Slashdot Mirror


On Hacktivism

z84976 writes "Oxblood Ruffin, of cDc fame, has produced a nice article discussing various aspects of hactivism and some of the approaches used by their own Hacktivismo group in supporting freedom (of thought, mainly) on the internet. Check it out over at The Register when you get a chance."

228 comments

  1. Re:"Online Privacy" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    I might not agree, but I'll fight to the death to ensure your rights to post blatantly fucking obvious trolls.

  2. Hacktivism by BrianGa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You know, the antics of the music industry (and the kind of thing that MS is kowtowing to with their DRM scheme) really pisses me off, but also convinces me that there will eventually come something to replace them both. But, know what? It's their property. If they want to fuck up their distribution channels, fuck em. I can do without "so-called" modern music anyway. I go see live bands locally, get lit, and have a great time and I didn't need to buy a fucking copy-protected by the DMCA CD or cassette or anything. These guys are out there trying to make a living, maybe you should check em out. And if you catch them after the show, you might can convince them that they should distribute their songs on CD's for cheap and ask them (ask them) about how they feel about MP3's and music-sharing in general. Of course, they might not agree with you (or myself), but they have that *right* to do so. So, I encourage, nay I *challenge* each and every one of you who would boycott MS or the RIAA to pick up a local newspaper and see what's going on in y our town this weekend. Chances are, there's a band or two actually worth checking out, and hey, it's not like you're going to meet chicks sitting behind your monitor. Oh, and on-topic: Rock on Beale! I'm encouraged to see that grassroots hactivism coming alive! :) (hacker used in "coder" definition) Keep up the good work and keep fighting the good fight.

    1. Re:Hacktivism by maxpublic · · Score: 1

      And the majority of us actually like popular music, hence the term 'popular music'. Touting the tired old 'go see a local band' line, or 'support alternative artists duuude!' is really a display of ignorance, or a complete lack of respect for any musical taste but your own.

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    2. Re:Hacktivism by Antipop · · Score: 2

      Yes! I'm an active member of the Charlotte, NC music scene and I have been exposed to the most incredible, talented bands I have ever heard. The scene here is a lot better than most places, especially if you're into hardcore, but everywhere has something. Go support your local artists. If you hear something you like, buy a shirt or a CD or just give the band a compliment when you see them. I've heard so many good bands and met so many cool people. Get off your ass and stop whining about how the RIAA is taking away your rights and go out in your community and circumvent the whole system.

      You will be suprised.

    3. Re:Hacktivism by sketerpot · · Score: 1

      What about people like me who live in backward rural places? Not everywhere has something.

    4. Re:Hacktivism by Rinikusu · · Score: 2

      You know, I hate to rain on your parade, but it's really fucking lame to copy/paste *other people's words* as your own. You know what I'm talking about.

      Sheesh, first article I check out today and see one of my posts with someone else's fuckin name attached.

      At least give credit.

      Ass.

      --
      If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
    5. Re:Hacktivism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=22776&cid=2450 939

    6. Re:Hacktivism by deathscythe257 · · Score: 1

      popular music may be defined as what most people listen to, but what you're forgetting is that the radio stations, music industry, mtv, etc, try to decide what you will hear/like for you. try picking up a cd that you've never heard of [not necessarily a local one] at a little record store in your home town. you'll be surprised- while you might get crap sometimes, noone gets a record deal for no reason and a lot of times you will really like music that noone else has heard of or will ever. Not to say that you need to pick up an alternative artist- there are plenty of pop artists out there that don't get played on the radio. Next time you are listening to the radio sit down and count how many different bands you hear in an hour. not likely to be many.

  3. Since Slashdot Doesn't Care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Mozilla 1.0 RC1 has been released. If we all remember Windows 2000 RC1 this means "pretty damn stable" (but since this is open sores, I'm skeptical). Get your copy today!

  4. Civil disobedience by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 4, Funny
    In Mauritania - as in most countries - owners of cybercafés are required to supply government intelligence agents with copies of e-mail sent or received at their establishments.

    If anyone is ever in a cybercafe in Mauritania or Elbonia, let's mail them 64k of encrypted random data. Let the government snoops try to decode that!

    --
    "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
    1. Re:Civil disobedience by bartyboy · · Score: 2

      "Elbonia - where gambling and prostitution are not only legal, they're mandatory." - Dilbert

      (or was that Elstonia?)

    2. Re:Civil disobedience by Ed+Avis · · Score: 1

      What is the difference between encrypted random data and random data?

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    3. Re:Civil disobedience by pizen · · Score: 3, Funny

      What is the difference between encrypted random data and random data?

      Just put the "PGP Message Follows" header thingy in front of your random data. Hours of enjoyment for the whole family.

    4. Re:Civil disobedience by blibbleblobble · · Score: 5, Informative

      No need. Just email a valid, encrypted file to somebody in the UK. They can go to prison for 2 years if they fail on request by the police to decrypt it.

      The legal burden is on the owner of an encrypted file to prove that they never had the key, and anyone using encryption is guilty until proven innocent, on the basis that anyone using encryption must be a snuff-child-porn baron

    5. Re:Civil disobedience by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 2
      When the NSA's new supercomputer 8 qBit quantum computer crunches through it and breaks the encryption, it'll still be garbage but they had to work for it.

      It's like finding a treasure map, finding the treasure, digging it up, only to get an empty box.

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
    6. Re:Civil disobedience by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 2
      But wouldn't that come back to the sender of the email, not the reciever?

      It would be like asking someone on the street to prove they didn't have the key to the house they happened to be walking by.

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
    7. Re:Civil disobedience by Ed+Avis · · Score: 1

      What I meant was you could generate random data and they could 'break' the encryption on it just as well. In either case for any key chosen it'll decrypt to garbage (almost certainly).

      If the encryption system is any good, it's not possible to distinguish between 'some random data' and 'some random data which has been encrypted with a key I'm not telling you'. They are effectively the same thing. IANAC.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    8. Re:Civil disobedience by ethereal · · Score: 1

      Hey, nobody ever said that the law had to make sense. Our only requirement is that it "protect the children" and sounds good in a 10-second sound bite on the evening news.

      --

      Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

    9. Re:Civil disobedience by ProfMoriarty · · Score: 1
      The legal burden is on the owner of an encrypted file to prove that they never had the key.

      Since I live in the US, I'm not up to speed on forgien laws and such ...

      But how do you prove a negative? Last time I checked it was impossible. Though I haven't been through that new math that they're teaching in schools now ...

      So just by receiving an encrypted email ... either you show it, or go to jail. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

      --
      Karma? Karma? I don't need no stinkin' karma.
    10. Re:Civil disobedience by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 2
      Outrageous! I am stunned! I get a picture in my head of the first person charged under that law, and it is very similar to that scene in the Phantom Menace with the droid..."mmmm that does not compute...mmmm...YOU'RE UNDER ARREST"

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
    11. Re:Civil disobedience by JordanH · · Score: 2
      Wouldn't be ironic if you sent someone random data and some supercomputer somewhere, after a long time, "decrypted" it into a some kind of incriminating message?

      If an infinite number of monkeys decrypted a message for a very long time...

    12. Re:Civil disobedience by Ed+Avis · · Score: 1

      Ironic but statistically very unlikely. I suppose it depends on the key length. If you have a 100 bit message and a 10000 bit key, then by the pigeonhole principle there exists at least one key to 'decrypt' the message to anything you like. There are 2**100 messages, a given key can send each message to one of 2**100 encrypted strings, so there are (2**100) * (2**100) possible keys, at most. (Less than that in fact, since two different plaintexts should encrypt to different ciphertexts.)

      Haven't checked this thoroughly, could well be wrong. But it sounds roughtly sensible.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    13. Re:Civil disobedience by JordanH · · Score: 2, Insightful
      But, there're infinite number of potential encryption/decryption algorithms, right?

      If a computer were programmed to find patterns in the data and derive a message, it could come out with something from seemlingly random data, given sufficient time.

      Maybe someday anyone who sends messages will be subject to prosecution because the powers-that-be will always be able to find an incriminating message in every transmission. Even plaintext could contain hidden messages.

      Yeah, I know. It was meant to be funny.

    14. Re:Civil disobedience by YoungHack · · Score: 1

      How could it? With modern asymmetric encryption methods, the receiver is the only one who could decrypt a message. Even the sender is locked out.

    15. Re:Civil disobedience by sulli · · Score: 2

      Encrypted random data won't compress. So if you wanted to send fake ciphertext, you would have to somehow render it uncompressible - or, better, encrypt a bunch of random garbage.

      --

      sulli
      RTFJ.
    16. Re:Civil disobedience by Glytch · · Score: 2

      Don't forget to add a nice incriminating subject, like "Re: Request for nuclear bomb plans, here you go" or "Schedule for attacking the air force base".

    17. Re:Civil disobedience by dgroskind · · Score: 2

      They can go to prison for 2 years if they fail on request by the police to decrypt it.

      The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 is a bit more complicated than this statement suggests. For instance, the explanatory notes say the act creates civil liability for unlawful interception on a private telecommunications network and defines who may bring an action, namely the sender, recipient or intended recipient. For example, where an employee believes that their employer has unlawfully intercepted a telephone conversation with a third party, either the employee or the third party may sue the employer.

      Interception normally requires a warrant from the Secretary of State. It would not be sufficient for him to consider that a warrant might be useful in supplementing other material, or that the information that it could produce could be interesting. The word 'necessary' means 'necessary in a democratic society'.

      The act provides for a tribunal as a means of redress for those who wish to complain about the use of the powers.

      The provision that forces disclosure of the decryption key assumes that the investigator has authority to read the email in the first place.

      The suggestion that the British practice resembles a dictatorship is preposterous.

    18. Re:Civil disobedience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It IS impossible. Go directly to jail. Do not pass Go. Do not collect two hundred dollars.

    19. Re:Civil disobedience by blibbleblobble · · Score: 1

      Though I haven't been through that new math that they're teaching in schools now ...

      It's not math you want to be worried about. It's science: "The world was created in seven days, evolution never happened"

      Makes you wonder how long a "day" was before the light was separated from the darkness...

    20. Re:Civil disobedience by Pituritus+Ani · · Score: 2
      The act provides for a tribunal as a means of redress for those who wish to complain about the use of the powers.

      I'm sure that'll be quite a consolation to the suspect as he's being tortured by agents of the Crown.

      --

      Another proud carrier of the $rtbl flag

  5. Ummm... by DickPhallus · · Score: 2

    Advanced research and technical notes are being handed over to the Chinese without question. It couldn't be going better for the Communists.

    Can anyone back up this claim? I mean it doesn't seem like good business sense to just give things away for free to a competiting nation...

    --

    --
    Some weasel took the cork out of my lunch.
    1. Re:Ummm... by KDENCE · · Score: 0

      Know that under the Clinton administration China was not a competing nation, it seemed to me that we had a one sided brotherhood with them. Clinton actually made them think we were afraid of them and gave him a lot of intelligence for FREE!

      "Entertain the Brutes"

    2. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
      An interesting claim made in the article, and it caught my eye too, but for a different reason:

      Just because a nation adopts communism as their economic model does not make them an enemy of the US, of the world, or of any person or ideology. Communism is an interesting economic structure which has good points and bad points. Capitalism is another interesting economic structure which also has good points and bad points. Together a lot of their good points will overshadow the others bad points . . . like maybe there is some optimal mix of the two.

      Of course I'm an AC, what with McCarthy still very much alive in some powerful people . . .

      Does anyone think that the Chineese really want to continue to annex land? If so, then we need to bring some diplomatic efforts to try to resolve the situation. Sharing of technology should be viewed as a Good Thing, as we are increasingly a global society. Otherwise we should be bringing diplomatic efforts to them in the areas of space exploration, global resource management (they are a huge chunk of land), and environmentally sound industrial practices. Anyone who thinks that we can't learn from each other is simply ignorant, or truly stupid.

      This is probably Offtopic -1; Flaimbait -1; Troll -1; Treasonous -10

      Live free or die

    3. Re:Ummm... by ProfMoriarty · · Score: 4, Informative
      I believe what they were trying to get at, is that companies are getting or trying to get their products into China so badly (the market opportunity is huge), that they will help the Chinese government understand the product.

      Once the product is in China, then the reverse engineering can start. This has happened with a couple of rocket launches a few years ago. Also, it is purported that the former US administration allowed classified technologies into China.

      Unfortunately, I cannot provide links to help prove this post ... and that appears what you wanted in the first place ...

