Slashdot Mirror

Wired has a long, excellent feature article on Electronic Ink.

The Article is dated 5/97, so it's a few years old, but if you're looking for a longer discussion, and more information on the technology, it's a good place to start.

I've been waiting for digital ink since May, 1997. Looks like only a few more years now!

Wired has a long, excellent feature article on Electronic Ink.

The Article is dated 5/97, so it's a few years old, but if you're looking for a longer discussion, and more information on the technology, it's a good place to start.

I've been waiting for digital ink since May, 1997. Looks like only a few more years now!

In his writeup in Risks 20.36 Richard Smith (one of the folks that reported the tracking policy) points out that keeping too much information poses a risk to the Website or ISP collecting the information as well as to the users who are being monitored. To summarize his argument, the more information these sites collect, the more likely they are to get dragged into a legal dispute that doesn't really involve them directly. So, an argument can be made that respecting users' privacy is beneficial for users and ISPs alike.

-r

See this wired article by Leonard, from a few years back.

Don't know why nobody found this one on Wired News:

Thomson is investing in MP3. Thomson owns several of the patents on MP3 technology, so it looks like they're going in the right direction.

1) The sound quality is *not* sufficient. Why step-back again? LP's had the widest dynamic range of any mainstream music format, but suffered from limited portability. 8-tracks, cassettes, and yes even CD's have offered less dynamic range for more convenience. It's a shame that most people under 30 are convinced that CD's are the highest quality audio. It was a lame standard to begin with and MP3's really don't even compare to CD's when played on anything more advanced than computer speakers.

I'll adress this FUD first, if you are releasing music as MP3 you are not limited by the 44.1 that you are limited to on CD therefore you can actually make an MP3 that is of higher quality than CD. If you care to argue this point I can you spectral analysis of stuff from CD and stuff done digital direct to MP3. I work in the recording/sound industry as a DJ/sound tech/studio musician/and remixer so I have researched this fairly well.

The artist is *still* losing. Instead of the major record company pimping the artists you now have a bunch of hackers with hard drive space becoming the pimps. Sure MP3.com is a professional organization but we all know where the real traffic for MP3's is: illegal copies of pre-recorded music. For all the terrible things one can say about the record industry, your favorite artist is benefiting much more from you buying the CD than downloading a MP3 copy of it. Before the portable players arrived you could make the argument that illegal MP3's increased CD sales, but now we can bypass the CD completely.

FUD again I say. the prohibitive cost of the portable devices along with the fact they can only carry about the same number of songs as a CD has made them not much more than a cute toy. If an artist releases a song and charges, hmmm lets say $ 0.75 to d/l it, people will pay it, when calcualte that out to full album ( ten songs for the sake of this argument) thats $ 7.50 for the whole album, 90% of which is kept by the artist. That works out to be more than the artists make now per CD/cassette. If you want more info on why MP3 is good for the artist and the industry check out Chuck D's MP3 commentary on Wired.com.

3) The standard is too young and too unstable to support industry acceptance. Granted, this might change soon, but I would hate to reinvest yet again in a new music format that changes as quickly as technology. Music media formats usually last 15-20 years - do you think people will want to listen to crappy sounding MP'3 in 2015? Probably not. But then again would you want to purchase your music collection over again everytime a new version comes out? I realize this is the weakest of my arguments but it still bothers me. Music is timeless, unlike computer programs. The media should be more stable.

MP3 will be the door to digital music for the masses, it might not be on top in the end, but it is the start of a new era in music. I will refer to the afforementioned Wired.com article to dispense with this further.

Flesh 99, flinging MP3 FUD right out the window ;P
________________________________________________ ________
Can We trust the future - Flesh99

1) The sound quality is *not* sufficient. Why step-back again? LP's had the widest dynamic range of any mainstream music format, but suffered from limited portability. 8-tracks, cassettes, and yes even CD's have offered less dynamic range for more convenience. It's a shame that most people under 30 are convinced that CD's are the highest quality audio. It was a lame standard to begin with and MP3's really don't even compare to CD's when played on anything more advanced than computer speakers.

I'll adress this FUD first, if you are releasing music as MP3 you are not limited by the 44.1 that you are limited to on CD therefore you can actually make an MP3 that is of higher quality than CD. If you care to argue this point I can you spectral analysis of stuff from CD and stuff done digital direct to MP3. I work in the recording/sound industry as a DJ/sound tech/studio musician/and remixer so I have researched this fairly well.

The artist is *still* losing. Instead of the major record company pimping the artists you now have a bunch of hackers with hard drive space becoming the pimps. Sure MP3.com is a professional organization but we all know where the real traffic for MP3's is: illegal copies of pre-recorded music. For all the terrible things one can say about the record industry, your favorite artist is benefiting much more from you buying the CD than downloading a MP3 copy of it. Before the portable players arrived you could make the argument that illegal MP3's increased CD sales, but now we can bypass the CD completely.

FUD again I say. the prohibitive cost of the portable devices along with the fact they can only carry about the same number of songs as a CD has made them not much more than a cute toy. If an artist releases a song and charges, hmmm lets say $ 0.75 to d/l it, people will pay it, when calcualte that out to full album ( ten songs for the sake of this argument) thats $ 7.50 for the whole album, 90% of which is kept by the artist. That works out to be more than the artists make now per CD/cassette. If you want more info on why MP3 is good for the artist and the industry check out Chuck D's MP3 commentary on Wired.com.

3) The standard is too young and too unstable to support industry acceptance. Granted, this might change soon, but I would hate to reinvest yet again in a new music format that changes as quickly as technology. Music media formats usually last 15-20 years - do you think people will want to listen to crappy sounding MP'3 in 2015? Probably not. But then again would you want to purchase your music collection over again everytime a new version comes out? I realize this is the weakest of my arguments but it still bothers me. Music is timeless, unlike computer programs. The media should be more stable.

MP3 will be the door to digital music for the masses, it might not be on top in the end, but it is the start of a new era in music. I will refer to the afforementioned Wired.com article to dispense with this further.

Flesh 99, flinging MP3 FUD right out the window ;P
________________________________________________ ________
Can We trust the future - Flesh99

How many read the Wired article about people in the Marine Corps. modifying Doom for training purposes? I think they made a good case for the limited way in which it could be useful to them. If these guys in Littleton were really playing like this, they took the idea a little far, regardless of the ultimate real-life actions.

But... What's important is what you don't see. Working on webpages, I view source. A lot. And most of the JavaScript I see, like most of the best software in any case, is transparent. It's doing stuff so pages look better for you. Just like any good piece of software. Go to Hotwired for another article about this Ebay thingy. One person comments that he can't believe Ebay allows Javascript in people's auction descriptions, which I have to say is a pretty salient point. I think Ebay should not only ban javascript, but all browser-specific HTML. Just think: Ebay could force all auctioneers to submit to HTML 4.0 standards, creating a new breed of >technically good web authors. (I use the term technically because AFAIK, HTML 4 doesn't standardize taste, thereby preventing nausea-inducing color combinations.)

