Maps are arguably the most useful source of information for terrorists. How else can they get their bombs to the correct location in a foreign land?
Explosives can be used by terrorists to harm innocent people.
Chemistry describes how chemicals react...to create explosions.
Physics describes how force is applied...during an explosion.
Math is used extensively to solve formulas...in both Chemistry and Physics.
Words are used to represent information...that describes how to make bombs.
Paper is used to convey language...which could describe terrorist actions.
Food is an important resource...that helps all terrorists survive!
You don't want to help the terrorists do you? Then, you understand why we're removing all of your surplus food items, writing utensils, books, maps, televisions, and home computers. Do you have a license for those vocal cords?
...he showed how he hacked into the Web site of a Chinese company. Once the Web site popped up on his screen, he created additional pages and typed the word “hacked” onto one of them.
Perhaps the journalist had no idea how web browsers work...
Perhaps the "hacker" just pressed Ctrl+T then typed: javascript:document.write('<h1>HACKED</H1>'); into the address bar...(try it)
Point being: The journalist didn't describe "Majia" doing anything that I would consider cracking... From the description given, Majia could have just been updating his own blog.
You can add the word "Hacked" to the top of almost any web page (incuding this one) by pasting this into your address bar: javascript:b=document.getElementsByTagName('body')[0];b.insertBefore(document.createTextNode('Hacked!'),b.firstChild);void(0);
Does that make you a hacker? To a NYT Journalist, yes.
Traditional radio frequency systems (Wi-Fi , WiMAX etc.) do not require line of sight transmission, but can pass through some substances and so present a security problem. Light, in a room without windows, will not escape the room, improving security."
As if security through obscurity weren't bad enough, now we'll have security via opacity... which can easily be defeated by slipping a fiber optic cable under the door, or through a small hole in the wall.
Bottom line: You'll still need to encrypt your data and it won't be any more secure than Wi-Fi. Both Wi-Fi and Optical signals will only be as secure as the encryption system they use.
So, Optical transmission IS NOT more secure than Wi-Fi, and it sucks at traveling through walls (unlike Wi-Fi)... Wired 1Gps networks don't "leak" from the room with the door and windows open either... ( why we should care about this? )
But... DES is a block cipher. The algo. E(E(M,K1),K2) == E(M,K3) where K3 is some other key is only true if E is simply operating on K in a stream like fashion (like XOR).
Transposing the keys produces a different output stream in DES... E(E(M,K1),K2) =/= E(E(M,K2),K1). There is no "magic" K3 that will produce the same sequence of encrypted bytes as taking the encrypted output of E(M,K1) and encrypting it again via K2.
This is simple to demonstrate with a car analogy: With BLOCK ciphers there is no magic "getting in a car" that equals "getting into a car" then putting that car inside another car.
With stream ciphers: There IS a magic "getting into a car" that equals "getting into a car", driving a ways and "getting into a different car".
Let's say you're on a "secured" web page entering your credit card information. You see that iframe that's "verified by visa". The code on the page you're looking at says where to get the content from, and IT is secure... The content that is loaded is via "https://..." https (TLS) is secure, it can not be spoofed.
This means that if the content in the iframe has been tampered with your web browser will not display the content. The secure iframe is sent the "Referrer"(sic) header containing the URL of the page that contains the iframe, which the iframe verifies is https and will contain a secure token in the URL (that's what the gibberish after the ? mark is). Therefore "verified by visa" is secure. Annoying as hell, but it is secure.
The issue is: if you're on "secured" web page that you don't fully trust (say from "https://theives.com") entering your credit card information and you see the "verified by visa" iframe, without any address bar for that iframe you can't trust that the content within the iframe isn't spoofed. The iframe could contain content that looked like the "verified by visa" iframe, but was actually from "thieves.com".
Therefore, the "verifed by visa" iframe content should not reassure you that the page you are on is "verified by visa"... instead you should realize that "verified by visa" means that YOU are being verified by visa.
Check the address bar of the page you are on. Check the page's certificate chain. If you don't trust the web site you're on don't enter financial information. If you don't know how to verify that you can trust the site, you should educate yourself or stop using e-commerce.
We use Thunderbird with the Enigmail (OpenPGP) plugin at my office to cryptographicly sign and/or encrypt our email.
