After this story on EE Times, perhaps the tide will shift a bit?
"Cipher attack delivers heavy blow to WLAN security - A new report dashes any remaining illusions that 802.11-based (Wi-Fi) wireless local-area networks are in any way secure"
EE Times Article.
Hmm, the attack scales linearly with number of bits. Bummer.
In Minnesota, there's a specific law that deals with physical objects delivered onto property without the property owner's consent. These things are classified as "Unsolicited Gifts". The rub is that the object is now the property owner's to do whatever they want with it and no conditions or terms can be enforced by the person sending the "Unsolicited Gift". Given that transmissions are a physical phenomenon, I'd wonder if this applies.
(The original law was to keep people from "giving" you something you hadn't asked for and then charging you later.)
Re:Some copyright is good (heresy, heresy!)
on
At The Crossroads
·
· Score: 2
Just a quick comment on copyright revocation after the French Revolution.
Any time a soceity is faced with the introduction of a new freedom (in this case the freeing of all information into the public domain), it takes, IMHO, at least a generation to deal with the impact. I've often thought that this is the result of the Illicit Thrill(tm) still attched in the subconscious of the generation which grew up indoctrinated into restraint. This seems to set people back into some teen-angst phase and they either mature in their behaviours or not. The second generation is then faced with some ugly spectres of the abuse of the new freedom and learns from the mistakes. It's almost another form of social Darwinism, those ill equipped to deal with the new freedom trash their nest and don't fare well.
my $0.02 of pop psychology - still cheaper than the real thing!
Thanks for reacting first. After finishing the great waste of time article - I was itchy enough to want to flame/. for putting the GNU icon on this with an Open Source headline. I mean, come on, it was a great interview - how does it get forgotten so fast? If Free Software can't hold it's ideological ground on/. then OSS has succeeded in watering the Free down to Open.
It's early for me, but if you are trying to judge the favor for a windows-based OSS project, you don't have to look much farther than the Borg Icon that this story got! Hmm Rob may have to get a windows logo for announcements like this. It would start to confuse people if OSS annoucements for Win start appearing more.
A couple of Quick Points: 1) Science already admits (and Goedel proved mathematically) that it can't answer everything. In any formal system there are things that are true that CANNOT be proven by that system. (Incompleteness theorem)
2) The basis of scientific fact is experiment. Technically we are confined to this universe, therefore any question dealing with before, after, or outside of this universe can neither be confirmed nor controverted by science.
Of course, PNG is supposedly enjoying the rennaissance in terms of not only good, but Politically Correct graphics format. Just a reminder for those of you trying to use JPEG to aviod GIF. I haven't noticed a quality difference in PNG, but then again, I've neever been an imaging purist.
I have seen quite a few comments on being able to bypass BIOS passwords with shorting the battery or disconnecting it. That's true of most systems, but for my old IBM PC330 (486DX2-66). The power on password came with the following caveat: "If you forget this password, there is no way to change it or reset it and the motherboard must be replaced."
I never believed this was true until I finally got ahold of the internal Service Manual for this one. The corrective action to take on a unit that had been returned due to a lost Power-on password was to replace the motherboard!
There was a second level of password that was kept that could be reset if you were too chicken to use the power-on. Man, sometimes IBM stuffs the damndest stuff into their BIOS and board designs.
Actually, his discusison of property may or may not remove it as a "right" depending on your strict interpretation of "right". It is not a natural right, but in fact (physical) property is a necessity for civilization to progress. He clearly stated that in the article. This elevates it, given the reality of the world, to a right because we chose civilzation and that requires concrete property as a right to function. The undebateable nature of this right is granted once the basis of civilization being individual initiative is accepted.
This part, at least, should be very palatable to people here. The IP examination is what will raise hackles, in my opinion.
I'm not sure about the socialist angle, I don't see the equal liberty goal espoused here leading directly to socialism or Marxism. In fact, off the cuff this would seem to be anti-Marx. The only way to get rid of property is to have all property collectively "owned" which is only possible in a single world Marxist collective. Otherwise, even with separate Marxist collectives, you replace the individual property argument with a collective argument with different dimensions, but the same dynamics.