I was approached by a Wired Magazine columnist that wanted my comments on GeekWorld when it was announced. I sent back the message below the same day, but it seems that journalism deadlines these days are quite cut-throat (I apparently sent in the response too late - although it was no more than 6 hours after she had sent it). Anyway, here is what I said.

Red Hat has received multiple grants of funds from industry heavyweights during the past few months, including Intel, Netscape and IBM. Also, Red Hat has become the major source for US vendors for a "standardized" Linux distribution. While I myself use Red Hat, I in no way see that Red Hat should become a "buzz-vendor" of Linux. Should Dell have, for instance, chosen SuSE Linux to be their distribution of choice for workstations, the announcement, in my belief, would not have created as much a stir as the decision to use the well-known US company's distribution.

Now, on to my previous statement about GeekWorld being a PR stunt. While Red Hat may have hit home with PC vendors and the mainstream public interest (for instance, readers of CNET News.Com), the company realizes the potential this capital has. Mainly, it will help attract new Linux developers to work for RedHat, but more importantly, it has the ability to draw users.

What other Linux distribution group has the funding to launch its own television advertising campaign? Possibly SuSE or Pacific HiTech, but keep in mind they are international vendors. Not that Red Hat has done so, but high profile media advertising (ie. television, the New York Times, or other popular newspapers) is definitely a viable option at this point. Branding of the company's red hat logo could be just as important to the company as the "Where do you want to go today?" slogan is to Microsoft. Keep in mind, Red Hat is a company. And its ultimate goal is to make a profit, albeit, in this case, there is a purpose behind the goal other than money. Note that it pays other developers around the world to keep working on projects such as GNOME.

GeekWorld seems to me to be a way of saying to the general public "Red Hat is as cool as MTV," alluding to the popular "Real World" television show. And in essence, Red Hat may imply that the people who use their distribution are also that 'cool.'

GeekWorld is a contest. And, therefore; will most likely will get much publicity, much like the Wired Magazine journalist's article. I would not be surprised if I saw a side-story about the contest winners on World News Tonight during the week of Linux Expo. Of course, Red Hat will gain a national spotlight in this sense, thereby growing consumer awareness of their product.

Note: The following becomes slightly off-topic from the subject of Red Hat paranoia, but it was part of the letter nonetheless.

About the difficulty of the contest: There is actually nothing really difficult about it. For instance, many geeks out there are taking their time away from kernel hacking (or whatever they used to coding) and writing Perl scripts that will scour Red Hat's site from 12AM to 11:59 PM and start over again the next day, just looking for that small footprint.

I do not denounce Red Hat for doing this. The Linux community needs something like this every once in a while to add some excitement to the regular life of the average geek. Heck, I'd love to go myself. However, I've got a summer job coming up, I'm an active coder on an open source project, and I'll be perfectly happy attending the Season Finals of the Professional Gamers' League in Manhattan, NY - it's free and definitely a lot closer. Also, I don't have to find a GNOME logo to go.

- Shaheen Gandhi (sgandhi@andrew.cmu.edu)

Q: What about the Microsoft trial - should they shut down Mr. Bill, or let him play his game?

Chuck: When someone comes along and dominates an industry, of course you get a whole bunch of losers screaming, hoping somehow they can beat 'em down. Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser. Bill Gates is Michael Jordan.

Is this where I'm supposed to say "Don't believe the hype" again? We put pop stars on pedestals and expect them to put as much thought into everything as they put into their money-making endeavors. You people think he has a Debian box or something? The PE site runs on NT, methinks.

--

Wired Magazine had this story in their March '99 issue. Chuck D posted MP3s of unreleased Public Enemy tracks late in '98, pissing off his label, Def Jam. Def Jam's parent Polygram "sent in the suits". In January, Chuck D released a single called "Swindler's Lust", in MP4. (ick)

- jeek (jeek@eckman.tj)

Wired Magazine had this story in their March '99 issue. Chuck D posted MP3s of unreleased Public Enemy tracks late in '98, pissing off his label, Def Jam. Def Jam's parent Polygram "sent in the suits". In January, Chuck D released a single called "Swindler's Lust", in MP4. (ick)

- jeek (jeek@eckman.tj)

Lets See

Chuck D. and Public Enemy

The Beastie Boys

Sigue Sigue Sputnik

Ice T Who offers his newest only as MP3

Tom Petty

The Artist Formerly Known As The Artist Formerly Known As Prince


And this is about twenty seconds of looking,in one publication (links are to the articles) but all these poor garage bands who'll never get a real gig. Right ? Hell the beastie boys are streaming MP3s........

________________________________________________ ________
Can We trust the future - Flesh99

Lets See

Chuck D. and Public Enemy

The Beastie Boys

Sigue Sigue Sputnik

Ice T Who offers his newest only as MP3

Tom Petty

The Artist Formerly Known As The Artist Formerly Known As Prince


And this is about twenty seconds of looking,in one publication (links are to the articles) but all these poor garage bands who'll never get a real gig. Right ? Hell the beastie boys are streaming MP3s........

________________________________________________ ________
Can We trust the future - Flesh99

Lets See

Chuck D. and Public Enemy

The Beastie Boys

Sigue Sigue Sputnik

Ice T Who offers his newest only as MP3

Tom Petty

The Artist Formerly Known As The Artist Formerly Known As Prince


And this is about twenty seconds of looking,in one publication (links are to the articles) but all these poor garage bands who'll never get a real gig. Right ? Hell the beastie boys are streaming MP3s........

________________________________________________ ________
Can We trust the future - Flesh99

It appears that the Wired story has been revised since it was posted on slashdot: A Search for the Highest Bidder

Editor's note: This story has been corrected. Comments attributed to Doubleclick suggesting that AltaVista wished to downplay its strategy could not be independently confirmed and have been removed. Further, comments that the sold search positions were identical to regular search results were incorrect. Wired News regrets the error.

And yes, this is a big deal. Maintaining a separation between advertising and content is very important if you care at all about at least keeping up an appearence of integrity. It's always a worry that advertising supported media will be corrupted by their advertisers. If they were going to suddenly start selling placement in their rankings, without providing any visual cue about what was paid for, that would be clearly unethical. It might even be illegal (deceptive business practice?).

How would you feel if you found out that the headlines of your local newspaper could be bought?

There is a lengthy and unflattering discussion of the Xanadu story in this Wired article. Ted Nelson's response to this articel can be found here. Here's a quick summary:

Ted Nelson is credited as the inventor of hypertext. For the last thirty years or so, he has been working on a project called Xanadu, an effort to create a hypertext 'docuverse' where information may be included (or 'transcluded') into any document while preserving the author information for all pieces and preserving the author's ability to collect royalties for every single piece of his work that is downloaded, no matter how small a fragment. It sounds like a good idea, IMHO, until you get to the royalties part.

