hardly pro AOL-Time Warner but it is a huge company with control of Netscape, CNN, and many other things, and I think it is newsworthy.

For the login-impaired.
Here

Right here!

You'll thank me later!

AT&T is flexing their virtual monopoly muscle by not coming to some sort of interim agreement with @home to temporarily continue providing service to its customers. Every other cable provider was able to reach some sort of agreement with @home. The New York Times reports that there are 850k AT&T customers without service. It upsets me that AT&T has the audacity to put 850k of its customers out of service. Apparently, AT&T thinks it can afford to lose 850k customers.

I live in AT&T's Chicago market and have been without service since Saturday morning. I got a message on my answering machine from AT&T that said I may be without service for about ten days. I have also heard estimates from other sources ranging from a week to a month. The Chicago Tribune has a related article about the 100k people affected in the Chicagoland area. Every person I know who has a cable modem is affected by this.

I've already been through two DSL bankruptcies (PhoenixDSL and NorthPoint). But, AT&T is forcing me to reconsider DSL once again. I can't get the same maximum speed out of DSL because of my distance from the CO, but I'm fed up with AT&T's handling of the situation. They obviously don't care enough about retaining their customers to have come to some sort of agreement with @home, like every other cable company did, to continue providing service until they were really ready to cut-over users to their new network. Can you imagine if AT&T would have done this with their wireless phone service? Since there is actually healthy competition in place, I'm sure AT&T would have lost a lot of customers...

Ok, enough of the boring stuff. Here are some links to keep you guys semi-entertained. The Cube goes into the Museum of Modern Art. For those without a NYTimes subscription, MacObserver summarizes the article.

Now for the fun stuff. Case mods! Check out the Kleenex Cube and the Blue Smoke Cube. Also, here's an All American Cube.

The New York Times (free reg, etc) is an article about the latest @Home issues. Its an interesting read.

I wonder which broadbamd providers will be left... Verizon DSL is looking pretty good at this point. What a sad result of the times.

C|net Editor's Choice

New York Times Review

Business Week Sweet Music

Wall Street Journal Review

LA Times Review

PC Magazine 5/5 Rating

But more to the point, who has played the cell-phone style hidden game on the iPod? With new hacking sites popping up all over, has anyone found a firmware update that gives them any more games yet? Or playback of even more media formats or other abilities? Of couse it will soon have Windows compatibility and people have been booting off their iPods since the beginning, but lately I've seen someone modifying it for use as a simple address book, people trying to get it to work under *BSD and Linux, and development of a new graphic EQ for it. Anyone else made cool hacks?

If you don't want to register, just visit this url instead.

-J

i was going to breath some fire, but i have to concede that you're right.

while i didn't want to get involved in a discussion with strong Stallman supporters - in part because of my lack of expertise on the subject, and in part due to the unwillingness to listen that i've seen among them - i'll clarify my views.

(i don't know Stallman and don't feel comfortable making personal statements about him. so i am guarded in my language, like it or not.)

from what essays of his that i've read, i can't help but think that he is too much of an extremist and too much of an idealist to be an effective spokesperson for Free software.

i read an interesting editorial today in the nytimes (here). it discusses fundamentalism vs pluralism, albeit in the context of the afganistan war. Stallman might do himself a favor by reading it and looking closely between the lines.

i see no reason that commercial, proprietary software cannot coexist with Free software.

unfortunately, i don't think that Stallman really sees that his view is totally contrary to the notion of 'freedom'. it's a totalitarian notion that has historical analogs - notably the USSR - where an ideology has been imposed on people for their 'benefit'.

why should i distribute my source with my binaries? if i'm offering my binaries for free, then what right does anyone have to complain about this - if it is buggy or you have issues with my licensing, then don't download it. i can see were this gets sticky in areas were a single product has almost universal acceptance and the source is closed (ie windows, aol client/AIM). but if there are no alternatives, you are always free to develope your won, as Mr. Torvalds did.

i am positive that this is Stallman's view because he nearly says it outright: "However, one so-called freedom that we do not advocate is the 'freedom to choose any license you want for software you write'. We reject this because it is really a form of power, not a freedom."

