Slashdot Mirror

atu.com.au">Venebulon writes "A new mp3 player will make its debut at Comdex, November 15. Similarly sized as a PalmPilot, and containing a 4.62Gb internal hard drive, this new device will be able to store 80+ hours of music, with anti-skip features. " I'm going to COMDEX, I guess I'm glad that I finally found something I want to see there (well, besides maybe the porn con next door or Barry White)

NoWhere Man writes "Intel plans to release Coppermine, its 700Mhz+ series of Pentium III chips, on Monday. The new chip will, not only be available for desktop machines, but notebooks aswell; thanks to a new design which makes them cooler. This release will allow Intel to say, once again, that it offers the fastest chip on the market. "

reflector writes "It looks like Comdex got enough flack over not letting the teen execs of Matrixcubed in the door that they've backed off (see Thursday's Slashdot ). There's an article in Wired." Good to see this happen, even if you want to argue that Comdex shouldn't have tried to keep out the Matrixcubed guys in the first place.

Cpt_Kirks writes "Wired has an article mentioning a new thumb keyboard for the PalmPilot that clips over the graphitti (sp?) area. The site listed is in Japanese, but it appears to just be push buttons that tap the screen. The rest must be done in software. " They claim you can use it as fast as you can use grafitti, and at only $40 it doesn't seem that expensive.

Cpt_Kirks writes "Wired has an article mentioning a new thumb keyboard for the PalmPilot that clips over the graphitti (sp?) area. The site listed is in Japanese, but it appears to just be push buttons that tap the screen. The rest must be done in software. " They claim you can use it as fast as you can use grafitti, and at only $40 it doesn't seem that expensive.

IQ was first to write "The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) was issued today by the FTC. It kicks in April 2000. The goal is to protect the privacy of the children by requiring "verifiable parental consent". Check out the release text. "

If you have the time you might also want to read the actual rule and public comments. Most online news services have covered it; Wired has a lengthy analysis sourced to an anonymous Republican staffer, but News.com has one without the Republican political spin. Fundamentally, the act regulates those commercial websites that target themselves to children (12 and under) and collect personal information about them - if you aren't commercial, or don't target yourself to children (even if you collect personal information from people) or just don't collect personal data from the kids, you aren't affected. Nevertheless, it is a significant step in privacy regulation - businesses must contact parents before collecting such information from an individual that they have actual knowledge is a child (for instance, by asking their age), but have no duty to ask the age of the general population. Thus most websites, even commercial ones that collect personal information, will have no change in day-to-day operations - they target themselves to a general audience, don't care about their visitors' ages, and need not take any steps under the new regulations.

Sites which do target kids for marketing will have to get parental permission before doing so. Parents also must be offered the option to prevent their kids' information from being shared with third-parties - to prevent the sale of that data, in other words. Parents can also opt-out entirely on behalf of their children and the site must honor their request. In school situations, teachers can give the requisite permission for their students so school activities won't be hampered.

The law and rule are likely to put a significant damper on online marketing to kids aged 12 and under. Specialized kids' sites will have to get parental permission to collect the data that is their primary reason for existence, and presumably many parents will prevent these sites from selling it. How well will they be enforced? That's uncertain. According to EPIC, the FTC has received hundreds of privacy-related complaints and has investigated only three.

"Self-regulation" of privacy concerns is an obvious failure. TrustE, the leading light of the businesses trying to prevent consumer protection on the internet, spends more time covering up privacy breaches by its members than investigating complaints... Will targeted government intervention have any better effect?

Doug Muth shares an "article in Wired News about the CTO of a company, Matrixcubed, who is being denied admission to Comdex - because he is 17 and you must be 18 to attend. This is really sad that Comdex is ignoring the realities of the IT industry like this." The profitable company was founded, by the now-17-year-old CTO, three years ago.

Update: 10/22 14:00 by michael : eswierk writes "After reading the Wired article about Mike Lavers being too young for Comdex, I immediately dashed off a email to Comdex imploring them to stop being a Big Dumb Corporation and admit the kid. Who knew I'd get a reply from the VP. I don't normally distribute personal email, but this seems like one worth repeating to those foaming at the mouth.

Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 08:56:40 -0400
From: Bill Sell
Subject: Re: Mike Lavers too young for Comdex

Ed, as far as I can tell, Mike never asked anyone in management about attending. This is a case of the Internet gone amok again with a fable and fiction, not fact. Too bad.