Our SPAM filter consists of simply rejecting all unsigned e-mail messages. One exception is that external e-mail addresses can be whitelisted (with approval) to allow for email from companies with no email authentication in place.
It's a bit of a pain at first, but everyone at work agrees that it's a small price to pay when you consider the alternative (inboxes full of spam). I've never recieved a spam e-mail message at work. New employees create PGP keys during orientation (or else they can't send any e-mail).
One by one I'm convincing my friends and family to cryptographicly sign their messages (tech-savy ones love the Idea). Soon I hope to get zero spam at home too.
[sigh]... If only the rest of the Internet authenticated their email we could all have Zero spam in our inboxes.
The open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as [Mac OS X]...
Free BSD, Linux, Open BSD -- Just because you don't have to buy it doesn't mean it wasn't "produced".
Not just for desktops... The percentage of web servers running FOSS vs proprietary OSs is staggering. I'd venture to say that the Internet is far more "useful" than Mac OS X.
I remember seeing that 3D file system on the screen in Jurassic Park: "It's a Unix System!, I know this!" I just shook my head thinking, "It's acutally IRIX."
Standardized tabs was great back in the old "10: if ( x ) goto 100" days...
But today 8 spaces per tab is far too much for most folks. Nearly all newer code has portions that are deeply nested. if ( x ) {
x.addEventListener (
"hover",
function() {
window.status = "Hovering Over X";
x.changeColor (
{
text: "green",
background: "black",
outline: "white"
}
);
},
true
); }
This is a mild example of 5 levels of nesting.
Some code is more deeply nested than others, and some fonts are wider than others. Changing the tab spacing let's us see more without having to scroll horizontally decrease our font size.
Here's the same code with 1/2 the tab width. if ( x ) {
x.addEventListener (
"hover",
function() {
window.status = "Hovering Over X";
x.changeColor (
{
text: "green",
background: "black",
outline: "white"
}
);
},
true
); }
What looks fine on my screen may look very different on someone else's. Using tabs and editors that allow tab size adjustment allows coders to manage the source code more efficiently.
If the VC IDE was as "smart" as any that I use it would just write a comment in the file containing the indent and tab settings, use default settings if the special comment doesn't exist, and allow the user to override / adjust those settings.
e.g. /* MS_VC_INTENT=2; MS_VC_TAB=4 */
It's the old "Use Comments for Meta-Data" trick (As seen everywhere else...) <!DOCTYPE> anyone?
The point is that they didn't want to fix their own bugs related to the setting so they eliminated the cause... They got rid of the setting and claimed "It's not a bug, it's a feature!"
It doesn't matter if the hardware or software is compromised, it's still secure because a TOR node is just one node in a chain of encrypted nodes. You encrypt your data 5 times if you're sending it through 5 nodes.
Each node takes off one layer of encryption and forwards the still encrypted data to the next node. If any intermediate nodes (2 3 4 in our 5 node example) are compromised (in software or hardware), they can not see the message in plain text, or determine the originating IP or destination IP of the traffic.
If the first node is compromised it can see your source IP, but not the destination IP or any part of the message (it's still encrypted.)
If the exit node is compromised it can see the destination IP, and clear text message, but not the source IP.
These multiple layers of encryption mean that if any one node is compromised the system is still very secure.
Taking off a layer of encryption at each router is like peeling an onion... hence, "The Onion Router".
(this is an oversimplified explanaion -- if you're talking compromised code repositories, viruses and trojans are usually not delivered as source code, the tampering would be evident.)
Find an existing project that interests you and work on it. Developers need projects to collaborate on. Fortunately, many projects already exist.
To find a project just browse open source projects on sites like SourceForge, Google Code, CodePlex, etc. Don't waste your time (and life) working on projects that don't get you excited. If you're not interested in a project it will feel more like work than it has to.
So read this and get out your p2p and help kill the industry to make the world safe for music and musicians.
P2P won't kill the industry, it will only help to spread the music's popularity. P2P = Free Advertising (similar to radio music). Some free music labels even distribute via P2P to cut server costs.
Start listening to free music from free sources. Start listening to and making some donations to the artists and companies that are already achieving your goals.
Go to a few concerts, buy a t-shirt or two. Check out the local music scene. The only way to "kill the industry" (by which I hope you mean "kill evil labels") is for the majority of people to stop consuming (even via P2P) the music they produce.