      --
      Karma? Karma? I don't need no stinkin' karma.
    4. Re:Ummm... by Rorschach1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well spoken. I realized one day that pretty much the only education I'd had about Communism, at least before college, consisted of 'Communist = Evil'. Not even in high school did we ever cover the basics of what it really is.

      I spoke to a friend who spent some time travelling around Laos. Apparently the system's worked pretty well for them. They've got better education and nutrition now, access to healthcare, and at least some hope of sending their children on to something beyond a subsistence-level existence in a small village. And when you're operating on that scale, I really can't see how capitalism could be argued to be that much better.

      Empirical evidence would suggest, however, that communism hasn't worked out terribly well for the long term in larger implementations.

    5. Re:Ummm... by ProfMoriarty · · Score: 1
      Too bad you're posting AC ... you made some really good points ...

      Capitalism (economic) is the opposite of Communism (economic)

      Whereas Democracy (government) is the opposite of Dictatorship (government)

      Often people confuse Democracy with Communism ... which is wrong. However, how do you think a government form of Democracy would work with Communism? I think it would self-implode. However, a Capitalistic Dictatorship MAY work ... as long as the dictator doesn't interfere too much with the market forces.

      This is starting to get off-topic ... so I will stop.

      --
      Karma? Karma? I don't need no stinkin' karma.
    6. Re:Ummm... by mochan_s · · Score: 1
      The article goes on to say "While bootstrapping their economy with the fruits of Western labor and ingenuity, they gain the tools to prune democracy on the vine."

      Communism and freedom aren't related. Communism is an economic model and there is no freedom/no freedom in there.

      Second, if you accept capitalism as the invisible hand which balances everything to the optimal, the transfer of technology to China is just the forces of capitalism working to right the an economic imbalance.

      It's very easy to make an issue out of a popular irrational hate. If the arguements go like "snouts deep in the feedbag, they haven't quite noticed the bacon being trimmed off their ass", one should be suspicious.

    7. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Empirical evidence would suggest, however, that communism hasn't worked out terribly well for the long term in larger implementations.

      One word: Corruption.

    8. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      This was my point exacly: Communism and freedom are not related. Neither are capitalism and freedom.

      Live free or die

    9. Re:Ummm... by MisterBlister · · Score: 2

      Nazi Germany was essentially a capitalistic dictatorship -- yet more proof that its the Dictatorship part that is the evil. And I agree, there's nothing wrong with Communism in theory and in fact, I'm sure most of the world will be Communist (assuming we haven't destroyed it) within the next couple hundred years...It sure won't be capitalist, because the supply/demand/scarcity stuff just isn't going to work...Except maybe for clean air and water(?).

    10. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pure communism has no gov't. The purpose of the gov't is to redistribute among the classes (workers & capitalists), but in communism, there is only one class, and no need for gov't.

      Socialism is a "temporary" gov't after the capitalist revolution, until the people no longer need a gov't. They must command & control all market aspects and even be dictatorial into people's lives to prevent people from making money, etc, and are therefore anti-democratic.

    11. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It sure won't be capitalist, because the supply/demand/scarcity stuff just isn't going to work

      That loud laughing sound is every person who has ever taken an economics course.

    12. Re:Ummm... by NinjaGaidenIIIcuts · · Score: 1

      "I'm sure most of the world will be Communist (assuming we haven't destroyed it) within the next couple hundred years...It sure won't be capitalist, because the supply/demand/scarcity stuff just isn't going to work"
      Probably when technology reaches its limit in helping the human kind (as well as some asses get tired from being entertained by the latest and greatest apparatus), we'll see some inroads in that direction, everything being Open Source, high-quality public hospitals every place, etc., meanwhile, I'll just keep watching value stocks.

    13. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      I told you. We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune. We take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week, ... but all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special bi-weekly meeting ... by a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs, ... but by a two-thirds majority in the case of more major--

      Here ...

    14. Re:Ummm... by groman · · Score: 1

      Not if I can help it. http://www.lp.org

    15. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      communism is based on generousity and fairness
      capitalism is based on greed and self-interest

      Greed and self-interest are more natural tendensies, especially as the population grows. Furthermore, those who break the capitalistic model do poorly in it, while those who break the communist model do well in it.

      Communism would be perfect with perfect people.

    16. Re:Ummm... by RKloti · · Score: 1
      Communism would be perfect with perfect people.

      And capitalism perfect for real people. Real people who want the best for themselves, like everyone does, including yourself. People are much more willing to work towards something when they can see tangible results, rather than some slight percentual increase that can hardly be attributed to any individual effort. Regrettably, perfect people do not exist. If they did, economic systems would hardly be necessary at all, depending on just how you define a perfect person. What is perfection? Working for nothing? That's selflessness, but from a subjective point of view, selfnessless does not necessarily achieve anything, unless you can gain favour from others through it, in which case, selfnessless is preferable only if the favour exceeds the expense. As perfection in human beings is a purely subjective, ie unquantifiable and indeterminable by experimentation or measurement, the assumption that human perfection can be arbitarily defined is false.

      And then there the battle cry of social democrats, solidarity. Solidarity means supporting everyone else at the cost of yourself, with the presumable goal of having everyone in the same or at least similar social/financial position. So it boils down to a simple ideological question: Should what you get out be proportional to what you put in, or should you get out the same amount as everyone else, regardless of how much they contributed, if indeed they contributed anything at all?

      BTW:

      especially as the population grows.

      Total BS. It has a lot to do with human nature and absolutely nothing to do with population growth. Even at it's most primitive stages of social (but not biological) development, humans expressed the drive for material wealth and dominance over others, which one would attribute to greed.

    17. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am all with Plato, who argued in The Republic that a philosopher-king was the ideal, meaning a benevolent and wise dictator. The herd is just too easily manipulated. They can be led to believe any absurdity, commit any atrocity, and give up any right. The difficult part would be in selecting the first philosopher-king. The only rule should be that politicians or those with any political experience at all should not be allowed. I would suggest that a committee be formed that consists of a few people that almost everybody acknowledges to be absolutely brilliant, reasonable, and mentally healthy, perhaps having a heart is important too. Then this committee would pick the first philosopher king. Does anybody think the current system is really working? So we're prosperous, so we used to have liberties? Slowly, they are being undone, and the herd doesn't even notice or care! How is this a working system?

    18. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      solidarity.
      humans are hardwired for empathy.
      anyone living in total selfish greed gotta be in total denial and/or hypocrisy.

      humans are BOTH greedy and emphatic, simple as that.
      a socialist/capitalist model works best to accomodate for these two.
      there are NO completely capitalist governments in the western world, even the US is quite socialist with wellfare and whatnot.
      And it's not like the really greedy ones don't get to live out their natural greediness in socialist countries: three of the worlds 50 wealthiest men come from Sweden.

    19. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Communism only works so long as the government isn't corrupt, which is a rather telling condemnation of most forms thereof...

    20. Re:Ummm... by Stonehand · · Score: 2

      Hmm. Wasn't the Speer in charge of setting industrial targets, planning a centralized economic strategy, and managing the various businessmen under the Nazi administration? Or was that only for materials judged necessary for the war effort?

      --
      Only the dead have seen the end of war.
    21. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Communism only works so long as the government isn't corrupt, which is a rather telling condemnation of most forms thereof...

      Any system only works so long as the government isn't corrupt.

    22. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you a communist? No offense, I'm just asking.

    23. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you think about Lenin? Or Stalin? Or Castro? Or Jaruzelski? Or Mao Tsetung? Or Hitler? Apparently the system's worked pretty well for them. I would really like to hear your opinions on that subjects. Thanks.
      -Z.

    24. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I spoke to a friend who spent some time travelling around Laos. Apparently the system's worked pretty well for them. They've got better education and nutrition now, access to healthcare, and at least some hope of sending their children on to something beyond a subsistence-level existence in a small village.

      Oh, God! All of that and only for the price of giving up your freedom! Gee, I would love to live there!

      And when you're operating on that scale, I really can't see how capitalism could be argued to be that much better.

      It's EASIER to have centralized market on SMALL scale. On LARGE scale only FREE market works.

    25. Re:Ummm... by Glytch · · Score: 2

      Arthur C. Clarke had an interesting idea in "Fountains of Paradise". The leader of a colony was chosen at random by the colony's central computer. Anyone who expressed an interest in ruling was disqualified. There was a quote (I don't have the book with me, I'm most certainly getting it wrong) along the lines of "We want someone who will be dragged kicking and screaming into office, and then will do the best job they can so that they'll get time off for good behaviour". Probably not practical in real life, though.

    26. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Communism would be perfect with perfect people."

      What the hell are you talking about?! God damn it, if you want your perfect communism co to Cuba or China if you don't like US, no one is forcing you to live here you know! Damned commie!

    27. Re:Ummm... by sketerpot · · Score: 1

      It would be cool if we could have a sort of libertarian pseudo-communism like the one in Voyage From Yesteryear, by James P. Hogan, in most libraries.

    28. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does anyone think that the Chineese really want to continue to annex land?

      Of course not -- they already have quite a bit of land. What they want to annex ix bux and power.

    29. Re:Ummm... by kubrick · · Score: 2

      China isn't communist, though -- it's totalitarian state-run capitalism. Socialist, but not by Marx's definition.

      What I object to isn't the economic system -- it's the lack of individual freedom and the oppression of those who choose to go against government fiat. The economic system of China is very much like the USA, only the government owns all the corporations instead of the corporations owning the government :) (OK, the market has been somewhat liberalized in the past few years but this is still mostly true.) Understandably it's amazingly corrupt...

      It's still possible to speak your mind in the US without being run over by a tank... unless you're *really* on the fringes of society (e.g. Waco)

      (Disclaimer: IANAA -- I am not an American.)

      --
      deus does not exist but if he does
  6. sport huh. by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 2

    Hacking is a contact sport.
    The more people who have contact with one another, the better.
    -- Shaolin Punk,
    Proxy Boss,
    Hacktivismo

    Yea, totally. I'm routing for the Bears!

    --
    "I only speak the truth"
    Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
    1. Re:sport huh. by CrazyBrett · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yea, totally. I'm routing for the Bears!

      Yes, that is one possible joke in this context :)
      The other would be "I'm rooting for the Bears!"

    2. Re:sport huh. by NinjaGaidenIIIcuts · · Score: 1

      Yes, hacking is really sportish, it opens your mind, and it opens the content you're working at, in every aspect.

      Not just software is definable as the "content", but anything you like to do that's benefitial for most ppl.

      Repeat, I said "most", because "some M-inoritie-$" (without mentioning names) aren't much of hacktivism fans.

  7. MOSTLY. by Renraku · · Score: 2

    "Hacktivism chooses open code, mostly." Guess this means a lot of people will be against it because its not totally open.

    --
    Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
  8. cDc blocked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I tried to access the cDc site from my school library and was blocked by a filtering firewall. I can't remember if their site contained sexually explicit content that would justify filtering. Does anybody think that this is an outrage and a politically modivated block?

    1. Re:cDc blocked by duren686 · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's so much sexually explicit content as potentially dangerous borderline-illegal content. It makes sense for your school to block it, just as it would to block instructions on how to make pipe bombs from common materials found around one's school.

      --
      Y2K Compliant since the late 1890s
    2. Re:cDc blocked by blibbleblobble · · Score: 1

      cDc itself says:

      "This site may contain explicit descriptions of or advocate one or more of the following:
      adultery, murder, morbid violence, bad grammar, deviant sexual conduct in violent contexts, or the consumption of alcohol and illegal drugs.
      Then again, it may not.
      Who knows?"

      You can see it for yourself at:
      https://proxy.magusnet.com:443/-_-http://www.cultd eadcow.com/

    3. Re:cDc blocked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make sure you send JLF a thank you note for keeping that proxy online, despite the threats.

    4. Re:cDc blocked by blibbleblobble · · Score: 2

      List of other anonymisers

      I put that up when my mum was blocked from reading my own website at school... I don't know which would be worse, someone at her school blocking a free-software/free-speech site, or the site being added by censorware companies themselves.

      I'd add an anonymiser myself if I had the bandwidth, but it would give people too much false-security to be able to use one without an HTTPS connection

  9. Long on Talk, Short on Substance by nairnr · · Score: 2

    Wow, is it just me or was that just a lot of fluff!