Bill Sell
Vice President & General Manager, COMDEX"

I'm not sure I see the foaming, however. According to the original Wired article, COMDEX was contacted and refused to make an exception for their policy, then refused to comment to Wired News. And of course, Sell still hasn't offered to actually let Lavers or any other under-agers attend. Where's the fiction, where's the fable? More than likely, COMDEX's insurance coverage is based upon only adults being present, and would be difficult to change at this late date, which is why they don't want to change their policy now; but that's no excuse for not having anticipated younger attendees in the first place, or for trying to spin it after the fact as an internet fable. COMDEX might do better to solve the problem instead of spinning it.

samsonite writes "For those familiar with Echelon, 21 October 1999, has been set as the day for everyone to put harmless, yet "subversive" words in emails and postings to overload the Echelon machine. Echelon was once considered a mythical machine that watched all email, internet traffice, phone calls, etc. for "key" words - maintained by the US, among others. " For more information on Echelon, click here. Now, it's time to run my script with verboten words - check out the article for a list.

phutureboy writes "The Freedom Forum survey mentioned in this Wired News story scares the crap out of me, and has shocked me into wanting to do something about it. What can the average Joe like myself do to help protect the First Amendment?" A good question...

adraken writes "Wired is reporting on the recent charges filed against Corel CEO, Michael Cowpland. Cowpland replied to the charges, "Obviously it's upsetting. And that's why I've been putting a lot of energy into proving my side is right in this situation. But, nevertheless, it's not distracting because I'm convinced there's nothing been done that's wrong -- and that will show up." The article goes into an indepth look at Cowpland and his life. "

Macki writes "Citing the poor quality of republican websites, Republican Conference Chairman J.C. Watts has started a project called 'GOP.gov' to help improve their websites. This is all well and good, except GOP.gov isn't just their name, it's also their domain. This is a pretty clear violation of RFC 2146." (Please click below for more.)

The domain is registered to 'US House of Representatives Republican Conference' and should rightfully be GOP.HOUSE.GOV.

Excerpt from RFC 2146:

C) Subsidiary, non-autonomous components of top-level or other entities are not eligible for separate registration. International organizations listed in this document are NOT eligible for registration under .GOV. Subsidiary components should register as third-level domains under their parent organization. Other Federal entities may apply to the FED.US domain."

Comment from Roblimo: Well, that's Mackie's opinion. I disagree, at least in part. I believe a political organization - and that's what a political party is; it's certainly not a government agency - should be an ".org", not a ".gov". BTW, I don't see this as a Republican vs. Democrat thing, either, but as evidence of general Congressional cluelessness. Anyone else care to weigh in on this?

Anonymous Coward wrote to us with a recent story in which Wired reports that whatshappenin.com claims that quepasa,com, being a mere translation of their name, is an infringement on their trademark. So, who wants to help me translate Slashdot into all of the major world languages? *grin*

M1000 pointed us over to a recent Wired article regarding NASA picking up maglev technology for launching spacecraft. The reasoning is that the weight-cost of propellant when launching shuttles takes up a high amount of the weight and this would cut down the needs for rocket fuel. Rockets would still be needed for the final launch as the current max maglev speed is 600 MPH. More experiment test models are being worked on now.

NoWhere Man writes "Just surfed into Wired and read an article about a theif using email to get AOL passwords. Using OperaMail and a program similar to those used to hack ICQ, the sender can get the password to anyone's account on AOL; all the user has to do is open the email. " You've Got A Password! (Done in sing-song voice).

NoWhere Man writes "Just surfed into Wired and read an article about a theif using email to get AOL passwords. Using OperaMail and a program similar to those used to hack ICQ, the sender can get the password to anyone's account on AOL; all the user has to do is open the email. " You've Got A Password! (Done in sing-song voice).

PhilHibbs sent us an article from wired that talks about Neuroscientists creating videos from a cats eyes using electrodes implanted in a cats brain. Here are some Pictures.

According to an Australian official, the CEO of Lotus Development Corporation believes:

Industry has no issue with online content regulation. The industry endorses content regulation.

The context is Australia's new system of dumbing the net down for children; here, the words "content regulation" mean simply: "censorship." An excerpt follows.

Senator Alston, Australia's Minister for Communications, is still working to sell Australia's censorship law, which was passed in June and takes effect on January 1st. Essentially the entire continent's internet will be rated like movies, with teeth. Unless something is done before January - which looks unlikely - it will be the worst trampling of net liberties by a Western democratic nation.

One of the compelling arguments against Australia's plan is that it will slow or halt the technology industry - halting progress means losing venture capital and slowing an entire nation's economy; nobody wants that. So Senator Alston has been looking for evidence to the contrary, and in particular he hopes to convince people that the industry itself supports the plan.

In the excerpted speech below, given on September 30, he recalls a conversation with Jeff Papows, CEO of Lotus, and claims Papows voiced support for the plan. (Note that Alston also claims support from Yahoo. Yahoo denies this, but Lotus has not, and had no comment at press time).

