Slashdot Mirror

I just updated my mirror page with a link to this slashdot article. I thought I'd post the others on the list here for everyone's edification (and because the server of my personal web page probably wouldn't take it if you went there for it!)

• Wired: Mattel Stays on the Offensive (27 Mar 2000 2:45PM PT)
  "Upping the stakes in a battle over a utility that reveals Cyberpatrol's list of off-limits websites, Mattel threatened mirror sites with contempt charges during a court hearing Monday afternoon."
• ZDNet: Hackers settle Cyber Patrol suit (27 Mar 2000 2:11PM PT)
  "ACLU attorney 'surprised' as programmers surrender rights to their hack of Cyber Patrol filter and agree to permanent injunction."
• ZDNet: ACLU slams Cyber Patrol tactics (27 Mar 2000 4:03AM PT)
  "The American Civil Liberties Union criticized Internet filtering software maker Microsystems Software Inc. and its parent company Mattel Inc. on Friday, accusing them of attempting to limit free speech on the Internet."
• Wired: Mattel's Filter Fiasco to Court (27 Mar 2000 3:00AM PT)
  "A federal judge in Boston will hear arguments on Monday over whether a program that reveals Cyberpatrol's secret blacklist should be banned from the Internet."
• ZDNet: You've got a subpoena! (24 Mar 2000)
  "Call it legal spam. Lawyers in the Cyber Patrol legal battle have created an e-precedent -- sending subpoenas by e-mail."
• CNN: Cyber Patrol decoding brawl gets ugly and international (21 Mar 2000)
  "A legal dispute between a U.S. toymaker that produces a popular Internet pornography filter and two programmers that decoded the software could heat up into a messy international brawl."
• Slashdot: Mattel/Cyber Patrol Censors Critics Again (20 Mar 2000)
  "Mattel is updating the Cyber Patrol blacklists for all of their customers to include the homepages of the authors and all of the mirrors, blocked under every blocking category the product has."
• USA Today: Judge helps Mattel zap effort to undermine filter (20 Mar 2000)
  What a misleading headline. Yet another example of McPaper earning its abysmal reputation.
• Wired: CyberPatrol Hackers Lose Round (17 Mar 2000)
  "A federal judge in Boston has tried to ban the distribution of a computer program that reveals CyberPatrol's secret list of sex sites."
• Slashdot: Mattel dislikes being embarrassed (16 Mar 2000)
  "In addition to demanding the removal of the decryption utility, Mattel is also seeking the logfiles of the Swedish ISP that hosts the decryption utility, to identify everyone who has downloaded it to date. Today's news was filled with Mattel's PR lies about their suit."
• Wired: Mattel Sues Over Blocking Hack (16 Mar 2000)
  "Toy-maker Mattel has sued two programmers who revealed how to circumvent its CyberPatrol blocking software."

Several news outlets uncritically ran Ted Bridis's AP newswire story characterizing the decryption program as a tool to let children view pornography:

"A company that makes popular software to block children from Internet pornography is suing two computer experts for distributing a method for kids to deduce their parents' password and access those forbidden Web sites."

• SJ Mercury News: Software Co. Sues Hackers (15 Mar 2000)
  
• cnet: Hackers crack online porn filters (16 Mar 2000)
  cnet's version adds this interesting paragraph:

  "Early today, activists copied the utility and details of the effort and began distributing them across the Internet on nearly two dozen Web sites that duplicated Jansson and Skala's original work. Those efforts apparently were coordinated on technology Web site Slashdot.org, where the lawsuit was roundly condemned."

• CNN: Software company files lawsuit against hackers (16 Mar 2000)
  CNN's version also adds the cnet paragraph and some additional reportage, but still mischaracterizes the program. However, their later coverage was more evenhanded.

I just updated my mirror page with a link to this slashdot article. I thought I'd post the others on the list here for everyone's edification (and because the server of my personal web page probably wouldn't take it if you went there for it!)