Slashdot Mirror
After this story on EE Times, perhaps the tide will shift a bit?
"Cipher attack delivers heavy blow to WLAN security - A new report dashes any remaining illusions that 802.11-based (Wi-Fi) wireless local-area networks are in any way secure"
EE Times Article.
Hmm, the attack scales linearly with number of bits. Bummer.
In Minnesota, there's a specific law that deals with physical objects delivered onto property without the property owner's consent. These things are classified as "Unsolicited Gifts". The rub is that the object is now the property owner's to do whatever they want with it and no conditions or terms can be enforced by the person sending the "Unsolicited Gift". Given that transmissions are a physical phenomenon, I'd wonder if this applies.
(The original law was to keep people from "giving" you something you hadn't asked for and then charging you later.)
Just a quick comment on copyright revocation after the French Revolution.
Any time a soceity is faced with the introduction of a new freedom (in this case the freeing of all information into the public domain), it takes, IMHO, at least a generation to deal with the impact. I've often thought that this is the result of the Illicit Thrill(tm) still attched in the subconscious of the generation which grew up indoctrinated into restraint. This seems to set people back into some teen-angst phase and they either mature in their behaviours or not. The second generation is then faced with some ugly spectres of the abuse of the new freedom and learns from the mistakes. It's almost another form of social Darwinism, those ill equipped to deal with the new freedom trash their nest and don't fare well.
my $0.02 of pop psychology - still cheaper than the real thing!
Thanks for reacting first. After finishing the great waste of time article - I was itchy enough to want to flame /. for putting the GNU icon on this with an Open Source headline. I mean, come on, it was a great interview - how does it get forgotten so fast? If Free Software can't hold it's ideological ground on /. then OSS has succeeded in watering the Free down to Open.
OK - coffee - no more ranting.
It's early for me, but if you are trying to judge the favor for a windows-based OSS project, you don't have to look much farther than the Borg Icon that this story got! Hmm Rob may have to get a windows logo for announcements like this. It would start to confuse people if OSS annoucements for Win start appearing more.
A couple of Quick Points:
1) Science already admits (and Goedel proved mathematically) that it can't answer everything. In any formal system there are things that are true that CANNOT be proven by that system. (Incompleteness theorem)
2) The basis of scientific fact is experiment. Technically we are confined to this universe, therefore any question dealing with before, after, or outside of this universe can neither be confirmed nor controverted by science.
both of these points call for some faith. . .
Of course, PNG is supposedly enjoying the rennaissance in terms of not only good, but Politically Correct graphics format. Just a reminder for those of you trying to use JPEG to aviod GIF.
I haven't noticed a quality difference in PNG, but then again, I've neever been an imaging purist.
I have seen quite a few comments on being able to
bypass BIOS passwords with shorting the battery or disconnecting it. That's true of most systems, but for my old IBM PC330 (486DX2-66). The power on password came with the following caveat: "If you forget this password, there is no way to change it or reset it and the motherboard must be replaced."
I never believed this was true until I finally got ahold of the internal Service Manual for this one. The corrective action to take on a unit that had been returned due to a lost Power-on password was to replace the motherboard!
There was a second level of password that was kept that could be reset if you were too chicken to use the power-on. Man, sometimes IBM stuffs the damndest stuff into their BIOS and board designs.
Actually, his discusison of property may or may not remove it as a "right" depending on your strict interpretation of "right". It is not a natural right, but in fact (physical) property is a necessity for civilization to progress. He clearly stated that in the article. This elevates it, given the reality of the world, to a right because we chose civilzation and that requires concrete property as a right to function. The undebateable nature of this right is granted once the basis of civilization being individual initiative is accepted.
This part, at least, should be very palatable to people here. The IP examination is what will raise hackles, in my opinion.
I'm not sure about the socialist angle, I don't see the equal liberty goal espoused here leading directly to socialism or Marxism. In fact, off the cuff this would seem to be anti-Marx. The only way to get rid of property is to have all property collectively "owned" which is only possible in a single world Marxist collective. Otherwise, even with separate Marxist collectives, you replace the individual property argument with a collective argument with different dimensions, but the same dynamics.