Here's a great comment on that Huffington post from "buckygreen":
Anyone who wishes to request a refund on their previous donations to the 0bama campaign may contact Alexa Chappell (achappell@barackobama.com) They have agreed to return my non-merchandise contributions. Its not much - only about $1000 over 6 months - but I will place it in the escrow fund, and my weekly pittances will go to Feingold and his Progressive Patriots Fund and the ACLU until I detect a return to principle on the part of our nominee.
Would you consider it a success if we replace broken body parts with prosthetics, artificial organs, or lab-grown replacements? Or are you focusing on keeping our original stock components?
Forgot to mention - any IT guys looking for work in the Washington, DC area should write to Mr. Capuano and tell him you know how to set up a video server. Seems this all started because the House has lousy IT.
> why should it be illegal? Because it isn't opt-in.
> Is it illegal for me to tell my wife the details of a conversation I had with you? The more relevant question would be: Is it ethical for the phone company to record and correlate all conversations going through their lines and sell (summaries of) the recordings to third parties? Without their customers' consent? Without their knowledge?
> Were you never taught that emails... should be considered postcards What I've been taught is irrelevant. What the average user expects is what congress is asking. And just because a mailman has the ability to peruse a postcard doesn't mean he should photocopy it and sell it on eBay.
> I am loathe to ask for a legislative solution to a problem that has a technical solution Me too - I absolutely agree. So, how do I conceal my slashdot posts, google searches, and online shopping from my ISP?
if a partner in a two-way correspondence chooses to share details of that correspondence, that's their choice
Maybe. But that doesn't mean it's legal, and, more to the point, that there isn't "an expectation of privacy."
If you choose not to make safe your correspondence from third parties via encryption, that's your problem
So we should google over SSL? I can't find their https search service.
The same tools that allow data aggregation... give us better access to information... You have to take the bad with the good.
Why do we have to "take the bad with the good"? Is there some law of quantum physics that says website visitor tracking must be entangled with advertising services?
> is it worth my time to learn a foreign language? If so, which one?
Is it worth your time to live in a foreign land? Taking language courses will give you academic credits, but practical linguistic skill comes bundled with learning the culture.
someone did something heinous, and can't be charged for it, because there was no law against it...the state they're in needs to pass a new law, saying that creating a false identity for the express purpose of harassing someone else is illegal.
If the prosecutors couldn't find a law related to psychologically abusing somebody until they commit suicide, then probably they're not very good prosecutors.
If their laws really are crafted so this can't be conceivably called murder or manslaughter or bullying, then probably they're not very good legislators, and they should fix it.
But there's no reason any such law need to be concerned with false identities or cyberspace.
> the system is supposed to control itself like say the division of power in government That is exactly the sort of system I'm talking about. Other self-controlling systems include market economies, and Nature.
> there's always people in the system trying to unravel it. Just because humans want to (and do) subvert such systems doesn't mean all systems are actively managed. Nor does it mean that actively managed systems are comparably robust to self-correcting systems.
For example, Republicans and Democrats have subverted the separation-of-powers so completely that even SCOTUS now breaks along party lines, but it's not clear that an omnipotent Chief Commander/Committee of Power Division would have prevented that. Nor is it clear that concentration-of-powers would have been a more robust system.
Your point that humans devised the system is well taken. And if you argue that the system needs people to defend it, I accept that. But fighting subverters is not the same thing as controlling the process.
> there's always people at the helm somewhere. In the context of privacy policies that's true today. That doesn't mean a self-correcting privacy structure is impossible.
Hi, I agree with you and I think we're on the same team, but the way you put a couple things doesn't quite make sense to me.
> Deserts are not desirable ecosystems What does "desirable ecosystems" mean? A desert is the best place in the world for those who are adapted to it.
> They are what happens when you push a healthy ecosystem to the point of collapse. They are what happens when a place gets really hot and dry.
In the case of anthropogenic global warming, it does look like we are hoisting ourselves (along with a bunch of similarly adapted organisms) by our own petard. But Nature will indifferently keep rolling on, and coyotes will happily take over what we abandon.
> most rooftops are pointed the wrong direction. Explain? Most rooftops point in about four different directions of up.
> Reducing the dependence on centralized infrastructure can only be a good thing. I'm with you there, friend. Keep the faith.
From the OP:
require the vote of 40 senators to keep the filibuster alive. From Wikipedia:
The term first came into use in the United States Senate, where Senate rules permit a senator, or a series of senators, to speak for as long as they wish and on any topic they choose, unless a supermajority of three-fifths of the Senate (60 Senators, if all 100 seats are filled) brings debate to a close by invoking cloture. So I'm not sure they need 40 supporters - they just need 40 who'll do nothing.