    If you consider some of his topics and questions that he introduces, there is no resolution. While trying to detail what hacktivism is, he makes one statement about it being about creating, rather then destroying, but on the other hand he says that people should be writing disruptive code. Also in the same vein, while talking about writing disruptive code and what should be made, there is a big Closed source bad/open source good (except when you want to hide something malicious). P2P turns into H2H, why napster shut down.. blah, blah, blah.

    While I applaud the use of key phrases and liberal use of rhetoric, I walked (or clicked) away with the sense that I wa no more enlightened...

    1. Re:Long on Talk, Short on Substance by Deagol · · Score: 2
      This was meant to be a visionary kind of statement, to make you sit up and think a little bit. And he clearly states that "disruptive" was in context of the status quo (of censoring entities), not disruption of services, systems, etc.

      He described a problem, described the first step (design), and only hinted at implimentation (open vs closed code, and using P2P -- er, H2H -- systems), but primarily we the readers are meant to be inspired to find, rather than spoon-fed, the solutions (which may not be even be known yet).

    2. Re:Long on Talk, Short on Substance by Liora · · Score: 1

      It's just you. I found it pretty informative. I have known that other countries had been censoring internet access for their citizens for a while, but it never occurred to me that I should try to do anything about it. What I do not feel, having read that, is that I have a clue as to what to do.

      Was that supposed to be a speech for people who already know what to do? Or was it supposed to just make me aware and get me thinking? I thought that he said we shouldn't be writing disruptive code, but that we should practice dissonant compliance. (I know that wasn't the term, but that's what it sounded like.)

      It was beautifully written. I have to give him that.

      --
      Liora
    3. Re:Long on Talk, Short on Substance by electroniceric · · Score: 2
      Well put. Ironic that while the article bashes in the press and pundits who dare attach e to words, the author spends many column-inches predicting e-democratization.

      How often do most Internet users take take advantage of the fact that most major world newspapers are online, and a fish away from being comprehensible in their own language? I certainly can't speak for any Chinese, but the case for truth and light coming shining through the Internet seems vastly overstated to me. I think the reason is that putting the case for lux et libertas et machina is that you get to hack the firewall and call it progress, instead of cleaning up oozing wounds on people afflicted with AIDS.

      I admire the concern for social problems and the desire to get the tech community (indisputably among the world's richest few percent) involved. Let's just remember: technology won't solve a problem unless the remainder of the infrastructure exists to do the task at hand. You could definitely build a massive shipping database in Equatorial Guinea, but that wouldn't get shipments anywhere any faster than the donkey walks.

  10. World War III by loosenut · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article quotes McLuhan: "World War Three will be a guerilla information war with no division between military and civilian participation."

    I firmly believe that this is true, and is going on right now. But I wonder if it is appropriate to mix this concept with hacktivism. Consider Bush's current position. He's convinced most of the world (most of the US, anyway) that he should be given free reign to wage war anywhere in the country, all in the name of fighting terrorism. I'll keep theories about military-industrial complex profits to myself, at this point.

    The point is, he is using major media outlets to spread his message, and in the mainstream media, very few people are questioning him. And at the moment, it is the mainstream media that carries the perception that it reflects the national consciousness.

    Not enough people have switched off their TVs and let their corporate newspaper subscriptions expire to make hacktivism effective. It's unfortunate, and I expect (hope) things will change in the coming years, but for now, it's largely irrevelevant.

    1. Re:World War III by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'll keep theories about military-industrial complex profits to myself, at this point.

      Please do so.

    2. Re:World War III by subhuman666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The only problem with mainstream versus independant media sources is that the majority of US citizens tend to believe that anything that hasn't been reported by a major media outlet isn't verfiable. It's kind of funny actually, considering mainstream media rarely reports anything other than common knowledge and murders in Hollywood(check out CNN's front page)...it's also a little sad, because this seems to be all society wants to hear.

    3. Re:World War III by blibbleblobble · · Score: 2

      How strange. When I read that, I tried to remember my history, tried to think when Bush had been president.

      I just realised he still is... That's scary!

    4. Re:World War III by Odinson · · Score: 2
      " Not enough people have switched off their TVs..."

      Perhaps it's time we hit our neighbors, friends and faimlies with a quick reality check.

      Run on sentence, spoken with accending pitch

      "Over half the country is on the Internet using hundereds of different instantanious media sources reporting at contantly increasing levels of detail all run and funded by competing conflicting interests, and you still wait for six o'clock to wade through a half hour of drivel and meaningless commercials that mean nothing to you to get to the one thing of interest on the TV news..."

      "...uh huh..."

      feel free to use :).

    5. Re:World War III by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 2
      I hear you. There's one guy in Canadian Parlament who's kicking up a fuss about how our government is basically useless because of the PM, but there is only one story in the news up here.

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
    6. Re:World War III by Archie+Steel · · Score: 4, Informative

      A good example of this is the recent attempted coup in Venezuela: North American media have all relayed the information reported in Venezuelan media that government troops fired on anti-Chavez protesters. This, you'll remember, is what prompted his (ultimately unsuccessful) removal from power by the coup leaders -- which subsequently led the Bush administration to trample the ideals of democracy by refusing to denounce the coup (they didn't even call it like that at the time)! While the White House is pathetically trying to backpeddle out of this mess, it is still saying that Chavez will have to respect democracy (how Orwellian!) and not repress political dissent. However, nobody stopped to think if what was shown by the Venezuelan media was the whole truth, even though they are known to be overtly and aggressively anti-Chavez. As it happens, testimony from people who were there, including an Irish filmmaker, is starting to reveal that government troops were not the only ones to shoot, and perhaps not even the first one. Another telling detail: most of those killed by snipers on that day were Chavistas (pro-Chavez) who had come to confront the anti-Chavez demonstration...

      --

      Reminder: find a new sig
    7. Re:World War III by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >have all relayed the information reported in Venezuelan media

      You really are a moron. I'm from Venezuela and the media is being censored by Chavez. They are not reporting anything that is against Chavez. The constitution is lifted and he is in full power. Basically It's an undeclared dictatorship.

      The US didn't denounce the coup because he's clearly a dictator/communist leader. Amongst other things he is best friends with Fidel (so much so that Castro spent his birthday in Venezuela).

      Not only that he's in contact with the colombian guerilla; and there are many reports of weapons being bought for 'police use' (1500 firearms for a small police force).

      He also has "Círculos Bolivarianos", which are groups of armed men in the poorest neighbourhoods, there to produce terror and instigate civil unrest (and pro-Chavez feelings amongst the poorest elements of society).

      I checked out the irish website, and they are either sadly mistaken or just don't speak enough spanish.

      If you want to read what really happened, see the articles by Poleo.

    8. Re:World War III by Stonehand · · Score: 2

      In Chavez's case, it's not surprising that suspicion fell on him pretty rapidly. Recall that he was involved in two previous armed conspiracies to overthrow the government... it's actually quite remarkable that they allowed him to run at all, really. Apparently Venezuela's more forgiving than most countries in that regard.

      --
      Only the dead have seen the end of war.
    9. Re:World War III by Glytch · · Score: 2

      The National Post is a joke. It's just our version of CNN. Now the Globe and Mail on the other hand, that's a decent paper. Not perfect, but decent.

      Besides, the mace story doesn't deserve wide coverage. Some idiot MP throwing a temper tantrum isn't as important as, say, the 3 boards of inquiry looking into the two US F16 pilots that killed 4 soldiers.

    10. Re:World War III by Ankh · · Score: 1

      McLuhan was a visionary, yes; even he didn't predict the extent to which media would be controlled. See Transnationale for information about who owns which media company.

      There are several more or less independent Media firms and portals - this is a snapshot taken from several, last Summer.

      I once went to a Linux Users' group meeting in Toronto, held in the building where Marshall McLuhan taught, which was an interesting experience.

      It is clear that we have to act to keep any independent news at all. Compare the BBC with CNN, and then realise that, in effect, these are both government organizations. Luckily, in the US, the New York Times and its subsidiary, the Boston Globe have more balanced reporting than CNN; perhaps they have to, to stay alive.

      When your news is controlled by the government, so are your opinions. Example: are the computers being resisted in Cuba because the country is trying to keep its culture and way of life in the face of increasing globalisation, or is it because computers are a luxury they can't afford (don't pretend they increase farmers' productivity when the farm workers have them) or is it to control the spread of ideas? To look at that in detail you'd have to ask whether photocopiers and printing presses are controlled.

      The article is openly anti-communist: it wants everywhere to be like America, and measures Freedom in terms of American-ness, it seems. I want to measure Freedom differently.

      Freedom is the ability to form your own opinions and to act on them. Freedom must be tempered with Responsibility towards other people: you are not free to limit other people's Freedom. Opinions must be based on Information and Understanding, and Society must work hard to make that possible. In a truly Free society everyone can go to college or university to study to the limit of their abilities. In a truly Free society, Rights are replaced by real choices.

      How do we get there in the West, when we have been so tied to the idea that Freedom means Power over Other People?

      Perhaps hactivism is part of it. But it has to be aimed at education, at flow of information, not simply at sharing bigoted ideals and corruption.

      What Freedom we have, will only stay, will only grow, if we share it.

      --
      Live barefoot!
      free engravings/woodcuts
    11. Re:World War III by Archie+Steel · · Score: 2

      Yeah, like we should believe you. You're nothing more than part of the propaganda machine, spewing lies so that you can profit from good ole-fashioned corruption once the "old gang" is back in power. If you had any balls you wouldn't post as an Anonymous Coward but would try to support your fabrications with some evidence. Of course, there is no such evidence so you just invent incredibly moronic statements like:

      He also has "Círculos Bolivarianos", which are groups of armed men in the poorest neighbourhoods, there to produce terror and instigate civil unrest (and pro-Chavez feelings amongst the poorest elements of society)

      That doesn't make any sense: you can't generate support for you by terrorizing people! You must really think we are a bunch of idiots to say things like that! The fact is, the great majority of the people stand behind Chavez because he has tried (with moderate success) to address the wide gap between the rich and the poor in Venezuela and tried to dismantle the network of corruption (of which you are obviously a part of) that poisoned the country.

      If you really don't like Chavez, vote him out, don't break the law with a coup. This whole story has a real embarassment for the U.S., and the whole world has noticed. Don't expect much more help from them in the months to come...

      --

      Reminder: find a new sig
    12. Re:World War III by Professor+Nova · · Score: 1

      Obviously you show your ignorance. Chavez is a marxist dictator, not a legitimate leader. Your banter reminds me of the Chinese leadership's remarks about Tianammen Square.

      As for voting him out, you obviously know little to nothing about central and south american "politics" vote fraud and voter intimidation are par for the course. It is likely that the army arrested him hoping to advert civil war, incidents like that start long and bloody guerrella wars in countries like Venezuela.

      And as far as Indymedia.org being a legitimate source of info, don't make me laugh. The bias is obvious.

      Sometimes the 900lb. gorilla in the world is right.

      "I want a future brighter than polished diamonds" -Justice by Aki Kudo (pardon the translation)

    13. Re:World War III by Archie+Steel · · Score: 2

      Obviously you show your arrogance. Chavez was elected, therefore he is a legitimate leader. The fact that he may be left-leaning, a socialist or even a communist has nothing to do with it. In a democray, if people vote for you you are elected. That's how it works, in case you didn't know. There were no signs during the last election that the vote was rigged and in fact even his political opponents have not tried to play that card. Your banter reminds me of cold-war era fearmongering by strident right-winger that we had to napalm thousands of civilians in order to "fight communism".

      I know quite a lot more about South American politics that you'd give me credit for: no left-wing government has ever seized power by vote-rigging and intimidation - that has always been the perogative of militaristic juntas. AFAIK, the only non-elected left-wing government in Latin America is Cuba. But even then, if you actually took the time to look at how their political system worked, you'd see that they do elect representatives, who do exert influence on how the country is run. While I would prefer if Castro called in elections (he would probably be elected anyway), Cuba is still more of a democratic country than, says, Colombia.

      For your information, it wasn't the army who conducted the coup, it was a coalition of generals, industrials, union leaders and church leaders - in other words, all of those who really profit when democracy remains just an empty shell. Most of the lower officers and foot soldiers supported Chavez, hence his return to power. For someone calling me ignorant, you sure need to read up on this a little!

      As for indymedia, it is no more biased than The Economist or The New York Times...it's just that its bias doesn't agree with your own. It really doesn't matter, however, since most of the information I've gotten on this matter has come from "mainstream" source (such as the NYT, the Washington Post, Reuters, Associated Press, the Irish Times, the International Herald Tribune). So don't try to pigeonhole me with your condescending attitude - I'm confident my media sources cover a wider range than yours...

