If some legitimate service launches on a blocked IP and makes fantastic profits within the few countries that aren't blocking that IP, would there be a case for a massive lawsuit due to lost profits? IANAL.
Not at all geeky, and admittedly contributing to the shameful advertising nature of this story, but of all the grilling gadgets I've bought Grill Grates have hands down been the best investment:
They're best known for DOS attacks, but Doyon claims in the interview that they do much more than this. For example, the article mentions gaining access to sensitive email databases. He claims they often don't even need to hack to obtain these, that they're being provided by people in governments/corporations.
Whether it's true or not, I don't know. All I'm saying is that the claim to power is based on more than website defacing that they're best known for.
It's the same question as "Why do you need anonymity or privacy if you're not doing anything wrong? If you have nothing to hide, why do you want these rights?"
I believe that we should consider potential distant future consequences of our laws before accepting them. Our constitution was drafted with the intention of providing protections for us against highly corrupt and power-hungry people. Just because these people don't seem to exist among us today, it doesn't mean we should throw away these rights, for who knows what tomorrow will bring, and what we will need to do to get these rights back.
It's the age old argument about privacy, security, and freedom.
It's more important to protect the many good people from the few bad cops than it is to protect the many good cops from the few bad people.
Today if you are present at a protest which in their judgement "turns violent", and you get arrested, then they need to prove you were contributing to the violence in order to convict you.
Tomorrow, if you are wearing a mask and are present at a protest which in their judgement "turns violent", and you get arrested, all they need is a photo of you wearing your mask to throw you in the slammer for 10 years, even if you were sitting on the grass singing "Kumbaya My Lord" the whole while.
I'd rather have a few ruffians dressed in black getting away with smashing a few windows and police cars than lose an important right. It's NOT a worth-while trade-off.
The reason anonymous protest needs to be protected is the same reason anonymous voting needs to be protected. Imagine living in Nazi Germany knowing that the government had a record of you voting or protesting against the Nazi government. And don't tell me society will never again make the mistake of electing a Nazi-like government.
To me, this law provides even more incentive for riot police to aggravate peaceful protesters towards violence. They have a number of ways of doing this, including infiltrating protest groups and inciting violence from within.
10 years, or any kind of jail or financial penalty seems excessive for being in the wrong place at the wrong time while wearing a mask (or religious face covering). The G20 in Toronto was entirely peaceful until a few rogue protesters ruined the party. Peaceful protesters were arrested en-mass but almost all were released without charges (since there were none that would stick). I hate to think how many would be spending 10 years in jail consuming my tax dollars if this law had been in place.
So if you're a peaceful protester in a protest which turns violent, you have at most 2 options:
1) forfeit your anonymity (take off your mask) 2) leave the protest (except that, as happened in the G20, many people were boxed by riot cops and unable to leave).
Wow... The Pirate Bay is making public relations announcements. If that isn't a sign that the site now exists more for political reasons than to be complicit in piracy, I don't know what is.
I would rather live in a world where occasional acts of terrorism succeed due to missed opportunities to gather intelligence, than live in a world where there is even the REMOTE possibility that said intelligence will be used against me and my family by those we entrust to collect and manage it.
It is time to shift focus from restricting government gathering of information to restricting government use of information already in their possession.
Today's rules for how that information can justifiably be used will be different from tomorrow's. Most likely, the trend will continue towards more liberal use of the information by the authorities as time goes on. When the information exists in storage and the tyrant of the day has sufficient power to gain access to that information, and the right political / social situation presents itself, the information WILL be abused.
When - not IF - but WHEN the next "Hitler" comes to power, we need to have a system of government that limits the damage he can cause. If Hitler had access to a database of all German communications and the resources to process that information, do you think that would have made things better or worse for the Jews?
What mechanism of restricting the use of collected intelligence do you propose that would be effective against a talented and devoted psychopathic world leader?
I'm currently putting together a DIY security system based on opensource LinuxMCE.
My house when purchased already had a mid-90s wired alarm system from DSC. I've taken all the sensors wires off the DSC panel and fed them into a GlobalCache GC-100 (which can be had for a couple hundred $$) connected to my server. LinuxMCE has a bunch of code that takes care of the logic side of things, but if you can write your own code to communicate with the GC-100 you could do away with the LinuxMCE side of things.