"quickly locating a very expensive portable medical device which may have been left in the wrong room in a 10,000-room hospital" Who/what are you quoting?
RFID is good at identifying things you have, not finding things you've lost. Distances like 30 cm aren't much help "in a 10,000-room hospital".
I did a stint doing wildlife tagging, where I got to roam around on a four wheeler shooting things with a tranq gun Awesome! Where can I sign up?
astoundingly boring...99% of the time you just... let the mosquitos gorge themselves on your blood. This activity can also be lots of fun - if you like Tabasco sauce.
As Bruce Schneier put it:
Too many wrongly characterize the debate as "security versus privacy." The real choice is liberty versus control. Tyranny, whether it arises under threat of foreign physical attack or under constant domestic authoritative scrutiny, is still tyranny. Liberty requires security without intrusion, security plus privacy. Widespread police surveillance is the very definition of a police state. And that's why we should champion privacy even when we have nothing to hide.
If they turn our Mr. Coffee into a spam cannon, I'll thwart them by implicating the coffee maker in p2p sharing of Monty Python sketches or something and tip off the BPI/**AA.
Cycling is a fun and healthy way to get around, and pretty darn safe - were it not for careless drivers, or the occasional psychopath like the grandparent here. Unpredictable or hostile drivers can turn a carefree Sunday bike ride into near terror. Or in my case, actually waking up in an ambulance.
> we have not been able to spontaneously synthesis life from components... seems highly improbable on the Earth
Not sure what "spontaneously" means, but man-made/synthetic life probably has been done already. If not, it'll be here soon.
The first phase of Venter's three-step process, which he published last year, involved transplanting and "booting up" the genome of one species of bacterium into another. The remaining step is to combine the first two steps, then insert the new synthetic genome into a standard bacterium. Scientists said they expect the announcement of man-made life this year. [from Wired, 1/24/08]
a large part of the software development community is likely prejudiced against helping our country Say what?
If you mean to say lots of us don't support invading foreign countries without causus belli, or we start complaining at the suspension of habeas corpus and being jailed indefinitely without charges, then you're confusing "helping our country" with supporting the government.
Defending Liberty and Supporting our President are not necessarily the same thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone who wishes to request a refund on their previous donations to the 0bama campaign may contact Alexa Chappell (achappell@barackobama.com) They have agreed to return my non-merchandise contributions. Its not much - only about $1000 over 6 months - but I will place it in the escrow fund, and my weekly pittances will go to Feingold and his Progressive Patriots Fund and the ACLU until I detect a return to principle on the part of our nominee.
Would you consider it a success if we replace broken body parts with prosthetics, artificial organs, or lab-grown replacements? Or are you focusing on keeping our original stock components?
Forgot to mention - any IT guys looking for work in the Washington, DC area should write to Mr. Capuano and tell him you know how to set up a video server. Seems this all started because the House has lousy IT.
How dare you? If you post the real document people might read it! And see that this - analysis? - is a crock of horseshit.
webinar, n:
1) something formed by or as if by weaving. There's a spider webinar garage
> why should it be illegal?
Because it isn't opt-in.
> Is it illegal for me to tell my wife the details of a conversation I had with you?
The more relevant question would be: Is it ethical for the phone company to record and correlate all conversations going through their lines and sell (summaries of) the recordings to third parties? Without their customers' consent? Without their knowledge?
> Were you never taught that emails ... should be considered postcards
What I've been taught is irrelevant. What the average user expects is what congress is asking. And just because a mailman has the ability to peruse a postcard doesn't mean he should photocopy it and sell it on eBay.
> I am loathe to ask for a legislative solution to a problem that has a technical solution
Me too - I absolutely agree. So, how do I conceal my slashdot posts, google searches, and online shopping from my ISP?
> the free market has killed democracy
Maybe it's not so much the "free market" that's to blame, but that we allowed our government to sell itself.
> [killed] quite badly.
It just so happens that it's only mostly dead.
if a partner in a two-way correspondence chooses to share details of that correspondence, that's their choice
Maybe. But that doesn't mean it's legal, and, more to the point, that there isn't "an expectation of privacy."
If you choose not to make safe your correspondence from third parties via encryption, that's your problem
So we should google over SSL? I can't find their https search service.
The same tools that allow data aggregation ... give us better access to information... You have to take the bad with the good.