There are many lessons in software development that can be gleaned from the story of Xanadu. A lesson for COSS is that this type of system is ridiculously complicated, perhaps prohibitively so. And it is probably not even something that anyone wants. Another, more tangential, lesson for OSS in general is that lunatic leaders can be divisive and irritating enough to totally screw projects that are otherwise good ideas. But I digress.

Even if Xanadu software shipped tomorrow (there is actually a program called zigzag), why would anyone want it when html has so much more infrastructure? Similarly, I think that COSS will not be able to attract people away from pure OSS. COSS may be appropriate for companies like Apple that are trying to recruit more eyeballs, but I think that most of us will stick to truly free software. I think that OSS is doing fine, and it is certainly meeting my needs as a programmer and an end user. I'm sure that a lot of you out there feel the same way. And with every office package and video driver that is released, the number of people whose needs are met by pure OSS solutions increases. I don't think that current open source hackers will get involved with COSS, and thus it will suffer from the same problems that proprietary software has. It will not benefit from many bug-fixing eyeballs, and people who get involved with COSS are likely to be just looking for a quick buck, the sort of people who will find a way to subvert the COSS system for their own purposes. These people will try to confine the exchange of information in such a way that they make money. Again, like the Xanadu project.

Information longs to be free. It will not permit restrictions. This is not a moral judgement, it is just an observation.

will be the killer hardware (or rather "software") for this kind of stuff. Fold it up and stash it in your bag. Millions of little ink droplets in a matrix which can be manipulated to form an arbitary image. Now if only they can get it to market...

a wired article about Xerox's efforts

I seem to remember there was an MIT project too, but I can't find the link.

John Perry Barlow of the EFF. Hardly a newcomer in this debate.

His essay from early 1994, The Economy of Ideas is still strong stuff and definitly relevant for the discussion about free/open source/code. If you haven't read it you should....

The Wired article about this drew an implied connection that David Smith was Vicodin ES, with the obvious implication to us slashdot regulars that he was found via GUID. But I haven't seen any real evidence to back this up.

As an excellent article on Ars Technica has pointed out, all the GUID shows is who the original document creator was. If someone had taken a previous Vicodin ES virus and modified it to create Melissa, his GUID / MAC address would remain in the "new" virus.

So is David Smith Vicodin ES? And do they have anything stronger on him than the GUID?

The Wired article was called Mother Earth Mother Board . Highly recommended for those who haven't read it yet.

Sure enough:

You can find it in this article by Wired that ran a little while back.

You'll just need to search for the word "scaffolding" once there. I'll leave interpretation to everyone else.

----------
mphall@cstone.nospam.net

the format is legal, but don't forget that copyrights are still in effect. Artists can put up MP3s on their own site, but that doesn't mean a whole lot. Chuck D put mp3s from the new PE album up on the Public Enemy site, and the powers that be(Polygram..oh wait they got bought out..Universal) forced him to take em down.
There was a story about this in Wired

But yeah, mp3s are legal as long as material is put up by those with the copyright, or you own the material and your mp3 is purly for archival purposes.

try http://www.wired.com/news/n ews/culture/story/18675.html instead :)

This is the same thing that was in the Fetish section of this month's WiReD [7.04, p.58], and they at least list the price (£69.95, US$117) At least this isn't another reference to the car MP3 player that we see every month or so :-)

No Al Gore is.
http://w ww.wired.com/news/print_version/politics/story/183 90.html?wnpg=all

This is an edit of a message I posted to my (IP law) class mailing list... (Most of the links have appeared in Slashdot before).


>With regard to the questions posed at the end of your email... I think
>I'd be wanting a serious reduction in price if I were to have my rights in
>the music made subject to a restrictive licence. Certainly it wouldn't go
>down well with the music buying public, but then, if the corporations want
>us to go this way we'll have no choice: they'll just withdraw the other
>music media.

Yup. People won't be happy with restrictive licences, but the corporations
will try to introduce them anyway...

Following my ramblings about proprietary vs. open formats, there is an interesting piece in Wired News, reporting a speech from the head of BROADCAST.COM, Mark Cuban.

WIRED: MP3 WILL DIE

He says "distribution, not content, will be king" and that "MP3 will die".

Two thoughts spring to mind.
1. The golden rule of the web: "Content, Content, Content"
2. Why give up what's free in favour of what costs?

MP3 can't be uninvented - and new open formats will undoubtedly come along. I think this gives publishers and broadcasters a problem - they are going to have to find new ways to "add value" if they want to keep their markets.

This also applies to Windows vs. Linux:
WIRED: OFFICE DELAYS AFFECT MS PROFIT

WIRED: LINUX CUTS IN ON MS TURF

Does anyone think governments, regulators, and the software and entertainment industries will be able to stem the tide?

LAWNEWS: LINUX MAY ALTER IP LEGAL LANDSCAPE

Hopefully this all ties in with the current study topics - I apologise if I'm just rambling on :-)

I say sell broadcast.com, buy redhat and Transmeta :-)

What do slashdot-ers think?

--
http://www.dubar.com

--

This is an edit of a message I posted to my (IP law) class mailing list... (Most of the links have appeared in Slashdot before).


>With regard to the questions posed at the end of your email... I think
>I'd be wanting a serious reduction in price if I were to have my rights in
>the music made subject to a restrictive licence. Certainly it wouldn't go
>down well with the music buying public, but then, if the corporations want
>us to go this way we'll have no choice: they'll just withdraw the other
>music media.

Yup. People won't be happy with restrictive licences, but the corporations
will try to introduce them anyway...

Following my ramblings about proprietary vs. open formats, there is an interesting piece in Wired News, reporting a speech from the head of BROADCAST.COM, Mark Cuban.

WIRED: MP3 WILL DIE

He says "distribution, not content, will be king" and that "MP3 will die".

Two thoughts spring to mind.
1. The golden rule of the web: "Content, Content, Content"
2. Why give up what's free in favour of what costs?

MP3 can't be uninvented - and new open formats will undoubtedly come along. I think this gives publishers and broadcasters a problem - they are going to have to find new ways to "add value" if they want to keep their markets.

This also applies to Windows vs. Linux:
WIRED: OFFICE DELAYS AFFECT MS PROFIT

WIRED: LINUX CUTS IN ON MS TURF

Does anyone think governments, regulators, and the software and entertainment industries will be able to stem the tide?

LAWNEWS: LINUX MAY ALTER IP LEGAL LANDSCAPE

Hopefully this all ties in with the current study topics - I apologise if I'm just rambling on :-)

I say sell broadcast.com, buy redhat and Transmeta :-)

What do slashdot-ers think?

--
http://www.dubar.com

--

This is an edit of a message I posted to my (IP law) class mailing list... (Most of the links have appeared in Slashdot before).


>With regard to the questions posed at the end of your email... I think
>I'd be wanting a serious reduction in price if I were to have my rights in
>the music made subject to a restrictive licence. Certainly it wouldn't go
>down well with the music buying public, but then, if the corporations want
>us to go this way we'll have no choice: they'll just withdraw the other
>music media.

