Slashdot Mirror

This only applies if you use their webmail service with server side encryption. They have to have your key in order to encrypt/decrypt server-side, and they have to turn it over to the authorities if they have a valid warrent. It's the law.

If you use their client-side Java applet to do the encryption on your computer - as they strongly recommends that you do - then this is not an issue. Hushmail never see you keys and thus cannot be compelled to hand them over.

Several other sites covered this story earlier in the month all without the crappy sensationalism of slashdot. I first saw it at arstechnica, which linked to an interview with the CEO by wired.

I'm not usually one to hard on individual slashdot editors, but this is the 4th intentionally misleading troll that zonk has posted today. It is crap like this that caused me to not renew my slashdot subscription so many years.

Here is a link to a wired article about the same issue. However wired actually bothered to contact the Hushmail and got a response from the CTO Brian Smith. Apparently it is not a clearcut as the OP and TFA suggests. http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/11/encrypted-e-mai.html

Some people take old electronics and make sculptures out of it. This lady makes moving animals out of old electronics junk. If I also recall there was a guy back in the early 2000's that made a life-size dinosaur sculpture out of old electronics gear...I couldn't find a link to it though, I think I saw it in Wired Mag. Apparently the point of the dinosaur was to represent how much electronics junk the average American consumed in their lifetime. I am sure there are plenty of other examples of such a thing.

All you need are more lava lamps.

There are various examples known world wide such as in Argentina (1980's) when all of the communications were monitored by the government to "capture the terrorists."

Who needs Argentina as an example? AT&T (for sure) and others (probably) are doing this for the US government right now. That's the purpose behind the FISA update that they keep trying to pass -- lift the existing requirement that the telcos reject government requests that are illegal under existing law.

Pretty sure Slashdot covered it at some point (probably more than once, knowing the propensity toward dupes).

Some links:

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/04/70619

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/05/70908

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060412-6585.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hepting_vs._AT&T

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/11/15/amnesty_fisa/index.html

There are various examples known world wide such as in Argentina (1980's) when all of the communications were monitored by the government to "capture the terrorists."

Who needs Argentina as an example? AT&T (for sure) and others (probably) are doing this for the US government right now. That's the purpose behind the FISA update that they keep trying to pass -- lift the existing requirement that the telcos reject government requests that are illegal under existing law.

Pretty sure Slashdot covered it at some point (probably more than once, knowing the propensity toward dupes).

Some links:

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/04/70619

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/05/70908

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060412-6585.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hepting_vs._AT&T

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/11/15/amnesty_fisa/index.html

She's ridiculously litigious and her inaction against her publisher is a threat to human rights. Richard Stallman (RMS) has good coverage of this issue and an explanation of why this campaign against buying Harry Potter books is necessary.

As others have pointed out here on /., she's a billionaire. Therefore she can afford to do quite a lot of things to her liking. I don't believe that she's "massively disappointed that this matter had to come to court at all". She's disappointed that this publisher hasn't buckled to her will (even though she stood up for herself against charges of plagiarism from the author of the "Larry Potter" stories). Perhaps more publishers will publish their works and defend themselves against malicious charges of copyright infringement.

I don't usually reply to my own stuff, but here's Wired's report on the raid and what Egerstad actually did.

But with the latest testimony by Rory Reiser - it really doesn't look good for Hans:

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/hans_reiser_trial/index.html

The design of the Chernobyl and 3 Mile Island Nuclear reactors was based on our primitive understanding of how to harness nuclear energy. But these incidents have by and large shaped the way 90% of the people today see nuclear power generation.

Pebble reactors change the risk equation and can be thought of as "failing safely" if cooling fails (as long as the container can withstand high temperatures of around 2000K.)
An easy to understand reference on pebble reactors: http://pebblebedreactor.blogspot.com/2007/01/pbr-passive-safety-comes-from-basic.html

China is doing it - http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.09/china.html

I believe that pebble reactors also change the equation when it comes to "spent fuel" but I'll leave that for someone else to follow up on.

