Slashdot Mirror

Given what's been going on recently, however, it seems like only a matter of time before somebody justifies using it on Americans on the grounds of terrorism prevention.

Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA) Counterespionage Section [these are the people who evidently maintain the database in question]

The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) Unit administers the FARA and maintains a public office to make all registration materials available to the public. In addition, it administers and/or provides advice for certain other statutes related to either matters requiring registration with or notification to the Attorney General.

Public information (ANALOG only cause they use Sperry-Univacs rather than FAA vacuum tube computers - feel safer?) relating to the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) can be obtained in person at the FARA Registration Unit Public Office located at:

Department of Justice Registration Unit 1400 New York Avenue, N.W. 1st Floor - Public Office Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20005

Researching Hours: 11 AM - 3 PM Mon. - Fri.
Filing Hours: 8:30 AM - 5 PM Mon. - Fri.

If the expense were negligable (say 50 cents or so) that would be different. Honestly though, I would rather use the money to feed a few hungry children.

If they could do it then, why can't they do it now?

--Mike--

Looks like a plea agreement. read it and weep^h^h^h^hlaugh here(pdf).

Uh... how about the fact that nothing even remotely like that is in the statute?

You're right and I noticed after posting this. Since the german copyright explicitely contains such a provision (par. 53(1) UrhG), I assumed that Americans had the same freedom. Obviously they don't.

Copies, yes. Perfect digital reproductions, no.

Actually, the fair use clause doesn't even guarantee the right to make analog copies. Neither does it explicitely prohibit perfect reproductions so it all boils down to a matter of interpretation.

Yes, that's right: it's a big conspiracy.

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not after you. Now that digital broadcasting is gaining momentum, they want legislation to make hometaping technically impossible. The copyright flag is just one step among others. E.g., the DMCA (1201 k) already requires manufacturers of analog recording devices to obey to copy control (i.e. prevention) mechanisms. The ultimate aim is that there will be no way to record a digital TV/radio broadcast if it has the copy control bit set, apart from building your own recorder. Note that the RIAA is lying again: Digital radio is - for bandwidth reasons - far from CD quality[1]. VCRs will go extinct and be replaced with devices like DVD players which aren't capable of any recording, and can be subjected to any DRM scheme from region code over expiring keys to the right to unilaterally terminate your license upon any activity which the MPAA disapproves of (this will probably be used rarely, but not be unheard of). Just take a look at the legislation, the RIAA and MPAA have pushed through in the recent years, and are now trying to establish. Here's an incomplete list:

Succeeded:

• The underestimated NET Act
• DMCA
• Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (of course this name obscures the involvement of The Walt Disney Company a little)

In progress:

• PIRATE Act
• INDUCE Act

More laws are waiting where these are coming from (well, that would be Hell, I guess). The goal is to give copyright holders (which are only rarely nowadays the actual artists) enormous power even beyond that which they already wield. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people that are too lazy, gullible or indifferent to defend their freedom.

Nonsense. Macrovision doesn't even come close to meeting the definition of "access control mechanism" given in Title 17. The courts have so held, despite civil suits alleging differently.

You haven't got references? I have.

Before you can "recompress" you must "decompress," which is the same as making a perfect digital copy of the original work.

Yes, that's why even viewing a DVD is illegal. D'oh! Seriously though, at least German courts have ruled that making a transient copy of copyrighted material in order to exercise fair use rights is fair use itself. So of course this is a BS argument.

If they mis-handled Social Security numbers alone (simply by sending them to the TSA without the approval of the people who possess those SSNs) then this is a very clear violation of the Privacy Act. Hello lawsuit?

Related to gmail itself and not the users so much (though who's actually held accountable for their own actions anymore?):

Federal law, and I'm paraphrasing, permits private ISPs to read users' email for performance monitoring reasons, etc. Right now, gMail is a private ISP, as it's open on the basis of invitation only, and they're granted much more freedom by federal laws. When/if they become a public service provider - which doesn't mean free - they fall under more stringent rules. In both cases, though, the eMail isn't exclusive property of the sender, but shared by the recipient *and* the sender. If someone sends me email, and I read it to my coworkers, it doesn't matter that the sender is damaged. Once I've read the message and left it on the server, it's also contained on a "remote storage device". While I may personally be liable for leaking the information, Google has no liability for treating my message (whether someone in CA sent it to me or not) just like any other message that they can legally monitor for performance reasons, etc.

Anyway, all the laws in the world mean jack squat when you sign the form that says "I grant Google et. al. rights to read my email. In exchange I'll use their email service." People can sign away their "rights" if they want to.