      For the 900lb. gorilla, only one thing matters: its own interests. Similarly, democracy is only important for the U.S. government if it suits America's national interest. This has been the case since at least 1953, with the CIA -backed coup against Iran and has been going on ever since. I know it, you know it, so let's drop the bullshit.

      For the record, the suppresion of democratic protest at Tiananmen Square was a tragedy. On that we agree. But to draw a parralel with what happened in Venezuela is both ludicrous and misleading. Note, however, that the anti-democratic repression in China did not prevent it from keeping Most Favored Nation status (for trade purposes) with the U.S., allegedly the champion of democracy...

      --

      Reminder: find a new sig
  11. Pick your cause before you pick the site... by Rorschach1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    To quote cDc at DefCon a couple of years ago.

    Personally I think 'hacktivism' is a grossly overused excuse for vandalism. Hacking sites as a 'service' to the operators is passe... now the kiddies have to act like they've got some sort of noble political agenda.

    1. Re:Pick your cause before you pick the site... by djwavelength · · Score: 2, Informative

      they repeat that view in the article, and then go on to define "Hacktivism" in the cDc sense of the word.

    2. Re:Pick your cause before you pick the site... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Earth First, make Mars our bitch!

    3. Re:Pick your cause before you pick the site... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty impressive that they seem to realize that "hacking" means writing code, not exploiting flaws or corrupting data.

    4. Re:Pick your cause before you pick the site... by 56ker · · Score: 2

      Well what do you expect when it's based on an original article written by a cDc member?

  12. Save the trees by ZaneMcAuley · · Score: 1, Troll

    Im a hacktivist.

    --
    ----- Whats wrong with this picture? http://www.revoh.org:1234/whatswrong
  13. Re:Article read better with special hat by Alien54 · · Score: 2
    The article reads better with a tin-foil hat. God you people with the free speech and shit... Get a grip, your rights aren't being killed....

    This is in keeping with the biblial imperative:

    "Thou shalt not kill"

    Torture is another matter entirely, however.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
  14. hacktivism.com by m.e.l.l.e.n.t.i.n.e · · Score: 1

    Mmm... I'm totally gonna buy that domain (hacktivism.com) that they're selling. Think of all the wonderful things I could do with it. Although, I kinda feel sorry for the idiot that mispelled it and got the wrong domain for them. Wait... no I don't. *pointing finger and laughing*

    --

    Producer: NEXT!!
    Ralph Wiggum: Chicken necks
  15. Random data versus encrypted random data? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It's the same thing.

  16. H2H sounds good but... by Shaper+of+Myths · · Score: 0

    will it have good pr0n and warez? =)

  17. Nothing New by thryllkill · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Civil liberties are being oppressed the world over, and us techies are pissed!

    This article tells us of some of the horrible things going on in the world and all, but it is nothing we didn't know was going on.

    Hackers collaborate over the web to fight oppression and close mindedness!

    Sound at all like a certain upstart OS?

    I really did like this article, don't get me wrong but it is very lite on the important information like what they are actually doing about it. I doubt making it easier for a Chinese person to rip music off of the internet is going to bring them to the enlightened western thinking necessary to invoke social change.

    What apps are you creating to further this change, where can I get the source (since you sited open source as being the obvious choice among hacktivist coders)? What can I do to help? This article, while being interesting, served no real purpose.

    --

    Note to self: No more arguing with the faithful.

    1. Re:Nothing New by Hydrogenoid · · Score: 1

      Easy... Try the project (named peek a booty) website.
      You can also go visit the Hacktivismo one, or the cDc one...
      Enjoy!

  18. Ya but... by iONiUM · · Score: 0, Troll

    They made back orifice. I'm pretty sure I didn't "learn" anything, or get any more "free rights" from using. All I got was passwords which allowed me to cause havoc on the net.
    I think the wrong people are representing "hackers"..

    1. Re:Ya but... by thryllkill · · Score: 1

      You obviously didn't use back oriface since it is a remote admin tool and not a password sinffer, huh?

      --

      Note to self: No more arguing with the faithful.

    2. Re:Ya but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you think a 'remote admin tool' is used for, skippy?

    3. Re:Ya but... by iONiUM · · Score: 1

      ... Ok i don't think you used it. Back orifice would sweep blocks of IPs for someone who had it installed, so you could "REMOTE ADMIN" it, in other words, GET THEIR PASSWORDS.
      Very handy for dialup access accounts (when they were popular)

    4. Re:Ya but... by thryllkill · · Score: 1

      If you have a remote admin tool installed on someone's computer you don't need their password. duh!

      --

      Note to self: No more arguing with the faithful.

  19. Uhhhh.. Sorry? by quantaman · · Score: 4, Funny

    In 1968 the Canadian communications guru Marshall McLuhan stated, "World War Three will be a guerilla information war with no division between military and civilian participation."

    So if the war is being waged on the Internet by civilians would that make the /. effect an attack? Maybe we should call it a /. blitz or /. offensive. On that note we've been hitting a lot more good guys than bad guys, sheesh! Us geeks can't even get a techie war right!!

    --
    I stole this Sig
    1. Re:Uhhhh.. Sorry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most SlashDotters are American +
      Terrible aim evidenced by Americans =
      Not much surpise.

    2. Re:Uhhhh.. Sorry? by idontneedanickname · · Score: 1

      yeah, and we can create divisions and have logos and....

    3. Re:Uhhhh.. Sorry? by MullerMn · · Score: 1

      On that note we've been hitting a lot more good guys than bad guys, sheesh!

      Well this is an American website, isn't it? I thought that's the way you guys do things? ;)

      --
      Andy

  20. Re:Article read better with special hat by L1nUx+h4x0r · · Score: 0

    They're out there. Just trying to take away all of our rights. So far they haven't been able to completely succeed. However, do you really know what's in the water? That's right, government mind control drugs! In addition, they're watching, listening, and even smelling you 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. They know when you take a piss in your neighbors pool, even though you don't think anyway was watching. They were, believe me.

    Just because you don't want to face reality doesn't mean it isn't true!

    Don't turn off your telescreen, just turn it down and go into the corner to read. I wouldn't use anything more than a candle for light, though. They'll see it anyway.

    --
    The GPL makes software more like your mom. Free and open to all.
  21. Re:Article read better with special hat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Bad interpretation.. should be Thou Shalt Not Murder. If we all spoke Hebrew, we would understand this.

  22. Open source Food by RealisticWeb.com · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have two things to say about this article.

    1) It was VERY VERY long

    2) I really liked the analogy of OSS to Resturants.

    Think about it. The majority of people never think twice about never seeing the ingrediants, but there are some who feel "I'm putting this stuff in my system, I have the right to know what's in it!". Some even have good reasons like peanut reactions and so forth.

    The resturant will say "If we tell you how we made it, we will lose business". I think that's nonscence personally. Ten to one, I'm not going to be able to cook that by myself anyway, and I'm just going to come back to the restaurant to get it donecorrectly. Plus if I do make it and feed it to all my friends and they say "where did you get that recipie?" and I tell them, don't you think they are going to go check out the menu for themselfs?

    And finally, what if the majority of the people eating at your restaurant wanted the food cooked a different way, but didn't have any other choice on the menu? They are going to take those ingrediants and make the food better. If the cook was smart enough, he might be able to learn from what the other cook did, and make his own product better!

    Am I making my analogy clear here, or is this just gibberish?

    --
    Sigs are out of style, so I'm not going to use one...oh wait..
    1. Re:Open source Food by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's clear... but there's a fault in that argument.

      Sure, you'd have the right to see what you are eating and how it's prepared... but so would McCompetitor... and steals your recipe and takes you out of business. So, in the end you lose out... the reason we have patents and so on I guess.

      Ok, so patents are there to protect that but there are things you just can't patent.

      Peace.

    2. Re:Open source Food by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      You've obviously never worked in a restaurant. Outside of maybe a TGIFridays or a McDonalds, the vast majority of chefs and cooks are more than happy to have you come back into the kitchen and will show you exactly how they cook your meal.

    3. Re:Open source Food by blibbleblobble · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ok I'll bite.

      Lookup news on MacDonalds, GM crops, and hormone-injected beef in France.

      Also lookup the US trade-barrier-attacks on French roquefort and fois-gras.

      Maybe MacDoSerfs in america don't care about the shit they eat (yes, that claim can be proven) but if "You are what you eat" then yes, Europeans do care about the recipe used at their restaurants.

    4. Re:Open source Food by RealisticWeb.com · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes the COOK is, just like the person doing the coding usualy is too, it's the companys that have the restrictive policies. The cook might show you how he cooked it, but if the regional manager finds out he is likely to lose his job. Of cource I'm talking about large restarunts/companies. The smaller locals one will be more fiendly.

      --
      Sigs are out of style, so I'm not going to use one...oh wait..
    5. Re:Open source Food by fishebulb · · Score: 2

      what you actually believe in "Secret ingredients"

      a competitor can easily figure out the recipe. but generally they put their own style on it. it make it a little different.

    6. Re:Open source Food by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

      How about some evidence that GM crops or hormone injected beef is actually unhealthy for you. If the governments of both the US and Europe see fit to let people eat it, then why should a group of malcontents in Europe be able to interefer in the commerce of GM/homeone injected foods in their region?

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    7. Re:Open source Food by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the governments of both the US and Europe see fit to let people eat it, then why should a group of malcontents in Europe be able to interefer in the commerce of GM/homeone injected foods in their region?

      For a long time, the governments of the US and Europe saw fit to let people keep slaves, need I expand more on that argument?

    8. Re:Open source Food by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who needs it to be unhealthy? Surely the very fact that it was depriving French farmers of their livelyhood is enough to justify French farmers refusing to eat it?

    9. Re:Open source Food by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The resturant will say "If we tell you how we made it, we will lose business". I think that's nonscence personally. Ten to one, I'm not going to be able to cook that by myself anyway
      So what? That doesn't mean they won't lose business when someone who *can* make it goes in and gets the recipe. (Of course, what *actually* differentiates most restaurants is not their recipes, but that's just a weakness in the analogy. I doubt restaurants are even all that secretive with their recipes).
    10. Re:Open source Food by kubrick · · Score: 1

      It was VERY VERY long

      Go and read Moby Dick or War and Peace and then come back to me and whine about that article some more.

      Sheesh, kids these days.

      --
      deus does not exist but if he does
  23. Re:Article read better with special hat by MaxwellStreet · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Losing your rights (and especially your right to privacy) is not going to happen in one fell swoop.

    Rather, it's more like the oft-spoken-of boiling frog - if privacy is taken away in tiny little increments, then before long it will be compromised in a big way without any substantial opposition.

    I'm not saying that we should all wear tinfoil hats - but constantly recognizing (and opposing, where necessary) the gradual erosion of our right to privacy and governmental abuse of information is our only defense against being... boiled alive.

    The government wants to know more and more about us these days - the excuse du jour is homeland security and counter-terrorism. Throw in stopping child-porn and just about any legislator will support any bill that enables more monitoring of citizens.

    Better to be watchful and vocal - without screaming that the sky is falling - than to sit quietly, watching the privacy we enjoy now disappear for our children.

  24. Re:Article read better with special hat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Already starting on that winter wool coat? But, winter just ended...

    Ignoring the wolves doesn't make them go away.

  25. Go Hacktivism, Down with TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    You would think that a medium that offers no good information, barely passes for entertainment, and peppers you with commercials ad nauseum would ultimately fail. The fact that it has not yet indicates that there may be some addictive qualities to TV which should make it subject to FDA approval. There are actually some interesting studies that show a brain on TV is very much like a brain on Heroin, and that withdrawal from TV (though not like Heroin) is very difficult, moreso than caffine, and causes significant mood disruption.

    The media is a mouthpiece of corporate America, and therefore corporate America has been able to HIJACK the government largley through obfuscation of the facts and manufacturing consent.

    Turn of the TV. Go for a hike. Smoke a joint. Hang out nude with a good friend at some hot springs. Then think about what a good life might be and see if TV is a part of it. If it's not, turn it off and throw it away.

    Anonymouse, but not cowardly.

    1. Re:Go Hacktivism, Down with TV by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

      Its kind of funny that you mention TV is possibly addictive and then in your advice you tell people to go smoke some weed.

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    2. Re:Go Hacktivism, Down with TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      only funny if you buy the government propaganda that using a drug is abusing a drug. Some people can use drugs once in a while and never be addicted. Fewer still can do the same with TV.