This story was broken by the Wired blog Threat Level, then re-written by Ars Technica hours later with no real attribution as to where it found the story. http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/11/comcast-sued-ov.html Please reward good journalism with attribution and traffic, instead of giving it to sites that make a habit of following on other outlets' stories without adding to the story.

To me, commercial radio is a punishment rather than an entertainment option. I don't like to listen to advertisements, as they make my skin crawl. I only listen to community-supported radio, which is free to those who can't afford to donate, and costs as much as people are willing to give to it to those who can.

This is more or less what Radiohead has done with In Rainbows and it appears they have grossed over $2.7 million from that project so far - a win-win situation, with the only loser being the deserving losers in suits at the record label.

Right now, the only people moving this way are Sony. You'll note that Warhawk was available as a download purchase, as well as being sold in stores. Don't expect to ever see this feature for the Wii, though. The lack of a proper hard-drive means that you'll never see new commercial-quality games as downloads.

Yes, but I think Warhawk symbolizes how dumb corporations are in trying to pursue a new revenue model. The Downloaded version of the game (for $40 mind you) does not support local multiplayer, since in Sony's infinite wisdom "they did not pay for the right to play that game", It doesn't matter if they are sub accounts under the master that did buy them, they still can't play. So either you can pay $60 for a version with a bluetooth headset (and local multiplayer, and resellability, or the ability to loan it to friends), or a $40 version without the headset, or a $40 version that is locked to both the PS3 and the user?

The Wii could support USB hard drives, or SDHC cards (which are pin compatible with SD cards and offer sizes over 2 gig) with a firmware update so it is completely possible. Remember, it wasn't too long ago that (nearly all) Gamecube games shipped in 1.5 gig mini DVD's. Originally this was reguarded mearly as "wishful thinking" by the fan base, but with Final Fantasy Christal Chronicles was announced as a WiiWare title , something along these lines seems imminent.

The original phrase is "Don't tase me, bro!". Google it or see a helpful summary here (not my blog).

Don't Tase Me Bro!

Original article (instead of Tomcat error)

In any case, the real judge is how they decide to act next time something like this happens...

--
Educational microcontroller kits for the digital generation.

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/11/yahoo-settles-w.html

I think we are on the border of a time when any OS can be a success given a few things:

1. It has a word process that opens Word documents and the icon is on the desktop.

   Google Docs supposedly opens Word documents, and I imagine one of the icons on the desktop opens Google Docs. I just don't know which without mousing over it.

2. It has a web browser with an icon on the desktop.

   Firefox appears on this other screenshot. A Google search from the desktop or other icons like Wikipedia and Blogger should bring it up.

3. It saves documents locally and on the web with one click.

   Again, this depends on Google Docs, but supposedly it can save locally, and it shouldn't take too many clicks.

4. It plays DVD, flash, mp3s.

   As discussed and linked below, the OS bundled with the PC does play DVDs and mp3s. I saw no specific mention of Flash; but I can't imagine how the YouTube icon would work without it.

5. It lets folks use their ipods.

   It certainly does, with an icon on the desktop!

I think we are on the border of a time when any OS can be a success given a few things:

1. It has a word process that opens Word documents and the icon is on the desktop.

   Google Docs supposedly opens Word documents, and I imagine one of the icons on the desktop opens Google Docs. I just don't know which without mousing over it.

2. It has a web browser with an icon on the desktop.

   Firefox appears on this other screenshot. A Google search from the desktop or other icons like Wikipedia and Blogger should bring it up.

3. It saves documents locally and on the web with one click.

   Again, this depends on Google Docs, but supposedly it can save locally, and it shouldn't take too many clicks.

4. It plays DVD, flash, mp3s.

   As discussed and linked below, the OS bundled with the PC does play DVDs and mp3s. I saw no specific mention of Flash; but I can't imagine how the YouTube icon would work without it.

5. It lets folks use their ipods.

   It certainly does, with an icon on the desktop!

The Canadians pulled the same trick on the British in an naval exercise this year. Check out the picture the HMCS Corner Brook took of the HMS Illustrious.

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/08/gotcha-canuck-s.html

Ironically Canada bought these subs from the British.

