I think it's easier to convince the government to fund NASA projects that are completely awesome.
And the more space telescopes, the merrier--this way we have a back-up on the moon if the one at L2 fails.
Again, no. There are some black boxes on Congress's defense appropriation bills--they don't micromanage everything--but for many years, I've heard about Congress setting aside money to fund specific projects the military doesn't actually want to pursue, such as that VTOL hover-aircraft. This gets done because the project in question sounds like a neat idea and brings jobs to, or keeps them in, some important representative's district.
Once money is allocated by Congress, it must be spent toward the goals it's allocated to. The only question for the Secretary of Defense and underlings is how efficiently to spend it--how much goes to $6000 screwdrivers, one-corp. bids, bids guaranteed to run over, etc.
True. But if you aren't the one planning to do such things, then it's easier to surveil a physical document, or secure it, to make sure such things don't happen. Seal that envelope the letter is in! Keep the document on your person, or locked in a steel suitcase chained to your wrist! How many people are good enough pickpockets to put something back without your noticing?
If people used the same standards of safety for computer documents as they used to for paper documents, electronic ID theft would be less of a problem.
Yes, you're right about relative severity and seriousness. (Though--has anyone actually been tried for treason lately?)
Still--commercial value (aka "making money") may be less valuable than national security in any sane society, but it is still a form of value. The record labels maybe shouldn't have the right to make so much money off their records at the expense of its artists, but the gov. likely shouldn't have the right to re-classify stuff.
The fine article is originally from the AP, which I don't trust if there is anyone else covering the story. It is also simply covering a press briefing from the Pentagon.
Important questions were asked, but the Pentagon simply didn't answer most of them.
What specific systems? All we know is, the DoD Blackberries didn't get hit by this particular attack. We're also told that the Pentagon systems are attacked all the time.
If the Pentagon systems are attacked all the time, then it's likely not an easy task to determine who launched any specific attack. Al Qaeda, the Chinese government, a Chinese cracker working on his own, a mindless virus--who knows?
Whether any intelligence reports were lost or copied is likely classified itself. If the cracker doesn't know whether what he has, or what he destroyed, is valuable, then why should our government tell him?
We're talking about the Department of Defense, remember. They likely don't care about the safety of the individuals whose data was compromised. They had to compromise those individuals themselves to make their intelligence reports!
No. The Congress says where the money goes. If this were not so, then we would have no B-2 bombers and would be forced to stop researching the VTOL hover-aircraft that doesn't really VTOL & hover.
The Secretary of Defense only determines how inefficiently the money is spent.
At least when something goes wrong with a sealed message sent over the sneakernet, you'll know that something has gone wrong.
Encryption isn't common in the current internet. And it is possible for someone to copy data and leave hardly any trace that it was copied.
"Copyright infringement isn't theft." Is copying another state's secrets theft if the original copy of the secrets is still in the original computer?
Radios are cheaper than computers, last I checked.
Also, Soundscan collects extra fees for any internet radio station that plays music, and is about to retroactively raise the rates, so internet radio stations with music aren't cheaper than true radio stations in the long run.
Serious, non-creationist natural history museums exist for a reason, right?
Surely anyone who believes evolution believes it happened in a certain order. You should be able to arrange all the fossils to show in what order everything evolved, more or less. (I know that it's only science if it could conceivably be disproven and just hasn't been yet, but I hope you get my idea.)
I'll tell you the reason why public safety frequencies should remain dedicated to public safety:
There will be businesses and people who will be annoyed if they are knocked off the air because of an emergency. What happens if a cell-phone co. buys those frequencies, and they are commandeered for public safety right when everyone is trying to call people because it's an emergency?
I accept that sometimes TV stations have to switch to all-weather when a tornado watch is on. Nonetheless, I get annoyed by this neccesity when I'm nowhere near the area needing the intense watch.
"Amber Alerts" are sometimes counted as emergencies. What business wants to be knocked off the air simply because a kid has gone missing?
Actually, there is something that could block that plan.
Many cities have signed agreements with cable cos. that only one cable co. is allowed in the city. And it appears that in most areas, only one phone co. is allowed to lay down lines. If you are neither of those, the local government won't give you the right-of-way to lay the fiber across their roads & culverts.
You mean, the military had to clear you and put you under an NDA because your brother works for them? [sigh]
It is uncertain that what happened to Judith Miller when she was caught in the Valerie Plame case was strictly legal. If those tactics had been in use in the '70s, Nixon could've shut down Woodward & Bernstein for not IDing Deep Throat.