His notion of power ("Freedom is being able to make decisions that affect mainly you. Power is being able to make decisions that affect others more than you.") is deeply flawed... i would say power is more like 'directly preventing others from acting freely'. government has power - you can be punished for murder, you must pay taxes, etc. it is limited power we give up under the social contract (if you subscribe to Hobbes) in return for certain benefits of government. and their cannot be more than 1 government simultaneous.

software companies/programmers don't have this power that Stallman attributes to them. there are always alternatives. if you don't like oracle, then use sqlserver. or use postgresql or mysql. or write your own. a company can be as restrictive as they want with their license and charge as much as they want. but they cannot force people to buy their software.

an abundance of licenses doesn't affect the freedom of a computer user.

a restriction on the way i see fit to distribute my software does infringe on my freedoms, though. and a restriction on any freedom undermines them all.

</big long rant>...

Political News from Wired News - Cybercrime Treaty Finally Ready. After four years of haggling over the language, several countries including the United States will sign a cybercrime treaty.

WildernessCoast.org - Cybercrime Treaty Bibliography -- By Date. A wide collection of links that talk about the Cybercrime Treaty Same info sorted by title.

Council of Europe - Convention on Cybercrime.

The Convention on Cybercrime has been adopted by the Committee of Ministers during its 109th Session, on 8 November 2001 and will be opened for signature, in Budapest, on 23 November 2001.

The Convention will be the first international treaty on crimes committed via the Internet and other computer networks, dealing particularly with infringements of copyright, computer-related fraud, child pornography and violations of network security. It also contains a series of powers and procedures such as the search of computer networks and interception.

Its main objective, set out in the preamble, is to pursue a common criminal policy aimed at the protection of society against cybercrime, especially by adopting appropriate legislation and fostering international co-operation.

The Convention is the product of four years of work by Council of Europe experts, but also by the United States, Canada, Japan and other countries which are not members of the organisation.

It will be supplemented by an additional protocol making any publication of racist and xenophobic propaganda via computer networks a criminal offence.

[ ... ]

But Fred Eisner, a consultant for the Dutch government and private companies, said the draft made unfair demands on Internet service providers by asking them to track Web users' online movements.

"This draft convention lacks balance," Eisner told the assembly. "The convention explicitly gives much more power to law enforcement agencies and it has no system of checks and balances."

Bruce McConnell, president of McConnell International, a Washington-based consulting firm, said the treaty should be more forceful in protecting the privacy of Web users who are already worried about being spied on.

"There is concern that the powers of surveillance ... are not balanced by comparable protections for individuals' privacy," he said.

Maybe you trust the law-enforcement chiefs in D.C. to do the right thing. But here's the catch. The same new powers given to the United States will also handed over to Bulgaria, Romania, Azerbaijan, and other Council of Europe nations that-although officially democratic now-don't have a strong traditions of checks and balances on police power.

Do you want investigators rummaging around your clients' computer systems on warrants issued by former Soviet bloc nations?

That's the prospect that has pushed AT&T Corporation and other high-technology companies into feverishly trying to stop or at least soften the treaty. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Information Technology Association of America also oppose it.

Stewart Baker is one of the chief lobbyists for the treaty opponents. As a former general counsel of the National Security Agency and recipient of the Department of Defense Medal for Meritorious Civilian Service, he's got street cred on these issues in corporate America.

What worries Baker and his colleagues? Consider the following hypothetical: A Los Angeles screenwriter corresponds by e-mail with a neo-Nazi in Germany while researching a script. Shortly after, he finds federal agents examining the files on his home computer. The agents also visit America Online Inc. to retrieve records of the screenwriter's AOL usage.

The agents are fulfilling a warrant issued by German authorities allowing them to search for Nazi propaganda. Such material is unlawful in Germany but not in the U.S. They framed their warrant in terms of "suspected terrorist activity."