• Wired: Mattel Stays on the Offensive (27 Mar 2000 2:45PM PT)
  "Upping the stakes in a battle over a utility that reveals Cyberpatrol's list of off-limits websites, Mattel threatened mirror sites with contempt charges during a court hearing Monday afternoon."
• ZDNet: Hackers settle Cyber Patrol suit (27 Mar 2000 2:11PM PT)
  "ACLU attorney 'surprised' as programmers surrender rights to their hack of Cyber Patrol filter and agree to permanent injunction."
• ZDNet: ACLU slams Cyber Patrol tactics (27 Mar 2000 4:03AM PT)
  "The American Civil Liberties Union criticized Internet filtering software maker Microsystems Software Inc. and its parent company Mattel Inc. on Friday, accusing them of attempting to limit free speech on the Internet."
• Wired: Mattel's Filter Fiasco to Court (27 Mar 2000 3:00AM PT)
  "A federal judge in Boston will hear arguments on Monday over whether a program that reveals Cyberpatrol's secret blacklist should be banned from the Internet."
• ZDNet: You've got a subpoena! (24 Mar 2000)
  "Call it legal spam. Lawyers in the Cyber Patrol legal battle have created an e-precedent -- sending subpoenas by e-mail."
• CNN: Cyber Patrol decoding brawl gets ugly and international (21 Mar 2000)
  "A legal dispute between a U.S. toymaker that produces a popular Internet pornography filter and two programmers that decoded the software could heat up into a messy international brawl."
• Slashdot: Mattel/Cyber Patrol Censors Critics Again (20 Mar 2000)
  "Mattel is updating the Cyber Patrol blacklists for all of their customers to include the homepages of the authors and all of the mirrors, blocked under every blocking category the product has."
• USA Today: Judge helps Mattel zap effort to undermine filter (20 Mar 2000)
  What a misleading headline. Yet another example of McPaper earning its abysmal reputation.
• Wired: CyberPatrol Hackers Lose Round (17 Mar 2000)
  "A federal judge in Boston has tried to ban the distribution of a computer program that reveals CyberPatrol's secret list of sex sites."
• Slashdot: Mattel dislikes being embarrassed (16 Mar 2000)
  "In addition to demanding the removal of the decryption utility, Mattel is also seeking the logfiles of the Swedish ISP that hosts the decryption utility, to identify everyone who has downloaded it to date. Today's news was filled with Mattel's PR lies about their suit."
• Wired: Mattel Sues Over Blocking Hack (16 Mar 2000)
  "Toy-maker Mattel has sued two programmers who revealed how to circumvent its CyberPatrol blocking software."

Several news outlets uncritically ran Ted Bridis's AP newswire story characterizing the decryption program as a tool to let children view pornography:

"A company that makes popular software to block children from Internet pornography is suing two computer experts for distributing a method for kids to deduce their parents' password and access those forbidden Web sites."

• SJ Mercury News: Software Co. Sues Hackers (15 Mar 2000)
  
• cnet: Hackers crack online porn filters (16 Mar 2000)
  cnet's version adds this interesting paragraph:

  "Early today, activists copied the utility and details of the effort and began distributing them across the Internet on nearly two dozen Web sites that duplicated Jansson and Skala's original work. Those efforts apparently were coordinated on technology Web site Slashdot.org, where the lawsuit was roundly condemned."

• CNN: Software company files lawsuit against hackers (16 Mar 2000)
  CNN's version also adds the cnet paragraph and some additional reportage, but still mischaracterizes the program. However, their later coverage was more evenhanded.

I just updated my mirror page with a link to this slashdot article. I thought I'd post the others on the list here for everyone's edification (and because the server of my personal web page probably wouldn't take it if you went there for it!)