LinuxMCE also integrates webcams, ip cams, z-wave security devices, and just about any ubiquitous device into your security network, and that's not mentioning all the other cool stuff it does (home media sharing, telecom, home automation, etc). And it's very customizable. I configured, for example, my doorbell to disarm my security system (in-case I lose my phone, or its battery dies) if its pressed in the correct morse-code sequence.
If a person is speaking while plugging his ears, what effect does that have on the audience's perception of the speaker? "I'm not listening to you, this is what I'm saying, lalalalalalaal"...
I would imagine most would consider it childish/rude, and the speaker's credibility would disappear rapidly. The tool would have that effect, as a minimum.
Then there's the fact that it always has to be decrypted at some point before being displayed. With the right equipment, you can record the individual pixel values in your monitor right before they hit the appropriate display circuitry.
This will pave the way to a whole new way to goof off in class: Kids will have their eyes and "full attention" on the teacher, all the while playing 3d-shooters or watching porn!
Among other things, it's potentially useful for insulation, battery electrodes, and sound dampening
Super-low-density materials don't generally lend themselves well to this - this would be a truly exceptional material if it makes a good acoustic absorber.
Hyperlinks are about as complicit in libel as ears are complicit in slander. Both provide access to the defamation in question, but neither are the defamation itself!
You see, it's the northern part of Canada (furthest from you) which has no internet. Between them and you is southern Canada, who happens to still have internet, as well as an overly-extreme pride for hockey and beer. Of course, I wouldn't expect an American to comprehend his relative geographical location:)
Anik F2 satellite experienced an attitude control issue
Great, so now we have self-aware machines with personality disorders orbiting us? Who's gonna capitalize on the budding satellite anger-management industry?
Slashdot Mirror
If some legitimate service launches on a blocked IP and makes fantastic profits within the few countries that aren't blocking that IP, would there be a case for a massive lawsuit due to lost profits? IANAL.
Not at all geeky, and admittedly contributing to the shameful advertising nature of this story, but of all the grilling gadgets I've bought Grill Grates have hands down been the best investment:
http://grillgrate.com/
The marketing seems more or less accurate, though I haven't personally done a controlled scientific comparison.
An update to the story:
Sonne has already announced plans to sue the Crown and Toronto Police
They're best known for DOS attacks, but Doyon claims in the interview that they do much more than this. For example, the article mentions gaining access to sensitive email databases. He claims they often don't even need to hack to obtain these, that they're being provided by people in governments/corporations.
Whether it's true or not, I don't know. All I'm saying is that the claim to power is based on more than website defacing that they're best known for.
I've never attended a protest in my life. I have however studied a number high-profile protests and heard first-hand accounts of how they unfolded.
With respect to your question about why I'd want to wear a mask to a protest, I'd refer you to my other post:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2844423&cid=39970717
It's the same question as "Why do you need anonymity or privacy if you're not doing anything wrong? If you have nothing to hide, why do you want these rights?"
I believe that we should consider potential distant future consequences of our laws before accepting them. Our constitution was drafted with the intention of providing protections for us against highly corrupt and power-hungry people. Just because these people don't seem to exist among us today, it doesn't mean we should throw away these rights, for who knows what tomorrow will bring, and what we will need to do to get these rights back.
It's the age old argument about privacy, security, and freedom.
http://www.petitiononlinecanada.com/petition/anti-bill-c-309/792
It's more important to protect the many good people from the few bad cops than it is to protect the many good cops from the few bad people.
Today if you are present at a protest which in their judgement "turns violent", and you get arrested, then they need to prove you were contributing to the violence in order to convict you.
Tomorrow, if you are wearing a mask and are present at a protest which in their judgement "turns violent", and you get arrested, all they need is a photo of you wearing your mask to throw you in the slammer for 10 years, even if you were sitting on the grass singing "Kumbaya My Lord" the whole while.
Mod parent up
The important difference is that it is legal to wear a mask while protesting, but illegal to riot with a mask. That's an important distinction.
When it's up to the cops' discretion whether you are rioting or protesting, not really. That's giving them way too much power.
I'd rather have a few ruffians dressed in black getting away with smashing a few windows and police cars than lose an important right. It's NOT a worth-while trade-off.
The reason anonymous protest needs to be protected is the same reason anonymous voting needs to be protected. Imagine living in Nazi Germany knowing that the government had a record of you voting or protesting against the Nazi government. And don't tell me society will never again make the mistake of electing a Nazi-like government.