I'm thinking a dozen more electric boats once the Northwest Passage will do nicely.

According to the article the original /. story linked to, the number to be sold was around 10,000.

Having done a quick pass through the docs, it doesn't look like there's much info on the VM, other than that they're calling it the "Dalvik VM" (a Google search doesn't turn up much - Dalvik is just some place in Iceland, so it's likely they just chose the name).

I kind of doubt the Jazelle thing, though, since Warren East at ARM was talking smack about Android, and they are the ones that do Jazelle...

Sorry, but...that's not remotely true....

Given that, supposedly, ALL AT&T traffic is routed through NSA sniffers, that might "alarm" non-US governments. Let them argue about net-control all they want, but as long as the US *is* the hub for most world calls, they may have some resistance.

so how is that the USs fault? because russia and other states in the region havent laid sufficient fiber, the US is somehow responsible?

You miss the point. It isn't about who's "responsible" for anything. We recently passed something called the "Protect America Act"- in full view of everyone, ironically with limited public debate- that allows the American government to engage in warrantless surveillance of any Internet traffic routed through the United States if either or (commonly) both endpoints of that traffic lie in a foreign country.

And it turns out, surprise surprise, that most people in the world would rather not have their packets routed through a police state.

You mean donations? http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/10/dem-pushing-spy.html

...neuroscientist Ian Robertson polled 3,000 people and found that the younger ones were less able than their elders to recall standard personal info. When Robertson asked his subjects to tell them a relative's birth date, 87 percent of respondents over age 50 could recite it, while less than 40 percent of those under 30 could do so. And when he asked them their own phone number, fully one-third of the youngsters drew a blank. They had to whip out their handsets to look it up.

Here's another article on the same topic.

well, at least they have their suitable programming language http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/10/att-invents-pro.html

Only 2 pictures, and both depict only closed doors leading to Mark Klein's secret room, # 641A.
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/multimedia/2006/05/70944

No racks filled with boxes labeled "Carnivore," no spooks in button-down shirts dashing about, no nothing. Could just as well be a closet, albeit one that requires heavy-duty ramp access on one door. Massive, cast iron, diesel-powered brooms, I'll bet.

pictures of the secret room at AT&T here.

There are no pictures of a 'secret room' in your link. Your pictures all show the outside of an SBC/ATT facility on Folsom(?) street in the SOMA district of San Francisco, about a 5 minute walk from Wired office. I've walked by this building hundreds of times. I often saw homeless people sleeping on those front steps right under the 'Warning this facility is monitored by cameras' sign.

Where are the pictures of the 'secret room'?

The 'Warning... cameras' sign aren't unusual for an SBC/ATT facility. I think I remember the cameras and signs going up around year 2000.

You can read Klein's April 2006 statement in his own words here and there are pictures of the secret room at AT&T here.

Very scary stuff.

You can read Klein's April 2006 statement in his own words here and there are pictures of the secret room at AT&T here.

Very scary stuff.

..fashion some kind of crude weapon to break the impasse.

http://blog.wired.com/games/2007/11/hack-turns-ps3-.html

With robots already established as killing machines, why is there any doubt they'd try to take over?

Something is fishy about all those numbers of market share and units sold. Lets see;

I know more people with iPhones (4) than use Vista (3) and they only sold 1.2 million iPhones in the U.S so far. 100 million copies of Vista? Maybe, but Idunno. Can't see them anywhere. Of the three people I know with Vista, two hate it and are ready to buy Macs. I know many many more people who used to own PCs who now own Macs (about 30 over two years). Seeing as one in every six laptops sold in the U.S. is a Mac, that market share claim is further in doubt.

Very few corporations have switched to Vista. There weren't any lines at Best Buy to get boxed Vista when it was released. Who's buying it? How many Vista machines have been rolled back to XP? How's XP selling next to Vista? Apparently enough to force Microsoft to allow it to be installed on new computers.

So, in the time Vista has been around, Vista shipments slumped in Q3, Apple has jumped a few percent in market share, Dell is selling Linux computers fairly briskly and Ballmer has been VERY noisy about little Linux blip on the radar. Something doesn't add up here - like someone is lying about it all.