Good reading on this topic:
http://www.cybercrime.gov/s&smanual2002.htm#_I II_
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/1030_anal .html

It's already well-documented that Yahoo moves Gmail invites into the Bulk Mail folder. I've personally confirmed the Hotmail and Yahoo blocking.

Much as I enjoy wearing my tinfoil hat, I think it can be dispensed with here.

Both Hotmail and Yahoo mail have been plagued with spam, and with users demanding they do something about that spam. Indeed, that's one reason people are interested in GMail.

Since almost all spam -- anything we think of spam, anyway -- arrives in mass quantities, and a logical way to reduce spam is simply to look for many addresses receiving the same email.

So a decent first cut at filtering bulk spam (and recall that both Yahoo and Hotmail use "bulk mail" folders) would be to take an MD5 sum of each email (not including the "To" address header lines, of course), stick the sum in hash table or other database, and increment a counter for each email with that MD5 sum. Once the counter reached some arbitrary large-ish number, you'd mark all copies of that emails spam.

Since the GMial invite varies slightly, it's clear that something fuzzier than an MD5 sum is being used, but the principle remains the same.

The first N GMail invites weren't marked as "bulk email"; after the counter threshold was reached, all the rest have been.

So all we've learned from this is that, even during this invite-only beta test, GMail must be sending out a hell of a lot of invites, and that, yes indeed, Hotmail and Yahoo customers demanded and got "bulk email" filtering.

So take off the tinfoil hats -- you'll have a real reason to wear them soon enough.

Perhaps someone can explain to me the slight or not-so-slight bias against the French in the US I keep hearing about

France is in a power play right now and are using the UN/EU/NATO to achieve its goals. It wants to try and regain some of the its past power. The results of this have been to use their power in those orginizations to rebut much of what the US has been trying to do.

But even before that France and America haven't always gotten along. To them we're crazy gun-toting uncultured right wing Christian criminals (even though our gun related crime has been decreasing and theirs has been increasing greatly due to a huge, uncontrollable black market for guns in Europe, flooding in from Eastern Europre). To Americans the French are snobby, elitist, socialist, and godless people who are morally bankrupt.

If 'The patriot' is any accurate indication of US history

No movies coming out of America should be assumed to be anywhere near truthful or accurate. Even our "documentaries" are fictional.

In every case where there has been a problem with Windows security, it's been AFTER they released a patch for the vulnerability.

That sounds great, except you're completely wrong. There are plenty of unpatched MS vulnerabilities that are being actively exploited. For example:

Microsoft Internet Explorer ADODB.Stream Object File Installation Weakness

And this certainly isn't the only example. They've earned their reputation for ignoring known vulnerabilities:

pivx list of unpatched IE vulnerabilities from 9/2003

And before you say that these are IE vulnerabilities, not "Windows" vulnerabilities, you might want to consider Microsoft's own position in a certain court case.

I don't understand why this sort of thing doesn't happen more often. In fact, I suspect that the GPL license, may be too restrictive and not enforceable. US citizens have a right to receiving that code (and other information) in the public domain under the US Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). (There are limits regarding national security, etc.) This has already been done with software in the past.

The US Department of Veterans Affairs has been actively developing and using the VistA (Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology Architecture) software since the 1980's. This software has a proven track record and is used in hundreds of healthcare facilities of all sizes. Many agree that it is at least as good as multi-million dollar systems from companies like Siemens, GE, Cerner, and McKesson.

The VistA software has already been released to the public domain under the US Freedom of Information Act. Since then an active open source community has grown around that freely available code and is even being used in non-government facilities around the world. More recently the open source community and the VA developers have begun discussions on how to combine their efforts.

So if you know of any useful software developed by the US government, speak up and ask for it to be opened up so everyone can benefit!!

New York has such a law. Most states don't. One site I found claims that 23 states have such age ranges. Some states, such as California, have civil penalties for sex with a minor when the ages of the victim and perpetrator are similar. The catch is that the district attorney can press charges for these penalties even if all parties involved don't want to. After doing this extra research, I'd like to modify my statement to include the phrase "in some states".

That's thirty dead in one year out of a nation of 294 million. I don't know how many police officers the US has, but I do know how many local police departments, sheriff's offices, state police agencies, and federal police forces exist within the contiguous states - 18,000. Presumably police officers themselves number in the millions. Taking into account the inevitablity of the occasional crazy, 30 seems like an amazingly reasonable number.

Especially when you compare that to the UK. A country of about 52 million with a total of 42 police forces employing 126,000 police (25,000 of which, BTW, are employed in Greater London) had 14 police officers killed in the line of duty last year. (see numbers here and here). As best as I can tell, the problem's gotten BETTER in the US and WORSE in the UK.