Yup. People won't be happy with restrictive licences, but the corporations
will try to introduce them anyway...

Following my ramblings about proprietary vs. open formats, there is an interesting piece in Wired News, reporting a speech from the head of BROADCAST.COM, Mark Cuban.

WIRED: MP3 WILL DIE

He says "distribution, not content, will be king" and that "MP3 will die".

Two thoughts spring to mind.
1. The golden rule of the web: "Content, Content, Content"
2. Why give up what's free in favour of what costs?

MP3 can't be uninvented - and new open formats will undoubtedly come along. I think this gives publishers and broadcasters a problem - they are going to have to find new ways to "add value" if they want to keep their markets.

This also applies to Windows vs. Linux:
WIRED: OFFICE DELAYS AFFECT MS PROFIT

WIRED: LINUX CUTS IN ON MS TURF

Does anyone think governments, regulators, and the software and entertainment industries will be able to stem the tide?

LAWNEWS: LINUX MAY ALTER IP LEGAL LANDSCAPE

Hopefully this all ties in with the current study topics - I apologise if I'm just rambling on :-)

I say sell broadcast.com, buy redhat and Transmeta :-)

What do slashdot-ers think?

--
http://www.dubar.com

--

The scumbag used FUD tactics by raising the spectre of skinheads with their own radio stations. Um, excuse me, but isn't America a democracy? Free speech?

Man, I can't wait for Louisianians to vote this clown out of office...

Any step towards loosening restrictions is a good one, but this bill does not address the concerns that the free software community cares most about.

Understand the significance of Big Brother extends past the realm of computer users. Yes, Microsoft is far worse than Intel because at the very least hardware won't broadcast the cpuid - software will. also think about all of the data that Microsoft gains every time they consume/purchase a smaller startup (VSI, HotMail, MSN) - it's staggering. The real BigBrothers include the average world citizen. Top three big brothers not in order: ATT (TCI, credit-cards, ISP, phone companies, et al.), TimeWarner (think about it), and Microsoft (nuf said). Unfortunately, they're all american.

Check out Wired for a great article on what privacy really is.

Understand the significance of Big Brother extends past the realm of computer users. Yes, Microsoft is far worse than Intel because at the very least hardware won't broadcast the cpuid - software will. also think about all of the data that Microsoft gains every time they consume/purchase a smaller startup (VSI, HotMail, MSN) - it's staggering.
The real BigBrothers include the average world citizen. Top three big brothers not in order: ATT (TCI, credit-cards, ISP, phone companies, et al.), TimeWarner (think about it), and Microsoft (nuf said). Unfortunately, they're all american.

Check out Wired for a great article on what privacy really is.

.. .. ...

Let's not forget about the EU decision to make web and media caching illegal without prior permission (Wired Article).

I hope that Europe wises up to the need for Internet free speech.

:-)

ACTION:

MS Product and Corporate Questions: Waggener Edstrom at (503) 245-0905
MS email contact info is at http://register.microsoft.com/regwiz/regwiz.asp

The USPTO phone number is 800.786.9199 (800.PTO.9199). They say they are "not yet equipped to handle general email correspondence". What a shock.

US Asst. Attorney General for Antitrust: Joel Klein.
* "If your comments relate specifically to the Antitrust Division's suit against Microsoft Corporation, please direct your correspondence to Microsoft.atr@usdoj.gov". Seems like this qualifies, eh?
* Other DOJ email contact info is at http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/contact/emails.htm
* DOJ Antitrust phone contact info: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/contact/phoneworks.htm

Vice President Al Gore (cheerleader for hi-tech and, um, less distracted than others at the White House)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/WH/Mail/html/Mail_Vice_P resident.html
Or email direct at vice.president@whitehouse.gov

US Senate Commerce, Science, And Transportation Committee
John McCain, chairman: John_McCain@McCain.senate.gov
http://www.senate.gov/~commerce/
508 Dirksen Senate Office Bldg
Washington, DC 20510-6125
(202) 224-5115
http://www.senate.gov/committees/committee_detail. cfm?COMMITTEE_ID=419 -- lists all members, with links to their homepages.

The House Committee on Commerce
2125 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-2927
Commerce@mail.house.gov

House Committee on Science
2320 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-6371

Bogus Patent petition:
http://ethepeople.com/affiliates/national/fullview .cfm?ETPID=0&PETID=98938 &ETPDIR=affiliates/national

INFO:

W3C copyright terms: http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice

W3C software license: http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-softw are.html

"Microsoft Awarded Style Sheet Patent"
Reprinted from The Bulletin: Seybold News & Views on Electronic Publishing, Vol. 4, No. 19, February 4, 1999
http://webreview.com/wr/pub/1999/02/05/style/index .html
This article apparently broke the story.

Wired News: "MS Wins Patent for Web Standard" by Chris Oakes
2:05 p.m. 4.Feb.99.PST
http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/17 741.html

WEB STANDARDS PROJECT CALLS FOR CLARIFICATION OF WHETHER PATENT GIVES MICROSOFT CONTROL OVER TWO KEY WEB STANDARDS
(press release: Feb. 4, 1999)
http://www.webstandards.org/patent.txt
(Also discussed at http://webreview.com/wr/pub/1999/02/05/style/index 2.html)

At this writing (11:30pm PST Feb. 5), nothing on this story has appeared in/on:
* C|Net
* ZD Net and all related publications/sites
* CNN
* NY Times, et al.
* Seattle Times (www.seattletimes.com)

PS: This very well may be a stupid question, but what's to keep MSFT from getting a patent on HTML or some variation thereof? If they can patent an open standard like CSS ...

And what about getting a patent on other open standards ... like internet protocols?

Possible? Or am I way off base here?

=moJ
- - - - - -
Member in Good Standing,

WIRED had this article about the subject this morning.

Funny, and really really impressive of anyone to pull of a stunt like that on impulse!

================================================== ====================
SCAN THIS NEWS
1/31/99

Global Electronic Commerce Plan Hits Public Acceptance Snag

Who instructed Intel to program digital IDs into their new Pentium III
computer CPUs? Was this something they came up with independently, or was it
done in furtherance of a larger agenda?

Who instructed all four of this nation's banking regulatory agencies to
simultaneously propose "Know Your Customer" identification regulations
coincidentally at the very same time that lawmakers in other countries were
also instituting KYC policies? Did all of these entities propose nearly
identical laws and regulations at the same time just by chance, or did
someone plan and orchestrate the event?

Whatever you believe, you should not dismiss the fact that plans are
presently being made and implemented on the global scale which will
ultimately determine how you conduct business - possibly all business - in
the future. The fact that plans are underway is no secret; however, the
precise details are very secret. The overall plan has been made public; but
the intricacies will not become public until the necessary national laws and
regulations are securely established, and the agreed upon technologies have
been incorporated.