I thought the standard was set by the Pentagon Papers. Even if the material shouldn't have been leaked, you don't punish the journalist for printing it.
Leaked state secrets aren't outright illegal. It's not illegal to distribute them unless you were the one to leak them.
So, if you are the government and want to remove a leaked state secret from the 'net, you'll need the DMCA after all.
Without legal repercussions directly related to the act of blocking. Financial and social repercussions are, as you note, guaranteed.
The entertainment industry associations don't want to admit that there could be any legal content on P2P nets.
I am not a lawyer, but this looks like AT&T would be immune to prosecution for blocking any "pirated"/grey copyrighted content carried over its lines as long as it isn't actually hosting the work. That is, if the work isn't actually on att.com or sbc.*.com, AT&T won't get in trouble for blocking us from it.
Is this right?
A single song may be three minutes, though with modern songs I think four or five is more typical. But single songs can be only $0.99 a piece--small price for small trouble.
An entire album of songs takes 45-60 min., with the occas. 75-min. album. They may not take an entire hour to download, but the time to download an entire album is minutes, not seconds. And a full album actually will come close to filling a CD regardless of how you get it.
Of course, music does tend to get valued beyond simple reason anyway if it's valued at all.
So much the better. If almost nobody knows those services exist, then maybe the labels and studios don't know they exist. If the labels and studios don't know about them, they can't sanction or bankrupt anyone who happens to use them for a black/grey market.
Selection won't be as good, but odds of prosecution will lower considerably.
Actually, it appears that EMI has found a cut-off for releasing DRM-free songs. The songs iTunes is selling as iTunes-Plus songs (inc. many of EMI's) have no DRM. EMI allows this because those songs are watermarked with material to ID the purchaser, so if any of those leak out they'll know whose copy it was.
The film studios are another matter. They have not released digital DRM-free material ever, and it's unlikely that they'll change their mind in the near future.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay! Let the first production vs. of this supercomputer be called the Stargazer! Sounds quite fitting... [smile]
Sun is responsible for OpenOffice. I expect OpenOffice to become the premiere office suite on PCs of all sorts any day now.
I think it's easier to convince the government to fund NASA projects that are completely awesome.
And the more space telescopes, the merrier--this way we have a back-up on the moon if the one at L2 fails.
Robert Gates isn't an exec, he's a Secretary of Defense. Using time efficiently isn't quite as high a priority in the gov.
Again, no. There are some black boxes on Congress's defense appropriation bills--they don't micromanage everything--but for many years, I've heard about Congress setting aside money to fund specific projects the military doesn't actually want to pursue, such as that VTOL hover-aircraft. This gets done because the project in question sounds like a neat idea and brings jobs to, or keeps them in, some important representative's district.
Once money is allocated by Congress, it must be spent toward the goals it's allocated to. The only question for the Secretary of Defense and underlings is how efficiently to spend it--how much goes to $6000 screwdrivers, one-corp. bids, bids guaranteed to run over, etc.
True. But if you aren't the one planning to do such things, then it's easier to surveil a physical document, or secure it, to make sure such things don't happen. Seal that envelope the letter is in! Keep the document on your person, or locked in a steel suitcase chained to your wrist! How many people are good enough pickpockets to put something back without your noticing?
If people used the same standards of safety for computer documents as they used to for paper documents, electronic ID theft would be less of a problem.
Yes, you're right about relative severity and seriousness. (Though--has anyone actually been tried for treason lately?)
Still--commercial value (aka "making money") may be less valuable than national security in any sane society, but it is still a form of value. The record labels maybe shouldn't have the right to make so much money off their records at the expense of its artists, but the gov. likely shouldn't have the right to re-classify stuff.
The fine article is originally from the AP, which I don't trust if there is anyone else covering the story. It is also simply covering a press briefing from the Pentagon.
Important questions were asked, but the Pentagon simply didn't answer most of them.
What specific systems? All we know is, the DoD Blackberries didn't get hit by this particular attack. We're also told that the Pentagon systems are attacked all the time.
If the Pentagon systems are attacked all the time, then it's likely not an easy task to determine who launched any specific attack. Al Qaeda, the Chinese government, a Chinese cracker working on his own, a mindless virus--who knows?
Whether any intelligence reports were lost or copied is likely classified itself. If the cracker doesn't know whether what he has, or what he destroyed, is valuable, then why should our government tell him?
We're talking about the Department of Defense, remember. They likely don't care about the safety of the individuals whose data was compromised. They had to compromise those individuals themselves to make their intelligence reports!