Just because something can be patented doesn't mean it should be patented. The patent system is supposed to keep things that shouldn't be patented from being patented, but it doesn't -- It's broken. Saying: "Let's see you do better!" isn't the answer.
It's not that I think patent examiners are ignorant, it's just that I find the entire patent system ridiculously flawed...
The patent system is obviously designed to have the least efficient method for discovering prior art. The entire world of prior art simply won't fit through a patent examiner's sieve in the time they are given to decide over a patent. This flaw in the system worsens with time as more patents are granted -- the whole system should be scrapped.
The initial secrecy granted to patent applications is the problem. If the goal is to deem a technology as patentable or not patentable then secrecy should not be required. The solution is to provide a public forum where "persons having ordinary skill in the art" can come to you (the examiners) and show you our previous art.
To put it plainly: Help us Help You! Instead of employing a small group of patent examiners to filter through the entire world's catalog of information, let the entire world direct you to the prior art information you are trying to find.
Both large companies examine their large patent portfolios and threaten each other with any infringing patents found.
This effectively increases the chances they'll come to an agreement instead of fight out each "infringement" suit in court. The costs of the lawsuits is always less than the price of coming to an agreement. The real looser is the consumer who will now have to pay more for products due to the costs of the companies throwing around their patent weights.
(Also note: Lack of a huge patent portfolio ensures that inventors who naturally have less bargaining chips never win at the big boy's table.)
I second this idea. TrueCrypt can be used, but you have to use it correctly for this instance.
You could be subpoenaed to provide access to the encrypted volumes on your laptop.
Fortunately, TrueCrypt will let you store encrypted data in the unused space of an encrypted volume.
Make a large encrypted volume and place a few files in it you don't mind prying eyes viewing, then use the rest of the volume's "free space" as a volume to store your actual data.
When the subpoena arrives, you simply unlock the innocent looking files in the "dummy" part of the encrypted volume.
Actually... I use torrents because I can't seem to avoid breaking the law no matter how much money I throw at the problem.
I have a massive collection of media on various formats: DVD, CD, VHS, etc.
With all but DVD (I don't buy Blu-ray) I can convert the audio and video media into a digital format OGG Video/Audio, and make perfectly legal backup copies of my expensive media library.
Because of DMCA I can no longer even play a DVD on my computer with my chosen operating system (Linux) legally... The DVD plays, but the player isn't licensed and breaks the DMCA just to play the movie. I also break the law (DMCA) each time I back up a DVD onto my hard drive -- not because back up copies are illegal by copyright, but my circumvention of the weak DVD encryption is.
Transcoding a DVD into a digital format like.AVI or.OGG takes a lot of time. In fact, it takes less time for me to download a movie via Bittorrent (1-2 hr torrent vs 2-5 hr transcode).
I already own the movies and music. Using torrents seems like a perfectly acceptable method of obtaining a backup copy to me. I simply assume that everyone else that shares data with me has rights to the data as well... innocent until proven guilty is how I treat strangers.
My friends often download movies they don't own... They also use Linux. Think about it: If they purchase a DVD then play it on their computer they've just broken the law... Might as well just break the law via torrent and avoid spending the money, the law's broken either way.
I'm breaking the law by enjoying or preserving my DVD collection any way you look at it, and they're breaking the law blatantly... I feel stupid for not following suit.
(note: I can't enjoy DVDs on a DVD player since I no longer own a TV or DVD player, a large monitor and computer work just as well.)
It's a good thing hard copy media isn't this restrictive: "Here! Take this magazine, but you can only read it in approved spaces... You live in a Linux house? Then you can have it but you better not read it!"
Slashdot Mirror
The minute we decided that freedom was less important than safety.
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" - Benjamin Franklin
Therefore, we now have neither Liberty or Safety.
...only outlaws will have knowledge.
Maps are arguably the most useful source of information for terrorists.
How else can they get their bombs to the correct location in a foreign land?
Explosives can be used by terrorists to harm innocent people.
Chemistry describes how chemicals react...to create explosions.
Physics describes how force is applied...during an explosion.
Math is used extensively to solve formulas...in both Chemistry and Physics.
Words are used to represent information...that describes how to make bombs.
Paper is used to convey language...which could describe terrorist actions.
Food is an important resource...that helps all terrorists survive!
You don't want to help the terrorists do you?
Then, you understand why we're removing all of your surplus food items, writing utensils, books, maps, televisions, and home computers.