To me, this law provides even more incentive for riot police to aggravate peaceful protesters towards violence. They have a number of ways of doing this, including infiltrating protest groups and inciting violence from within.
10 years, or any kind of jail or financial penalty seems excessive for being in the wrong place at the wrong time while wearing a mask (or religious face covering). The G20 in Toronto was entirely peaceful until a few rogue protesters ruined the party. Peaceful protesters were arrested en-mass but almost all were released without charges (since there were none that would stick). I hate to think how many would be spending 10 years in jail consuming my tax dollars if this law had been in place.
So if you're a peaceful protester in a protest which turns violent, you have at most 2 options:
1) forfeit your anonymity (take off your mask)
2) leave the protest (except that, as happened in the G20, many people were boxed by riot cops and unable to leave).
Wow... The Pirate Bay is making public relations announcements. If that isn't a sign that the site now exists more for political reasons than to be complicit in piracy, I don't know what is.
Sorry, but what kind of attack are they expecting where air-to-air missiles won't be sufficient?
I would rather live in a world where occasional acts of terrorism succeed due to missed opportunities to gather intelligence, than live in a world where there is even the REMOTE possibility that said intelligence will be used against me and my family by those we entrust to collect and manage it.
It is time to shift focus from restricting government gathering of information to restricting government use of information already in their possession.
Today's rules for how that information can justifiably be used will be different from tomorrow's. Most likely, the trend will continue towards more liberal use of the information by the authorities as time goes on. When the information exists in storage and the tyrant of the day has sufficient power to gain access to that information, and the right political / social situation presents itself, the information WILL be abused.
When - not IF - but WHEN the next "Hitler" comes to power, we need to have a system of government that limits the damage he can cause. If Hitler had access to a database of all German communications and the resources to process that information, do you think that would have made things better or worse for the Jews?
What mechanism of restricting the use of collected intelligence do you propose that would be effective against a talented and devoted psychopathic world leader?
I'm currently putting together a DIY security system based on opensource LinuxMCE.
My house when purchased already had a mid-90s wired alarm system from DSC. I've taken all the sensors wires off the DSC panel and fed them into a GlobalCache GC-100 (which can be had for a couple hundred $$) connected to my server. LinuxMCE has a bunch of code that takes care of the logic side of things, but if you can write your own code to communicate with the GC-100 you could do away with the LinuxMCE side of things.
LinuxMCE also integrates webcams, ip cams, z-wave security devices, and just about any ubiquitous device into your security network, and that's not mentioning all the other cool stuff it does (home media sharing, telecom, home automation, etc). And it's very customizable. I configured, for example, my doorbell to disarm my security system (in-case I lose my phone, or its battery dies) if its pressed in the correct morse-code sequence.
If a person is speaking while plugging his ears, what effect does that have on the audience's perception of the speaker? "I'm not listening to you, this is what I'm saying, lalalalalalaal"...
I would imagine most would consider it childish/rude, and the speaker's credibility would disappear rapidly. The tool would have that effect, as a minimum.
Then there's the fact that it always has to be decrypted at some point before being displayed. With the right equipment, you can record the individual pixel values in your monitor right before they hit the appropriate display circuitry.
You made a --CANADIAN-- angry. About something completely unrelated to hockey or beer
There, fixed that for you.
...is to give the US more reason to incorporate off-shore into their "territory".
This will pave the way to a whole new way to goof off in class: Kids will have their eyes and "full attention" on the teacher, all the while playing 3d-shooters or watching porn!
Among other things, it's potentially useful for insulation, battery electrodes, and sound dampening
Super-low-density materials don't generally lend themselves well to this - this would be a truly exceptional material if it makes a good acoustic absorber.
Hyperlinks are about as complicit in libel as ears are complicit in slander. Both provide access to the defamation in question, but neither are the defamation itself!
You see, it's the northern part of Canada (furthest from you) which has no internet. Between them and you is southern Canada, who happens to still have internet, as well as an overly-extreme pride for hockey and beer. Of course, I wouldn't expect an American to comprehend his relative geographical location :)
Anik F2 satellite experienced an attitude control issue
Great, so now we have self-aware machines with personality disorders orbiting us? Who's gonna capitalize on the budding satellite anger-management industry?
And if that pushes the market to unlocked products, so be it.
If history is any indicator, the music/film market doesn't get "pushed". Consumers will simply be pushed to break the law.