• Wired: Mattel Stays on the Offensive (27 Mar 2000 2:45PM PT)
  "Upping the stakes in a battle over a utility that reveals Cyberpatrol's list of off-limits websites, Mattel threatened mirror sites with contempt charges during a court hearing Monday afternoon."
• ZDNet: Hackers settle Cyber Patrol suit (27 Mar 2000 2:11PM PT)
  "ACLU attorney 'surprised' as programmers surrender rights to their hack of Cyber Patrol filter and agree to permanent injunction."
• ZDNet: ACLU slams Cyber Patrol tactics (27 Mar 2000 4:03AM PT)
  "The American Civil Liberties Union criticized Internet filtering software maker Microsystems Software Inc. and its parent company Mattel Inc. on Friday, accusing them of attempting to limit free speech on the Internet."
• Wired: Mattel's Filter Fiasco to Court (27 Mar 2000 3:00AM PT)
  "A federal judge in Boston will hear arguments on Monday over whether a program that reveals Cyberpatrol's secret blacklist should be banned from the Internet."
• ZDNet: You've got a subpoena! (24 Mar 2000)
  "Call it legal spam. Lawyers in the Cyber Patrol legal battle have created an e-precedent -- sending subpoenas by e-mail."
• CNN: Cyber Patrol decoding brawl gets ugly and international (21 Mar 2000)
  "A legal dispute between a U.S. toymaker that produces a popular Internet pornography filter and two programmers that decoded the software could heat up into a messy international brawl."
• Slashdot: Mattel/Cyber Patrol Censors Critics Again (20 Mar 2000)
  "Mattel is updating the Cyber Patrol blacklists for all of their customers to include the homepages of the authors and all of the mirrors, blocked under every blocking category the product has."
• USA Today: Judge helps Mattel zap effort to undermine filter (20 Mar 2000)
  What a misleading headline. Yet another example of McPaper earning its abysmal reputation.
• Wired: CyberPatrol Hackers Lose Round (17 Mar 2000)
  "A federal judge in Boston has tried to ban the distribution of a computer program that reveals CyberPatrol's secret list of sex sites."
• Slashdot: Mattel dislikes being embarrassed (16 Mar 2000)
  "In addition to demanding the removal of the decryption utility, Mattel is also seeking the logfiles of the Swedish ISP that hosts the decryption utility, to identify everyone who has downloaded it to date. Today's news was filled with Mattel's PR lies about their suit."
• Wired: Mattel Sues Over Blocking Hack (16 Mar 2000)
  "Toy-maker Mattel has sued two programmers who revealed how to circumvent its CyberPatrol blocking software."

Several news outlets uncritically ran Ted Bridis's AP newswire story characterizing the decryption program as a tool to let children view pornography:

"A company that makes popular software to block children from Internet pornography is suing two computer experts for distributing a method for kids to deduce their parents' password and access those forbidden Web sites."

• SJ Mercury News: Software Co. Sues Hackers (15 Mar 2000)
  
• cnet: Hackers crack online porn filters (16 Mar 2000)
  cnet's version adds this interesting paragraph:

  "Early today, activists copied the utility and details of the effort and began distributing them across the Internet on nearly two dozen Web sites that duplicated Jansson and Skala's original work. Those efforts apparently were coordinated on technology Web site Slashdot.org, where the lawsuit was roundly condemned."

• CNN: Software company files lawsuit against hackers (16 Mar 2000)
  CNN's version also adds the cnet paragraph and some additional reportage, but still mischaracterizes the program. However, their later coverage was more evenhanded.

I just updated my mirror page with a link to this slashdot article. I thought I'd post the others on the list here for everyone's edification (and because the server of my personal web page probably wouldn't take it if you went there for it!)