The industry itself accepts that there should be these codes of practice and this form of regulation. We have been trying to negotiate it for the last three years with the Internet Industry Association. Their problem is that there are these maniacs - these electronic frontiers outfits - running around stirring up trouble, using quaint expressions and feeding lines to that woman from the Civil Liberties Union [Nadine Strossen] who then gets out there, gets a good run and says that we are global village idiots. This is just a low-grade political campaign. I do not find industry opposing this approach.

I was fascinated when I was in Silicon Valley about two months ago. I waited for industry to raise it, because it was at the height of the furore. It was just after the legislation had gone through and I was doing the rounds of all the IT companies in the valley. I waited for them to raise it with me. The only people who ever raised it with me were journalists who were saying, 'Isn't this a big problem?' I replied, 'Why it is a big problem?' They said, 'It is because it is getting media coverage. It is coming out of Australia. Your Senator Lundy is faxing the New York Times and saying, "Isn't it disgraceful?" and Electronic Frontiers Australia is calling for the minister's resignation. Isn't this an issue?' It is an issue for the media, because it is new, exciting and a lot of fun, but it was not an issue for the industry.

The only people who raised it with me on that visit were Yahoo who thought it was a good idea. I recently saw the president and CEO of Lotus, which is a major player. He was out visiting Australia. Again, I waited for him to raise it with me and he did not. Over the years I have seen a lot of these people and none of them have ever raised it. I thought I might as well ask him what he thinks. His answer was, 'Industry has no issue with online content regulation. The industry endorses content regulation.' In other words, all of the responsible players - and most of these people have kids of their own - do not for a moment want to see the anarchy that is prevailing at the moment.

Lotus' support for this plan comes as a surprise to those who remember that the company was founded by Mitch Kapor, later a co-founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

A lot of people have been sending the story at Wired about Dungeons and Dragons, the movie. There's a strong emphasis on how the movie will be based on the rules systems, which seems strange to me. I'm not sure how to visually represent a number system for people - but we'll see. It should be out in October of 2000.

Ant sends a Wired story about DSL subscribers whose company set up their IP's to reverse to their full names - ostensibly to prove that the company needed more IP addresses. I'm not sure that the Wired author is on the ball for part of his story; it's not really very likely that anyone is going to target junkmail based on your third-level domain name unless the practice becomes terribly widespread. But certainly it makes the user's name available in any circumstance where the IP is normally exposed, which can't be a good idea. This is a specific case that relates to the more general set of naming exposing information about your network topology. -- michael

kubrickian writes "Apparently many people have been experiencing trouble with their new DVDs of The Matrix. " My player worked fine, but then again without DVD support under Linux, I haven't tested the PC stuff. But I still don't know ju-jitsu.

Doug Muth writes "There is an article in Wired that talks about a bug in their Pentium III Xeon chips that causes crashes when "when a system is pushed to its highest performance limit", whatever that is supposed to mean. Fortunately, the bug is only present in two specific variations of the chip, the 550 Mhz versions that have either 512 K or 1 Meg of secondary cache. Intel is also working on a bugfix for the problem. " Furthermore, the bug seems to be only present in Intel-brand motherboards, (Sabre). Intel has stopped shipping the board, but not the chip.

bdavenport writes "Several sites have stories on the unification of cell and PDA technology. Check out MSNBC and Wired. " This whole handheld convergence thing is an area where the Europeans seem to be well ahead of the U.S. - and everyone else. I still like my big monitor and keyboard, though. The WWW on a palm-sized screen seems to lose some of its flavor.

Doug Muth writes "According to this article in Wired News, there is a company that is taking bets on which disasters will occur when Y2K comes around. Think a commercial airliner will go down? That's 300-1 odds. Think armageddon will occur? That's 1,000,000-1 odds, though even if you win, I think collecting on that bet would be a bit pointless."

According to this story on Wired News, NASA honcho Dan Goldin is now actively encouraging private companies to become more active in space research and exploration. In a speech he gave yesterday at the 8th annual Space Frontier Foundation conference, he is quoted as saying, "A partnership between NASA and the Space Frontier Foundation -- which consists mostly of aerospace companies -- will be the only way to make the new millennium the space millennium." For decades, NASA has seemingly done more to hinder than to help private industry get into space. Maybe this represents a long-overdue about-face. I sure hope so.