The establishment of a global framework under which all business will
eventually be conducted is every bit as profound as the establishment of the
Federal Reserve Banking system here in the U.S. in 1913, which placed total
control of this nations economy solely in the hands of a few, un-elected
individuals. Although the Federal Reserve system has been the focus of much
talk of "conspiracies" and secretive planning, few people today are even
aware that the establishment of a vastly more ominous global financial
system is being instituted right under their collective noses. Global
planners are now spreading their tentacles of economic control over the
entire globe which will eventually afford them complete and total power over
the world's economies.

Before all commerce can be conducted electronically however, a number of
foundational provisions must first be put into place. Perhaps chief among
these is the ability to positively identify all parties who engage in
electronic business - particularly over the Internet. This will require a
combination of technologies to identify both the user and the equipment from
which a transaction originates.

Contracting parties will be identified through the use of either "digital
signatures" that will be assigned to each individual by the government, (see
linked article below), or by using digitized fingerprints captured and
transmitted at the time of a transaction. Digital fingerprint readers are
now available for use with PCs, and Windows 98 already includes an
Application Programming Interface (API) which allows for easy hook-up of
personal fingerscanner devices. Recently, Compaq computer company announced
that it had begun marketing a PC-based fingerscan reader for under $100
each.

Another prerequisite to the global transactions system will be the
establishment of Electronic Commerce Taxation agreements so that local,
state, and national taxes can be collected at the "point of sale." As more
and more purchases are made over the Internet, various government agencies
are beginning to clamor about lost revenue due to electronic sales that are
not taxed. Tax revenues diminish in direct proportion to the increase in
un-taxed electronic sales. This issue will have to be addressed very soon,
one way or another.

Computer chips with electronic IDs and personal digital signatures (or
electronic fingerprints) will satisfy both the taxing and the contractual
requirements by associating every electronic sale with originating locations
and participant individuals. Legally, the "identified person" and the owner
of the "identified terminal" will be liable for whatever tax is imposed at
the time of the transaction. The tax will be levied and collect when the
sale is conducted.

Law enforcement interests will be central to whatever electronic commerce
technologies are eventually established. Therefore, assurances will be
provided for the ability to trace all transactions back to an individual,
identify the originating address, and verify the computer terminal used.
These system's inherent traits will provide the ability to track all
transactions so that illegal activity can be monitored.

Because of the tax component of the electronic commerce equation, and
because of law enforcement interests, "anonymous" electronic activity may be
outlawed under the system currently being planned. A gossamer form of
anonymity may be permitted to the extent that the veil of privacy can be
lifted in the event unacceptable activity is detected.

The planners may allow "pseudo-encrypted transactions," but only if
designated governmental entities (probably international in nature) have the
"keys" to all approved encryption algorithms. Only approved encryption
schemes will be permitted in the global electronic commerce system.
Un-approved technologies and encryption schemes simply will not be allowed
over the international transactions system.

Not only will the system provide a means to monitor suspicious transactions,
but the technologies that are being developed will also certainly
incorporate methods for identifying all other un-approved, un-authorized, or
otherwise illegal online activity. Therefore, the same identification
standards that are finally agreed upon for electronic commerce will most
likely also be required for all other electronic correspondence transmitted
over the Internet.

On July 1, 1997, President Clinton released his Presidential Directive on
Electronic Commerce which sets out the agenda for accomplishing the above
objectives. On that date, he also announced the release of "A Framework For
Global Electronic Commerce;" the official administrative plan for the
development of a global electronic commerce system.

The President's Directive delineates the fundamental areas in which
government agencies are to work with law enforcement and private sector
businesses, both nationally and internationally, to develop new technologies
which will assure that electronic transactions can be conducted "securely."
Clinton's Directive states:

"According to several estimates, commerce on the Internet will total tens
of billions of dollars by the turn of the century and could expand rapidly
after that, helping fuel economic growth well into the 21st century.

"For this potential to be realized, governments must adopt a
market-oriented approach to electronic commerce, one that facilitates the
emergence of a global, transparent, and predictable environment to support
business and commerce."

"In promoting robust security needed for electronic commerce, the
Administration has already taken steps that will enable trust in encryption
and provide the safeguards that users and society will need. The
Administration, in partnership with industry, is taking steps to promote the
development of market-driven standards, public-key management infrastructure
services and key recoverable encryption products."

"Many businesses and consumers are still wary of conducting extensive
business over the Internet because of the lack of a predictable legal
environment governing transactions. This is particularly true for
international commercial activity where concerns about enforcement of
contracts, liability, intellectual property protection, privacy, security,
and other matters have caused businesses and consumers to be cautious."

"Today I have approved and released a report -- "A Framework For Global
Electronic Commerce" -- outlining the principles that will guide my
Administration's actions as we move forward into the new electronic age of
commerce. This report articulates my Administration's vision for the
emerging digital marketplace by declaring a set of principles, presenting a
series of policies, and establishing an agenda for international discussions
and agreements to facilitate the growth of electronic commerce."

"Accordingly, I am hereby directing that executive department and agency
heads should be guided in any future actions they take related to electronic
commerce by the following principles:"

"7. I direct the Secretary of Commerce to work with the private sector,
State and local governments, and foreign governments to support the
development, both domestically and internationally, of a uniform commercial
legal framework that recognizes, facilitates, and enforces electronic
transactions worldwide. I further direct the Secretary of Commerce within
the next 12 months to seek to gain agreement with the private sector, State
and local governments, and foreign governments, both domestically and
internationally, on common approaches for authentication of electronic
transactions through technologies such as digital signatures."

The Framework itself states:

"The United States, through the Department of the Treasury, is working
with other governments in international fora to study the global
implications of emerging electronic payment systems. A number of
organizations are already working on important aspects of electronic banking
and payments. Their analyses will contribute to a better understanding of
how electronic payment systems will affect global commerce and banking.

"The Economic Communiqué issued at the Lyon Summit by the G-7 Heads of
State called for a cooperative study of the implications of new,
sophisticated retail electronic payment systems. In response, the G-10
deputies formed a Working Party, with representation from finance ministries
and central banks (in consultation with law enforcement authorities). The
Working Party is chaired by a representative from the U.S. Treasury
Department, and tasked to produce a report that identifies common policy
objectives among the G-10 countries and analyzes the national approaches to
electronic commerce taken to date.

"As electronic payment systems develop, governments should work closely
with the private sector to inform policy development, and ensure that
governmental activities flexibly accommodate the needs of the emerging
marketplace."

"Of particular importance is the development of trusted certification
services that support the digital signatures that will permit users to know
whom they are communicating with on the Internet.

[The Framework on Electronic Taxation]

"The taxation of commerce conducted over the Internet should be consistent
with the established principles of international taxation, should avoid
inconsistent national tax jurisdictions and double taxation, and should be
simple to administer and easy to understand.