Do you have a license for those vocal cords?
...he showed how he hacked into the Web site of a Chinese company. Once the Web site popped up on his screen, he created additional pages and typed the word “hacked” onto one of them.
Perhaps the journalist had no idea how web browsers work...
Perhaps the "hacker" just pressed Ctrl+T then typed:
javascript:document.write('<h1>HACKED</H1>');
into the address bar...(try it)
Point being: The journalist didn't describe "Majia" doing anything that I would consider cracking... From the description given, Majia could have just been updating his own blog.
You can add the word "Hacked" to the top of almost any web page (incuding this one) by pasting this into your address bar:
javascript:b=document.getElementsByTagName('body')[0];b.insertBefore(document.createTextNode('Hacked!'),b.firstChild);void(0);
Does that make you a hacker?
To a NYT Journalist, yes.
Traditional radio frequency systems (Wi-Fi , WiMAX etc.) do not require line of sight transmission, but can pass through some substances and so present a security problem. Light, in a room without windows, will not escape the room, improving security."
As if security through obscurity weren't bad enough, now we'll have security via opacity... which can easily be defeated by slipping a fiber optic cable under the door, or through a small hole in the wall.
Bottom line: You'll still need to encrypt your data and it won't be any more secure than Wi-Fi. Both Wi-Fi and Optical signals will only be as secure as the encryption system they use.
So, Optical transmission IS NOT more secure than Wi-Fi, and it sucks at traveling through walls (unlike Wi-Fi)... Wired 1Gps networks don't "leak" from the room with the door and windows open either... ( why we should care about this? )
But... DES is a block cipher. The algo. E(E(M,K1),K2) == E(M,K3) where K3 is some other key is only true if E is simply operating on K in a stream like fashion (like XOR).
Transposing the keys produces a different output stream in DES... E(E(M,K1),K2) =/= E(E(M,K2),K1).
There is no "magic" K3 that will produce the same sequence of encrypted bytes as taking the encrypted output of E(M,K1) and encrypting it again via K2.
This is simple to demonstrate with a car analogy: With BLOCK ciphers there is no magic "getting in a car" that equals "getting into a car" then putting that car inside another car.
With stream ciphers: There IS a magic "getting into a car" that equals "getting into a car", driving a ways and "getting into a different car".
Does it have to be virtual? If you just want to sandbox IE why not just use Sandboxie?
Welcome to the 70's porn industry.
Let's say you're on a "secured" web page entering your credit card information.
You see that iframe that's "verified by visa". The code on the page you're looking at says where to get the content from, and IT is secure... The content that is loaded is via "https://..." https (TLS) is secure, it can not be spoofed.
This means that if the content in the iframe has been tampered with your web browser will not display the content. The secure iframe is sent the "Referrer"(sic) header containing the URL of the page that contains the iframe, which the iframe verifies is https and will contain a secure token in the URL (that's what the gibberish after the ? mark is). Therefore "verified by visa" is secure. Annoying as hell, but it is secure.
The issue is: if you're on "secured" web page that you don't fully trust (say from "https://theives.com") entering your credit card information and you see the "verified by visa" iframe, without any address bar for that iframe you can't trust that the content within the iframe isn't spoofed. The iframe could contain content that looked like the "verified by visa" iframe, but was actually from "thieves.com".
Therefore, the "verifed by visa" iframe content should not reassure you that the page you are on is "verified by visa"... instead you should realize that "verified by visa" means that YOU are being verified by visa.
Check the address bar of the page you are on. Check the page's certificate chain. If you don't trust the web site you're on don't enter financial information. If you don't know how to verify that you can trust the site, you should educate yourself or stop using e-commerce.
We use Thunderbird with the Enigmail (OpenPGP) plugin at my office to cryptographicly sign and/or encrypt our email.
Our SPAM filter consists of simply rejecting all unsigned e-mail messages.
One exception is that external e-mail addresses can be whitelisted (with approval) to allow for email from companies with no email authentication in place.
It's a bit of a pain at first, but everyone at work agrees that it's a small price to pay when you consider the alternative (inboxes full of spam).
I've never recieved a spam e-mail message at work.
New employees create PGP keys during orientation (or else they can't send any e-mail).
One by one I'm convincing my friends and family to cryptographicly sign their messages (tech-savy ones love the Idea).
Soon I hope to get zero spam at home too.