• Wired: Mattel Stays on the Offensive (27 Mar 2000 2:45PM PT)
  "Upping the stakes in a battle over a utility that reveals Cyberpatrol's list of off-limits websites, Mattel threatened mirror sites with contempt charges during a court hearing Monday afternoon."
• ZDNet: Hackers settle Cyber Patrol suit (27 Mar 2000 2:11PM PT)
  "ACLU attorney 'surprised' as programmers surrender rights to their hack of Cyber Patrol filter and agree to permanent injunction."
• ZDNet: ACLU slams Cyber Patrol tactics (27 Mar 2000 4:03AM PT)
  "The American Civil Liberties Union criticized Internet filtering software maker Microsystems Software Inc. and its parent company Mattel Inc. on Friday, accusing them of attempting to limit free speech on the Internet."
• Wired: Mattel's Filter Fiasco to Court (27 Mar 2000 3:00AM PT)
  "A federal judge in Boston will hear arguments on Monday over whether a program that reveals Cyberpatrol's secret blacklist should be banned from the Internet."
• ZDNet: You've got a subpoena! (24 Mar 2000)
  "Call it legal spam. Lawyers in the Cyber Patrol legal battle have created an e-precedent -- sending subpoenas by e-mail."
• CNN: Cyber Patrol decoding brawl gets ugly and international (21 Mar 2000)
  "A legal dispute between a U.S. toymaker that produces a popular Internet pornography filter and two programmers that decoded the software could heat up into a messy international brawl."
• Slashdot: Mattel/Cyber Patrol Censors Critics Again (20 Mar 2000)
  "Mattel is updating the Cyber Patrol blacklists for all of their customers to include the homepages of the authors and all of the mirrors, blocked under every blocking category the product has."
• USA Today: Judge helps Mattel zap effort to undermine filter (20 Mar 2000)
  What a misleading headline. Yet another example of McPaper earning its abysmal reputation.
• Wired: CyberPatrol Hackers Lose Round (17 Mar 2000)
  "A federal judge in Boston has tried to ban the distribution of a computer program that reveals CyberPatrol's secret list of sex sites."
• Slashdot: Mattel dislikes being embarrassed (16 Mar 2000)
  "In addition to demanding the removal of the decryption utility, Mattel is also seeking the logfiles of the Swedish ISP that hosts the decryption utility, to identify everyone who has downloaded it to date. Today's news was filled with Mattel's PR lies about their suit."
• Wired: Mattel Sues Over Blocking Hack (16 Mar 2000)
  "Toy-maker Mattel has sued two programmers who revealed how to circumvent its CyberPatrol blocking software."

Several news outlets uncritically ran Ted Bridis's AP newswire story characterizing the decryption program as a tool to let children view pornography:

"A company that makes popular software to block children from Internet pornography is suing two computer experts for distributing a method for kids to deduce their parents' password and access those forbidden Web sites."

• SJ Mercury News: Software Co. Sues Hackers (15 Mar 2000)
  
• cnet: Hackers crack online porn filters (16 Mar 2000)
  cnet's version adds this interesting paragraph:

  "Early today, activists copied the utility and details of the effort and began distributing them across the Internet on nearly two dozen Web sites that duplicated Jansson and Skala's original work. Those efforts apparently were coordinated on technology Web site Slashdot.org, where the lawsuit was roundly condemned."

• CNN: Software company files lawsuit against hackers (16 Mar 2000)
  CNN's version also adds the cnet paragraph and some additional reportage, but still mischaracterizes the program. However, their later coverage was more evenhanded.

They may have been bought, but it wasn't the money.

Taken from the Wired News article:

"Co-author Matthew Skala of Canada signed a similar agreement giving up his rights for one dollar."

I don't really consider one dollar to be much of a payoff, do you?

This is pretty sad. Snipped from a Wired article:

The seven-page "assignment agreement" signed by cphack co-author Eddy Jansson of Sweden gives Mattel "all rights" to the program's source code and binaries and an explanatory essay he wrote. Co-author Matthew Skala of Canada signed a similar agreement giving up his rights for one dollar.

Yep, that's right. One dollar. I wonder if it was American or Canadian? If it was Canadian, Mattel cheated him out of a couple cents...

I just wonder, if this code had been released under an open source or free software licence, could Mattel have been unable to pressure them to sell out like this?

Declan's article at Wired can be found here.

