That investing extremely large sums of money based on the momentary whims of teenagers and early twenty-somethings wasn't such a great idea? The winds of the internet can shift in an instant, and it seems like Murdoch hasn't caught on to that yet. Of course, it won't be long before The Next Big Thing comes along, and Facebook will be in the same spot that MySpace is right now.
Yeah, it seems to me that it was an oversight that networking wasn't encrypted in the first place.
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but as I understand it security was outside of the scope of networking technology when it was first created. ARPANET was created in order to facilitate information sharing, and it started out quite small. Encryption at that point would've been counterproductive. Security wasn't much of a consideration because the network was connected and used by trusted nodes, namely research centers and universities.
They suggest that proof of actual distribution shouldn't be required.
I don't know whether to be worried or relieved. It worries me that a judge somewhere is going to buy into that, at which point we can all kiss "innocent until proven guilty" goodbye. On the other hand this could turn out very well indeed if they get laughed out of court and be made to play by the same rules as everyone else.
Since both presidential candidates are in congress, they way that they vote on this bill should be the tipping point for anyone on the fence between the two.
You're working under the assumption that people actually care about this issue enough to make a decision one way or another based on how the Senate vote goes down. Unfortunately outside of the tech and privacy advocacy circles (which tend to overlap) there are a lot of folks that this is a non-issue for. There are many people who are more than willing to say "I don't have anything to hide, so if this protects me from the terrorists then so be it." They will bury their head in the sand while their rights are steadily eroded.
You're also making the assumption that both candidates will vote on the issue. There is a trend that politicians will abstain from voting on sensitive issues during election years, though I can't see Obama doing this and I'm not sure what McCain's record looks like in this regard.
Really, it would have been either party, and any person in office that would have fought this.
That's entirely irrelevant. I don't really care what party it is, if the Democrats were in this situation they would be scrutinized just as much as the current administration is.
What exactly makes these Earth-like? From the data it appears that their masses are several times greater than Earth and their orbital periods are much much shorter than Earth. Is it because the star they orbit is similar to Sol? Is there any indication of water or an atmosphere on any of them? Not that this isn't a cool find, but it seems that the use of the word "Earth" is just sensationalism. I would've been just as happy if they had simply said "three planets."
A lot of people feel the same way about COBOL, but for a language used in more than 80% of the world's businesses it's done pretty well. Say what you will about it, but it has been very influential, and was groundbreaking in its time.
I've always held Grace Hopper in high regard myself. She was involved in the development of the first compiler for COBOL, as well as the language itself. She also pushed for standards in computing, and is at least partially responsible for the term "bug" in software. On top of all that she was a Rear Admiral in the Navy. What more could you want in a woman? She was truly one of the greatest female geeks in history.
Other democracies have done it. France could wait no longer.
Gotta love that "Everyone else is doing it, so why shouldn't we?" mentality.
Seriously though, I want to know exactly how this will work. Who gets to decide what sites go on the black-list, and how deep are they going to dig into a claim before a site gets taken down? I can see a huge potential for abuse here.
that/. could fall within the AP's sights as well? I glanced drudge.com and it looks like they have even less of a story on their front page than/. does. Of course here most (if not all) of the stories are prefaced with "According to..." or some other similar wording with a link back to the article.
Ok, for one thing I said they have the ability to provide citations, not that they necessarily do or do not. Secondly, you don't seriously believe that they currently have all these files just sitting around with no notes about where the information came from do you? I have a hard time believing that they don't have some kind of documentation about about their intel, even if it is something along the lines of "Interrogated shady character A, who confessed to X, Y, and Z regarding topic B." All I'm saying is they have the capability to provide citations and no good reason (that I can currently think of) not to use them.
Interesting. Of course, just because one article is marked as non-classified doesn't mean they all are. I also find it interesting that whoever took the screenshot is using Firefox and del.icio.us;-) I guess I shouldn't be too surprised though given IE's security track record.
Any kind of remote control system could potentially be disabled (probably before takeoff), and there is always the possibility that a plane without the remote control system could be used.
That was my first thought too, but then the problem becomes "minimal collateral damage." When a plane gets hit with by the EMP it WILL go down. I suppose they could always give it some kind of inflatable protective airbag structure like they used for the Mars Exploration Rover, though I don't know I'd want to be a passenger in this scenario (I just imagined being flung all around the cabin while the plane bounces around).
True enough, but there are systems in place to mitigate the possibility of inaccurate information. Their wiki is based off of the Wikipedia engine, so they should still have the ability to provide citations (I guess in their case it would be where the intel came from and whether or not the source was reliable.). Edit histories, the ability to revert changes, they should have all of these features. At worst it would be as if the wiki didn't exist, and the intel would still be just as questionable (not that the wiki makes the intel any more credible, it would just be more centralized and up-to-date) as it might've been before.
For me, the whole wiki concept clashes with the need to know concept. It makes no sense for an organization like the CIA to make every information they have available to anyone inside the organization.
I'm sure it's still on a need-to-know basis. The article states that anyone with access to certain networks can read the wiki, but there is authorization involved with making edits. I'm also sure that their wiki follows their pre-existing rules about who can access what information, they're not going to suddenly dump a lot of top-secret information into a wiki that everyone has access to.
Slashdot Mirror
That investing extremely large sums of money based on the momentary whims of teenagers and early twenty-somethings wasn't such a great idea? The winds of the internet can shift in an instant, and it seems like Murdoch hasn't caught on to that yet. Of course, it won't be long before The Next Big Thing comes along, and Facebook will be in the same spot that MySpace is right now.