LAW.com (requires cookies) - International Treaty on Cybercrime Poses Burden on High-Tech Companies.

Maybe you're a civil libertarian, and maybe you're not. Maybe you worry about how the United States exercises its vast investigative and prosecutorial powers, and maybe you don't.

But if you counsel U.S. corporations on computer-related issues, you should be concerned about a new proposed treaty known as the "Convention on Cybercrime." The Council of Europe, a 43-nation public body created to promote democracy and the rule of law, is nominally drafting the treaty. Curiously, however, the primary architect is the U.S. Department of Justice.

The Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation are using a foreign forum to create an international law-enforcement regime that favors the interests of the feds over those of ordinary citizens and businesses. Their goal is to make it easier to get evidence from abroad and to extradite and prosecute foreign nationals for certain kinds of crimes.

Maybe you trust the law-enforcement chiefs in D.C. to do the right thing. But here's the catch. The same new powers given to the United States will also be handed over to Bulgaria, Romania, Azerbaijan, and other Council of Europe nations that -- although officially democratic now -- don't have a strong tradition of checks and balances on police power.

[ ... ]

Stewart Baker, a partner at Washington, D.C.'s Steptoe & Johnson, is one of the chief lobbyists for the treaty's opponents. As a former general counsel of the National Security Agency and recipient of the U.S. Department of Defense Medal for Meritorious Civilian Service, he's got street credentials on these issues in corporate America.

Slashdot | Implications Of The International Cybercrime Treaty.

SiliconValley.com part of San Jose Mercury News - Pioneer cybercrime pact tightens privacy rules.

MS-NBC - Pioneer cybercrime pact tightens privacy rules. PARIS, May 25 -- Stiff criticism from the EU and pressure groups has prompted drafters of the world's first treaty against cybercrime to tighten provisions protecting privacy online, the final text showed Friday.

[ ... ]

Against EU objections, it also limits the right of a country to reject a request from abroad to store and hand over data in potential crime cases if the requesting country thinks it could be misused.

The text says states should make sure that systems operators or other people who know how to use a certain system can be ordered to cooperate in any such a cyberprobe.

PARIS (Reuters) - Stiff criticism from the EU and pressure groups has prompted drafters of the world's first treaty against cybercrime to tighten provisions protecting privacy online, the final text showed on Friday.

The Council of Europe, a 43-state human rights watchdog, has amended the text to ensure police respect privacy rights when they follow digital trails to fight online crimes such as hacking, spreading viruses, using stolen credit card numbers or defrauding banks.

''The guarantees in the treaty have been reinforced,'' Peter Csonka, deputy head of the economic crime division at the Council's headquarters in Strasbourg, told Reuters after the Council posted the final text -- version 27 -- on its Web site.

But the treaty, which has aroused heated debate in cyberspace since its draft text became public last year, ignored calls by Internet service providers (ISPs) for fewer costly requirements on preserving data that could be linked to a crime.

It still accorded police wide powers to chase suspected cybercriminals -- powers some critics say go beyond what is legal in some Council member states or in observer countries like the United States, Canada and Japan due to sign the treaty.

ZDNet - Internet founder worried over EU cybercrime plans.

BRUSSELS --Vint Cerf, a founding father of today's Internet, said on Thursday that European Union plans for new rules to fight crime on the Web risked clashing with existing EU privacy regulations.

Cerf, who helped develop the Internet in the early 70s shortly after graduating from Stanford University and now works for WorldCom, said more secure network systems were an immediate priority for the successful development of the ubiquitous Web.

He told Reuters in an interview that Internet traffic should be retained only for billing purposes and was too cumbersome to be stored for police investigations.

Changes to a controversial treaty on cybercrime have done nothing to improve it, say civil liberty campaigners.

Next week, the Council of Europe will vote on the treaty, which has been redrafted 26 times before reaching its final version late in May.

The most recent changes were made to take into account the fears of civil liberty and privacy campaigners. But cyber-rights groups say the latest changes are purely cosmetic and have not diluted what they describe as its most pernicious sections.