Declan's article at Wired can be found here.

[IMHO]RMS needs to lighten his stance against Amazon. I think Jeff Bezos's reply to Tim O'Reilly's open letter did a good job of explaning why Amazon had to get the patents it did.

I have to disagree here. Bezos ' letter does condede that patents can indeed be harmful to innovation, but offers no reason for why his patents should stand, other than to say "I don't believe it would be right for us to [relinquish those patents]... even though the vast majority of our competitive advantage will continue to come not from patents, but from raising the bar on things like service, price, and selection." Note that Bezos could have argued that 1-Click (or any of the other patents which Amazon holds) were sufficiently innovative and distinctive to merit their own patents: he did not.

Stallman's criticism is that Bezos cannot (and, as nearly as I can tell, did not) argue that his patent was acquired for purely defensive reasons. A defensive patent is never used to launch a lawsuit. Protecting your business investment is one thing: suing someone is quite another.

Anyway, if the same precedent used in Sean's case is used with the Teacher Review case, it would seem to me that the Teacher Review would have the stronger case.

of a professor (Laurence Godfrey) suing the UK 's largest ISP (Demon) over something posted on USENET. In this case the ISP caved.

Read the story on Wired.

of a professor (Laurence Godfrey) suing the UK 's largest ISP (Demon) over something posted on USENET. In this case the ISP caved.

Read the story on Wired.

But this omits the other forecast that by 2050 we'll be able to make an electronic recording of human brains. So by 2100 we'll be in machines also, so one way or another there will be machines with intelligence. And Trolls will be able to run at electronic speed...

-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?

Anyone remember how this case got started?

This all came about over a copyright fight because model Estelle Hallyday did not like that nude photos of her had been scanned from a magazine and posted to free website AlternB.

One VERY important note from the original case is that the plaintiffs did not even TRY to identify the poster of the "offending" material. They specifically targeted the ISP. In fact, it seems that it would have been quite trivial to identify the owner of the pages.

Article from March, 1999 in Wired News

The implications of this decision are FAR worse than a cursory examination would reveal.

Read the quotes of Irwin Schartz of Schwarz and Nystrom, who is representing Mattel in the CyberPatrol censorship list decryption case:

http://www.wired.com/news/linu x/0,1411,35038,00.html

He brags about the censoring effect that the injunction will have on others mirroring the cphack utility (which in reality has had little effect), and mocks the defendants for not having opposing counsel show up, when the hearing, set on a friday morning, was arranged late on the previous thursday. Remember, that these two guys are not Americans, they live in Sweden and Canada.

However, the stock market didn't see it that way, and their stock had fallen way way down. This is an IPO--a crucial timeframe for them. It's make or break time, and they have to do everything they can to guarantee success and look good to the stockholders and the potential investors (ie, People Who Would Be Prone To Throw Money At Them). After the IPO is over, they'll probably relax a bit. For all we know, it might be some easily-bypassable hack that they just throw in for the sake of being able to say they could.

I guess this is a kinda late post, and many people who might have benefited from this, will unfortunately not. BUT! if u buy the new Wired or visit site and read the article after Bill Joy's, The Tale of Two Botanies. It talks about plagues that could easily end our society, either done as a terrorist act to wipe out a section of the world, or as a way to destroy civilization. And with the new creation of "Golden Rice" (read the article if u dont know what it is) it will be eaven easier to alter one's genetics through simple foods. Foods such as rice, which i believe are eaten by almost if not more than 50% of the world population daily. hmmmm....The end is near? heh

Wired Article:"DVD Player at Apex of Controversy"

that can defeat their attempts to destroy fair use, they summon their lawyers and start making threats.

The real goal is to make fair use de facto illegal, so that whenever anyone does something that could cut into their profits they'll have legal precedent backing them when they go after him/her.