According to this story on Wired News, NASA honcho Dan Goldin is now actively encouraging private companies to become more active in space research and exploration. In a speech he gave yesterday at the 8th annual Space Frontier Foundation conference, he is quoted as saying, "A partnership between NASA and the Space Frontier Foundation -- which consists mostly of aerospace companies -- will be the only way to make the new millennium the space millennium." For decades, NASA has seemingly done more to hinder than to help private industry get into space. Maybe this represents a long-overdue about-face. I sure hope so.

cpt kangarooski writes "Wired is reporting that the state of Virginia plans to issue license plates bearing the motto "Internet C@pital." I suspect Network Solutions put them up to it. " Really funny article. Everyone knows that Michigan is the real c@pital anyway.

ari{Dal} writes "Sony has revealed plans for a new digital walkman for the Japanese market. " Not quite a Rio or Nomad, it will take Sony's Memory Flash Stiks, like the Vaio and Aibo. It can play the Sony proprietary musical format, as well as encrypt and play MP3s or Wavs.

A friend of mine who works for the NAACP (and doesn't want his name used here) sent me this Wired News story about a sad but necessary move his employers have made. It seems that the NAACP, the Anti-Defamation League, and other groups that fight against racial hatred have been quietly registering as many offensive domain names they can get their hands on so that hate groups can't use them. It's sad that civil rights groups have to do this, but (sigh) I suppose it's better than having the government censor domain names.

JTek writes "Wired News has a story about sci-fi writer David Brin's idea of surveillance being everywhere, and why this is a good thing. The article raises interesting points about privacy vs. accountability. Very interesting read. "

Brin's ideas are interesting (he wrote a book about this recently, for those truly curious), but the point where he loses me is when he thinks that the rich, powerful and/or famous are somehow going to let the cameras into THEIR lives. I think the result of pursuing Brin's "Utopia" is that all the po' folk will get put on camera and then when they say to the rich, "Okay, now it's your turn", all you'll hear is laughter. GIVEN that the rich ARE NOT going to end up on camera, the sensible thing is to lessen the information gap by opposing putting the poor on camera either.

I can add a neat link, too: Surveillance cameras in New York City, or some of them anyway, courtesy of the New York Civil Liberties Union. Oh, and if you truly want to see what Brin's future looks like, I highly recommend Lacey and His Friends, by David Drake. That's the real outcome of the growing trend toward the surveillance society, and it's not Utopia - it's Dystopia. Jamie adds: Another sci-fi book that deals with ever-present cameras is The Truth Machine. -- michael

JTek writes "Wired News has a story about sci-fi writer David Brin's idea of surveillance being everywhere, and why this is a good thing. The article raises interesting points about privacy vs. accountability. Very interesting read. "

Brin's ideas are interesting (he wrote a book about this recently, for those truly curious), but the point where he loses me is when he thinks that the rich, powerful and/or famous are somehow going to let the cameras into THEIR lives. I think the result of pursuing Brin's "Utopia" is that all the po' folk will get put on camera and then when they say to the rich, "Okay, now it's your turn", all you'll hear is laughter. GIVEN that the rich ARE NOT going to end up on camera, the sensible thing is to lessen the information gap by opposing putting the poor on camera either.

I can add a neat link, too: Surveillance cameras in New York City, or some of them anyway, courtesy of the New York Civil Liberties Union. Oh, and if you truly want to see what Brin's future looks like, I highly recommend Lacey and His Friends, by David Drake. That's the real outcome of the growing trend toward the surveillance society, and it's not Utopia - it's Dystopia. Jamie adds: Another sci-fi book that deals with ever-present cameras is The Truth Machine. -- michael

Kathleen Ellis, editor of the Privacy News Portal, attended yesterday's press briefing about a proposed loosening of export restrictions, and wrote the following feature article about the current situation. Click below for more.

Actually, let me hit you with a few links before you get started:

• EPIC's page on the proposed Cyberspace Electronic Security Act
• Proposed text of the bill
• White House analysis of the bill - really an executive summary
• Wired coverage, by Declan McCullagh
• Update: Press statements, including briefing transcript

Encryption Exports: Small Step Forward, Big Step Back
by Kathleen Ellis
September 17, 1999

Prominent U.S. Government representatives yesterday announced at a White House press briefing that the President was proposing legislation on encryption policy, and that the Department of Commerce was revising its export restrictions on some encryption products. Last year, Vice President Al Gore vowed to further loosen restrictions and propose a solution to the encryption issue, which has been the subject of contentious debate for the past decade.

The legislation, known as the Cyberspace Electronic Security Act of 1999 (CESA), has been transmitted to Congress by President Clinton. The bill purports to strike a "compromise" between the needs of law enforcement for access to data and the needs of Internet users to secure and their e-mail, web transactions, and stored data from hackers or thieves. According to the text of the bill, "society's increasing reliance on information systems in this new environment exposes U.S. citizens, institutions, and their information to unprecedented risks." Despite this acknowledgement, the bill clearly gives consideration to the needs of law enforcement and intelligence agencies first; "The failure to provide law enforcement with the necessary ability to obtain the plaintext version of the evidence makes existing authorities useless."