You're right that a US police officer being gunned down in, say, New Orleans isn't a nationwide news story; but that has more to do with:

A - the size of the country and

B - the fact that most US news is regional.

In the US, national news only comes to the forefront during massive catastrophes (high visibility terrorist attacks, Pee Wee Herman molesting a child, presidential elections, etc). International news only gets attention during a war. In the UK, national and international news get much more play time. (The US, for instance, doesn't have a tax funded international news agency)

My point is this - comparing crime in the UK and the US is comparing apples and oranges. Different social pressures, different sample population sizes, radically different landmass, different presumptions, different histories, utterly different beasts. The perception of people outside the environment in question is no more accurate than the perceptions of the people within the environment - they're both perceptions. Little better than opinions.

Um, I suggest you check out

An Article
Another Article
Bureau of Justice Statistics

Especially the Crime rates from victim surveys.

OK, so your hypothetical man on the street is completely ignorant. What is that supposed to prove?

I'd be interested to know how many times people really defend themselves with their guns (and what is the ratio against "gun accidents" for instance).

Average annual incidence of self-defense actions involving firearms, 1987-1992: 82,500 (USDOJ)

Annual accidental fatalities involving firearms, 1993: 1543

Unintentional firearms-related injuries, 1993: 21,385 (CDC)

The numbers stack up pretty well, I'd say. And that's not even taking into account that the incidence of firearm-related accidents has decreased dramatically in the last decade.

Really (pdf link)

In the Philippines, it is customary to include on your resume: age, religion, marital status, weight, height, a recent photograph, and if female, "measurements". If you don't, you probably won't be considered. The age of being "past your prime" is about age 25, professionally and maritally. You can be summarily rejected for employment for any of the above parameter values - being muslim as always been a strike against in the Catholic Philippines. Not being of the right sex or not being "pretty enough" to "decorate" the office is pretty common.

I'm sure other countries are similar. USian companies are required to follow the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act; I wonder if it could apply to foreign age discrimination of subcontractors and subsidiaries?

For the Secret Service - call the Dept. of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General Hotline (800) 323-8603.

For the FBI - call the Dept. of Justice Office of Inspector General Hotline (800) 869-4499.

When you call, remind both of them that active stolen credit cards can be used by terrorists to purchase things like AIRPLANE TICKETS, and that you do not find it acceptable that these agencies responses were not prompt and definitive.

These Hotlines must come to some final resolution for every reported allegation. That should provide you some assurance that even if they decide to not pursue the matter it is being documented that decision was made by law enforcement.

> Just one bit of [proof] would be enough for me to not think you are some insane zealot.

If you insist...

Evidence of sabotage and fraud in The Sun vs Microsoft case:

Memo to Bill Gates from the manager responsible for Microsoft's Java strategy:

> When I met with you last, you had a lot of pretty pointed questions about Java, so I want to make sure I understand your issues/concerns....

> 1. What is our business model for Java?

> 2. How do we wrest control of Java away from Sun?

> 3. How do we turn Java into just the latest, best way to write Windows applications?

> 4. What are we doing to leverage/expose Windows to Java developers?

Microsoft's pricing strategy paper for its VJ++ development suite:

> The "strategic objective" of its new toolkit is to "Eliminate/contain cross-platform Java by growing the polluted Java market," "migrate and lock Java developers to Win32 Java," and ultimately to "kill cross-platform Java by grow[ing] the polluted Java market."

Statement by a Microsoft vice president:

> I would explicitly be different -- just to be different.... [W]ithout something to pollute Java more to Windows (show new cool features that are only in Windows) we expose ourselves to more portable code on other platforms.

Another Microsoft memo:

> At this point its [sic] not good to create MORE noise around our win32 java classes. Instead we should just quietly grow j++ share and assume that people will take advantage of our classes without ever realizing they are building win32-only java apps.

Evidence of contract interference and extortion in The DOJ versus Microsoft case:

> "Content drives browser adoption, and we need to go to the top five sites and ask them, "What can we do to get you to adopt IE?" We should be prepared to write a check, buy sites, or add features -- basically do whatever it takes to drive adoption."

> Gates wrote, "Apple let us down on the browser by making Netscape the standard install." Gates then reported that he had already called Apple's CEO (who at the time was Gil Amelio) to ask "how we should announce the cancellation of Mac Office...."

> In Waldman's words: Sounds like we give them the HTML control for nothing except making IE the "standard browser for Apple?" I think they should be doing this anyway. Though the language of the agreement uses the word "encourage," I think that the spirit is that Apple should be using it everywhere and if they don't do it, then we can use Office as a club.