No. The Congress says where the money goes. If this were not so, then we would have no B-2 bombers and would be forced to stop researching the VTOL hover-aircraft that doesn't really VTOL & hover.
The Secretary of Defense only determines how inefficiently the money is spent.
At least when something goes wrong with a sealed message sent over the sneakernet, you'll know that something has gone wrong.
Encryption isn't common in the current internet. And it is possible for someone to copy data and leave hardly any trace that it was copied.
"Copyright infringement isn't theft." Is copying another state's secrets theft if the original copy of the secrets is still in the original computer?
Radios are cheaper than computers, last I checked.
Also, Soundscan collects extra fees for any internet radio station that plays music, and is about to retroactively raise the rates, so internet radio stations with music aren't cheaper than true radio stations in the long run.
Serious, non-creationist natural history museums exist for a reason, right?
Surely anyone who believes evolution believes it happened in a certain order. You should be able to arrange all the fossils to show in what order everything evolved, more or less. (I know that it's only science if it could conceivably be disproven and just hasn't been yet, but I hope you get my idea.)
I'll tell you the reason why public safety frequencies should remain dedicated to public safety:
There will be businesses and people who will be annoyed if they are knocked off the air because of an emergency. What happens if a cell-phone co. buys those frequencies, and they are commandeered for public safety right when everyone is trying to call people because it's an emergency?
I accept that sometimes TV stations have to switch to all-weather when a tornado watch is on. Nonetheless, I get annoyed by this neccesity when I'm nowhere near the area needing the intense watch.
"Amber Alerts" are sometimes counted as emergencies. What business wants to be knocked off the air simply because a kid has gone missing?
Actually, there is something that could block that plan.
Many cities have signed agreements with cable cos. that only one cable co. is allowed in the city. And it appears that in most areas, only one phone co. is allowed to lay down lines. If you are neither of those, the local government won't give you the right-of-way to lay the fiber across their roads & culverts.
Or it could be that AT&T needs to cooperate with the MPAA, at least, to get actual popular channels on the TV service that they are now advertising.
You mean, the military had to clear you and put you under an NDA because your brother works for them? [sigh]
It is uncertain that what happened to Judith Miller when she was caught in the Valerie Plame case was strictly legal. If those tactics had been in use in the '70s, Nixon could've shut down Woodward & Bernstein for not IDing Deep Throat.
I thought the standard was set by the Pentagon Papers. Even if the material shouldn't have been leaked, you don't punish the journalist for printing it.
Pick AT&T.
Time Warner is a full member of the media industry. The Warner half has been in the media industry since before The Jazz Singer.
No, just the ones that have both a personal God and sharp definitions of right and wrong. Not as many as you might think.
So the anti-decryption sections of the DMCA don't apply to ISPs? If "safe harbor" does, why not "anti-decryption"?
Leaked state secrets aren't outright illegal. It's not illegal to distribute them unless you were the one to leak them.
So, if you are the government and want to remove a leaked state secret from the 'net, you'll need the DMCA after all.
Without legal repercussions directly related to the act of blocking. Financial and social repercussions are, as you note, guaranteed.
The entertainment industry associations don't want to admit that there could be any legal content on P2P nets.
I am not a lawyer, but this looks like AT&T would be immune to prosecution for blocking any "pirated"/grey copyrighted content carried over its lines as long as it isn't actually hosting the work. That is, if the work isn't actually on att.com or sbc.*.com, AT&T won't get in trouble for blocking us from it.
Is this right?
A single song may be three minutes, though with modern songs I think four or five is more typical. But single songs can be only $0.99 a piece--small price for small trouble.
An entire album of songs takes 45-60 min., with the occas. 75-min. album. They may not take an entire hour to download, but the time to download an entire album is minutes, not seconds. And a full album actually will come close to filling a CD regardless of how you get it.
Of course, music does tend to get valued beyond simple reason anyway if it's valued at all.
So much the better. If almost nobody knows those services exist, then maybe the labels and studios don't know they exist. If the labels and studios don't know about them, they can't sanction or bankrupt anyone who happens to use them for a black/grey market.
Selection won't be as good, but odds of prosecution will lower considerably.
Actually, it appears that EMI has found a cut-off for releasing DRM-free songs. The songs iTunes is selling as iTunes-Plus songs (inc. many of EMI's) have no DRM. EMI allows this because those songs are watermarked with material to ID the purchaser, so if any of those leak out they'll know whose copy it was.
The film studios are another matter. They have not released digital DRM-free material ever, and it's unlikely that they'll change their mind in the near future.