  26. Rock On by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I *challenge* each and every one of you who would boycott MS or the RIAA to pick up a local newspaper and see what's going on in y our town this weekend.

    Challenge excepted. Live music, chics, and getting lit - cheers to that.

  27. Re:Article read better with special hat by FortKnox · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Torture is another matter entirely, however

    I'll get modded down for this (and you) are completely off topic, but toture is just as bad.

    Interesting read? Try Matthew 5 - 7: Sermon on the Mount. That's some radical religious thinking for you.

    Don't mean to stir up a religious battle or flamewar. Just thought I'd respond to your misperception.

    --
    Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
  28. back in 1995 by Syre · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Back in 1995 I had some arguments... that is um... discussions (in Cannes at Milia) with Nicholas Negroponte and John Perry Barlow. Both Negroponte and Barlow believed that the Internet was an unstoppable force that would inevitably make countries like China become free.

    My argument was that the Chinese and other repressive governments would be sure to set up national proxies with filtering that blocked out sites the government didn't want people to see and kept track of what people were accessing.

    Both Negroponte and Barlow told me that was impossible and would never happen. They also pointed out that the TCP/IP is designed to route around obstacles.

    Well, I've been proven right (so why am I not running Media Lab or flying around the world giving speeches?). China and other countries (Singapore, etc.) have in fact put in national proxies and are blocking thousands of sites, tracking people's usage, and putting people in jail.

    On the other hand, I think that there is a hope that Barlow and Negroponte will eventually turn out to be right in the end, as hackers and other renegades put in alternative links via satellite and other means, which bypass these government blockades.

    If enough of that happens, the blockades will come down, since they won't be useful any longer.

    But I think there will be a long hard struggle befoe that happens.

    1. Re:back in 1995 by First_In_Hell · · Score: 1, Insightful
      I don't want to be a troll, but god knows I am sure there are some asshole senators in the government that would restrict the net here in the US if they could get away with it. They probably think it would be good for us.

      Shit slimeball scum companies like Gator are already spying on me.

    2. Re:back in 1995 by Geekonomical · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You just included Singapore and China in the same bandwagon. I guess folks in America could afford to think a little bit more outside the obsession towards free speech. Singapore doesn't block websites that criticizes its own government. In plain simple words it blocks porn. What have we done so far to make the internet a safe environment for kids? Is there any onus on the pr0n site owners? You can easily get away with running a free porn post site which can be (potentially) visited by any age group.

      When it comes to free speech, everybody is up for hactivism or activism. When it comes to responsibility......

    3. Re:back in 1995 by mochan_s · · Score: 1
      Well, I've been proven right (so why am I not running Media Lab or flying around the world giving speeches?). China and other countries (Singapore, etc.) have in fact put in national proxies and are blocking thousands of sites, tracking people's usage, and putting people in jail.

      Those firewalls are only symbolic. They block CNN, BBC. You were right that it would be attempted but it's not really possible. Anyways, what do the Chinese have to repress more than any other country?

      I didn't know they were tracking people's usage. I though that was more done by companies in the US with spyware.

    4. Re:back in 1995 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point is that it is not very effective, and the Minister for Information and the Arts has acknoledged that the act is merely symbolic. Why do symbolic but ineffective things?

    5. Re:back in 1995 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Let's hear it for responsibility. Like the responsibility of a parent to keep his or her rugrat away from things they deem harmful.

      It's not my responsibility to keep anyone else's child away from things they don't like. If you want to shelter your kids from reality as a method of preparing them for it, you're welcome to do so, but not on my dime.

      --blob

    6. Re:back in 1995 by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Responsibility? Well I'd guess you'd have to assume that porn in general is just plain bad for children. Just seeing naked people getting busy is going to mess them up right? Well not everyone agrees. So don't try to claim the moral high ground or assume we're all up there with you if you do.

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    7. Re:back in 1995 by Stonehand · · Score: 2

      What might they have to repress? Well, they're not even in the same league as North Korea as far as repression goes, but...

      It would not be too surprising if their entrance in the WTO eventually leads to greater unrest in urban areas, considering that the lowering of trade barriers will hurt the more inefficient state industries, and that the guaranteed-job entitlement may need to be sharply cut back...

      Figure that they're also probably a bit more paranoid than most nations with regards to unrest, dissent and insurrections. They've had some pretty significant rebellions and civil wars in their long history, and they're even now still having to deal with separatist terrorists...

      --
      Only the dead have seen the end of war.
    8. Re:back in 1995 by mochan_s · · Score: 1

      Why is the WTO and economic factors repression? Why wouldn't they want to keep it away from people? It would screw up their economic planning if they did that.

      Well, if you consider Genghis Kahn to be the significant rebels!!

      I was thinking more along the lines of religious repression along the lines of Tibet (we all know how that goes), Falun Gong and maybe some human right abuses that the govt. is clamined to have done.

      But I don't know how much of that is Western media passing it thru an exagerration filter to display Chinese as repressed and the leaders as immoral and so on.

    9. Re:back in 1995 by kubrick · · Score: 2

      Singapore == single-party government that regularly sues local and overseas journalists for writing unfavourable articles about its totalitarian nature.

      Gee, I wonder why Singapore gets lumped in with China. A benevolent dictator is still a dictator.

      --
      deus does not exist but if he does
  29. Hacktivism? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that a peer technology to Activision?

  30. Re:Article read better with special hat by sugrshack · · Score: 1

    not with a bang but with a whimper right? read some of this guy

    --
    I can't believe it's not lard!
  31. The definition of 'activist' : by JonKatzIsAnIdiot · · Score: 2, Flamebait

    Someone who screams incessantly about something they know nothing about.

    1. Re:The definition of 'activist' : by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A-freaking-men...also, they're occasionally fun to photograph, as long as the weather holds up tomorrow. THey got rained on today [in D.C.]...suckers.

    2. Re:The definition of 'activist' : by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hmmm... sounds like the pot calling the kettle black

  32. Please crap-dot, tell me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...since the wicked witch took my brain, I can't decide and need your wisdom for my own.

    Is it a:
    - good read?
    - interesting read?
    - fun read?
    - must read?

    This tag needs to be on every article. You missed a few this week...what's wrong?
    ======
    News...if all of the sand in North Africa were spread out to a depth of 3 meters, it would cover the entire Sahara Desert...it's a dry read, but you'll enjoy it.

  33. Well by MisterBlister · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Hacking is wrong.

    1. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      The Jargon Lexicon, section H:

      hacker n.

      [originally, someone who makes furniture with an axe] 1. A person who enjoys exploring the details of programmable systems and how to stretch their capabilities, as opposed to most users, who prefer to learn only the minimum necessary. 2. One who programs enthusiastically (even obsessively) or who enjoys programming rather than just theorizing about programming. 3. A person capable of appreciating hack value. 4. A person who is good at programming quickly. 5. An expert at a particular program, or one who frequently does work using it or on it; as in `a Unix hacker'. (Definitions 1 through 5 are correlated, and people who fit them congregate.) 6. An expert or enthusiast of any kind. One might be an astronomy hacker, for example. 7. One who enjoys the intellectual challenge of creatively overcoming or circumventing limitations. 8. [deprecated] A malicious meddler who tries to discover sensitive information by poking around. Hence `password hacker', `network hacker'. The correct term for this sense is cracker.

      You were saying?

    2. Re:Well by idontneedanickname · · Score: 1

      that's right

    3. Re:Well by Mizery+De+Aria · · Score: 1

      hacker

      \Hack"er\, n. One who, or that which, hacks. Specifically: A cutting instrument for making notches; esp., one used for notching pine trees in collecting turpentine; a hack.

      It depends on what you hack. If you hack bodies, that's just wrong.

      --
      If you're religishitty, KILL YOURSELF!
  34. hacktivist-to-hacktivist (H2H) networks. by cdf12345 · · Score: 1

    Sounds like a good idea,
    I'd love to know of any that are in existance,

    I'd say it's more of a hopeful theory.

    --
    Chicago2600.net more than a lifestyle, its a survival trait.
  35. Re:Article read better with special hat by PsychoFurryEwok · · Score: 1

    True...true...our rights aren't being killed (yet). But they are being restricted. The more restriction, the closer they come to be killed. If the restrictions keep coming, the less we will be aloud to do without having someone look over our backs or accuse us, etc. Just something to think about, neh?

  36. They should play it backwards by kaladorn · · Score: 2

    Then they'll get the hidden message in the random data. ;)

    Like playing Ann Murray's Snowbird backwards and getting the message about the impending Canadian invasion...

    --
    -- Mal: "Well they tell you: never hit a man with a closed fist. But it is, on occasion, hilarious."
    1. Re:They should play it backwards by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 2
      Seen this yet?

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
    2. Re:They should play it backwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, this isn't far-fetched. (Remember the million monkey/million typewriter thing.) The space we're working in is All Possible Keys. Big set. Eventually they will find a complementary key that decrypts the message to some sensible text. I predict that this message will be '42'.
      I have discovered a truly remarkable proof, which this margin is too small to contain (sincere apologies and respect to Fermat; this is a joke.), that that decrypting any randomly generated text will decrypt, with some key, to '42'.
      Alas, Douglas, your work was not in vain.

      (Man, let me apologize in advance to the memories of both Fermat and Douglas Adams.)

  37. Sites that bring you news and let you act on it by daemon+lover · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Check out sites like weseeyou.org. Great info and it lets you act on the news you read. It's now my homepage. I'm tired of standing quietly by while Republicans and Democrats let corporations dictate U.S. policy.

  38. Irony so thick you can taste it by kaladorn · · Score: 2

    The guy who is decrying the free speech crowd is posting as an AC.... could their be a greater irony?

    Out of curiosity, at exactly what points are "rights being killed"? Your argument seems to be that if the entire free world doesn't come to an end with chaos in the streets, that a particular trend in society isn't anything to worry about.

    The right to personal privacy and the right to free speech are perhaps ill-understood and used as an excuse to justify crapulent behaviour, but that doesn't change the fact that those rights are the cornerstone of quality of life in a civilized country. Rights can be destroyed all at once (Communist invasion of Czechoslovakia fer instance) or eaten away at gradually (recent trends in the G8). The end result (given enough time) will be fundamentally indistinguishable if the brakes aren't put on.

    Maybe you'd prefer to examine your rights in the context of "things I can identify because I used to have them", but I'd rather not....

    --
    -- Mal: "Well they tell you: never hit a man with a closed fist. But it is, on occasion, hilarious."
  39. There is another net behind the H2H ... by software_non_olet · · Score: 1

    ...and that net is not the internet, B2B or H2H -- it's simply conscience to conscience. And that (say) +2+ net is going to take over, when times get really chaotic (which is no longer so far away as it was before Bush became the instrument of 'righteous war making' IMO).

    All other nets - especiall the H2H net - are just the physical surface of that underlying connection. Please let's not forget that. Sorry, that I sound that twisted, but that's my reality. Must have been a drunken preacher some lifes ago .o)

    Viewed from that angle fighting the suppressing government, economic, military and/or criminal structures (yes, I know, I'm putting all in one basket) will no longer be intelligent from a certain level onwards. The members of the +2+ net will simply avoid places and times, where the 'right' and 'wrong' ones are fighting each other.

    I wonder how many will be left after that World War III. Hence, dear H2H members, please don't play and pay with your lifes. Be carefull, don't let yourself become a member of the powergames too.

  40. Mail to politicians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aha! EMail random encrypted (sic) files to all politicians...

    1. Re:Mail to politicians by blibbleblobble · · Score: 1

      Strangely, that's exactly the signature I use in my email:


      (my email)@blibbleblobble.co.uk
      www.blibbleblobble.co .uk
      Encryption key on website

      -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----

      qANQR1DDBAQDAAHJSrgR4/zWmgIlOx7SKHg309W0V67HK6C3 Xp F1fXNrg8y6WQw6
      7rX04W3zM/H0mDE83Xm+mi9RPJkaWSSrvW 8Xpm6mOgVFAvSqKY s5
      =IoDB
      -----END PGP MESSAGE-----

      The above phrase is encrypted. I do not know the key, nobody does.
      If you fail to decrypt the above phrase on request, you can go to
      jail. See the RIP law for etails. http://www.stand.org.uk/v


  41. Strange - not offtopic, cites quote from cDc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oxblood, stick to writing for the Canadian newspaper "National Post". Your scare mongering works better there.