The groups say that, if adopted in its current form, the treaty could lead to changes in legislation that would stifle rights to privacy and do little to curb the activities of law enforcement agencies.

[ ... ]

In December 2000, 23 organisations, banding together under the banner of the Global Internet Liberty Campaign (GILC), signed a letter condemning the 25th draft of the treaty as "appalling", and warned that it handed law enforcement agencies sweeping powers to snoop and could seriously erode online privacy.

Now, three civil liberty groups, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Electronic Privacy Information Center and Privacy International, have sent another letter to the Council of Europe outlining their "continuing concerns" over the wording of the treaty and saying that their fears have not been laid to rest.

The letter chastises the Council of Europe for refusing to open up the redrafting debates to non-governmental organisations and for, it says, ignoring the human rights and privacy concerns of organisations such as the GILC.

It goes on to say that the original criticisms still stand, and that the treaty does not pay enough attention to existing laws which safeguard human rights. It says the treaty's recommendations on protecting privacy are vague and do not go far enough.

IT industry gurus have branded the Council of Europe's Convention on Cybercrime 'foolish, unworkable and a legal con trick'.

The controversial treaty provides a blanket legislation to deal with all forms of internet crime from hacking to online pornography.

Caspar Bowden, director of internet think-tank FIPR, said: "The Convention is essentially a legal con trick, drafted in secret by a handful of nameless bureaucrats. It equates the internet - a network of private networks - with 'cyberspace', a metaphor from science fiction.

"By this sleight of hand, the internet is defined as a public space over which law enforcement should be granted unfettered powers of surveillance and extradition," he added.

International policy-makers this week ended a round of talks aimed at setting common rules affecting online trade and commerce, but they made little progress in bridging divisions that threaten to delay the pact.

In the works for nearly a decade, the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments is still almost unknown outside international policy circles. Nevertheless, it could have broad implications for consumers and businesses by setting new rules for online copyrights, free speech and e-commerce--if it is approved.

Opposition to the treaty heated up Wednesday, when a two-week drafting session wrapped up with few concessions to critics, primarily from the United States, who say the pact threatens free speech and could force Internet service providers to become global content police.

"In a nutshell, it will strangle the Internet with a suffocating blanket of overlapping jurisdictional claims, expose every Web page publisher to liabilities for libel, defamation and other speech offenses from virtually any country, (and) effectively strip Internet service providers of protections from litigation over the content they carry," Jamie Love, director of Ralph Nader's Consumer Project on Technology (CPT), wrote in a report after the meeting.

The treaty is one of several efforts by the global community to grapple with a complicated legal issues on a borderless Web.

Four years ago, nations including the United States signed onto a World Intellectual Property Organization pact to protect copyright in the digital age. And several countries, including the United States, are hammering out the world's first cybercrime treaty, which would provide a standard for fighting online crime.

The Hague treaty differs from those efforts because it would not outline specific laws participants must follow. It's much broader, requiring participants to agree to enforce each others' laws on a variety of topics. As it stands, the treaty would require courts to enforce the commercial laws of the convention's 52 member nations, even if they prohibit actions that are legal under local laws.

BRUSSELS - The blueprint for a global code on Cyber-crime was agreed on in Strasbourg, France, Friday, paving the way for international rules governing online copyright infringement, online fraud, child pornography and hacking.

The 41 members of the Council of Europe (CoE), plus the U.S., Canada and Japan, signed on to a draft convention on cybercrime that is set to be rubber-stamped at ministerial level in September.

"Once adopted, the Convention will be the first international treaty on criminal offenses committed through the use of Internet and other computer networks," the Council of Europe said in a statement.

In September, the Council of Europe approved the Convention on cybercrime, a historic treatise that lays the foundation for legislation allowing for a greater sharing of information between countries to combat the rise of cybercrime.

The treatise isn't binding, but instead would have to be adopted into law by its 43 European member states and five outside countries including the United States, Canada and Japan.