Evidence of intentional destruction of standard protocols in the Microsoft Halloween Document:

> "OSS projects have been able to gain a foothold in many server applications because of the wide utility of highly commoditized, simple protocols. By extending these protocols and developing new protocols, we can deny OSS projects entry into the market."

And so on.

There is so much evidence that this (sabotage, fraud, and extortion) is Microsoft's normal way of operating, that the "zealot" position is anyone who attempts to claim that Microsoft is honest.

As to what Microsoft is currently trying to do to defeat Linux, there was obviously some speculation there, which I indicated by repeated use of the word "possibly."

In my opinion, Microsoft's legal "war chest" was built up by overcharging. This massive amount of overcharging for poor quality software was only made possible by abusing a market monopoly. This is not just my opinion, perhaps you have have read about what the DOJ had to say about this.

It's funny that you want to criticize "otherwise intelligent people" for not wanting to "reason with the terrorists". From what I've learned, they don't want to reason with us, either. Check out this quote:

"The confrontation that we are calling for with the apostate regimes does not know Socratic debates..., Platonic ideals..., nor Aristotelian diplomacy. But it knows the dialogue of bullets, the ideals of assassination, bombing, and destruction, and the diplomacy of the cannon and machine-gun."

It is taken from what is known as the "Manchester Document", an Al Qaeda training manual located by the Manchester (England) Metropolitan Police during a search of an Al Qaeda member's home. Selected passages from the manual are available in PDF format from the U.S. Department of Justice website. Go through it, it's a fun read. The quote above is from page four of the "Cover - Lesson Four" PDF.

It would seem to me that they don't want to "reason with" the rest of us (the "apostate regimes", which incidentally includes any Arab governments that they view as tinted by foreign influence) any more than your "otherwise intelligent" friends want to talk to them. In fact, it looks like they [the terrorists] will answer any invitation to dialog with a bullet to the face.

Please do some more research before discrediting those whose ideas you don't agree with. In this case I think you're both right - the terrorists do hate America because of its freedoms and religious beliefs, and the parading of civilian casualties on the Al Jazeera news channels is certainly being used by terrorists as a recruitment tool. Unfortunately, global politics is not as simple as we may want it to be, and neither negotiation nor cessation of the "never-ending war campaigns" will stop the violence.

For what it's worth (probably not much), in my opinion Al Qaeda picked the fight and are determined to fight it to the death. Since they refuse to even talk about it (see exhibit A above), and I'm not willing to accept their demands (things like relinquishing national sovereignty and accepting forced conversion to Islam), G. W.'s solution of going to them and inviting them to bring it on is a (perhaps the only?) valid solution.

Feel free to come up with another solution. I'll be willing to listen as long as it doesn't involve giving up my religion or nationality. You'll be doing the world a big favor.

In order to admit a picture as evidence (at least, in a normal criminal court--I don't know what they have to do in military courts), you generally do three things:

1) Print it.
2) Sign it.
3) Date it.

You then submit that to the court. For reference, my information on this comes from the US DOJ CCIPS page. Note that their position on this is similar to how they treat non-digital photographs--that is, they don't insist on the negatives, but they present developed photos to the court. I believe that they cite more case law in there about that so you can read up on it yourself. I'm still digesting lots of 4th ammendment case law from it, myself...

There are many others who have mistakenly trusted Microsoft:

For example, there's Bristol Technologies:

> The judge was also critical of a speech by Bill Gates in which he made "an affirmatively false statement and not merely an omission of material fact" at the Unix expo in New York (attended by some 20,000 people) in October 1996. Gates said: "... we work together with [Bristol and Mainsoft] to make sure they've got the very latest Windows API technology. Bristol and Mainsoft also provide source and binary compatibility, and again that's a close relationship where it's not just some old version of Windows, it's the very latest." It's the bit about the Microsoft claiming to offer the latest version of Windows that particularly caught the court's eye, because in fact Microsoft had refused to give Bristol access to the latest version of Windows.

> ...Microsoft was in fact already undermining Bristol's ability to develop its WIND/U (Windows/Unix) product by refusing to provide the latest source code, and that Bristol's users would be unable to get the expected functionality to run Windows programs on Unix as Microsoft would only supply Bristol with a subset of the NT code.

> The judge also said that Microsoft and was playing a bait-and-switch game in which it "baited" Bristol into continually devoting substantial resources to developing and selling WISE software, and "switched" on these converted Microsoft customers (and Bristol).

And let's not forget Apple and customers who use MS Office on the Mac. Little did they know that they were just pawns, to be sacrificed if Microsoft's edicts were not obeyed:

> Gates informed those Microsoft executives most closely involved in the negotiations with Apple that the discussions "have not been going well at all." One of the several reasons for this, Gates wrote, was that "Apple let us down on the browser by making Netscape the standard install." Gates then reported that he had already called Apple's CEO (who at the time was Gil Amelio) to ask "how we should announce the cancellation of Mac Office...."