One of the major provisions of CESA is to allocate $80 million dollars for an FBI "Technical Support Center", which would provide assistance to federal, state, and local law enforcement officials. The bill also reinforces the confidentiality of law enforcement intelligence techniques used to gather information about suspected criminals. "The Department of Justice has developed this legislation with the assistance of agencies in government," said Attorney General Janet Reno. "Law enforcement has tools at its disposal to fight crime, but those tools are rendered useless when encryption gets involved". Reno said that CESA "balances the needs of privacy and public safety".

Perhaps most the most noteworthy provision of the bill is the resurrection of key escrow, a solution long considered insufficient, insecure and obsolete by experts. Key escrow is a technology that entails entrusting one's private keys with a trusted third party, so that theoretically, a law enforcement official would be able to present that third party with a warrant in order to gain access to the plaintext of the encrypted data. Although the bill does not require domestic users to utilize an escrowed cryptosystem, the bill provides a legal framework to protect users from disclosure of their decryption keys by their trusted third party without a court order. The bill also proposes to implement strict guidelines outlining the circumstances under which a law enforcement agent may be granted access to a decryption key held by the third party.

This mention of key escrow worries privacy activists, who have heard the use of such language by the administration before. "This raises the specter of collusion between law enforcement and industry to build back door access into encryption products," says David Sobel, General Counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center. According to EPIC's statement, the bill will eventually "provide a legal framework for access to decryption keys," a prospect which worries many activists and internet users alike.

Sobel would rather see the Security and Freedom through Encryption Act determine the U.S. Government's encryption policy. Authored by congressman Bob Goodlatte, SAFE would essentially force the government to reverse its stance on the encryption issue. Unfortunately, passage of the SAFE Act now seems unlikely, in light of Deputy Secretary of Defense John Hamre's remark during the briefing that if the SAFE Act passes the House and Senate, "the Department of Defense will ask the President to veto it".

Also announced at the press conference were revisions to the Department of Commerce's encryption export policy. According to a report released at the briefing, the export requirements will be revised to allow software exports of products of any key length, after the product is first submitted for review by the Commerce Department, and as long as the manufacturer of the product meets strict guidelines for post-export reporting of any user or distributor who obtains the software directly from the licensee. Secretary of Commerce William Daley announced that that the Bureau of Export Administration would streamline the revision and reporting process, but was unclear about specific changes to the current procedure.

Two prominent industry groups are very enthusiastic about this proposal. "Today's decision articulates a policy that is good for America, good for our nation's high-tech industry, and good for the tens of millions of Americans who use computers and want them to be secure" says a press release from Americans for Computer Privacy, a group that has lobbied for legislative reform and is funded primarily by technology companies. In a statement published by the Computer Systems Policy Project, Sun Microsystems President and CEO Scott McNealy (who made headlines on Slashdot for his remarks telling reporters that the privacy issue was a "red herring" and that "you have zero privacy anyway...get over it") said "we applaud the Administration's recognition that the universal use of strong encryption will promote the benefits of a networked world while protecting Americans' privacy, safety and security,". CSPP is comprised of eleven CEOs from major Information Technology companies, such as IBM, Dell, and Intel.

James Steinberg, Deputy Assistant for National Security Affairs, opened the briefing by praising both groups for thier assistance in authoring the proposal, so it's no surprise that they're eager to ingratiate themselves to the Clinton Administration, while at the same time self-importantly emphasizing their effectiveness by declaring a victory. EPIC's David Sobel says "it appears that the FBI and large computer companies have reached an agreement on encryption, but that is not necessarily in the interest of the average computer user." Any compromise reached by these two groups could result in "less security than advertised, with hidden vulnerabilities the government can exploit".

Secretary Daley was repeatedly asked during the briefing what purpose the one-time review served, and under what circumstances an export license exception would be granted or denied; no clear answer was given. The U.S. Government may wish to allow exports only of flawed or escrowed encryption products using encryption above a certain key length, but have given up on explicitly pursuing that as a goal. Large software companies, the kind represented by ACP and CSPP, have lost a lot of business because of the export restrictions, and with each year that passes they may become less likely to object to making a few changes to their crypto modules in order to finally gain access to the foreign market.

In some ways, this proposal is good for the companies who have existed for so long without the ability to export their stronger security products at all until now, but for the rest of us, the proposal is neutral at best and abysmal at worst. As larger, wealthier proponents of crypto liberalization get what they want and contentedly back out of the debate on this issue (as American banks did when they were granted license exception to export security software to their overseas offices), further positive alterations to export policy start to seem less and less likely to happen. This is bad for American cryptographers who wish to discuss their work with their colleagues on the Internet. It's even worse for users, who may end up using insecure products without knowing it.