• Toy Story

• Gone with the Wind

Wired Article: Hart of the Gutenberg Galaxy

In a somewhat off-topic note, Wired News ran a story yesterday about MS's problems introducing Win2K in Germany. It seems that Win2K comes bundled with an defragmentation utility called DisKeeper; now, this utility was written by a company called Executive Software and the German government has a problem with this because Executive's CEO is a member of the Church of Scientology. Under German Law, state and federal governments can't do business with a member of the Church of Scientology (maybe someone knows exactly why, I don't). So there were rumors over the weekend that MS was disclosing (parts of) the Win2K code for the German Govt to examine. Just thought this might be interesting.

However, others might have similar thoughts and my be working towards building the schools of tomorrow!

Wired Iridium story

"After millennia of people looking up at the same night sky, we're the first to put up a new constellation since God. It's never going to be the same again."

Unfortunately, if you live in the U.S., you'll most likely miss the entire show. They will bring the satellites down over the ocean, most likely the Pacific if they can. The last thing they want to do is risk causing damage to something. As unlikely as the possibility of damaging something may be, there are 66 of those things, and 66 chances to screw up.

Unfortunately, I don't remember where I saw the article, prolly Cnet News.com or Wired, but an article concerning the pending shutdown of Iridium stated that the satellites would be brought down over the ocean.

On Saturday, Wired News featured an interview with Bruce Sterling in mp3 format. In it he talks about Dead Media and other subjects.

Check out the kinda sucky wired story

Now that it's been censored by AOL because it might be a threat to Warner and EMI...all you people who got a copy do your duty. Since it's gnu and all, maybe somebody will decide to maintain it....

kgb

Here is the link .

Wired had an article on this some time ago which is quite a nice read, and they where kind of enough to reprint the whole of the short story which is found here.

Wired had an article on this some time ago which is quite a nice read, and they where kind of enough to reprint the whole of the short story which is found here.

http://www.forbes.com/columnists/dvorak/

And here's a link to a Wired story on the same subject.

http://www.wired.com/news/n ews/culture/story/12899.html

This doesn't really solve much. A big part of the controversy is the research that is privately funded. Referencing this Wired Article (noted in this earlier /. article), "Celera Genomics president and CEO Craig Venter said Tuesday that his company is willing to continue discussing a collaboration with its longstanding competitor, the international Human Genome Project."

Sure this helps with some of the information it doesn't really address the underlying problem of private companies patenting gene sequences.

Interestingly enough, right now Wired has an article about this topic running right now called "Open Source Opens Education", which mentions the Linux In Schools Project. The article gives several examples of high schools and middle schools that have made the move to Linux, and outlines several reasons for doing so (cost, stability, etc). There are also some good pointers to other sites.

Interestingly enough, right now Wired has an article about this topic running right now called "Open Source Opens Education", which mentions the Linux In Schools Project. The article gives several examples of high schools and middle schools that have made the move to Linux, and outlines several reasons for doing so (cost, stability, etc). There are also some good pointers to other sites.

Interestingly enough, right now Wired has an article about this topic running right now called "Open Source Opens Education", which mentions the Linux In Schools Project. The article gives several examples of high schools and middle schools that have made the move to Linux, and outlines several reasons for doing so (cost, stability, etc). There are also some good pointers to other sites.

I think Scott McNealy said it best: "You have zero privacy anyway. Get over it."

Rather than privacy laws/regulations being passed for the internet, I'd much rather see actions that would protect people from discrimination no matter what their online viewing habits are.

This /. BBS has a prettier look but is very similar to forums back then (and PLATO had graphics then, even if only in orange-on-black), although now there's a Web to point links at. IRC is old hat also, there were talk programs on hundred-user systems with dozens of participants -- using a network instead of a central computer is only an implementation detail.

IF Hydrogen becomes a more viable alternative fuel a vehicle that emits only H2O from its exhaust pipe could conceivably be better for the environment than EVs BUT, WIREDs one year old article is enough for me to be interested in a commuter/cruiser powered by optima batteries and a DC motor or two. Suck AMPS! Hey it's the title of the article.

sig? never touch 'em.