As long as the same people are running the company, and as long as the law keeps looking the other way, there is no reason to expect Microsoft to change.

Microsoft is dishonest; Microsoft will break any promise; And, Microsoft treats Linux, not as a competitor, but as an enemy in a war.

Thus, compromise with Microsoft is not an option.

From

CNN:
"A draft of the new domestic security bill Ashcroft is seeking, published by a nonprofit government watchdog group in February, indicates that among other things, it would prohibit disclosure of information regarding people detained as terrorist suspects and prevent the Environmental Protection Agency from distributing "worst-case scenario" information to the public about a nearby private company's use of chemicals.
In addition, the measure would create a DNA database of "suspected terrorists;" force suspects to prove why they should be released on bail, rather than have the prosecution prove why they should be held; and allow the deportation of U.S. citizens who become members of or help terrorist groups."

The Patriot act, linked with the Homeland Security Act, has gutted the Freedom of Information Act.

From

Wired News Dec. 02, 2002
"One of the most egregious and potentially dangerous of these travesties is the Homeland Security Act's creation of new and very broad exemptions from the Freedom of Information Act. Businesses now have a new way to evade liability for safety violations, hazards to consumers and other abuses. They need merely report the information about their behavior -- even totally unclassified activities -- to the federal government, and claim it's related to homeland security. In the parlance of the Homeland Security Act, they declare the data to be "CII," or Critical Infrastructure Information."

In other News from the press: everything is classified now, and won't be released anytime soon. (See "Amendment To Executive Order No. 12958")
How much is this being used now?

Local News
"Federal agents sought 1,727 warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for electronic eavesdropping and physical searches last year, according to a Justice Department filing with Congress. Just four applications were rejected, and two of those were later revised and approved. The number of so-called FISA warrants jumped by 500 from 2002 and has almost doubled since 2001, when 934 applications were approved."
"By comparison, there were 1,442 wiretap petitions in federal and state courts for crimes like drugs and racketeering, according to a separate report from the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts."

How much abuse has been identified?

Inspector general's report on Patriot act abuses:
( They *only* found 34 *credible* cases in the 272 complaints. But please remember, it's all secret and there is no public oversight.)
The ACLU issued a report on how the Patriot Act is actually being used. Link Here.
The Migration Policy Institute says:
'Moreover, among those detained (and of the 1,200, the MPI could only identify a third) were "persistent violations of due p

> No, you just have no idea what the fuck you are talking about, and the parent is being modded down because they are comparing two things which are entirely different.

The details may be different, but the original poster's central point is absolutely correct. The law is not being applied equally.

Bill Gates has committed sabotage:

> "Strategic Objective... Kill cross-platform Java by grow[ing] the polluted Java market"

Bill Gates has committed consumer fraud (same link):

> "At this point its [sic] not good to create MORE noise around our win32 java classes. Instead we should just quietly grow j++ share and assume that people will take advantage of our classes without ever realizing they are building win32-only java apps."

Bill Gates has committed extortion:

> "Apple let us down on the browser by making Netscape the standard install." Gates then reported that he had already called Apple's CEO (who at the time was Gil Amelio) to ask "how we should announce the cancellation of Mac Office...."

Those were deliberate crimes -- deliberate acts of destruction. And his crimes have been costly to us all. By sabotaging Java, Gates delayed the introduction of modern e-commerce by years, which has cost the economy $hundreds of BILLIONS -- more costly than any virus or worm.

Meanwhile, Martha Stewart sold a stock she knew would drop, and saved herself a few $hundreds of thousands. A crime, perhaps, but piddling compared to the various crimes of Gates and company.

Yet Martha goes to jail, and Gates gets a slap on the wrist.

It is an extreme case of injustice, brought about by a corrupt government (not just the Republicans), and a cowardly justice system.

• Arrest warrants are outstanding for defendants James Lin and Daniel J. Lin. In a criminal complaint issued by the U.S. Attorney's Office, these individuals have been charged with violations of the federal mail fraud laws as well as with criminal violations of the CAN-SPAM Act.

The FTC also credits Spamhaus in assisting with the investigation.

• Arrest warrants are outstanding for defendants James Lin and Daniel J. Lin. In a criminal complaint issued by the U.S. Attorney's Office, these individuals have been charged with violations of the federal mail fraud laws as well as with criminal violations of the CAN-SPAM Act.

The FTC also credits Spamhaus in assisting with the investigation.