Microsoft better watch their backs - looks like the user satisfaction figures are becoming leading market share indicators.

They need to make sure that you are not wandering around the maintenance areas.

They can then require ID for those areas and have security request IDs to make sure anyone there is authorized. They don't need to know who a person is in public spaces. For instance they don't need to know who someone going to the game room is, I specifically mention this because my sister used to go the airport where we lived to play video games and occasionally she'd take me. If I wait in line at the ticket counter and buy a ticket going somewhere and pay cash they have no need to know who I am, all they need to know is where the ticket is to and if the person can pay for it. If paying with check or credit card then they need to know you are authorized to write a check or use the cc.

Airport employees need to know who you are, or more importantly, who you aren't. TSA has certain people that they do not want flying.

Yea, the TSA needs to make sure Senator Kennedy doesn't fly, NOT! There is no need for any TSA. Nor is there a need for the government to know what a law abiding person goes. Simply government shouldn't be controlling who gets on a plane.

I trust their judgment on this one, or at least I'm willing to give them the benefit of doubt and go toward the side of caution, especially when I'm one of the other passengers on the plane!

You trust someone who won't let Kennedy or Cat Stevens fly? Boy are they dangerous terrorists. NOT!!! Neither is John Gilmore. If the US really wants to do something about terrorism then it needs to stop creating and supporting terrorists If bin Laden, al Quada, and the Taliban are terrorists then why did the Reagan and Bush Sr admins support them?

Flying is not a right.

Neither is feeling secure. And like Benjamin Franklin said anyone willing to give up a little liberty for security neither will neither get nor deserve either. If you want to live somewhere where you'll feel secure I'm sure Putin's Russia, Iran, or Cuba would love to have you. Just don't turn my country into one of these. I was born in the Land Of The Free but if you don't like it move, that is if you live in the US.

I know you think that all this security at airports is inconvenient for you and all, but tough shit. The rest of us passengers don't mind getting there an extra thirty minutes early as long as we think that we are a bit safer in the air. Sorry bub, but majority rules in this case. Your right to not be offended and roam the airport peace-lovingly-naked and anonymous does not outweigh the right to life that everyone else on the plane and working in tall buildings enjoy.

Yeap, to some like you, tyranny of the masses is more important than liberty. Please form your own perfect government somewhere else, say NAZI Germany.

Most people? How many people are "most people?" The general populace in China and India are in worse shape now than they were before the industrial revolution in many ways. Bill Gates, ironically, didn't start to make inroads with his charities until leaving Microsoft.

When you talk about companies, you're right about one thing: "whats more important is reputation." Unfortunately, companies can buy reputations, and not by good works.

Have you boycotted Pepsi yet? They pressured the US into invading a Chilean democracy and replacing it with a US puppet dictatorship.

How about Coke? Fertile farmland has been razed and poisoned to bottle Dasani.

Could it be that Sony is still selling products to you? If the first rootkit didn't convince you, I guess the second wouldn't either.

Of course you've avoided my former employer, General Electric, inheritors of the Love Canal who refused to acknowledge their responsibility for as long as they could possibly get away with it.

Oh yes, and of course accidents happen when you cut corners. We could point to Union Carbide, Dow Corning, and of course, Exxon. Or, you could go for the jugular and mention Monsanto, possibly the most evil corporation on the planet. (and that comes with some pretty prestigious neighbors!)

The point isn't these companies, and it's not even anti-globalisation. Fundamentally, I'm anti-people and anti-humanity. We have never, as a species (NOT considering individual exceptions here, because there are always those), shown that we can do anything good unless it's for short-term, personal gain. The only thing that capitalism and the free market economy bring to the table is power and efficiency. They make it easier for psychopaths to be rich, powerful, and immoral.

Fundamentally, humanity sucks. Capitalism allows the worst of it to seize control. That's about all we've accomplished in the five thousand-plus years since we started herding cows.

See also this article from Wired. Wired also ran this article, which teaches you how to try this for yourself.