• http://www.georgebush.com/
  
• http://www.georgewbush.com/
  
• http://www.bushsucks.com/
  
• http://www.bush2000.com
  
• Click for more
  

_________________

• http://www.georgebush.com/
  
• http://www.georgewbush.com/
  
• http://www.bushsucks.com/
  
• http://www.bush2000.com
  
• Click for more
  

_________________

Not only is power generation more efficient en masse, but electric cars can also employ regenerative braking, a system in which the vehicle is slowed by the magnetic drag of the vehicle's motors, thus converting its kinetic energy, no longer wanted, into potential energy in its batteries, instead. Of course the system isn't 100% efficient (duh), but it's unspeakably better than simply throwing all that energy away by converting it into heat with break pads.

It also serves worth noting that hybrid electric vehicles can be made extremely efficient as well, even when the "hybrid" involves a traditional internal combustion engine: An engine running at a constant speed and load (or a very tight range thereof) can be fine-tuned to maximum efficiency in that target mode of operation. One of the things that makes current automotive internal combustion engines so inefficient is the wide range of conditions which they must serve.

In addition, finely-tuned engines serving an electric "drivetrain" can be made significantly smaller, simpler, and lighter-weight than their traditional counterparts, for the aforementioned reason. All in all, this makes for some dramatic increases in efficiency (I'd give figures, but I don't have my automotive engineering notes handy at the moment) without sacrificing range of travel and without completely alienating the petroleum industry.

Factor in recent advances in energy storage technology and regenerative braking, and you could have a ridiculously fuel-efficient vehicle that still ran (secondarily, primarily, or completely) on petroleum.

There was an interesting article in the March 1999 issue of Wired regarding high-performance (ie racing) electric vehicles. All of these are technologies which exist now. The only real barrier is retrofitting existing manufacturing facilities to work with a (completely) new system and getting over that intital cost hump. Until the major automakers decide that they really want to mass produce such vehicles, their costs will most likely remain prohibitive. But the automakers don't want to produce them because they cost too much now. And then there's the petroleum lobby.

There are certainly plenty of barriers, but it's feasible stuff, and worth developing, IMHO.

I'm inspired enough to someday build an electric vehicle for myself for city use.

I heard Bob Cringely suggesting that Iridium would be a great buy, because the big bucks, those necessary to put the sattelites in orbit, were already spent, and that the money that you could get from the service would be interesting :)

But sometimes he misses, so, who knows?

A link from an old Slashdot story is a story in Wired. Basically, Iridium use(s|d) a frequency that "bled" into one frequently used by radio-astronomers to observe the cosmos.
--

You can read the DOJ report for yourself here. CNN is somewhat correct - it does say that "existing substantive federal laws appear to be generally adequate." However, it emphasizes the dangers to security posed by anonymity, and it does not shut the door on new laws.

We've got an archive of other related articles on our Law Enforcement Online page.

A. Keiper

Okay, they say they don't need new laws to prosecute/catch cybercriminals, yet, as this article stated (I think nthis was also on /. the other day), they want to possibly eliminate privacy online? Isn's this a little weird/stupid or am I the only one?

I've received several hundred e-mail messages on the subject of our 1-Click ordering patent. Ninety-nine percent of them were polite and helpful. To the other one percent -- thanks for the passion and color! ...
I also read the first four hundred or so responses to Tim's summary of our conversation -- these too were helpful.
First of all thanks to all the people who either emailed Amazon or posted on Tim's website our voice was heard. Who says mass protests don't work (as long as they are constructive).

Unlike with trademark law, where you must continuously enforce your trademark or risk losing it, patent law allows you to enforce a patent on a case-by-case basis, only when there are important business reasons for doing so.
I stated before in earlier posts here and here the competition between Barnes & Noble and Amazon has lead both companies to do unsavory things (B&N moreso) but this was the first time a fight between both companies threatened an entire industry (actually B&N may have become a book industry monopoly if not for Amazon so maybe that isn't completely true) . I strongly beleive that when Jeff Bezos was acquiring this patent he saw it merely as a way to get back at B&N for all the things they had done (such as copying every Amazon innovation as quickly as possible).