"Any taxation of Internet sales should follow these principles:

"* It should neither distort nor hinder commerce. No tax system should
discriminate among types of commerce, nor should it create incentives that
will change the nature or location of transactions.

"* The system should be simple and transparent. It should be capable of
capturing the overwhelming majority of appropriate revenues, be easy to
implement, and minimize burdensome record keeping and costs for all parties.

"* The system should be able to accommodate tax systems used by the
United States and our international partners today.

"Wherever feasible, we should look to existing taxation concepts and
principles to achieve these goals.

"Any such taxation system will have to accomplish these goals in the
context of the Internet's special characteristics -- the potential anonymity
of buyer and seller, the capacity for multiple small transactions, and the
difficulty of associating online activities with physically defined
locations.

"To achieve global consensus on this approach, the United States, through
the Treasury Department, is participating in discussions on the taxation of
electronic commerce through the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD), the primary forum for cooperation in international
taxation.

[End of excerpts]
-------------------------

THE FATF AND KYC

The individual pieces of the Global Electronic Commerce plan are being put
into place currently worldwide. One element of the plan is the banking
industry's "Know Your Customer" program which establishes standards banks
must use in identifying individuals for all banking-related activities. The
Financial Actions Task Force (FATF) - established by the same Global-7
organization mentioned in the "Framework" - is the international
organization charged with developing and globally implementing the KYC
standards. The FATF's plan, called the "40 Recommendations," established the
KYC requirements that all member countries are now working to implement.

Although the KYC proposal has recently suffered a setback in the U.S. due to
public rejection of the identification and monitoring provisions, the
international FATF organization has not - and will not - abandon the
concept. The FATF identification measures must be put into place before the
electronic commerce system can go forward. Don't expect KYC identification
requirements to go away. In fact, federal regulators have stated that nearly
all of the KYC provisions are already in place at all major, and most
smaller, U.S. banks.

Related to this is the bank policy - which most banks have adopted -
requiring all non-member customers to submit a fingerprint in order to cash
checks. As electronic fingerscanners become cheaper and more readily
available it can be expected that banks will soon begin requiring digitized
fingerprints in order to open accounts and even for established customers to
transact regular banking business. Digitized fingerprints will also likely
be required for conducting conventional business whenever chargecards and
checks are used. The justification will be to "protect the customer and to
prevent fraud;" the now familiar chorus sung by all data-collecting
entities - public and private.

INTEL AND THE ID CHIP

The Framework for Global Electronic Commerce additionally proposes the
development and incorporation of new technologies that will assure that
"secure transactions" can be conducted over the Internet. The "Framework"
states that government will work with private sector industry to develop the
necessary technology and to assure that the requisite standards are put into
place by commercial concerns.

Intel spokesman Tom Waldrop was quoted in Wired Magazine (1/31/99) as saying
the purpose of the digital ID that has been programmed into Pentium chips
was to develop a method for "the consumer to have a secure transaction over
the Internet." This is essentially the same wording as used in President
Clinton's Directive and Framework for Global Electronic Commerce. Intel's
plan to assign a digital ID to all of its new Pentium III computer chips is
consistent with the Framework's objective for global electronic commerce.

Due to strongly vocal objections from the public - particularly those
concerned with privacy issues - Intel has agreed to alter their chip design
so that the ID feature will be turned off by default. The ID feature can,
however, be turned on using Intel-provided software.

If the emerging global electronic commerce system ultimately requires that
all CPUs have an ID feature, and that all users "identify" themselves when
logged on to the Internet - as is currently being planned - there may be no
option but to either acquiesce to the privacy-invading stipulations or
simply stop using the Internet altogether.

Scott McDonald
-------------------------------------------------- ---------------

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
IN ANNOUNCEMENT OF ELECTRONIC COMMERCE INITIATIVE
http://www.whitehouse.gov/WH/New/Commerce/remarks. html


PRESIDENT CLINTON'S FRAMEWORK FOR GLOBAL ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT
http://www.whitehouse.gov/WH/New/Commerce/


See also:

"Feds want a digital certificate in every pot,
July 16, 1998" - CNN News
http://cnn.com/TECH/computing/9807/16/digicert.idg /index.html


"Firm Sidesteps Intel on Chip ID" - Wired Magazine
http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/17 624.html
"...the purpose of the digital ID is so that "the consumer
to have a secure transaction over the Internet."

"Let Your Fingers Do the Login" - Wired Magazine
http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/13 507.html


================================================== =====================
Don't believe anything you read on the Net unless:
1) you can confirm it with another source, and/or
2) it is consistent with what you already know to be true.
================================================== =====================
Reply to:
================================================== =====================
To subscribe to the free Scan This News newsletter, send a message to
and type "subscribe scan" in the BODY.
Or, to be removed type "unsubscribe scan" in the message BODY.
For additional instructions see www.efga.org/about/maillist.html
-------------------------------------------------- ---------------------
"Scan This News" is Sponsored by S.C.A.N.
Host of the "FIGHT THE FINGERPRINT!" web page:
www.networkusa.org/fingerprint.shtml
================================================== =====================

================================================== ====================
SCAN THIS NEWS
1/31/99

Global Electronic Commerce Plan Hits Public Acceptance Snag

Who instructed Intel to program digital IDs into their new Pentium III
computer CPUs? Was this something they came up with independently, or was it
done in furtherance of a larger agenda?

Who instructed all four of this nation's banking regulatory agencies to
simultaneously propose "Know Your Customer" identification regulations
coincidentally at the very same time that lawmakers in other countries were
also instituting KYC policies? Did all of these entities propose nearly
identical laws and regulations at the same time just by chance, or did
someone plan and orchestrate the event?

Whatever you believe, you should not dismiss the fact that plans are
presently being made and implemented on the global scale which will
ultimately determine how you conduct business - possibly all business - in
the future. The fact that plans are underway is no secret; however, the
precise details are very secret. The overall plan has been made public; but
the intricacies will not become public until the necessary national laws and
regulations are securely established, and the agreed upon technologies have
been incorporated.

The establishment of a global framework under which all business will
eventually be conducted is every bit as profound as the establishment of the
Federal Reserve Banking system here in the U.S. in 1913, which placed total
control of this nations economy solely in the hands of a few, un-elected
individuals. Although the Federal Reserve system has been the focus of much
talk of "conspiracies" and secretive planning, few people today are even
aware that the establishment of a vastly more ominous global financial
system is being instituted right under their collective noses. Global
planners are now spreading their tentacles of economic control over the
entire globe which will eventually afford them complete and total power over
the world's economies.

Before all commerce can be conducted electronically however, a number of
foundational provisions must first be put into place. Perhaps chief among
these is the ability to positively identify all parties who engage in
electronic business - particularly over the Internet. This will require a
combination of technologies to identify both the user and the equipment from
which a transaction originates.