Why do we have to "take the bad with the good"? Is there some law of quantum physics that says website visitor tracking must be entangled with advertising services?
> getting Ford to pay part of the cost
Exactly. Much of the infrastructure build out has been taxpayer subsidized.
Now some taxpayers want to pay a second time to lay more fiber for themselves because the telcos won't, and the telcos call that unfair competition?
That's like Ford complaining it's unfair that I build my own car. After I already paid them to build one for me.
> is it worth my time to learn a foreign language? If so, which one?
Is it worth your time to live in a foreign land? Taking language courses will give you academic credits, but practical linguistic skill comes bundled with learning the culture.
someone did something heinous, and can't be charged for it, because there was no law against it ...the state they're in needs to pass a new law, saying that creating a false identity for the express purpose of harassing someone else is illegal.
If the prosecutors couldn't find a law related to psychologically abusing somebody until they commit suicide, then probably they're not very good prosecutors.
If their laws really are crafted so this can't be conceivably called murder or manslaughter or bullying, then probably they're not very good legislators, and they should fix it.
But there's no reason any such law need to be concerned with false identities or cyberspace.
> the system is supposed to control itself like say the division of power in government
That is exactly the sort of system I'm talking about. Other self-controlling systems include market economies, and Nature.
> there's always people in the system trying to unravel it.
Just because humans want to (and do) subvert such systems doesn't mean all systems are actively managed. Nor does it mean that actively managed systems are comparably robust to self-correcting systems.
For example, Republicans and Democrats have subverted the separation-of-powers so completely that even SCOTUS now breaks along party lines, but it's not clear that an omnipotent Chief Commander/Committee of Power Division would have prevented that. Nor is it clear that concentration-of-powers would have been a more robust system.
Your point that humans devised the system is well taken. And if you argue that the system needs people to defend it, I accept that. But fighting subverters is not the same thing as controlling the process.
> there's always people at the helm somewhere.
In the context of privacy policies that's true today. That doesn't mean a self-correcting privacy structure is impossible.
> A system is only as good as the people that control it.
A system that needs people to control it is destined to fail. A system that controls itself is robust.
Hi, I agree with you and I think we're on the same team, but the way you put a couple things doesn't quite make sense to me.
> Deserts are not desirable ecosystems
What does "desirable ecosystems" mean? A desert is the best place in the world for those who are adapted to it.
> They are what happens when you push a healthy ecosystem to the point of collapse.
They are what happens when a place gets really hot and dry.
In the case of anthropogenic global warming, it does look like we are hoisting ourselves (along with a bunch of similarly adapted organisms) by our own petard. But Nature will indifferently keep rolling on, and coyotes will happily take over what we abandon.
> most rooftops are pointed the wrong direction.
Explain? Most rooftops point in about four different directions of up.
> Reducing the dependence on centralized infrastructure can only be a good thing.
I'm with you there, friend. Keep the faith.
As Bruce Schneier put it: Too many wrongly characterize the debate as "security versus privacy." The real choice is liberty versus control. Tyranny, whether it arises under threat of foreign physical attack or under constant domestic authoritative scrutiny, is still tyranny. Liberty requires security without intrusion, security plus privacy. Widespread police surveillance is the very definition of a police state. And that's why we should champion privacy even when we have nothing to hide.
If they turn our Mr. Coffee into a spam cannon, I'll thwart them by implicating the coffee maker in p2p sharing of Monty Python sketches or something and tip off the BPI/**AA.
xxxx:0100 NOP
Mod parent up!
Cycling is a fun and healthy way to get around, and pretty darn safe - were it not for careless drivers, or the occasional psychopath like the grandparent here. Unpredictable or hostile drivers can turn a carefree Sunday bike ride into near terror. Or in my case, actually waking up in an ambulance.
Not sure what "spontaneously" means, but man-made/synthetic life probably has been done already. If not, it'll be here soon. The first phase of Venter's three-step process, which he published last year, involved transplanting and "booting up" the genome of one species of bacterium into another. The remaining step is to combine the first two steps, then insert the new synthetic genome into a standard bacterium. Scientists said they expect the announcement of man-made life this year. [from Wired, 1/24/08]
How about a WalkStation?
Price is around $2500 to $3K.
If you mean to say lots of us don't support invading foreign countries without causus belli, or we start complaining at the suspension of habeas corpus and being jailed indefinitely without charges, then you're confusing "helping our country" with supporting the government.
Defending Liberty and Supporting our President are not necessarily the same thing.
Uma bebida poderosa, nao e?