I have to agree with the other posters that we really don't need this.
On the other hand, because surveillance is increasing
everywhere it is a question that we should all be asking.
In my opinion, we need to keep this sort of data locked up (encrypted), to be
unlocked only in the event of a crime or emergency as determined
by a court (composition of the court TBD). And even when it is unlocked, the data should only be
viewed by court appointed personnel and only scanned for events related to the given situation.
The question you have to ask yourself is what is the
potential for abuse. Suppose that J. Edgar Hoover
wants to give you a hard time. You recently checked a book out of the library on midevil catapults (or fertilizer, tide tables, or whatever). He sends agents out to talk to your friends, business associates, employer, etc. to ask about "suspicious activities" and the next thing you know you are friendless and unemployed.
Can anyone share their experience developing
Java apps on Zaurus? Do all the Zauri have the
same level of Java support? Can you recommend
a URL to get me started? I did a Google search
for Zaurus Java and most of the websites seem to be way out of date.
... have everyone outraged when you are punished for it
By your very narrow criteria The Boston Tea Party would be considered shitty civil disobedience.
... just stop buying thier music all together
The RIAA has the copyright to a lot of music, some good, some bad. Many of the artists have been dead for years. Should we stop listening to it (sampling it, quoting it)? Some would consider that a hardship. Or put it another way, Why didn't the colonies just stop drinking tea if they didn't want to pay the tax?
The fat corporations represented by the MPAA and RIAA have been fleecing the public for years. They are the real criminals.
Now, as the people are becoming empowered by technology, those same corporations are fighting a propaganda war in a desperate attempt to derail a future in which they have no place. Let us celebrate their imminent demise!
Check out Downhill Battle. They have the same sort of skull and
crossbones logo.
This gives a lot of the legal arguments, expectation of privacy in public, etc. And this
while not about Video per se gives a
good discussion of Surveillance in general and
the potential for abuse.
I agree. We are seeing the government completely dominated by corporate interests. I view p2p as a form of civil disobedience. That's why I support downhillbattle. BTW, I like your website. Keep up the good work.
This is not a scholarly article. Here is his summary:
CONCLUSION REGARDING PROPOSED METHOD
I did not describe the details of how the proposed system would work, but I
hope the proposal aspect of this article leads to more thinking about
solutions to spam -- especially about solutions that avoid invasion of
privacy by any form of content analysis or packet tracking, or cooperation
with specific corporations, or censorship.
The web page contains lots of images of
SPAM that the author has received.
Here is the text of his proposal:
SPAM CONTROL PROPOSAL
This section contains a proposal for SOFTWARE and SOCIAL PRACTICES that have the potential of greatly reducing the nuisance of spam from a person's life.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Things required by this proposal:
(1) A person who wishes to greatly reduce spam must install software on each computer with an e-mail client application (such as Microsoft Outlook).
(2) A person who wishes to greatly reduce spam, when sharing his or her e-mail address, must also go through the trouble of sharing a code number.
(3) Mailing list services must make a slight modification to their databases and mailing scripts to store and use codes in addition to e-mail addresses.
Things that are NOT required by this proposal:
(1) Changes to e-mail servers, e-mail protocols, e-mail content standards, or Internet infrastructure, are not required.
(2) Existing spam countermeasures (content-filtering, IP blacklisting, anti-spam laws, etc) will not be necessary. (Such countermeasures are futile and dangerous anyhow.)
(3) It is possible that changes to existing e-mail clients will not be required.
Things that will NOT be directly helped by this proposal:
(1) Internet bandwidth consumed by the futile efforts of spammers trying to make it through to people. (Once the futility becomes apparent worldwide, the spamming model may naturally be a very unattractive waste of time.)
(2) E-mail "inbox" clogging while the spammer profession lingers on, before the futility of spamming has a chance to sink in worldwide.
(3) People with e-mail clients and services provided by giant corporations may not experience the diminished spam until the giant corporations have a chance to update software.
Other qualities of this proposal:
(1) Totally open technology; not "security through obscurity".
(2) Non-commercial, public-domain method, can be implemented by anyone without consideration.
(3) Totally smooth transition from current e-mail clients, servers, mailing list services, etc.