See also this article from Wired. Wired also ran this article, which teaches you how to try this for yourself.

I'm in a quandry. I see policemen beating lawyers on the streets in Pakistan. How should I be feeling?

That's a tough call. You should already be depressed, worried, upset, mad, and overall just frickin' pissed off at the terrible rape in the Congo (or even the U.S.), the starvation in Somalia (or North Korea, mothers dying around the world from a condition that can be treated simply and cheaply, incredible pollution in China and everywhere else, intense economic inequality in Latin America and how it's driving the obesity epidemic elsewhere in the world, the war in Iraq that will never end, and the spread of MRSA thanks to decades of using antibiotics too liberally.

This stuff in Pakistan is just more of the same. Please feel sad, perplexed, and angry.

The real question (which you missed) is this: what can you DO about it? Other than make snarky comments on Slashdot, of course.

...to major.

let's take a quick stroll down memoryhole lane shall we?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/06/23/sentient_worlds/

http://www.simulexinc.com/

just who do you think has all that info in a tight little package? a simulation with that many nodes running a very sophisticated 'world environment'.

right now on the front page of Drudge Report' 11/05/2007 2050 pst
http://tinyurl.com/2ghvhm 'Poll finds nearly 80 percent of U.S. adults go online'

let's add a few more bits to the mix (no pun intended ;) )

ATT invents surveillance programming language
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/10/att-invents-pro.html

Qwest exec not allowed to reveal classified documents in court re:civilian intercepts w/o warrant
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/tech/article/0,2777,DRMN_23910_5719566,00.html

an interesting summary statement.
http://cryptogon.com/?p=877

please pass the tinfoil, and yes, my html skills are few. however, like the slashdotter far above said 'we all have our skill sets'.

Privacy Policy or no privacy policy... if you have been surfing US sites in the past few years, the dept of Home Land Security tracked all (and I mean ALL) your information.

References:
1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-aQ_o_yi-s
2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWW09xzJfS0
3) http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm
4) http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2006/06/the_newbies_gui.html?entry_id=1510938

A higher punishment is required for deterrent.

While it is reasonable to assume that the very existence of the criminal justice system has some deterrent value, there is little evidence to support the view that increasing the level of sentences will deter the individual offender or would-be offenders in general. [...] One of the difficulties with deterrent sentencing is that there are numerous potential influences on offending behaviour, and these will vary between individuals. Even if the potential for conviction and sentencing acts as a general deterrent, this does not necessarily mean that an increased level of sentence will be a greater deterrent.

Just look at this article at wired where they claim that using lasers is possible to destroy virus using their own resonant frequency. Btw asking the medical industry to innovate is like asking Microsoft to innovate... if they really do what will they sell next ? Google or some other really caring company has to step in to solve this problem for humanity. Big companies have the chance to change everything for the best and yet all they can think of is the profit... No wonder the other species in the universe want to stay anonymous.

There actually was an article like this in Wired magazine last year: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/chemistry.html that talks about some of the terrorism issues. Yeah, I think it's true that chemistry sets have become less dangerous, but there are also a lot of them available now for younger kids than were available years ago. Here's a kit designed for ages 4 and up http://www.discoverthis.com/first-chemistry-kit.html Couldn't find that 20 years ago.

you're in luck - http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2003/04/58442

a nice link to Wired blog entries (from the darpa site) http://blog.wired.com/defense/urban_challenge/index.html

Not true on the MickeyD's domain.

That was a reporter for Wired magazine Joshua Quittner, who, back in the early days of the net (1994), noticed that McDonalds had not registered McDonalds.com. So he himself registered it, contacted the company, and documented the whole thing, prior to giving the domain to McDonalds.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/2.10/mcdonalds.html

In the article Safety Last for Robo-Cars, Jefferson team member Janie Perrone said, "...I think he jinxed us." Well, with such medieval thinking, the Jefferson team should count their lucky stars that they weren't all burned as witches.

If Apple even has 3 billion in cash I would be surprised. If they have 30 in cash someone belongs in prison for breach as fiduciary.