Sun's COs claim that they need to maintain tight control over the Java library source code and standards to insure Java cross vendor "write-once" portability. This was the main point for Sun's lawsuit against Microsoft. In fact, in the DOJ case the federal appeal court did find that Microsoft had deceived Java developers, which the court decided was in breach of the Sherman Antitust act.

For Sun to call their settlement anything but a sellout, Sun could at least persuaded Microsoft to create or adopt a modern release of Java to replace the 1997 eon MSJava JVM. Instead Microsoft gained the right to extends life of its Java Virtual Machine to December 31, 2007. Microsoft have stated that it will not be improving ( or updating ) the old JVM and Microsoft's J# "upgrade path" still uses non-standard interfaces for GUI's and .NET libraries. This leaves Microsoft free to play the old "standard" embrace, extend and enclose anti-competitive tactics.

Sun' s James Gosling claims, in response to this article and some "slashdot flamage" from the same author that though the new settlement, Sun has gained the right to selectively access Microsoft's Communications Protocol Program. This ablity to selectively pick and choose and other "flexabilities" was a detail left out of Sun's press release, and more interestingly, the recent joint status report on Microsoft's complicance with the US DOJ final antitrust judgement.

Don't insult our intelligence here, a vast majority of the files transfered by DCC are pirated.

A vast majority of files transferred by Internet are pirated. A friend (who just left the movie scene) and I (a neutral observer) once computed that high-level piracy (raced FTP sites and the like, mostly sitting on fat telecom links "borrowed" by otherwise legit admins -- the sort of piracy that the FBI didn't know existed until recently) consumes about 50-75% of all bandwidth on the Internet. When a single download thread for a single person can transfer a 3 SVCD movie in about 2 minutes, and there's other people doing the same thing on the same site, and there's dozens of sites out there, you know that there's some serious bandwidth utilization going on.

Its 65 MONTHS not 65 years. (a little under 5 1/2 years)

This is the government document being reffered to:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/psatsfv.pdf

The average sentence for criminals convicted of rape in the United States (and released in 1992) is 117 months. The average time served is 65 months, which equates to 56 percent of the actual sentence served. For crimes of sexual assault, the average sentence is 72 months, and the average time served is 35 months, equating to 49 percent of time served. (Greenfeld, Lawrence A., 1995, "Prison Sentences and Time Served for Violence," page 1, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.)

The best anonymous warez site ever seen can be found here. They move the directory around a lot so that it isn't to easily found by you know who. But, they always leave a clue to the new directory on this page.

'Operation Fastlink' Is The Largest Global Enforcement Action
Ever Undertaken Against Online Piracy


Key bits:

"Over 120 total searches have been executed in the past 24 hours in 27 states and in 10 foreign countries. Foreign searches were conducted in Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Israel, the Netherlands, Singapore, Sweden as well as Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Operation Fastlink is the largest multi-national law enforcement effort ever directed at online piracy."

"Among the groups targeted by Fastlink are well-known organizations such as Fairlight, Kalisto, Echelon, Class and Project X"

I doubt it has anything to do with P2P, most of "sites" reside in universities/schools/dorms.

A statement was just released about this here

Now perhaps everyone will stop posting about the RIAA which has absolutely nothing to do with these raids.

This is most likely part of Operation Fastlink - "The Largest Global Enforcement Action Ever Undertaken Against Online Piracy," according to the DOJ

Granted I don't agree with the raid, but this argument is so overused. Should we stop all traffic enforcement so that we can use those police resources to go solve murder cases?

It can be carried too far, as in your unrealistic example, but the application and proportionality of law enforcement resources is *always* a great argument, both for practical reasons and for the obvious political choices demonstrated by making some enforcement targets high priority and others get little or no priority.

For example, why is there an ongoing bong task force but no ongoing anti-fraud task force nailing spammers?

And as others have pointed out, why did we spend hundreds of millions figuring out whether Monica Lewinsky swallowed or not, instead of spending hundreds of millions tracking illegal immigrants or other undesirables pre-9/11?

In my mind, these things only underscore the fact that politics is the priority, and everything else is secondary. High minded claims otherwise just ignore all the other, more serious problems that get ignored so that other more politically favored issues can be pursued.

I worked for the "U.S. Military" for 10 years, and 6 of those years has been in either computers or communications in general.