The treaty is broad, covering crimes committed on the Internet such as fraud, child pornography and violations of computer network security. It also sets up global policing procedures for conducting computer searches, interception of e-mails, and extradition of criminal suspects.

More details on the CyberCrime Treaty can be found in the Privacy Digest archives dated September 26,2000, September 27,2000, October 09,2000, October 16,2000, October 18,2000, October 19,2000, October 25,2000, November 14,2000, November 20,2000, November 22,2000 and March 24,2001. This is not all the information at Privacy Digest and other sites so if you want to know more try a search

Political News from Wired News - Cybercrime Treaty Finally Ready. After four years of haggling over the language, several countries including the United States will sign a cybercrime treaty.

WildernessCoast.org - Cybercrime Treaty Bibliography -- By Date. A wide collection of links that talk about the Cybercrime Treaty Same info sorted by title.

Council of Europe - Convention on Cybercrime.

The Convention on Cybercrime has been adopted by the Committee of Ministers during its 109th Session, on 8 November 2001 and will be opened for signature, in Budapest, on 23 November 2001.

The Convention will be the first international treaty on crimes committed via the Internet and other computer networks, dealing particularly with infringements of copyright, computer-related fraud, child pornography and violations of network security. It also contains a series of powers and procedures such as the search of computer networks and interception.

Its main objective, set out in the preamble, is to pursue a common criminal policy aimed at the protection of society against cybercrime, especially by adopting appropriate legislation and fostering international co-operation.

The Convention is the product of four years of work by Council of Europe experts, but also by the United States, Canada, Japan and other countries which are not members of the organisation.

It will be supplemented by an additional protocol making any publication of racist and xenophobic propaganda via computer networks a criminal offence.

[ ... ]

But Fred Eisner, a consultant for the Dutch government and private companies, said the draft made unfair demands on Internet service providers by asking them to track Web users' online movements.

"This draft convention lacks balance," Eisner told the assembly. "The convention explicitly gives much more power to law enforcement agencies and it has no system of checks and balances."

Bruce McConnell, president of McConnell International, a Washington-based consulting firm, said the treaty should be more forceful in protecting the privacy of Web users who are already worried about being spied on.

"There is concern that the powers of surveillance ... are not balanced by comparable protections for individuals' privacy," he said.

Maybe you trust the law-enforcement chiefs in D.C. to do the right thing. But here's the catch. The same new powers given to the United States will also handed over to Bulgaria, Romania, Azerbaijan, and other Council of Europe nations that-although officially democratic now-don't have a strong traditions of checks and balances on police power.

Do you want investigators rummaging around your clients' computer systems on warrants issued by former Soviet bloc nations?

That's the prospect that has pushed AT&T Corporation and other high-technology companies into feverishly trying to stop or at least soften the treaty. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Information Technology Association of America also oppose it.

Stewart Baker is one of the chief lobbyists for the treaty opponents. As a former general counsel of the National Security Agency and recipient of the Department of Defense Medal for Meritorious Civilian Service, he's got street cred on these issues in corporate America.

What worries Baker and his colleagues? Consider the following hypothetical: A Los Angeles screenwriter corresponds by e-mail with a neo-Nazi in Germany while researching a script. Shortly after, he finds federal agents examining the files on his home computer. The agents also visit America Online Inc. to retrieve records of the screenwriter's AOL usage.

The agents are fulfilling a warrant issued by German authorities allowing them to search for Nazi propaganda. Such material is unlawful in Germany but not in the U.S. They framed their warrant in terms of "suspected terrorist activity."

LAW.com (requires cookies) - International Treaty on Cybercrime Poses Burden on High-Tech Companies.

Maybe you're a civil libertarian, and maybe you're not. Maybe you worry about how the United States exercises its vast investigative and prosecutorial powers, and maybe you don't.

But if you counsel U.S. corporations on computer-related issues, you should be concerned about a new proposed treaty known as the "Convention on Cybercrime." The Council of Europe, a 43-nation public body created to promote democracy and the rule of law, is nominally drafting the treaty. Curiously, however, the primary architect is the U.S. Department of Justice.

The Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation are using a foreign forum to create an international law-enforcement regime that favors the interests of the feds over those of ordinary citizens and businesses. Their goal is to make it easier to get evidence from abroad and to extradite and prosecute foreign nationals for certain kinds of crimes.

Maybe you trust the law-enforcement chiefs in D.C. to do the right thing. But here's the catch. The same new powers given to the United States will also be handed over to Bulgaria, Romania, Azerbaijan, and other Council of Europe nations that -- although officially democratic now -- don't have a strong tradition of checks and balances on police power.

[ ... ]

Stewart Baker, a partner at Washington, D.C.'s Steptoe & Johnson, is one of the chief lobbyists for the treaty's opponents. As a former general counsel of the National Security Agency and recipient of the U.S. Department of Defense Medal for Meritorious Civilian Service, he's got street credentials on these issues in corporate America.

Slashdot | Implications Of The International Cybercrime Treaty.

SiliconValley.com part of San Jose Mercury News - Pioneer cybercrime pact tightens privacy rules.

MS-NBC - Pioneer cybercrime pact tightens privacy rules. PARIS, May 25 -- Stiff criticism from the EU and pressure groups has prompted drafters of the world's first treaty against cybercrime to tighten provisions protecting privacy online, the final text showed Friday.

[ ... ]

Against EU objections, it also limits the right of a country to reject a request from abroad to store and hand over data in potential crime cases if the requesting country thinks it could be misused.

The text says states should make sure that systems operators or other people who know how to use a certain system can be ordered to cooperate in any such a cyberprobe.

PARIS (Reuters) - Stiff criticism from the EU and pressure groups has prompted drafters of the world's first treaty against cybercrime to tighten provisions protecting privacy online, the final text showed on Friday.

The Council of Europe, a 43-state human rights watchdog, has amended the text to ensure police respect privacy rights when they follow digital trails to fight online crimes such as hacking, spreading viruses, using stolen credit card numbers or defrauding banks.

''The guarantees in the treaty have been reinforced,'' Peter Csonka, deputy head of the economic crime division at the Council's headquarters in Strasbourg, told Reuters after the Council posted the final text -- version 27 -- on its Web site.

But the treaty, which has aroused heated debate in cyberspace since its draft text became public last year, ignored calls by Internet service providers (ISPs) for fewer costly requirements on preserving data that could be linked to a crime.

It still accorded police wide powers to chase suspected cybercriminals -- powers some critics say go beyond what is legal in some Council member states or in observer countries like the United States, Canada and Japan due to sign the treaty.

ZDNet - Internet founder worried over EU cybercrime plans.

BRUSSELS --Vint Cerf, a founding father of today's Internet, said on Thursday that European Union plans for new rules to fight crime on the Web risked clashing with existing EU privacy regulations.

Cerf, who helped develop the Internet in the early 70s shortly after graduating from Stanford University and now works for WorldCom, said more secure network systems were an immediate priority for the successful development of the ubiquitous Web.

He told Reuters in an interview that Internet traffic should be retained only for billing purposes and was too cumbersome to be stored for police investigations.

Changes to a controversial treaty on cybercrime have done nothing to improve it, say civil liberty campaigners.

Next week, the Council of Europe will vote on the treaty, which has been redrafted 26 times before reaching its final version late in May.

The most recent changes were made to take into account the fears of civil liberty and privacy campaigners. But cyber-rights groups say the latest changes are purely cosmetic and have not diluted what they describe as its most pernicious sections.

The groups say that, if adopted in its current form, the treaty could lead to changes in legislation that would stifle rights to privacy and do little to curb the activities of law enforcement agencies.

[ ... ]

In December 2000, 23 organisations, banding together under the banner of the Global Internet Liberty Campaign (GILC), signed a letter condemning the 25th draft of the treaty as "appalling", and warned that it handed law enforcement agencies sweeping powers to snoop and could seriously erode online privacy.