It's unclear what will happen at this point. The current congressional climate suggests that CESA will not pass without a significant push from the Clinton Administration. Even if the bill is defeated, however, Internet users around the world should continue to be cautious about purchasing commercial encryption products that originate inside the U.S.; you never know what may be lurking within.

Black Art writes "This Wired Story has information about Doubleclick's new patent on net banner ads. Yet another example that the patent office has lost all touch with reality. " Described as "Method of Delivery, Targeting, and Measuring Advertising Over Networks". Now might be an amusing time to mention that the Free Banner Ad Server AdFu me and some of my cronies have contributed code to (Specifically Nate, Pater and Vroon) should have a patch out soon that you can already see in action on Slashdot: it integrates mod_perl, Adfu & Slash to allow ads to be served without Layers or IFRAMEs. (the old functionality is still in place if anyone needs that, but this way is much faster). Hope it doesn't violate any patents. Note: None of us have ever seen or used any of Doubleclicks stuff ;)

Tekmage sent us a wired article about scientists cloning cloning an extinct tiger. We mentioned a similiar case involving a bird awhile back, but its getting more common. I knew that triceretops DNA I've been keeping in my fridge all summer would come in handy. It'll be on E-Bay next week.

Judg3 writes "Apparently the United States federal government began a plan in 1997 to start a national photographic database, digitizing driver's license photos among other things. More details are availible online. " It's being test piloted in 3 states currently, while kudos goes to Electronic Privacy Information Center for uncovering the information about this program. As would be expected the bogeymen are "illegal immigrants and terrorists".

sammy baby writes "Wired News is reporting that Apple deliberately wrote the firmware in the Apple G3 computers to prevent owners from upgrading them using the G4 CPU. Damn shame - I would have considered buying a G4, but I don't want to give my money to a company that resorts to tactics like this."

Rolan was the first one to write with the heads-up about Wired's story about Slashdot-things are in much the same vein as other stories, but give it a gander if you'd like. And stop submitting the story *grin*.

bbrindle writes " An unknown German company called IWin just recently announced the release of the Amiga 510 and Amiga 1010. The company just came about at the beginning of this month and is offering Classic Amiga compatibles at decent prices. It seems though they are slow to respond to the media and have not contacted Amiga Inc. in any way. Check out the story in Wired. " It doesn't look good though-if they've built them without contacting Amiga Inc., then they have violated the copyright-and they don't ship with Amiga installed apparently. You have to get it from a local dealer-wherever you might find one, that is.

bbrindle writes " An unknown German company called IWin just recently announced the release of the Amiga 510 and Amiga 1010. The company just came about at the beginning of this month and is offering Classic Amiga compatibles at decent prices. It seems though they are slow to respond to the media and have not contacted Amiga Inc. in any way. Check out the story in Wired. " It doesn't look good though-if they've built them without contacting Amiga Inc., then they have violated the copyright-and they don't ship with Amiga installed apparently. You have to get it from a local dealer-wherever you might find one, that is.

Octal writes "According to this story, there is a little-known advantage to running a distributed.net client from your start-up script. On two separate occasions, laptops have been stolen, and then returned, by tracing the IPs of rc5des clients that criminals forgot to remove."

Mark Denovich writes "Amazon worries those with privacy concerns with its new "feature" thatlets anyone view books, movies, and CDs ordered by amazon.com customers at corporations, nonprofit groups, and government agencies. " Its a neat idea, except that they don't let people opt out. This ought to get crazy.

ChrisGoodwin sent us linkage to a pretty excellent one. Its a Wired Story about a new toy called MP3 Anywhere from X10. It allows you to play MP3s wirelessly on your home stereo by transmitting them over a 2.4ghz connection from your PC. The downside is that it looks like it uses a winamp plugin, so there isn't Linux support yet, but it definitely shows promise. The same device can be used to broadcast video the same way.

Barcode (JPB) was one of the first to send us the word from Wired that the new audio format Microsoft introduced (Two days ago), supposed to be a secure format (resricting playback) has already been cracked. Dimension Music first carried the news-and what a name the crack has *grin*.

Emperor Palpatine writes "This article in Wired talks about the soon to be released Playstation 2 from Sony. Some pretty impressive talk. If they work it out so we can hook these up to a 10baseT, I may have to give it a try. "

Emperor Palpatine writes "This article in Wired talks about the soon to be released Playstation 2 from Sony. Some pretty impressive talk. If they work it out so we can hook these up to a 10baseT, I may have to give it a try. "

Baraka writes "Apparently MS is proposing a centralized, top-heavy system for delivering software applications in the future." It's kinda interesting: Web Applications in a way are kinda rent to own, and software licensing is so screwy that you don't really own it anyway. As irritating as it may sound, it would appear that application rental is coming... although not to my computer.