Where does he come off with the statement "...I don't really trust the Pentagon to abide by the GPL." Let me tell you something-we bend over backwards to abide by license restrictions. I can't even download a shareware program (when we deal with Windows, not too many in Linux) copy without demonstrating we've paid for it. I understand the idea of "free as in beer", but I also understand "free as in speech". Speaking of free [rant]haven't people heard of the "Freedom of Information Act"? Just in case you haven't, click here. If you want to know what software we're using ask us! Don't just sit in your field of daisies whining and complaining about things of which you know nothing. And, (just so you know I know what the GPL is) you can't have the modifications I've made to the machine in my office. Why? Because I'm not distributing it...if I was, yes, you can have my source code.[/rant]

Before throwing stones at that "big glass house", realize that much of it is glass. You can see in it (well, maybe not the utility room...well, not that closet either..never mind) more then some company that takes GPL code, puts it in their router, then sells it. That would never happen.

> Actually I am a developer that switched to Windows from Linux.

It was recently estimated that there are over 1 million Open Source developers in North America alone.

It's only logical that some of them are going to decide to switch to Windows.

And you're one of them. Good for you.

> Bullshit you switched because of all the hype and bull that accompanies the regular Linux religous preachers.

You're calling me a liar. That's mature.

> You wanna know why I switchd to Windows? It was to get away from the whiney, immature and the "Open Source it or you are a peice of crap" mentality.

So let me see if I have this straight...

I switched to Linux for rational business reasons. The platform APIs are relatively stable, so I don't have to keep changing my applications to match changes in the platform. All the interfaces are open and documented, plus I have the source code, so my development and debugging is faster and more accurate. And I know the owner of the platform is not going to try to undercut my product, and steal my business. All of thse things contribute to my bottom line.

You, on the other hand, switched to Windows because some people -- people who aren't even your customers -- are whining. You're not even doing it on principle, in fact you're bothered that _they_ have principles. That seems like a pretty poor way to run a business to me.

> Funny, all my favorite apps from Linux are available for Windows and they work flawlessly, can you say full of crap? Yes we know you are. . . . All my Windows apps work on all versions of Windows and not just the newer ones, hmmmmmmmmmmm

Wow, I am amazed. Can you possibly be that ignorant of Microsoft's history?

Here was Microsoft's plan for Java:

"Strategic Objective [is to] kill cross-platform Java by grow[ing] the polluted Java market."

Here is what Bill Gates said about Intel's multimedia support for Java:

"If Intel has a real problem with us supporting [AMD's 3DX technology] then they will have to stop supporting Java Multimedia the way they are. I would gladly give up supporting this if they would back off from their work on JAVA..."

Here is Microsoft's strategy to stop Open Source:

OSS projects have been able to gain a foothold in many server applications because of the wide utility of highly commoditized, simple protocols. By extending these protocols and developing new protocols, we can deny OSS projects entry into the market.

I could go on, but you get the point. Microsoft's entire history revolves around sabotaging competitors' products. Some Microsoft officials should probably be in jail. But, hey, if you're happy working with them, then that's your choice.

> When you show me some code then and only then will I be a little impressed, until then since you posted anonymously I put you at 14? 15? maybe 16

Not worthy of a response.

Yes, of course I am. I just think it's rediculous that the religious right Lunatics is attacking things like gay marriage and pornography while T.V. is clearly far more dangerous and invasive. I mean if parents only spend 38.5 minutes having meaningful conversation with their children and yet use the T.V. to babysit our children, what does this say about our priorities?

Please don't use the same word to refer to robbery and murder on the high seas, and copyright violation

Please don't avoid answering the question by nitpicking terminology. Is it okay to violate copyright by making unlicensed copies of games and software?

after three decades [...] our society several times more violent

Funny you should say that, because according to the DOJ violent crime has trended downward significantly since the early 1970's.

Where did you get your information from?

I've been suggesting for years that a model similar to that of songwriter royalites should be applied - copying is free (just like singing a song), profit-making use rquires royalties.

But singing a song isn't "copying" -- duplicating sheet music for the song is.

"Someone who is found to be biased against Microsoft in the court"

You have your lawyers all mixed up. You're thinking of judge Thomas Penfield Jackson, of the MS anti-trust case. Judge Jackson penned the "findings of fact" document. No connection to Lawrence Lessig.

You're right. We should laugh.

Like we laughed at the idea that Microsoft pays people to post in forums -- until it was proven to be true.

Like we laughed at the idea that Microsoft was funding Washington think tanks -- until it was proven to be true.

Like we laughed at the idea that Microsoft was spreading FUD about DR-DOS -- until it was proven to be true.

Like we laughed at the idea that Microsoft would submit doctored evidence in a federal court -- until it was proven to be true.

Like we laughed at the idea that Microsoft was trying to undermine Netscape and sabotage their business relationships -- until it was proven to be true.

Like we laughed at the idea that Microsoft was trying to sabotage Java, and lock in Java users -- until it was proven to be true.

Like we laughed at the idea that Microsoft would try to undermine Linux with extended protocols -- until it was proven to be true.