  42. hmmm... obligatory trolling on this one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    media is a wonderful one sided thing. The CDC has learned to manipulate just as any other politician. 4 years ago, they jumped into this game after another group basically flipped off the chinese government, first with a web defacement, and second with major server breaches throughout their government, medical and educational realms. The Chinese complained. Nothing could be done. The CDC recognized this, that since another group could get away with this, so could they. They jumped into the foray. Not saying that their contributions aren't valid, they are, but they defintely play it for all its worth. Their P2P software is a good idea, but infantile compared to some of the projects that are in the works. There is a private, encrypted internet being developed right now, complete with all the services needed for it to function. Access is allowed only thorough a friend basis. Pay it forward. The real hackers of the net will have their information through the private internet, the DMCA will be powerless, the worlds governing bodies will be powerless without a gross violation of civil rights. Finally, China and other countries will be able to have their nations elite take ideas and share them with their populace. It is the duty of everyone that possess such knowledge to share it with the rest. This is not just about human rights, this IS cyberwarfare. Think resistence. Things may not change for these people, but they will no longer be blinded to the truth. So, next time you credit the CDC with starting this little revolution, dig through some old news articles and
    look to see who actually fired the first shots in this war.

  43. Re:Article read better with special hat by Maroof · · Score: 1

    Anonymous, Heh Heh, if Christ had the internet he'd been spammed by pontius pilot, his email read and the photochoppers would have put his head on the body of brittany spears. As it was it happened just slightly differently. When we really look at what 'rights are being killed' there really aren't any 'being killed', at least I have yet to see the crosses going up on the edge of town and haven't seen the romans (Congress) rounding up masses for crucifixtion. Look around, no-one is being repressed!

  44. Actions speak louder than words by dgroskind · · Score: 4, Informative

    Our definition of hacktivism is, "using technology to advance human rights through electronic media."

    You might not know it from reading the manifesto, but cDc and Hactivismo have actually been working on a product called Peekabooty that allows users to sneak through the firewalls that oppressive regimes set up to restrict access to the Internet.

    Hacktivism chooses open code, mostly.

    Peekabooty is open source under the GPL but the FAQ advises people who would like to do testing: "You should have enough equipment to run at least three nodes, which means three MS Windows machines (we are in the process of porting it to Linux). You should also be skilled with tracing through code using Visual C++ or your own favorite debugger."

    the main challenge for hackers is to keep focused on the goal of liberating the Internet.

    There seems to have been some kind of falling out between cDc and Hactivismo over Peekabooty. The lead developer Paul Baranowski (aka Drunken Master) said he has "decided to sever ties with the Hacktivismo group but he will continue to develop the Peekabooty app. Occasionally developers can't find the environment they need to do their best work and now is one such time."

  45. Can somebody explain this? by josh+crawley · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Evidently, some AC posted a link about cDc (the main group in the article) how they offer to help the government.

    Now let's get a piece of that article linked above...

    So we intend to re-architect Back Orifice
    from the ground up. There will be absolutely no
    shared code between the two projects,
    in order to skirt detection by commercial
    antivirus packages. The code will remain
    totally secret. The software will never
    surface publicly.
    And it will be far
    more stealthy than anything we have ever
    released, demoed, or publicly discussed.


    What's this about? Are they friend of foe??? And lastly, the thread was modded -1, offtopic. Evidently somebody didn't want us to see that....

    josh crawley
    1. Re:Can somebody explain this? by I+The+Man+in+Black+I · · Score: 1

      If you do not comprehend the sarcasm in that article, you should be shot instantly. Evolution doesn't need you.

      --

      <sig>what-mib-says | mib2english</sig>
    2. Re:Can somebody explain this? by Ashcrow · · Score: 1

      It was a joke. Go ahead and email them at the cDc and they'll tell you it themselves. The FBI and cDc are not exaclty on the best terms.

    3. Re:Can somebody explain this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HOAX

  46. Dear John Ashcroft - Inhale @# +1 ; Inspiring @# by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Courtesy of About 420

    Connotative Use/Meaning

    420 is a phreak's (and not just a hippie's) favorite number for a
    variety of reasons, or maybe for no reason at all, but colloquially
    the number says pot -- "let's smoke pot", or "someone's smoking
    pot", or "gee, i really like pot", or "time to smoke pot", either by
    time (4:20 a.m. or p.m.), date (April 20th), or otherwise (e.g. State
    Route 420). April 20th at 4:20 is marked by annual events in
    Mount Tamalpais, CA (an informal gathering); Marin Conty, CA
    (the 420 Hemp Fest); Ann Arbor, MI (the Hash Bash); and
    Washington, D.C. (buildup towards the July 4th Smoke-In).

    Original Source(s)

    Conventional wisdom: The most common tale is that 420 is the
    police radio code or criminal code (and therefore the police "call")
    in certain part(s) of California (e.g. in Los Angeles or San
    Francisco) for having spotted someone consuming cannabis
    publicly, i.e. "pot smoking in progress"; that local cannabis users
    picked up on the code and began celebrating the number temporally
    (esp. 4:20 a.m., 4:20 p.m., and April 20); that the number became
    nationally popularized in the late 1980s and, more ferverently, in
    the early- to mid-1990s; and is colloquially applied to a variety of
    relaxed and/or inspired contexts, including not only pot
    consumption but also a "good time" more generally (in contrast to
    the drug war surrounding).

    Conventions are legends: 420 is not police radio code for
    anything, anywhere. Checks of criminal codes (including those of
    the City of San Francisco, the City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles
    County, the State of California, and the federal penal code) suggest
    that the origin is neither Californian nor federal (the two best
    guesses). For instance, California Penal Code 420 defines as a
    misdemeanor the hindrance of use ("obstructing entry") of public
    lands, and California Family Code 420 defines what constitutes a
    wedding ceremony (Marco). One state does come close: "The
    Illinois Department of Revenue classifies the Alcoholic Liquor Act
    under Part 420, and the Cannabis and Controlled Substances Tax
    Act are next, under Part 428." (RB 5/19/99)

    True story?: "According to Steven Hager, editor of High Times,
    the term 420 originated at San Rafael High School, in 1971,
    among a group of about a dozen pot-smoking wiseacres who
    called themselves the Waldos. The term 420 was shorthand for the
    time of day the group would meet, at the campus statue of Louis
    Pasteur, to smoke pot. ``Waldo Steve,'' a member of the group who
    now owns a business in San Francisco, says the Waldos would
    salute each other in the school hallway and say ``420 Louis!'' The
    term was one of many invented by the group, but it was the one
    that caught on. ``It was just a joke, but it came to mean all kinds of
    things, like `Do you have any?' or `Do I look stoned?' '' he said.
    ``Parents and teachers wouldn't know what we were talking about.''
    The term took root, and flourished, and spread beyond San Rafael
    with the assistance of the Grateful Dead and their dedicated cohort
    of pot-smoking fans. The Waldos decided to assert their claim to
    the history of the term after decades of watching it spread, mutate
    and be appropriated by commercial interests. The Waldos contacted
    Hager, and presented him with evidence of 420's history, primarily
    a collection of postmarked letters from the early '70s with lots of
    mention of 420. They also started a Web site, waldo420.com. ``We
    have proof, we were the first,'' Waldo Steve said. ``I mean, it's not
    like we wrote a book or invented anything. We just came up with a
    phrase. But it's kind of an honor that this emanated from San
    Rafael.''" Maria Alicia Gaura for the San Francisco Chronicle,
    4/20/00 p. A19; and thanks to Noah Cole for the submission

    Alternate explanations

    There are a variety of other explanations, all much more interesting
    than "police code", and many plausible. Some are more likely uses
    of the 420/hemp connection rather than sources of it, such as the
    score for the football game in Fast Times at Ridgement High,
    42-0.

    Known Myths: It isn't police code (see above). There are 315
    chemicals in marijuana, not 420. And although tea time in
    Amsterdam is rumored to be 4:20, it is actually 5:30 (Gerhard
    den Hollander).
    Sixties Songs: For instance, Bob Dylan's famous "Rainy Day
    Women #12 and 35" is a possible reference, or source --
    12x35=420. And Stephen Stills wrote (and Crosby Stills Nash
    & Young performed) a song "4+20" (first recorded 7/16/69,
    released on Deja Vu 3/11/70) about an 84-year-old
    poverty-stricken man who started and finished with nothing.
    (Thanks to Sherry Keel 12/6/98.) Dylan aslo mentions "4 and
    20 windows" in "The Balland of Frankie Lee and Judas Priest"
    (on John Wesley Harding).
    Older Verse: But 420 in poetry is older than that - Greg
    Keller notes the old nursery rhyme line, "four and twenty
    black birds baked in a pie". Revelation 5:14 (in the King
    James Version of the Christian Bible) reads, "And the four
    beasts said 'A-Men.' And the four and twenty elders fell down
    and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever." (Travis
    Spurley 2/15/99) And in Midnight's_Children, Salman
    Rushdie wrote, "Inevitably, a number of these children failed
    to survive. Malnutrition, disease and the misfortunes of
    everyday life had accounted for no less than four hundred and
    twenty of them by the time I became conscious of their
    existence; although it is possible to hypothesize that these
    deaths, too, had their purpose, since 420 has been, since time
    immemorial, the number associated with fraud, deception and
    trickery." (Comet 2/14/98) Comet's "best guess is that this
    refers to something in Indian mythology or numerology, since
    the book is set in India and frequently involves Indian history,
    culture, and religion. Given the high interest in Eastern
    religion among the phish/dead community, this seems a likely
    origin of 420's current significance."
    Temporal Significance: "Hands on analog clock at 4:20 look
    like position of doobie dangling from mouth" "Larry in
    Tuscan" and Alex Mack 5/19/99). Disruptive students are out
    of detention and safetly away from school by 4:20, also
    rumored to be "the time that you should dose to be peaking
    when the Dead went on stage" Hart. "The Waldos" were a
    group of teens back in the 70's that lived in San Rafael, CA.
    420 was the way they talked about pot in front of teachers,
    non-smoking family members etc. Also it was the time of day
    they could just go relax, and get baked." ("PhunkCellar")
    Jamaicans purportedly "worked till 4 then walked home then
    lit up. They would talk 420 like our parents talked about after
    5. That's when partying began" "Larry in Tuscan"). Albert (not
    Abbie) Hofmann supposedly first encountered LSD at 4:20
    p.m. on 4/19/1943 (Bart Coleman citing Storming Heaven by
    Jay Stevens, recommended by Mickey Hart in Planet Drum).
    Surrealist painter Miro was born April 20, 1893. And
    www.filmspeed.com says the propoganda film Reefer
    Madness has a copyright date of April 20, 1936 (i.e. 4/20).
    (Patrick Woolford)
    Misc: Could be that it comes from hydroponics, the practice
    of cultivating plants in water often used by indoor marijuana
    cultivators, since 4 is used for H on a calculator (420/H20).
    (Nick Lowe 3/30/00) The number 80 (eight) is "quatre vingt"
    (pronounced "cah-truh vahn"), meaning "four (times} twenty".
    Dan Nijjar 1/27/00 (No connection yet between the number
    80 and pot. A quarter pound is roughly 120 grams, rounding
    quarter-ounces to 7.5.) The titanic was supposed to arrive
    4/20/1912. (Thanks to RB.) Perhaps the heavy use of vt420
    terminals in the Berkeley area is to blame? (BTW, 420 in
    binary code is 110100100.)

    Ubiquitous?