(4) Privacy preserved (no content analysis), and possibly even improved (as proposed software becomes more widespread).
CORE CONCEPT
The following paragraphs describe the core concept of the method. Certain details will be discussed in the "Use Cases" section:
Messages received by an e-mail client will be sorted by codes contained in the message subject fields or within the message bodies. Spam messages are extremely unlikely to contain the proper codes, and are thus diverted to an anonymous-sender category. Unlike an e-mail address alone, which is a single, unmoving target for spammers, the additional codes are generated by formulae, and are tiny, constantly-moving targets in a huge expanse of possible target locations. Furthermore, any breach of trust can instantly be traced to specific unscrupulous people, and immediately and conveniently patched. The concept can be likened to "spread-spectrum" communication, or, much more loosely, "port knocking".
CORE IMPLEMENTATION
The following paragraphs describe the core implementation of the method.
Three encrypted files are stored on an e-mail client machine:
(1) PRIMARY FORMULA TABLE: Encrypted table with entries in the form: ( SHA hash of recipient e-mail address, primary formula )
Right, but the emphasis is on LIMITED. Here are the words of Supreme Court Justice Breyer, dissenting:
The U.S. Constitution's Copyright Clause grants Congress the power to "promote the Progress of Science... by securing for LIMITED TIMES TO AUTHORS... the exclusive Right to their respective Writings.." The statute before us, the 1998 Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act, extends the term of most existing copyrights to 95 years and that of many new copyrights to 70 years after the author's death. The economic effect of this 20-year extension, the longest blanket extension since the Nation's founding, is to make the copyright term not limited, but virtually perpetual. Its primary legal effect is to grant the extended term not to authors, but to their heirs, estates, or corporate successors. And most importantly, its practical effect is not to promote, but to inhibit, the progress of Science, by which word the Framers meant learning or knowledge...
The media giants own our government. Boycotting and file sharing are two ways that the unrepresented masses can fight back. Also, anyone who really cares will support Downhill Battle.
If your point is that talking heads shouldn't get involved in science, then I somewhat agree.
My point is that
Murray and Herrnstein got just what they wanted: plenty of publicity, and adulation by like-minded racist conservatives. If they had wanted a scientific discussion they would have submitted their work to scientific journals.
Your claim that respected researchers have been scared off is just silly. There are hundreds of scientists exploring these topics every day.
As pointed out by Donald D. Dorfman in the link that you provide, Herrnstein and Murray were engaged in non-peer-reviewed psuedo-science. The scientific flaws in their work were numerous and are well documented. See
The Mismeasure of Man
by Stephen Jay Gould for a critique of this and other attempts to put a scientific basis to racist beliefs.
Several of the comments so far suggest that a hack will be quickly forthcoming once the broadcast flag is implemented. Don't be so sure. The media producers and consumer electronics companies have learned *a lot* from past mistakes. The technology exists now to put a hack-proof lock on content. The main factors holding it back are cost and industry infighting.
The comments suggesting that this only affects TV are also misguided. Once the above mentioned industries get their act together and get all their ducks lined up, then they will lock down the content and it won't matter if you are watching TV, downloading to your PC, or whatever. At that point they will tell you what, when, and how you get your media.
It's a battle folks. Join EFF, support Downhill Battle, write your congress critter.
It's not easy to stop caring too much. You have to tell yourself that you are still a good person. You are not in a position to change all that is wrong in the world.
The short answer is that it is probably illegal because it allows you to prove to a third party how you voted and thus violates the secret ballot principle. Read the intro to Secret Secret-Ballot Receipts
and Transparent Integrity where he describes a different type of receipt.
If you are worried about the insecurity of e-voting, and you are wondering what to do, join EFF. They are working hard to educate the public and our politicians on this subject.
I am a member and big fan of the EFF, but their treatment of this topic leaves me unimpressed. The RIAA are fighting to maintain the status quo and their increasing irrellevance in the digital age, and they will continue to use any sleazy means at their disposal. Those of us on the other side are fighting to destroy them. I support downhillbattle.
Slashdot Mirror
In my opinion, we need to keep this sort of data locked up (encrypted), to be unlocked only in the event of a crime or emergency as determined by a court (composition of the court TBD). And even when it is unlocked, the data should only be viewed by court appointed personnel and only scanned for events related to the given situation.
