Anchordesk is not, nor is it trying to be, Slashdot. He is not writing "News for Nerds." Many of the people who read Anchordesk are management, and they're trying to at least be a little aware of what's happening on the tech front. At the same time, they don't much care about what libraries they need to make TrueType fonts show up on Gnome.
Obviously, none of you are going to learn much new about Linux from a Berst column. That shouldn't surprise you, because you aren't the audience he's writing to. And that isn't a bad thing.
I wouldn't be particularly worried, 'cuz I don't generally send stuff electronically that I wouldn't mind sending on a postcard. But that's entirely beside the point: The government has no bloody business reading my postcards or "monitoring all non-military public networks."
The plan, as described in the article, is attacking the percieved problem ("attacks that might cripple Government operations or the nation's economy") the wrong way. If your house is vulnerable to break-ins because your door doesn't have a lock, you don't stay up all night watching your door, you install the best lock you can find (along with all the rest of the security system).
Maybe someone knows this: In most of the recent cyber-attacks against government systems, have the crackers gotten in *despite* the best security systems, or have the gotten in because someone left the back door open?
Slashdot Mirror
Anchordesk is not, nor is it trying to be, Slashdot. He is not writing "News for Nerds." Many of the people who read Anchordesk are management, and they're trying to at least be a little aware of what's happening on the tech front. At the same time, they don't much care about what libraries they need to make TrueType fonts show up on Gnome.
Obviously, none of you are going to learn much new about Linux from a Berst column. That shouldn't surprise you, because you aren't the audience he's writing to. And that isn't a bad thing.
Which works until they make encryption illegal.
I wouldn't be particularly worried, 'cuz I don't generally send stuff electronically that I wouldn't mind sending on a postcard. But that's entirely beside the point: The government has no bloody business reading my postcards or "monitoring all non-military public networks."
The plan, as described in the article, is attacking the percieved problem ("attacks that might cripple Government operations or the nation's economy") the wrong way. If your house is vulnerable to break-ins because your door doesn't have a lock, you don't stay up all night watching your door, you install the best lock you can find (along with all the rest of the security system).
Maybe someone knows this: In most of the recent cyber-attacks against government systems, have the crackers gotten in *despite* the best security systems, or have the gotten in because someone left the back door open?