[sigh]... If only the rest of the Internet authenticated their email we could all have Zero spam in our inboxes.
Not only on phones...
The open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as [Mac OS X] ...
Free BSD, Linux, Open BSD -- Just because you don't have to buy it doesn't mean it wasn't "produced".
Not just for desktops...
The percentage of web servers running FOSS vs proprietary OSs is staggering.
I'd venture to say that the Internet is far more "useful" than Mac OS X.
I remember seeing that 3D file system on the screen in Jurassic Park: "It's a Unix System!, I know this!"
I just shook my head thinking, "It's acutally IRIX."
I remember seeing Sun's 3D desktop, Project Looking Glass, back in 2003.
Compiz "was released as free software by Novell (SUSE) in January 2006"
Vista went retail in January 2007...
Compiz Fusion, is "the default window manager" in Ubuntu since 7.10 (October 18, 2007).
Hundreds of videos suggest that exponentially more people have been using compositing. Some since WAY before Vista ever released...
Band wagons don't just spontaneously appear just because Microsoft finally decides to hop on board.
Standardized tabs was great back in the old "10: if ( x ) goto 100" days...
But today 8 spaces per tab is far too much for most folks.
Nearly all newer code has portions that are deeply nested.
if ( x ) {
x.addEventListener (
"hover",
function() {
window.status = "Hovering Over X";
x.changeColor (
{
text: "green",
background: "black",
outline: "white"
}
);
},
true
);
}
This is a mild example of 5 levels of nesting.
Some code is more deeply nested than others, and some fonts are wider than others.
Changing the tab spacing let's us see more without having to scroll horizontally decrease our font size.
Here's the same code with 1/2 the tab width.
if ( x ) {
x.addEventListener (
"hover",
function() {
window.status = "Hovering Over X";
x.changeColor (
{
text: "green",
background: "black",
outline: "white"
}
);
},
true
);
}
What looks fine on my screen may look very different on someone else's.
Using tabs and editors that allow tab size adjustment allows coders to manage the source code more efficiently.
If the VC IDE was as "smart" as any that I use it would just write a comment in the file containing the indent and tab settings, use default settings if the special comment doesn't exist, and allow the user to override / adjust those settings.
e.g.
/* MS_VC_INTENT=2; MS_VC_TAB=4 */
It's the old "Use Comments for Meta-Data" trick (As seen everywhere else...)
<!DOCTYPE> anyone?
The point is that they didn't want to fix their own bugs related to the setting so they eliminated the cause...
They got rid of the setting and claimed "It's not a bug, it's a feature!"
Wait... Anyone can be a TOR node and it's still secure.
TOR data is very encrypted.
It doesn't matter if the hardware or software is compromised, it's still secure because a TOR node is just one node in a chain of encrypted nodes. You encrypt your data 5 times if you're sending it through 5 nodes.
Each node takes off one layer of encryption and forwards the still encrypted data to the next node. If any intermediate nodes (2 3 4 in our 5 node example) are compromised (in software or hardware), they can not see the message in plain text, or determine the originating IP or destination IP of the traffic.
If the first node is compromised it can see your source IP, but not the destination IP or any part of the message (it's still encrypted.)
If the exit node is compromised it can see the destination IP, and clear text message, but not the source IP.
These multiple layers of encryption mean that if any one node is compromised the system is still very secure.
Taking off a layer of encryption at each router is like peeling an onion... hence, "The Onion Router".
(this is an oversimplified explanaion -- if you're talking compromised code repositories, viruses and trojans are usually not delivered as source code, the tampering would be evident.)
Just Great... all the spammers need now is a few CAPTCHA deciphering Sikuli plug ins.
Once that's done we can all go back to manually removing spam from our web forums and in-boxes.
It's even worse than that... Just change your icon or window border theme and watch every Sikuli script break.
The great thing about all other languages except Sikuli is: When you change your Icon or window border theme the programs still run.
Find an existing project that interests you and work on it.
Developers need projects to collaborate on. Fortunately, many projects already exist.
To find a project just browse open source projects on sites like SourceForge, Google Code, CodePlex, etc. Don't waste your time (and life) working on projects that don't get you excited. If you're not interested in a project it will feel more like work than it has to.
Twenty heads are better than two.
So read this and get out your p2p and help kill the industry to make the world safe for music and musicians.