Contracting parties will be identified through the use of either "digital
signatures" that will be assigned to each individual by the government, (see
linked article below), or by using digitized fingerprints captured and
transmitted at the time of a transaction. Digital fingerprint readers are
now available for use with PCs, and Windows 98 already includes an
Application Programming Interface (API) which allows for easy hook-up of
personal fingerscanner devices. Recently, Compaq computer company announced
that it had begun marketing a PC-based fingerscan reader for under $100
each.

Another prerequisite to the global transactions system will be the
establishment of Electronic Commerce Taxation agreements so that local,
state, and national taxes can be collected at the "point of sale." As more
and more purchases are made over the Internet, various government agencies
are beginning to clamor about lost revenue due to electronic sales that are
not taxed. Tax revenues diminish in direct proportion to the increase in
un-taxed electronic sales. This issue will have to be addressed very soon,
one way or another.

Computer chips with electronic IDs and personal digital signatures (or
electronic fingerprints) will satisfy both the taxing and the contractual
requirements by associating every electronic sale with originating locations
and participant individuals. Legally, the "identified person" and the owner
of the "identified terminal" will be liable for whatever tax is imposed at
the time of the transaction. The tax will be levied and collect when the
sale is conducted.

Law enforcement interests will be central to whatever electronic commerce
technologies are eventually established. Therefore, assurances will be
provided for the ability to trace all transactions back to an individual,
identify the originating address, and verify the computer terminal used.
These system's inherent traits will provide the ability to track all
transactions so that illegal activity can be monitored.

Because of the tax component of the electronic commerce equation, and
because of law enforcement interests, "anonymous" electronic activity may be
outlawed under the system currently being planned. A gossamer form of
anonymity may be permitted to the extent that the veil of privacy can be
lifted in the event unacceptable activity is detected.

The planners may allow "pseudo-encrypted transactions," but only if
designated governmental entities (probably international in nature) have the
"keys" to all approved encryption algorithms. Only approved encryption
schemes will be permitted in the global electronic commerce system.
Un-approved technologies and encryption schemes simply will not be allowed
over the international transactions system.

Not only will the system provide a means to monitor suspicious transactions,
but the technologies that are being developed will also certainly
incorporate methods for identifying all other un-approved, un-authorized, or
otherwise illegal online activity. Therefore, the same identification
standards that are finally agreed upon for electronic commerce will most
likely also be required for all other electronic correspondence transmitted
over the Internet.

On July 1, 1997, President Clinton released his Presidential Directive on
Electronic Commerce which sets out the agenda for accomplishing the above
objectives. On that date, he also announced the release of "A Framework For
Global Electronic Commerce;" the official administrative plan for the
development of a global electronic commerce system.

The President's Directive delineates the fundamental areas in which
government agencies are to work with law enforcement and private sector
businesses, both nationally and internationally, to develop new technologies
which will assure that electronic transactions can be conducted "securely."
Clinton's Directive states:

"According to several estimates, commerce on the Internet will total tens
of billions of dollars by the turn of the century and could expand rapidly
after that, helping fuel economic growth well into the 21st century.

"For this potential to be realized, governments must adopt a
market-oriented approach to electronic commerce, one that facilitates the
emergence of a global, transparent, and predictable environment to support
business and commerce."

"In promoting robust security needed for electronic commerce, the
Administration has already taken steps that will enable trust in encryption
and provide the safeguards that users and society will need. The
Administration, in partnership with industry, is taking steps to promote the
development of market-driven standards, public-key management infrastructure
services and key recoverable encryption products."

"Many businesses and consumers are still wary of conducting extensive
business over the Internet because of the lack of a predictable legal
environment governing transactions. This is particularly true for
international commercial activity where concerns about enforcement of
contracts, liability, intellectual property protection, privacy, security,
and other matters have caused businesses and consumers to be cautious."

"Today I have approved and released a report -- "A Framework For Global
Electronic Commerce" -- outlining the principles that will guide my
Administration's actions as we move forward into the new electronic age of
commerce. This report articulates my Administration's vision for the
emerging digital marketplace by declaring a set of principles, presenting a
series of policies, and establishing an agenda for international discussions
and agreements to facilitate the growth of electronic commerce."

"Accordingly, I am hereby directing that executive department and agency
heads should be guided in any future actions they take related to electronic
commerce by the following principles:"

"7. I direct the Secretary of Commerce to work with the private sector,
State and local governments, and foreign governments to support the
development, both domestically and internationally, of a uniform commercial
legal framework that recognizes, facilitates, and enforces electronic
transactions worldwide. I further direct the Secretary of Commerce within
the next 12 months to seek to gain agreement with the private sector, State
and local governments, and foreign governments, both domestically and
internationally, on common approaches for authentication of electronic
transactions through technologies such as digital signatures."

The Framework itself states:

"The United States, through the Department of the Treasury, is working
with other governments in international fora to study the global
implications of emerging electronic payment systems. A number of
organizations are already working on important aspects of electronic banking
and payments. Their analyses will contribute to a better understanding of
how electronic payment systems will affect global commerce and banking.

"The Economic Communiqué issued at the Lyon Summit by the G-7 Heads of
State called for a cooperative study of the implications of new,
sophisticated retail electronic payment systems. In response, the G-10
deputies formed a Working Party, with representation from finance ministries
and central banks (in consultation with law enforcement authorities). The
Working Party is chaired by a representative from the U.S. Treasury
Department, and tasked to produce a report that identifies common policy
objectives among the G-10 countries and analyzes the national approaches to
electronic commerce taken to date.

"As electronic payment systems develop, governments should work closely
with the private sector to inform policy development, and ensure that
governmental activities flexibly accommodate the needs of the emerging
marketplace."

"Of particular importance is the development of trusted certification
services that support the digital signatures that will permit users to know
whom they are communicating with on the Internet.

[The Framework on Electronic Taxation]

"The taxation of commerce conducted over the Internet should be consistent
with the established principles of international taxation, should avoid
inconsistent national tax jurisdictions and double taxation, and should be
simple to administer and easy to understand.

"Any taxation of Internet sales should follow these principles:

"* It should neither distort nor hinder commerce. No tax system should
discriminate among types of commerce, nor should it create incentives that
will change the nature or location of transactions.

"* The system should be simple and transparent. It should be capable of
capturing the overwhelming majority of appropriate revenues, be easy to
implement, and minimize burdensome record keeping and costs for all parties.

"* The system should be able to accommodate tax systems used by the
United States and our international partners today.

"Wherever feasible, we should look to existing taxation concepts and
principles to achieve these goals.

"Any such taxation system will have to accomplish these goals in the
context of the Internet's special characteristics -- the potential anonymity
of buyer and seller, the capacity for multiple small transactions, and the
difficulty of associating online activities with physically defined
locations.

"To achieve global consensus on this approach, the United States, through
the Treasury Department, is participating in discussions on the taxation of
electronic commerce through the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD), the primary forum for cooperation in international
taxation.