But I do think we can help. As a company with some high-profile software patents, we're in a credible position to call for meaningful (perhaps even radical) patent reform. In fact, we may be uniquely positioned to do this.
This is where he starts sounding like one of us. I wholeheartedly agree with this observation and cannot thank Tim 'O reilly and all those who sent emails and posted on Tim's page enough for clearly elucidating why the patent was so wrong and convincing Jeff Bezos' of this.

Much (much, much, much) remains to be worked out, but here's an outline of what I have in mind: 1. That the patent laws should recognize that business method and software patents are fundamentally different than other kinds of patents.
Even though this seems like a no-brainer it's going to be difficult to push this through. Lots of companies exist solely because of business model patents and would fight tooth and nail (i.e. lobby and throw money around) to make sure this doesn't come to pass. I'm sure the priceline CEO will be pretty nervous and pissed off after reading this.

2. That business method and software patents should have a much shorter lifespan than the current 17 years -- I would propose 3 to 5 years.
Yep, the priceline.com CEO would be really agitated reading this.

This isn't like drug companies, which need long patent windows because of clinical testing, or like complicated physical processes, where you might have to tool up and build factories.
Comments like this are why I believe every CEO and industry leader should read slashdot, if they did the world (at least the software industry) would trult be a better place. I'm glad Jeff Bezos finally realized what we have been saying on Slashdot about how ridiculous the current length of software patents is...imagine there are still valid patents on Atari & Intellivision games and innovations.

3. That when the law changes, this new lifespan should take effect retroactively so that we don't have to wait 17 years for the current patents to enter the public domain.
I hadn't even thought of this but it's a great idea. No more priceline.com monopoly, no more Dell patents on building to order lasting forever, and no more patents on electronic programming guides (a square grid with the names of programs in it) lasting longer than the job expectancy of the board of directors and CEO of the company.

4. That for business method and software patents there be a short (maybe 1 month?) public comment period before the patent number is issued.
Waaay to short, it'd never fly. this is where Jeff starts sounding like an AC on slashdot and proposing extreme measures. :-) A month is no time at all in business terms for a bigger company to steal your idea and take it to the market while you're still involved in the patent process. This is a great idea for software patents though.

This To this end, I've already contacted the offices of several Members of Congress from the committees with primary responsibility for patents to ask if they would be willing to meet with me on this issue
...
I've also invited Tim O'Reilly to attend any such meetings with me. Thanks Tim you've done us a great service. Nothing like getting Time's man of the year on our side to get congress to sit up and notice that something is wrong with the USPTO.

fav Yunus quote:

Poverty is not created by the poor people. Poverty is created by the institutions that we have built around us. We have to go back to the drawing board, to redesign those institutions, so that they do not discriminate the poor, because the present ones do.

http://www.grameen.com/mcredit/weapon.ht ml

The war against poverty, in the long run, may prove to be the most profitable business on the 'net and planet.. it will obviously expand the marketplace for trading and sharing ideas..

re: infrastructure.. um.. in China, even with low annual incomes, cel phone usage ka-booms. Users pay by listening to ads. Sound familiar? Extrapolate this, along with Gilder's, Moore's, and Metcalfe's Laws.. Billions will have full access in a decade, almost for free. Since the 'net is a global medium and evolving jurisdiction, it will transform all goverments faster than we think.

Free software is sharing an increasing wealth of knowledge (power) without discrimation against the poor.. this is a radical shift away from centralized control and domination by force and money-as-we-know-it.. and watch out for freenet:
http://freenet.sourceforge.net
http://wired.com/news/print/0,1294,34768,00.html">

also, re infrastructure, check out:
http://www.media.mit.edu/unwired/more/ and
http://www.greenstar.org