    Now there's a 420 Pale Ale. One of the late-97/early-98 "Got
    Milk" ads featured a character eating cookies without milk and
    then passing a sign that reads "Next Rest Area 420 miles" (as Ross
    Bruning). Reportedly, all of the clocks in the movie Pulp Fiction
    are stuck on 4:20. Shirts with the number 420 on the red-and-blue
    interstate highway shield (Interstate 420?) have show up on the
    sitcom Will and Grace (Paul Risenhoover 5/14/99) and in several
    videos. UPS' labelling software has a "420 postal code" legend for
    next-day/2-day deliveries (which is how Phish tickets are sent).
    (Jack Lebowitz 10/3/98) MTV's 1997 Viewer's Choice Award (for
    the MTV Video Awards) was decided by calls to
    1-800-420-4MTV. And by May of 1998, the number was
    appearing in so many ads (eg Copenhagen 5/14/98 Rolling Stone
    p54, Corvette p55 5/98 Car & Driver) that its presence is
    presumed to be intentional. Many songs are around 4 minutes 20
    seconds long (since many songs fall between 2:30 and 5:30),
    including for example Pink Floyd's "A Great Day for Freedom" (on
    The Division Bell, 1994), the Foo Fighters' "My Hero", and
    "Smokin'" from Boston's first album. "There have also been some
    420 references on The Simpsons. In the re-run episode aired on
    April 20th, 1999 at a special time (probably in honor of those
    college students staying in the holiday spirit ;-), Homer mentions to
    Flanders that Barney's birthday is April 20th. Also, the jackpot sign
    in one part of the casino says $420,000. There are a couple less
    concrete ones, but these two have to be legit, especially since they
    decided to air THAT particular episode on 4/20/99." (Submitted by
    Matt Meehan 4/21/99) And (as of Fall '99) the 60 free minutes that
    Working Assets Long Distance offers, at the 7 cents per minute
    rate, is $4.20 free. There's even a band named 420, and another
    names . In the first fifteen pages of Karel Capek's novel War with
    the Newts, a man diving under wonder stayed down for four
    minutes and twenty seconds. Grant Garstka 1/6/00 At the
    suggested retail price ($3.96) and Michigan (6%) sales tax, a deck
    of Uno cards costs $4.20. Nic Boris 4:20 marks the first downbeat
    of the drums in Led Zeppelin's epic "Stairway to Heaven." (Dan
    Harris) The bill authorizing force after the World Trade Center
    attacks of 9/11/01 passed 420 to 1, and news reports in following
    months noted many times that there are (or were then, anyway) 420
    airports in the U.S. Allan Morris And don't forget that Adolf Hitler
    was born on April 20, macabely "celebrated" (or at least
    referenced) via the Columbine High School shootings.

    Phish-related Occurances

    Whatever the origin, the number appears frequently... For the
    summer 1997 tour, TicketMaster service charges were $4.20. In
    the Fall 1997 Doniac Schvice Dry Goods section, a limited edition
    Pollack poster printed on 100% hemp is order number 420P. The
    Great Went was 420 miles from Boston (former home of Phish).
    The official logo includes 4 gills and 20 bubbles ("Gringo"
    11/12/98). As of 6/15/97, including covers and originals, Phish
    had performed a total of 420 songs (thought its 486 by 4/24/98).
    (David Steinberg). Lawnboy is 420megs of memory. Patrick
    Walker Phish's The Vibration of Life underlies a whirling loop
    with Seven Beats per second (which makes 420 beats per minute.)
    Trey has used the altered line "woke up at 4:20" in "Makisupa
    Policeman", which also often indirectly celebrates 420ing, e.g. by
    mention of goo balls. One of the funniest shirts around takes light
    jabs at both the 4:20 phenomenon and the rumored evolution
    (collapse?) of the Phish.Net (especially rec.music.phish) from
    being Gamehendge to Flamehendge, and beyond. The first day of
    the Great Went started at 4:20 (with Makisupa Policeman. (The
    second day started late, at 4:37.) Noah Cole The first single from
    Slip Stitch and Pass was played on WBCN 10/14/97 at 4:20 pm.
    An uproar at 12/31/96 can be heard on tape during the 2001, in
    response to an enormous digital clock (which was counting down
    to midnight) reaching 11:55:40 and reading "-4:20". (Yoda)
    During the 9-12-00 2001, Trey hits the first riff right at 4:20 into
    the intro jam. (Cal 2/25/01) Some mail order tickets for the 1997
    New Year's run were in section 420. The first Mass Pike toll
    leaving Oswego was $4.20. (Camille Heath ) And the standard
    shipping for The Phish Companion through Amazon was
    originally $4.20.

    420 Shows: Phish performed on April 20 in 1989, 1990, 1991,
    1993, and 1994. The first day of the Great Went started at 4:20,
    although that was called a soundcheck by Trey after three songs.
    The Jazzfest Harry Hood 4-26-96 started at about 4:20 reported by
    Trevor. At Big Cypress, "David Bowie" was playing at 4:20 a.m.
    And the one event during the "hiatus" (10/8/00 - ?) featuring all
    four members - for Jason Colton's wedding - was 12/1/01, 420
    from: http://www.phish.net/faq/n420.html:

  47. Hey, I'm a stupid A.C. with NO sense of humor! by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 1

    Some crack-addled A.C. sez:

    cDc offer to help Feds after September 11...
    by Anonymous Coward on 2002.04.19 16:04 (Score:-1) (#3375602)

    The cure [cultdeadcow.com] sounds worse than the disease. As I read this story I thought it was a bad joke.

    THE CULT OF THE DEAD COW OFFERS A HELPING HAND IN AMERICA'S TIME OF NEED [cultdeadcow.com]

    This hyprocritical line caught my eye:

    So we intend to re-architect Back Orifice
    from the ground up. There will be absolutely no
    shared code between the two projects,
    in order to skirt detection by commercial
    antivirus packages. The code will remain
    totally secret. The software will never
    surface publicly. And it will be far
    more stealthy than anything we have ever
    released, demoed, or publicly discussed.

    Yeah, yeah, yeah, we like Open Source for everyone except for us - because we know better. Save it for the newspapers, Oxblood.

    ---End Text---

    That "helping hand" press release was one of the BEST mediapranks cDc has perpetrated in a while. The sheer number of people, who really should have known better, that fell for this was mind-numbing.

    Just because you call yourself a leet haxor and can slot a Linux distro CD, that doesn't mean you're not a gullible moron.

    As the above-mentioned crack-addled Anonymous Coward so publically proves.

    --
    Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
  48. Re:Article read better with special hat by Decimal · · Score: 2

    The article reads better with a tin-foil hat.

    Hey really? Do they sell them at ThinkGeek? I want one with Tux painted on it!

    --

    Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
  49. Tools by pyrrho · · Score: 1, Redundant

    One idea is tools people behind an totalitarian firewall can use to get through to the outside. However, what about rooting the firewall machines themselves and reconfiguring them appropriately.

    My real question is: would this even be illegal? Is there a US or European or International law that makes that illegal?

    --

    -pyrrho

  50. Thoreau on Activism vs. Civil Disobedience by lkaos · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I am of the opinion that activism is amoral whereas civil disobedience is not only moral, but one's duty. I think a good portion of hackitivism is not civil disobedience but instead just activism. At any rate, here is a quote from Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience" which is probably the most elegant statement I've ever read regarding the limits (and requirements) of protest.
    If the injustice is part of the necessary friction of the machine of government, let it go, let it go: perchance it will wear smooth--certainly the machine will wear out. If the injustice has a spring, or a pulley, or a rope, or a crank, exclusively for itself, then perhaps you may consider whether the remedy will not be worse than the evil; but if it is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then I say, break the law. Let your life be a counter-friction to stop the machine. What I have to do is to see, at any rate, that I do not lend myself to the wrong which I condemn.
    So, in my mind, hacking a web page can never really be justified--no matter what the cause is. On the other hand, refusing to obey government censorship (in places like China) by hacking through their censors is, in my mind, is a very noble thing.
    --
    int func(int a);
    func((b += 3, b));
    1. Re:Thoreau on Activism vs. Civil Disobedience by dgroskind · · Score: 3, Insightful

      refusing to obey government censorship (in places like China) by hacking through their censors is, in my mind, is a very noble thing.

      To be consistent with Thoreau's ideas on civil disobedience, the hacker would be have to announce his actions to the authorities and be prepared to go to jail.

      As political tactics, Thoreau's ideas may not be so effective in China. Considering the treatment of the Falun Gong and other religious groups, appeals to the conscience of the Chinese authorities are likely to be in vain. They don't have any.

      After Tianamen Square no one needs to lecture the Chinese on civil disobedience or the consequences thereof.

  51. News of the day: Smash Starbucks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But Indymedia is crap. Surely you know that, even if you can't spell independent.

  52. what a bunch of losers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what a bunch of fucking losers...

    hmmm, who am i talking about? the slashdot readers or the cDc?

    you decide!

    Here's a hint: all of the above.

  53. Re:"Online Privacy" by hettb · · Score: 0

    I might not agree, but I'll fight to the death to ensure your rights to post blatantly fucking obvious trolls.

    Let me be the first to nominate you for the Darwin award. You deserve it.

  54. Wrong by Shade,+The · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Firstly the police would have to have a warrant by a superintendent or above. Secondly they would have to be watching the communcations when the email has been recieved. Thirdly they would have to show that there is reasonable reason to believe that the target has the keys.

    So yes, if you were being monitored by the police and suspected of a crime, and you were sent an encrypted message, you might forgive the police for trying to decode it.

    That said, there is a lot about the RIP bill that is controversial. But compared to the Patriot Bill over in the US, it's pretty tame; warrants are still needed here for surveilence.

    1. Re:Wrong by chriso11 · · Score: 1

      Well, beforehand send around 50000000 keys
      in an email. Or send them compressed and encrypted, with an header
      that says "Secret Keys - you know the password..."

      --
      No, I don't trust in god. He'll have to pay up front, like everybody else.
    2. Re:Wrong by Shade,+The · · Score: 1

      The whole warrant thing still stands, though :)

  55. China, rant. by surfcow · · Score: 3, Informative

    Re: China...

    If I said I could *quadruple* the living standard of the poorest 20% of the globe in less than 3 decades, would you laugh? If I really did it, might you be impressed?

    The Chinese govt did just that between 1972 and 2000. Quadrupled the average income of the nation from about $800 to $3,600. Without spilling buckets of blood (see Stalin, Mao South America). http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ ch.html

    Yep, their govt is corrupt from stem to stern, a true cleptocracy. But it is undergoing change much more rapidly than gov't in the west, (which are selling their children's health and souls to big corporations).

    Can you really claim they the Chinese persecution is worse that the US war on drugs? Or the Israeli's treatment of the Palestinians? Or the US in central America?

    Don't fight them, wait, watch, keep perspective. Change is happening.

    The Oxblood essay is kind, progressive and well intentioned. But if you want to make a huge change in people's lives, stop playing in the
    Internet, go where help is needed and pick up a shovel. Or sign a check to feed a starving kid. Or help develop a better strain of rice. Or ...

    It's easy to be Robbin Hood. High-profile heroics is more fun than the hard work, but doesn't feed more people. Which, oddly enough, is
    what the chinese govt has been doing with amazing success.

    rant over,
    =brian

    1. Re:China, rant. by Chris+Johnson · · Score: 2
      About that rice...

      You might want to ask yourself whether selling a monoculture to the Third World to replace indigenous crops is really a good thing.

      You might want to ask yourself what kind of pesticide, fertilizer etc. support these high yield first world crops need in order to grow.

      You might want to ask yourself how many people you're ready to kill in your efforts to save them from having third-world level food supplies, which they generally do have.

      You might want to read what this Indian scientist has to say on the matter. IP-wary slashdotters will be particularly interested as, in her talk, she covers her experience of an American company patenting an indigenous crop of her valley, Basmati rice, which grew in India for centuries. Reading her is amazing, she is so familiar with the intimate details of how 'globalization' is screwing India and destroying their economy. And well she should as she lives in India- but it behooves the rest of us to have SOME clue as well, or we'll just parrot off what we're told to believe, even if it kills people.

      Sorry. But I've never been able to forget the reality of that 'better strain of rice' meme once I got a clue about it.

    2. Re:China, rant. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or help develop a better strain of rice. Or ...

      Sure, then patent it as Monsanto did. Then fuck over people in neighboring fields for patent infringement because your goddamn stuff blew over onto their plot. Now that you've destroyed the local economy by making them dependent on you ....

    3. Re:China, rant. by $lashdot · · Score: 1

      Well, there is that little matter of the Square. And the Gong, and the corruption that results in collapsing buildings, collapsing bridges, and collapsing coal mines at a rate that makes capitalist countries seem positively humane.

  56. Re:Article read better with special hat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is in keeping with the biblial imperative:

    "Thou shalt not kill"

    Torture is another matter entirely, however.
    ---->

    You missed the Golden Rule--do onto others as you would have them do unto you. I wouldn't want to be tortured; period.

  57. Re:Dear John Ashcroft - Inhale @# +1 ; Inspiring @ by jo42 · · Score: 1

    JonKuntz, is that you?

  58. Capitalism isn't the complete answer... by chriso11 · · Score: 1

    Well, some things should not be for sale. For example, private prisons.

    Other services can work quite well under other models. Asserting that 'deregulation of electricity' is better will get loud snorts of derision from the majority of Californians.