An anonymous reader wrote in to say "Seen on the IP list: a California company plans to offer a box that will securely encrypt your phone conversations, for less than $100 apiece. The company was founded by Cypherpunks who were upset about Clipper and wanted to create a good alternative. Looks like they're almost done. "

Wired News has an enjoyable report of the Linuxbierwanderung (Linux Beer Hike). It sounds like it was a wonderful event, and you can't beat the admission (free)! I almost feel stupid for missing out on this, even if I don't drink. As a bonus, they even got to see the eclipse.

Monday we asked Jonah Seiger and Shabbir Safdar of Mindshare Internet Campaigns a bunch of questions about effective online political activism. Here are their answers. (They skipped two questions. Perhaps they'll explain why on the message boards later today.)

Antizeus asks: While not everyone on the net shares a common political philosophy, there are some very common tendencies, such a strong libertarian undercurrent. Do you guys think the net could be used as an important tool in bringing together freedom-loving people to form a third party to represent the interests of liberty that so often get stepped on by the two major political parties in the USA? And could such a party have a chance of winning a significant number of elections, unlike (apparently) other third parties such as the lamented Libertarian Party?

Shabbir and Jonah answer: There's literally no other medium in existence today that has the potential for jump-starting a new political party *except* the Net. The open, decentralized nature of the Net naturally facilitates organizing and sharing ideas. The challege, of course, is finding issues and ideas around which people are willing to rally.

Also, the Net alone is not enough. Politics happens in the real world -- at the ballot box and the halls of Congress. While the Net does have the potential to grease the wheels of the third party movement, it alone is not enough to change our politics.

GuySmiley asks: For over a year, we have been told to either vote for Bush or Gore in 2000. The mainstream media does not let anyone else get air time.

How can you bypass the networks and use the internet to publicize a candidate that actually has a brain and a flying chance in hell of getting elected?

Shabbir and Jonah answer: The same way that /. gained notice and an audience -- word of mouse. If a candidate has a compelling message and people who are willing to carry it, the Net is in many ways more powerful than TV or other traditional media. Since the net has no gatekeepres (like tv does), spreading a message is much easier.

What does this mean? Talk to your friends. Do interesting things with the net that get positive press attention, buy banners ads, anything that will help generate positive attention for a candidate's message. But first and formost, have a good message (and never SPAM).

kmj9907 asks: UCITA is a pretty big issue among /.ers, I'd think. Are there any major efforts to fight this act? If so, how or where can I (we) find them? I personally think it would be a crime to allow this to pass.

Shabbir and Jonah answer: We're not closely following UCITA and therefore don't have much to say about it.

xmedar asks: There is strong advocacy within the geek population as epitomised by the Linux Advocacy How To, ways of increasing debate, and providing good quality information rather than FUD, therefore increasingeveryones understanding of the situation rather than polarising arguements and ending up in irrational finger pointing. Do you think this ethos can be translated to the world of politics, and what effect do you think it might have?

Shabbir and Jonah answer: (no answer - R)

Hobbex asks: Is it, as many like to believe, the NSA and the rest of the Intelligence community still running the show like puppet masters with absolutely no resistance, or is there in Washington a deep, pessimistic belief that freedom must truly be fought with all means possible because we the lesser people of the earth cannot handle it?

Shabbir and Jonah answer: (no answer -R)

Signal 11 asks: How does one organize a group of people entirely online? I have seen several attempts at getting a movement off the ground - setting up a listserv, website, discussing the issues.. but that's usually all the farther it goes, and then the whole thing sinks.

What's the best way to get in touch with people and get something off the ground?

Shabbir and Jonah answer: It's a hard combination of good leadership, a receptive audience, and the right moment in time. Without any real cohesive issue to keep people focused, or the right moment where a group identifies with itself, it's hard to coalesce.

Once you've built a group, I think the trick to avoid burnout is to stay focused on your issue, set small realistic goals initially, and don't try and take on everything yourself; spread out the work.

Mr. Slippery asks: Citizens who find themselves in the minority on many political issues have found the Internet a very valuable tool to organize, share information, and make their views known to the mainstream.

Now it seems that the federal government is trying to censor such discussion. For example, we have the "Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act of 1999", which would criminalize many discussions of drug policy.

I believe that you can't have a meaningful discussion on, for instance, the sentancing guidelines for possession of crack vs. powder cocaine without an understanding of how crack is made. Thus, my drug policy site has such information.

Trying to censor "dirty" bits is bad enough, but to censor political discussion is utterly abhorant. Political censorship is a life-and-death issue - people will fight, kill, and die for free speech. What, short of bullets, is it going to take to stop the cybercensors? (Or should I just go buy more bullets while I still can?)