Now, three civil liberty groups, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Electronic Privacy Information Center and Privacy International, have sent another letter to the Council of Europe outlining their "continuing concerns" over the wording of the treaty and saying that their fears have not been laid to rest.

The letter chastises the Council of Europe for refusing to open up the redrafting debates to non-governmental organisations and for, it says, ignoring the human rights and privacy concerns of organisations such as the GILC.

It goes on to say that the original criticisms still stand, and that the treaty does not pay enough attention to existing laws which safeguard human rights. It says the treaty's recommendations on protecting privacy are vague and do not go far enough.

IT industry gurus have branded the Council of Europe's Convention on Cybercrime 'foolish, unworkable and a legal con trick'.

The controversial treaty provides a blanket legislation to deal with all forms of internet crime from hacking to online pornography.

Caspar Bowden, director of internet think-tank FIPR, said: "The Convention is essentially a legal con trick, drafted in secret by a handful of nameless bureaucrats. It equates the internet - a network of private networks - with 'cyberspace', a metaphor from science fiction.

"By this sleight of hand, the internet is defined as a public space over which law enforcement should be granted unfettered powers of surveillance and extradition," he added.

International policy-makers this week ended a round of talks aimed at setting common rules affecting online trade and commerce, but they made little progress in bridging divisions that threaten to delay the pact.

In the works for nearly a decade, the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments is still almost unknown outside international policy circles. Nevertheless, it could have broad implications for consumers and businesses by setting new rules for online copyrights, free speech and e-commerce--if it is approved.

Opposition to the treaty heated up Wednesday, when a two-week drafting session wrapped up with few concessions to critics, primarily from the United States, who say the pact threatens free speech and could force Internet service providers to become global content police.

"In a nutshell, it will strangle the Internet with a suffocating blanket of overlapping jurisdictional claims, expose every Web page publisher to liabilities for libel, defamation and other speech offenses from virtually any country, (and) effectively strip Internet service providers of protections from litigation over the content they carry," Jamie Love, director of Ralph Nader's Consumer Project on Technology (CPT), wrote in a report after the meeting.

The treaty is one of several efforts by the global community to grapple with a complicated legal issues on a borderless Web.

Four years ago, nations including the United States signed onto a World Intellectual Property Organization pact to protect copyright in the digital age. And several countries, including the United States, are hammering out the world's first cybercrime treaty, which would provide a standard for fighting online crime.

The Hague treaty differs from those efforts because it would not outline specific laws participants must follow. It's much broader, requiring participants to agree to enforce each others' laws on a variety of topics. As it stands, the treaty would require courts to enforce the commercial laws of the convention's 52 member nations, even if they prohibit actions that are legal under local laws.

BRUSSELS - The blueprint for a global code on Cyber-crime was agreed on in Strasbourg, France, Friday, paving the way for international rules governing online copyright infringement, online fraud, child pornography and hacking.

The 41 members of the Council of Europe (CoE), plus the U.S., Canada and Japan, signed on to a draft convention on cybercrime that is set to be rubber-stamped at ministerial level in September.

"Once adopted, the Convention will be the first international treaty on criminal offenses committed through the use of Internet and other computer networks," the Council of Europe said in a statement.

In September, the Council of Europe approved the Convention on cybercrime, a historic treatise that lays the foundation for legislation allowing for a greater sharing of information between countries to combat the rise of cybercrime.

The treatise isn't binding, but instead would have to be adopted into law by its 43 European member states and five outside countries including the United States, Canada and Japan.

The treaty is broad, covering crimes committed on the Internet such as fraud, child pornography and violations of computer network security. It also sets up global policing procedures for conducting computer searches, interception of e-mails, and extradition of criminal suspects.

More details on the CyberCrime Treaty can be found in the Privacy Digest archives dated September 26,2000, September 27,2000, October 09,2000, October 16,2000, October 18,2000, October 19,2000, October 25,2000, November 14,2000, November 20,2000, November 22,2000 and March 24,2001. This is not all the information at Privacy Digest and other sites so if you want to know more try a search