The question you have to ask yourself is what is the potential for abuse. Suppose that J. Edgar Hoover wants to give you a hard time. You recently checked a book out of the library on midevil catapults (or fertilizer, tide tables, or whatever). He sends agents out to talk to your friends, business associates, employer, etc. to ask about "suspicious activities" and the next thing you know you are friendless and unemployed.
Can anyone share their experience developing Java apps on Zaurus? Do all the Zauri have the same level of Java support? Can you recommend a URL to get me started? I did a Google search for Zaurus Java and most of the websites seem to be way out of date.
By your very narrow criteria The Boston Tea Party would be considered shitty civil disobedience.
The RIAA has the copyright to a lot of music, some good, some bad. Many of the artists have been dead for years. Should we stop listening to it (sampling it, quoting it)? Some would consider that a hardship. Or put it another way, Why didn't the colonies just stop drinking tea if they didn't want to pay the tax?
The fat corporations represented by the MPAA and RIAA have been fleecing the public for years. They are the real criminals.
Now, as the people are becoming empowered by technology, those same corporations are fighting a propaganda war in a desperate attempt to derail a future in which they have no place. Let us celebrate their imminent demise!
Check out Downhill Battle. They have the same sort of skull and crossbones logo.
This gives a lot of the legal arguments, expectation of privacy in public, etc. And this while not about Video per se gives a good discussion of Surveillance in general and the potential for abuse.
We do. We donate to EFF and Downhill Battle.
I agree. We are seeing the government completely dominated by corporate interests. I view p2p as a form of civil disobedience. That's why I support downhillbattle. BTW, I like your website. Keep up the good work.
I just tried to download the form from http://www.microsoftcalsettlement.com/ClaimPage.ht m with Mozilla 1.7b. When I push the butten "Create Printable Claim Form" it just reloads the page, whereas with IE it loads a PDF of the claim form with URL "https://webform.microsoftcalsettlement.com/PDF/St andardClaimForm.pdf".
The web page contains lots of images of SPAM that the author has received.
Here is the text of his proposal:
You left out Downhill Battle.
The media giants own our government. Boycotting and file sharing are two ways that the unrepresented masses can fight back. Also, anyone who really cares will support Downhill Battle.
You can also check out my not-quite-ready-for-prime-time website Pirates Or Heroes.
My point is that Murray and Herrnstein got just what they wanted: plenty of publicity, and adulation by like-minded racist conservatives. If they had wanted a scientific discussion they would have submitted their work to scientific journals.
Your claim that respected researchers have been scared off is just silly. There are hundreds of scientists exploring these topics every day.
As pointed out by Donald D. Dorfman in the link that you provide, Herrnstein and Murray were engaged in non-peer-reviewed psuedo-science. The scientific flaws in their work were numerous and are well documented. See The Mismeasure of Man by Stephen Jay Gould for a critique of this and other attempts to put a scientific basis to racist beliefs.
The comments suggesting that this only affects TV are also misguided. Once the above mentioned industries get their act together and get all their ducks lined up, then they will lock down the content and it won't matter if you are watching TV, downloading to your PC, or whatever. At that point they will tell you what, when, and how you get your media.
It's a battle folks. Join EFF, support Downhill Battle, write your congress critter.
It's not easy to stop caring too much. You have to tell yourself that you are still a good person. You are not in a position to change all that is wrong in the world.
The short answer is that it is probably illegal because it allows you to prove to a third party how you voted and thus violates the secret ballot principle. Read the intro to Secret Secret-Ballot Receipts and Transparent Integrity where he describes a different type of receipt.
If you are worried about the insecurity of e-voting, and you are wondering what to do, join EFF. They are working hard to educate the public and our politicians on this subject.
I am a member and big fan of the EFF, but their treatment of this topic leaves me unimpressed. The RIAA are fighting to maintain the status quo and their increasing irrellevance in the digital age, and they will continue to use any sleazy means at their disposal. Those of us on the other side are fighting to destroy them. I support downhillbattle.
Hey moderator, this is not offtop.
I love to tinker on the computer, except at work. I love to tinker on the car, except when I need to get somewhere.