Shabbir and Jonah answer: As you probably already know, we cut our teeth on the defense of free speech of the net during the CDA battle in Congress and through the Supreme Court. We have since then seen many many attempts at suppressing speech on the net, and though we never take these lightly, we have faith in two things:

1. The hope that people like yourself will never stop telling their members of Congress that you don't like it when they play the censor, and that 2. The system we have in this country will continue to balance the whims of ill-thought-out legislation with the values in the Bill of Rights.

Since we don't live in a direct democracy, citizens input isn't always a "silver bullet" to making stuff happen. But it helps, and it's the first step.

dattaway asks: I would imagine the problems we have with the conflicting and silly laws we have is the low voter turnout and research on a bill's viability is based on polls. Statistics, not for love of the country.

So, my question is, if better than 95% of eligible voters had their voice punched on the ballot, would it be the end all of obscure laws, mudslinging, and corruption? Eligible voters should be based on age only (18) and nothing else. Having a disagreement with the law and getting a felony, etc, should be no excuse for silence. I feel it is everyone's duty to participate. Is this unreasonable?

Shabbir and Jonah answer: It is indeed everyones duty to participate, and if you don't vote you've got no right to complain.

PD asks: Al Gore offends Open Source fans by mocking the concept on his campaign web page. He offends internet users by claiming that he invented the internet.

On the other hand, G.W. Bush offends free thinkers by announcing that he wants religous organizations to take a larger part in government programs, and might directly tax dollars to those programs.

What is the best way to let these candidates know that their current positions are counter-productive? I want someone to say clearly that they will increase NASA's budget over the next 4 years.

Shabbir and Jonah answer: I'd definately focus on telling the campaigns directly, and then use the net to *organize*! Put up a site with a statement of what you want candidates to do (more $ for NASA), what people visiting the site can do to make it happen (write a letter to the campaign, or get on the mailing list) and then keep up with them.

Whenever a candidate is going to be somewhere online (like Gore's interactive town hall meeting this week) tell your mailing list to go and submit pro-NASA-funding questions!

There are also ways you can donate to the campaigns, as a group through online means as well.

Finally, check out the the Center for Responsive Politics database of contributors to the presidential campaigns (http://www.crp.org/) Some (but not all) of the contributions of the candidates are there. You can look through them to find donors who may already be supporters of the space program, and try to enlist them in your cause, either as supporters or spokespeople.

Stonehand asks: Arguably, the Internet can be used as a tool for the dissemination of propaganda -- including outright lies. This is at least partly due to

• The availability of free Web hosting.
• The difficulty of confirming the identity and credentials of 'net publishers/speakers.
• The occasional strange credulity of people...

An organized effort by any reasonably large group, be it a fringe, partisan group of people out to "get" somebody; or an activist group that does not bother with checking its "facts" can rapidly evangelize a cause with nonsense -- such as blatantly questionable statistics, out-of-context quotes, and so forth.

Is there any reason that the people *should* view the 'Net as a medium for information and activism, given all this? That is, why -- and how -- should people write or listen?

Shabbir and Jonah answer: Indeed, even outside politics, the rule of this medium is the reader's equivalent of "buyer beware". There isn't another medium where so many have had so much potential to speak so broadly.

But the medium can self-correct. Look at Slashdot! A perfect example. Many of these questions were selected because several moderators rated them highly, and even without the rating, anyone (even an Anonymous Coward) has the ability to reply and post a message correcting or clarifying a mistake in the message being followed up to.

Certainly, the medium has potential for abuse, but then so does every other. And I'd rather be in a medium where the power is spread out.

Next week Microsoft will shut down Firefly. For those who don't know, Firefly was responsible in large part for popularizing collaborative filtering, something online retailers such as Amazon and CDNow are now also utilizing. It's a shame to see it go. Microsoft has apparently taken the code and is using it for the soon-to-be-launched Microsoft Passport site which lets people give information once and buy merchandise from vendors without needing to type it in again.

Most small company IPOs have at least a little disorganization and hype surrounding them, but Red Hat's was over the edge. We're not even going to try to sort out the claims and counter-claims, the complaints and counter-complaints, and all the rest, just point you to a selection of stories on the subject, not all of which agree 100% about exactly what happened, when it happened -- or to whom.

• Late IPO change left many red-faced at C|Net.
• Red Hat charges up 272 percent in debut from ZDNet
• Geeks Tip Their Caps to Red Hat at Wired News
• Share Price More Than Triples in Red Hat's Public Offering from the New York Times (free registration required to read)
• The Tech Investor column in the Aug. 12 Washington Post talks not only about Red Hat, but other recent IPOs. Good perspective piece.
• Red Hot (with a cute "hat" graphic) headlined Salon's take on the subject.

I found a bunch of other stories too, but they all said pretty much the same as the ones I listed above. If you spot any more good ones (or have any good stories of your own to tell), please post them below.