But the idea that Microsoft would try to lock in Linux developers and users, through a secret deal with Trolltech?

You're right. That's laughable.

Bzzz Sorry, there are more record companies and musicians who are not connected to the RIAA than there are that are. Plus the RIAA is nothing more than a lobbying group. MAP pricing was an attempt to make Tower Records and other record only type stores happy. If they where really doing bad things with price fixing, people would have gone to jail, like the ADM execs did with Lysine.

> I guess he based that on the fact that the transition from Half-Life to Unreal Tournament was a transition from OpenGL to D3D.

Yes, but did that transition occur because D3D was better, in terms of technology and economics?

Or was there, perhaps, an outside influence tipping the economic scale...

Microsoft eyeing Vivendi unit?

Has Microsoft bought Vivendi Games?

Microsoft / Vivendi rumours gather steam

I don't know if the purchase actually took place, but they were talking, and Vivendi was deeply in debt, and Microsoft had lots of monopoly-generated cash. I think it's safe to assume that some sort of payoff occurred.

It is also widely believed that when Microsoft joined the OpenGL committee, it was for the purpose of sabotaging, and slowing down the technology.

That last bit is easy to believe, because it's the normal way that Microsoft operates. For example, consider these tidbits from the DOJ case Findings of Fact:

Microsoft's Jim Allchin, in a note to Gates:

> "I am positive that we must do a direct attack on Sun (and probably Oracle).... Between ourselves and our partners, we can certainly hurt their (certainly Sun's) revenue base.... We need to get Intel to help us."

Microsoft's Eric Engstrom describes Microsoft's goal as:

> "Intel to stop helping Sun create Java Multimedia APIs, especially ones that run well (ie native implementations) on Windows."

And Engstrom's proposed agreement with Intel:

> Microsoft would incorporate into the Windows API set any multimedia interfaces that Intel agreed to NOT help Sun incorporate into the Java class libraries. [emphasis/caps added]

So there you have a clear example of Microsoft using threats to sabotage open multimedia support.

If we want the PC to remain open (let alone the Internet), then we have to support technologies that don't come from Microsoft. In this case, it means supporting OpenGL, which is not hard to do, because it's a great technology.

It's time to get tough. No wimpy ribbons this time. It's time for the Bukkake Ashcroft Campaign for Free Speech.

1. Download a picture of the Attorney General.
2. Make a color print of the picture.
3. Jerk off on the picture. Do not look at the picture while you jerk off. Well, you could, but I don't want to know about it. I suggest you close your eyes and think of Asia.
4. If the face of the man who wrote "Let the Eagle Soar" isn't liberally (heh) covered with spooge, GOTO 3.
5. Take a picture of your Bukkake Ashcroft. Do not, REPEAT, do not use a flatbed scanner.
6. Post this picture on your home page. Or use someone else's site if you're so inclined.
7. ?????
8. Free Speech!

I guarantee that if enough people do this, it'll have an effect that a million EFF ribbons couldn't hope to match.

Maj. Kong

Oosterbaan said the department is employing much the same strategy this time, targeting not only some of the most egregious hard-core porn but also more conventional material, in an effort "to be as effective as possible." "I can't possibly put it all away," he said. "Results are what we want."

If MS open sourced all their apps, there would STILL be a large "we hate MS" movement on slashdot... mostly from people that haven't used windows since Windows98.

Yes, and if you haven't read Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson's original Finding of Fact in the MS antitrust case, do so and you'll better understand why the /. crowd will never trust MS's intentions. http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm

There are still people like you out there who will cite Penney Jackson with a straight face?

Read the findings. It's a very lucid document that explains just what Microsoft gets in return when it gives a browser away for free or "improves" an implimentation of java. Jackson deserves much more credit than he is generally given.

He shouldn't have talked to the press, but that doesn't make his findings stupid. In fact, they were so well regarded that the they stood on apeal, even though his judgement didn't.

TW

And the thing you don't realize is this also means the muggers have guns. And guess what? Having a gun is useless when a mugger pulls one on you first. Do you think he's just going to sit there and let you pull out your gun? In fact, at the end of it all, you'll probably be out an iPod AND a gun.

For a mugger, shooting you is a losing proposition -- it ruins his ROI, draws attention (gunshots are loud and distinctive), and while a guy can get away with a string of muggings for some time, cops tend to put a bit more effort towards investigating shootings.

Plus, you are wrong about the outcome from resisting violent crime -- read the US Bureau of Justice Statistics. "A fifth of the victims defending themselves with a firearm suffered an injury, compared to almost half of those who defended themselves with weapons other than a firearm or who had no weapon."