    --
    No, I don't trust in god. He'll have to pay up front, like everybody else.
  59. philosopher-king by midas2000 · · Score: 1

    i think the standard is that the person who wants to rule the least is the one best suited for the philosopher-king position.

    the more you want to rule, the more we (the proles) should be afraid of you doing so.

    on another note, i always thought it was kind of vain for plato to say the perfect ruler is a philosopher. my greek philosophy professor attributed it to the fact that philosophers can never get jobs, so they make up for it by declaring temselves the rulers of the universe.

    cheers,
    -midas (www.haduken.com)

    --
    maybe we're born with it, maybe it's haduken.
    1. Re:philosopher-king by jnana · · Score: 1
      Yes, you are correct. It is the one who least desires to rule that should rule. I think that goes too far though. Anybody who doesn't want to rule qualifies -- not just the guy who so passionately detests the very idea of ruling that he can think about nothing else but not ruling.

      It is interesting to note that the current system -- in the U.S., at least -- ensures that only those who most want to exercise that ruling power actually get to. I don't know about you, but a person who decides to devote their life to politics is a person that I would not trust for anything more important than a little league. And yet we do. These people who only know, understand, respect, and desire power decide all our fates.

      Yes, it is vain for Plato to say that the perfect ruler is a philosopher, but then again, if he didn't think that philosophers were pretty bloody cool, he would have done something else. He was obviously a brilliant guy. Having known quite a few philosophy majors, I would certainly have a philosopher or two on the committee that I mentioned above.

  60. Somebody who gets the point... by idontneedanickname · · Score: 1

    Finally! One person who actually gets it! Unfortunately the majority of the american population are degenerat couch-patatoes with no capebillity to think on their own whatsoever! That's why I think that people like us should just split from people like them...

    now for once u can REALLY & TRUTHFULLY say: "I am above these people" and know for certain that it's true!

    did i mention that i think the americans r studip?

    --tzan

    1. Re:Somebody who gets the point... by Professor+Nova · · Score: 1

      Actually, I know quite a few americans who think for themselves. We just draw conclusions that disagree with your's. Kind of the wonderful part of independant thinkers in a free society.

      As for americans being stupid, I think that describes the entire human race. Never underestimate the power of human stupidity (Heinlien)

      "I want a future brighter than polished diamonds" - Justice by Aki Kudo (pardon the translation)

    2. Re:Somebody who gets the point... by idontneedanickname · · Score: 1

      heck i have an amerikan passport and live inthe us too...that's why i said "most" (everybody except me, just kidding ;P )
      i know some americans who r inteligent too, but what i'm saying is that the majority of them aren't. And unfortunately they make the dissisions when there's a vote, otherwise there's allways that fool of bush to make baaad decisions and make the world a worse place to live in, i just wonder if he know it....naaa

  61. RTFA by startled · · Score: 2

    "I am of the opinion that activism is amoral whereas civil disobedience is not only moral, but one's duty. I think a good portion of hackitivism is not civil disobedience but instead just activism."

    The essay posits a new, more constructive definition for hacktivism, which doesn't include what you're using the word for. Here's the relative bit:

    Our definition of hacktivism is, "using technology to advance human rights through electronic media....." From the cDc's perspective, creation is good; destruction is bad. Hackers should promote the free flow of information, and causing anything to disrupt, prevent, or retard that flow is improper. For instance, cDc does not consider Web defacements or Denial of Service (DoS) attacks to be legitimate hacktivist actions.

    Your example of defacing a web page certainly doesn't fit into this definition. What you stated as noble (hacking through government censors) is what the article supports as hacktivism, and I agree with its classification as activism rather than civil disobedience. Regardless of the definition of hacktivism, activism and civil disobedience are well-defined and agreed upon.

    Civil disobedience requires putting yourself out in the open, blatantly violating the law and likely getting arrested. Activism is simply working hard to support a cause-- there's nothing amoral about it. You can be amorally acitivist just as much as you can be amorally civilly disobedient.

    The problem, as you've aptly demonstrated, is that certain words take on connotations that people don't want associated with them, and have to be wary of. While I've rarely seen activism associated with amoral (it's generally seen as highly moral), "hack" is one of those big bad words in the public eye. Calling someone a hacktivist will likely have most of the world thinking they're some evil guy who steals their credit card numbers from Amazon and uses them to buy guns for guerrillas.

    1. Re:RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you have "amoral" confused with "immoral".

    2. Re:RTFA by startled · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oops. True dat.

    3. Re:RTFA by lkaos · · Score: 2

      amoral
      adj : without moral standards or principles;
      "a completely amoral person"
      [syn: unmoral] [ant: moral, immoral]


      Not to be confused with:

      immoral
      adj 1: violating principles of right and wrong
      [ ant: moral, amoral]


      The former suggests that something has absolutely no relation to morality, which I believe activism doesn't. Activism is self-serving. An activist is neither moral, since he is not trying to do right, nor is he immoral, since he is not trying to do wrong. Therefore, the activist is amoral, or is acting outside the scope of morality.

      Perhaps the poster wouldn't have responded so negatively had he actually understood the English language...

      --
      int func(int a);
      func((b += 3, b));
    4. Re:RTFA by lkaos · · Score: 2
      Civil disobedience requires putting yourself out in the open, blatantly violating the law and likely getting arrested.

      If you go by the commonly bastardized version of Civil Disobedience used to justify various forms of activism. The term was really coined though by Henry David Thoreau in his essay, "On the Duty of Civil Disobedience" and can be summarized best by the following passage:
      If the injustice is part of the necessary friction of the machine of government let it go, let it go; perchance it will wear smooth, certainly the machine will wear out. If the injustice has a spring or a pulley or a rope or a crank exclusively for its own use, perhaps you may consider whether the remedy will be worse than the evil. But if it is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another then I say break the law. Let your life be a counter-friction to stop the machine. What I must do is to see, at any rate, that I do not lend myself to the wrong which I condemn.
      Civil Disobedience is about maintaining both order and individual autonomy in a state. Do not confuse civil disobedience with other forms of protest (such as satya agraha, or truth force) where violations of the law are justified in that "the ends justify the means."

      Civil Disobedience comes into play only when an individual is trying to preserve his moral beliefs. Non-violent protests are not examples of civil disobedience.
      --
      int func(int a);
      func((b += 3, b));
    5. Re:RTFA by lkaos · · Score: 2

      BTW: As far as the whole "open, blantantly" thing is concerned, Thoreau's great act of Civil Disobedience was far from any of these.

      He came into town one day to pick up his shoes that were being repaired. The town tax-collector asked him to pay his poll-tax which he had no paid in 6 years. He refused because he wished to refuse allegiance to a state that would wage an immoral war against Mexico and keep 6 million of its citizens in the bondage of slavery. So, the tax-collector threw him in jail. He sat in jail quietly overnight, was released in the morning, got his shoes, and went back into the woods.

      There was no great public event, or grand protest. He simply refused to obey a law that he felt would cause him to violate his morality, took the punishment for it, and went about his business.

      That is Civil Disobedience.

      --
      int func(int a);
      func((b += 3, b));
  62. /. in China!! by idontneedanickname · · Score: 1

    ok, now all somebody has to do is get the chinese surfers to be able to acces /.!!

  63. Re:Article read better with special hat by idontneedanickname · · Score: 1

    well if enough ppl posted about what we're talkin' about here all over the web then hopefully we would make a big difference

  64. restart by idontneedanickname · · Score: 1

    now where is that restart bottun on this whole place anyway? we got major problems in here. i think we better start with a clean sheet of paper. i just hope i will never have to see the real equivelent of the "blue screen of death"

  65. What you get out proportional to what you put in? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Should what you get out be proportional to what you put in, or should you get out the same amount as everyone else, regardless of how much they contributed, if indeed they contributed anything at all?

    Do you think that an actor from Friends is doing more in an hour than a coal miner from East Europe in his whole life, working for 50 years at 12 hours a day? Can you honestly say that you think so?

  66. Hacking, in this case, has good use but can't igno by dolphin558 · · Score: 1

    re the bad uses of Hacking. A knife can be used for good(cutting meat) but it can also be used for bad(cutting flesh). Knives shouldn't be banned because the good outweighs the bad but hacking should continue to be illegal.

  67. Re:Article read better with special hat by Alien54 · · Score: 2
    That's some radical religious thinking for you.

    Of course, I should have inserted irony tags, since the purpose of most surviving world religions is a better world, peace, etc. Although local definitions of what this means will vary. YMMV

    And of course, most people can only view the world based on the instructions of their own personal demons and devils.

    Pick the hot button of your choice. Use often.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
  68. Re:What you get out proportional to what you put i by RKloti · · Score: 1

    It doesn't matter how much the person actually considers themselves to be doing, but rather how much this is worth to other people.

    For the record, yes I think actors are overpaid. As long as the film industry is ready to overpay them, they will continue to be overpaid.

  69. Re:Article read better with special hat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look around, no-one is being repressed

    Threaten me by email and watch it be ignored by the cops. Then threaten a judge by email and watch the cops scoop your ass away from the keyboard in a matter of hours. My rights don't mean crap. A judge's do. Sounds like repression to me.

  70. Re:AI Activism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The ultimate hacktivist activity is the spawning and swarming of myriad Robot AI Minds [scn.org] evolving towards full civil rights on a par with Homo Sapiens and towards a superintelligence beyond any human IQ.

    You mean like the "corporate person" has done? It even has more rights than a real person. Don't believe it? Just try to attack one.

  71. Wine-Merchant-King by midas2000 · · Score: 1

    yeah, that's always bothered me about the whole system in these here united states. in order to be the president, the only skill you need is a friendly face and "people skills." sometimes i wonder if electing people into office based on how intelligent they are rather than how many babies they can kiss in a year might be an idea worth trying.

    re: plato, that's a good point, although i can't help but wonder that if he had ended up being a wine seller or something whether he would have declared the perfect ruler to be a Wine-Merchant-King instead. (i'm a philosophy major, so i'm allowed to tease him a little ;) ).

    cheers,
    -midas (www.haduken.com)

    --
    maybe we're born with it, maybe it's haduken.
    1. Re:Wine-Merchant-King by jnana · · Score: 1
      Yes, I am all for high intelligence and low desire for a career in politics being prerequisites for being a politician. I've known some extremely intelligent people though that I would never trust to be a politician. There are some extremely intelligent people who are well adjusted, but in my experience, they are the minority (but I guess that's true of people in general).

      The trouble, of course, is that very intelligent people by and large do not want to be politicians, sometimes vehemently so, and would resist being elected/nominated. What kind of intellectual stimulation can a career in politics offer? It appeals to the baser desire to exert power over others -- which most people have to lesser and greater extents -- without any of the intellectual stimulation of building a thermonuclear weapon, for example.

      I think if Plato had been a wine seller, there would have been no Republic and no conception of a perfect ruler -- except in the way non-philosophers 'do philosophy' after too much wine ;-), but perhaps you're right.

  72. Post Article by kaladorn · · Score: 2

    Quoting:
    Svend Robinson, the NDP Foreign Affairs critic, also criticized the government. "If ever there were any evidence needed that Canadian troops should not be in Afghanistan under United States command we have seen the tragic evidence of that," Mr. Robinson told a news conference.

    "If Canadian troops cannot be certain that they're not going to be fired on by Americans we have no business being there."

    This just shows how far from reality Svend Robinson is. Military operations (even training) are inherently risky. Co-operative operations with nations that operate usually with different equipment, protocols, and ROE are even more risky.

    There has never been a military operation where one group of troops could be certain that they would not be fired on by another group. And it is usually the infantry on the short end of the stick. That doesn't make it right, but right doesn't have a lot to do with war.

    And the day a nation becomes so averse to casualties taken (for any reason), it ceases to be able to exert itself even in the cause of peace or stability.

    --
    -- Mal: "Well they tell you: never hit a man with a closed fist. But it is, on occasion, hilarious."
  73. Central America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am sick to death of hearing how the U.S. is "meddling" or whatever you want to call it in Latin America. Although it may seem like over-simplifying and will probably be marked -1 troll, these countries are fucked up, absurd places. The positions of leadership are merry-go-rounds that in their entire history haven't added up to anything. These countries have adequate natural resources and population bases to become players on the world scene, but instead waddle from dictatorship to dictatorship. I personally could care less what happens in any of these countries, even if they end up extremely hostile to the U.S. Their best and brightest will continue emigrating from their country to here and bring what they have to offer to the table here.