[End of excerpts]
-------------------------

THE FATF AND KYC

The individual pieces of the Global Electronic Commerce plan are being put
into place currently worldwide. One element of the plan is the banking
industry's "Know Your Customer" program which establishes standards banks
must use in identifying individuals for all banking-related activities. The
Financial Actions Task Force (FATF) - established by the same Global-7
organization mentioned in the "Framework" - is the international
organization charged with developing and globally implementing the KYC
standards. The FATF's plan, called the "40 Recommendations," established the
KYC requirements that all member countries are now working to implement.

Although the KYC proposal has recently suffered a setback in the U.S. due to
public rejection of the identification and monitoring provisions, the
international FATF organization has not - and will not - abandon the
concept. The FATF identification measures must be put into place before the
electronic commerce system can go forward. Don't expect KYC identification
requirements to go away. In fact, federal regulators have stated that nearly
all of the KYC provisions are already in place at all major, and most
smaller, U.S. banks.

Related to this is the bank policy - which most banks have adopted -
requiring all non-member customers to submit a fingerprint in order to cash
checks. As electronic fingerscanners become cheaper and more readily
available it can be expected that banks will soon begin requiring digitized
fingerprints in order to open accounts and even for established customers to
transact regular banking business. Digitized fingerprints will also likely
be required for conducting conventional business whenever chargecards and
checks are used. The justification will be to "protect the customer and to
prevent fraud;" the now familiar chorus sung by all data-collecting
entities - public and private.

INTEL AND THE ID CHIP

The Framework for Global Electronic Commerce additionally proposes the
development and incorporation of new technologies that will assure that
"secure transactions" can be conducted over the Internet. The "Framework"
states that government will work with private sector industry to develop the
necessary technology and to assure that the requisite standards are put into
place by commercial concerns.

Intel spokesman Tom Waldrop was quoted in Wired Magazine (1/31/99) as saying
the purpose of the digital ID that has been programmed into Pentium chips
was to develop a method for "the consumer to have a secure transaction over
the Internet." This is essentially the same wording as used in President
Clinton's Directive and Framework for Global Electronic Commerce. Intel's
plan to assign a digital ID to all of its new Pentium III computer chips is
consistent with the Framework's objective for global electronic commerce.

Due to strongly vocal objections from the public - particularly those
concerned with privacy issues - Intel has agreed to alter their chip design
so that the ID feature will be turned off by default. The ID feature can,
however, be turned on using Intel-provided software.

If the emerging global electronic commerce system ultimately requires that
all CPUs have an ID feature, and that all users "identify" themselves when
logged on to the Internet - as is currently being planned - there may be no
option but to either acquiesce to the privacy-invading stipulations or
simply stop using the Internet altogether.

Scott McDonald
-------------------------------------------------- ---------------

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
IN ANNOUNCEMENT OF ELECTRONIC COMMERCE INITIATIVE
http://www.whitehouse.gov/WH/New/Commerce/remarks. html


PRESIDENT CLINTON'S FRAMEWORK FOR GLOBAL ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT
http://www.whitehouse.gov/WH/New/Commerce/


See also:

"Feds want a digital certificate in every pot,
July 16, 1998" - CNN News
http://cnn.com/TECH/computing/9807/16/digicert.idg /index.html


"Firm Sidesteps Intel on Chip ID" - Wired Magazine
http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/17 624.html
"...the purpose of the digital ID is so that "the consumer
to have a secure transaction over the Internet."

"Let Your Fingers Do the Login" - Wired Magazine
http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/13 507.html


================================================== =====================
Don't believe anything you read on the Net unless:
1) you can confirm it with another source, and/or
2) it is consistent with what you already know to be true.
================================================== =====================
Reply to:
================================================== =====================
To subscribe to the free Scan This News newsletter, send a message to
and type "subscribe scan" in the BODY.
Or, to be removed type "unsubscribe scan" in the message BODY.
For additional instructions see www.efga.org/about/maillist.html
-------------------------------------------------- ---------------------
"Scan This News" is Sponsored by S.C.A.N.
Host of the "FIGHT THE FINGERPRINT!" web page:
www.networkusa.org/fingerprint.shtml
================================================== =====================

Brin argues that there are only two possible futures. In the first, only the corporations have direct access to the information and the techniques with which to mine it. In the second, everybody has access to that information. The first grants us the illusion of privacy but effectively strips us of our freedom-- you can't know our neighbor's kinks but corporations know exactly what floats your boat. The second strips away any illusion of privacy, but grants you the real freedom to decide for yourself the information you take in and put out.

The question now becomes, do we act to ensure this illusory privacy, or do we demand that you and I have access to the same information those with money and power collect about us? Which do you want? A review of The Transparent Society can be found in Business Week.

Elf Sternberg

Brin argues that there are only two possible futures. In the first, only the corporations have direct access to the information and the techniques with which to mine it. In the second, everybody has access to that information. The first grants us the illusion of privacy but effectively strips us of our freedom-- you can't know our neighbor's kinks but corporations know exactly what floats your boat. The second strips away any illusion of privacy, but grants you the real freedom to decide for yourself the information you take in and put out.

The question now becomes, do we act to ensure this illusory privacy, or do we demand that you and I have access to the same information those with money and power collect about us? Which do you want? A review of The Transparent Society can be found in Business Week.

Elf Sternberg

Hi.
This is exactly the subject of a really fantastic article at Wired's magazine archives. Thought I'd contribute the URL.
Enjoy,
-p
--

Now, the story is available at here.

There was an article on Wired yesterday on some quack psychologist who claimed to have profiled the typical network intruder. Of course he used the word "hacker" everywhere, at least Wired used the right term. Anyways, to demonstrate how the "socially inept" "cyberpunks" are "glued to the computer" he used as an example a computer cracker who was caught by police with "a porta-potty under the seat, and [the cracker] was buzzed out on Coca-Cola and candy."

Anyways, it got me thinking, someone should write a psychological profile on zdnet journalists and their ilk, on busybody politicians who are out to censor everything, and especially on quack psychologists who want to make a quick buck or get some attention by throwing arround exagerated stereotypes of computer users.

It's unfortunate that /. didn't post a link I submitted over a week ago.
Wired New reports on the issue, but what it mentions
(which everyone here seems to have failed to notice so far) is that this levy is still very much in the air.
"The government body that's supposed to administer the fund doesn't yet exist, and the Canadian government hasn't even decided how
much the levy will be, or to what it will apply." It's very possible that it will be as
as little as pennies per disc. Unfortunately, the ammendment is retroactive,
meaning that once the amount has been set, the government will be expecting payment for new stock acquired after Jan 1.
The same story was reported on CBC's Defintely Not the Opera this weekend as well.
I'm not saying I support it, and I definitely think that the details should have been sorted out ahead of time, but for now, people need to know the facts.
It would be cool if DNTO put that segment up on their page... a lot of people here could use good, clear, objective take on the story...

Wired News reports that the lawsuit was rejected by the courts.

Maybe common sense is coming over your country's judicial system?