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but as I understand it security was outside of the scope of networking technology when it was first created. ARPANET was created in order to facilitate information sharing, and it started out quite small. Encryption at that point would've been counterproductive. Security wasn't much of a consideration because the network was connected and used by trusted nodes, namely research centers and universities.
You know the worst part? I actually took the time to "proofread" my post before making it too :-P Stupid word-skipping brain.
Possibly, but it's a trade-off. Do you want speed or do you want security? (Yes yes, I know, everyone wants their cake and wants to it too.)
I don't know whether to be worried or relieved. It worries me that a judge somewhere is going to buy into that, at which point we can all kiss "innocent until proven guilty" goodbye. On the other hand this could turn out very well indeed if they get laughed out of court and be made to play by the same rules as everyone else.
You're working under the assumption that people actually care about this issue enough to make a decision one way or another based on how the Senate vote goes down. Unfortunately outside of the tech and privacy advocacy circles (which tend to overlap) there are a lot of folks that this is a non-issue for. There are many people who are more than willing to say "I don't have anything to hide, so if this protects me from the terrorists then so be it." They will bury their head in the sand while their rights are steadily eroded.
You're also making the assumption that both candidates will vote on the issue. There is a trend that politicians will abstain from voting on sensitive issues during election years, though I can't see Obama doing this and I'm not sure what McCain's record looks like in this regard.
That's soon-to-be Dr. Mister PhD to you!
I realize you're joking but.....
http://www.wiley.com/legacy/compbooks/catalog/12974-7.htm
Not that I recommend it unless you also enjoy root canals. (Sorry about the link, I couldn't find a better one on short notice.)
That's entirely irrelevant. I don't really care what party it is, if the Democrats were in this situation they would be scrutinized just as much as the current administration is.
That they be held accountable for their actions?
Ah, a software analogy, all is right with the world again!
What exactly makes these Earth-like? From the data it appears that their masses are several times greater than Earth and their orbital periods are much much shorter than Earth. Is it because the star they orbit is similar to Sol? Is there any indication of water or an atmosphere on any of them? Not that this isn't a cool find, but it seems that the use of the word "Earth" is just sensationalism. I would've been just as happy if they had simply said "three planets."
Heheh, unfortunately I have.
A lot of people feel the same way about COBOL, but for a language used in more than 80% of the world's businesses it's done pretty well. Say what you will about it, but it has been very influential, and was groundbreaking in its time.
Ah, you beat me to it!
I've always held Grace Hopper in high regard myself. She was involved in the development of the first compiler for COBOL, as well as the language itself. She also pushed for standards in computing, and is at least partially responsible for the term "bug" in software. On top of all that she was a Rear Admiral in the Navy. What more could you want in a woman? She was truly one of the greatest female geeks in history.
Wow, now I wish there was such a thing as "-1, Too much information."
I'm hoping for your sake that said hottie programmer also isn't an avid /. reader.
Gotta love that "Everyone else is doing it, so why shouldn't we?" mentality.
Seriously though, I want to know exactly how this will work. Who gets to decide what sites go on the black-list, and how deep are they going to dig into a claim before a site gets taken down? I can see a huge potential for abuse here.
that /. could fall within the AP's sights as well? I glanced drudge.com and it looks like they have even less of a story on their front page than /. does. Of course here most (if not all) of the stories are prefaced with "According to..." or some other similar wording with a link back to the article.
Ok, for one thing I said they have the ability to provide citations, not that they necessarily do or do not. Secondly, you don't seriously believe that they currently have all these files just sitting around with no notes about where the information came from do you? I have a hard time believing that they don't have some kind of documentation about about their intel, even if it is something along the lines of "Interrogated shady character A, who confessed to X, Y, and Z regarding topic B." All I'm saying is they have the capability to provide citations and no good reason (that I can currently think of) not to use them.
Interesting. Of course, just because one article is marked as non-classified doesn't mean they all are. I also find it interesting that whoever took the screenshot is using Firefox and del.icio.us ;-) I guess I shouldn't be too surprised though given IE's security track record.
Any kind of remote control system could potentially be disabled (probably before takeoff), and there is always the possibility that a plane without the remote control system could be used.
That was my first thought too, but then the problem becomes "minimal collateral damage." When a plane gets hit with by the EMP it WILL go down. I suppose they could always give it some kind of inflatable protective airbag structure like they used for the Mars Exploration Rover, though I don't know I'd want to be a passenger in this scenario (I just imagined being flung all around the cabin while the plane bounces around).
True enough, but there are systems in place to mitigate the possibility of inaccurate information. Their wiki is based off of the Wikipedia engine, so they should still have the ability to provide citations (I guess in their case it would be where the intel came from and whether or not the source was reliable.). Edit histories, the ability to revert changes, they should have all of these features. At worst it would be as if the wiki didn't exist, and the intel would still be just as questionable (not that the wiki makes the intel any more credible, it would just be more centralized and up-to-date) as it might've been before.
I'm sure it's still on a need-to-know basis. The article states that anyone with access to certain networks can read the wiki, but there is authorization involved with making edits. I'm also sure that their wiki follows their pre-existing rules about who can access what information, they're not going to suddenly dump a lot of top-secret information into a wiki that everyone has access to.
Efficiency in dissemination is just as important as accuracy. Getting accurate information earlier to more people can save everyone a lot of trouble.
I for one welcome our new green, CO2 breathing overlords.