P2P won't kill the industry, it will only help to spread the music's popularity. P2P = Free Advertising (similar to radio music). Some free music labels even distribute via P2P to cut server costs.
Start listening to free music from free sources. Start listening to and making some donations to the artists and companies that are already achieving your goals.
Go to a few concerts, buy a t-shirt or two. Check out the local music scene. The only way to "kill the industry" (by which I hope you mean "kill evil labels") is for the majority of people to stop consuming (even via P2P) the music they produce.
Just because something can be patented doesn't mean it should be patented. The patent system is supposed to keep things that shouldn't be patented from being patented, but it doesn't -- It's broken. Saying: "Let's see you do better!" isn't the answer.
It's not that I think patent examiners are ignorant, it's just that I find the entire patent system ridiculously flawed...
The patent system is obviously designed to have the least efficient method for discovering prior art. The entire world of prior art simply won't fit through a patent examiner's sieve in the time they are given to decide over a patent. This flaw in the system worsens with time as more patents are granted -- the whole system should be scrapped.
The initial secrecy granted to patent applications is the problem. If the goal is to deem a technology as patentable or not patentable then secrecy should not be required. The solution is to provide a public forum where "persons having ordinary skill in the art" can come to you (the examiners) and show you our previous art.
To put it plainly: Help us Help You! Instead of employing a small group of patent examiners to filter through the entire world's catalog of information, let the entire world direct you to the prior art information you are trying to find.
Whoops, wrong article. My multiple tab browsing privileges should have been revoked a long time ago.
Both large companies examine their large patent portfolios and threaten each other with any infringing patents found.
This effectively increases the chances they'll come to an agreement instead of fight out each "infringement" suit in court. The costs of the lawsuits is always less than the price of coming to an agreement. The real looser is the consumer who will now have to pay more for products due to the costs of the companies throwing around their patent weights.
(Also note: Lack of a huge patent portfolio ensures that inventors who naturally have less bargaining chips never win at the big boy's table.)
I, for one, will not be satisfied until my URLs are compressed as a super positions of themselves and stored in qubits.
Perhaps Google can use one of their quantum computers to appease me.
I second this idea. TrueCrypt can be used, but you have to use it correctly for this instance.
You could be subpoenaed to provide access to the encrypted volumes on your laptop.
Fortunately, TrueCrypt will let you store encrypted data in the unused space of an encrypted volume.
Make a large encrypted volume and place a few files in it you don't mind prying eyes viewing, then use the rest of the volume's "free space" as a volume to store your actual data.
When the subpoena arrives, you simply unlock the innocent looking files in the "dummy" part of the encrypted volume.
The short: People pirate because they can.
Actually... I use torrents because I can't seem to avoid breaking the law no matter how much money I throw at the problem.
I have a massive collection of media on various formats: DVD, CD, VHS, etc.
With all but DVD (I don't buy Blu-ray) I can convert the audio and video media into a digital format OGG Video/Audio, and make perfectly legal backup copies of my expensive media library.
Because of DMCA I can no longer even play a DVD on my computer with my chosen operating system (Linux) legally...
The DVD plays, but the player isn't licensed and breaks the DMCA just to play the movie.
I also break the law (DMCA) each time I back up a DVD onto my hard drive -- not because back up copies are illegal by copyright, but my circumvention of the weak DVD encryption is.
Transcoding a DVD into a digital format like .AVI or .OGG takes a lot of time.
In fact, it takes less time for me to download a movie via Bittorrent (1-2 hr torrent vs 2-5 hr transcode).
I already own the movies and music. Using torrents seems like a perfectly acceptable method of obtaining a backup copy to me. I simply assume that everyone else that shares data with me has rights to the data as well... innocent until proven guilty is how I treat strangers.
My friends often download movies they don't own... They also use Linux.
Think about it: If they purchase a DVD then play it on their computer they've just broken the law... Might as well just break the law via torrent and avoid spending the money, the law's broken either way.
I'm breaking the law by enjoying or preserving my DVD collection any way you look at it, and they're breaking the law blatantly... I feel stupid for not following suit.
(note: I can't enjoy DVDs on a DVD player since I no longer own a TV or DVD player, a large monitor and computer work just as well.)
It's a good thing hard copy media isn't this restrictive: "Here! Take this magazine, but you can only read it in approved spaces... You live in a Linux house? Then you can have it but you better not read it!"