agreed. the author suggests that "the net effect of the regs would be to make it practically impossible for members of Congress to use social media tools to discuss official business or share video of the same with the public while creating a partisan disparity in what little approved messages might be permitted"
but the letter states "current CHA regulations have been interpreted to prohibit Members from posting official content outside of the House.gov domain."
while i won't pretend to know "House rules", it would seem they are trying to increase methods of communicating, not decrease them, as long as they follow the current rules. Hell, he even says so: "Please note that nothing in these recommendations should be construed as a recommendation to change the current House rules.. governing the content of official communications." additionally, where in the world is nancy pelosi's name in any of this? i dont see it in the letter, but i dont know much about politics; is it implied?
"Nancy Pelosi has finally arrived at a historical pinnacle - as an enemy of free speech and the public's right to know." wtf?
agreed. unless a real crime was committed using false information to help perpetrate it, then i don't see how using an alias in itself should be a criminal offense.
blah blah blah. i wonder if the punishment really fits the "crime". therefore, i pose a question: in today's technologically driven society, do you think having your permission to use the internet "revoked" is an un-due burden? it could seriously hamper- paying bills, using banking services, reading the news, finding a job/submitting a resume, finding an apartment, reporting unfair business practices, researching your rights/laws, identifying and contacting relevant regulatory/administrative agencies, working off-site, contacting family, making purchases, finding a date (grin) and sooo many more. what if they extend your punishment to the work place? i think i would get fired because it's a basic business requirement i wouldn't be legally allowed to perform.
additionally, who do you think is going to be monitoring this, and how much trust would you put into their findings? i'm too lazy to link, but i think we all know that there are legitimate concerns in the US about the accuracy of media sentry/riaa's findings. i hope they never pass this law in the US.
i have not performed the legal research myself, but from what i have been told you are correct. there are really two different goals or interests at stake here:
1. being reasonably sure the person submitting the "request" is who they say they are
2. having a legal contract to protect against long-term recourse to the agreement
while a faxed signature alone may not ensure 1 is met, it should reasonably ensure 2 is met provided it wasn't fraudulent. so, it's important to both create controls to verify identity (authentication), and retain legally binding agreements.
i bet The Consumerist http://consumerist.com/ has caused enough executive headaches that they are begging to have it taken down. i don't know how they will justify it, but they will probably try to convince with a slew of $15 rebate cards
1. internet
2. you on lan using internet
3. your emulated session to private sub-network
4. company's critical components, i.e. mainframe based applications
4 isn't connected to the internet, but you are. too many people often need access to these components either by operational or technological design flaws/constraints. in the end, a targeted attack only really needs to take control of your desktop computer.
the article alludes to misinformation by the US government... tall trees in ohio and a computer virus were blamed. what is the real truth, and would we ever be able to tell? i agree that a 13 yo script kid could probably pull off the same (depending on the actual circumstances), so how would we ever know?
energy technicians need to send email and surf/. too. I don't work for an energy company, but at the company I do work for, plenty of people connected to mission-critical applications use the internet.
agreed. this "tool" will be more prevelent with crackers then law enforcement soon if it's not already. dd if of done. i agree that similar tools exist already, but with script kids and low brow criminals, the easier it is to use, i.e. plug into a usb drive and select from a menu, the more likely they will. while a combination of auditing tools/techniques can be used to gather the same info already, this will make it all too convenient to get at the valuable personal info. of course the really dangerous ones will be the mods that incorporate malware, although they probably have it already anyways. next step, lock out usb devices without authentication.
in this case, you are at least assuming that the package file server is the same as the web server, and the login/password stolen is good to both machines and/or both directories with write access.. not to mention comparing the hash is how this was discovered. i wouldn't qualify stealing a developer's password, changing the code and writing a remote exploit as lazy/inept (although it is poor behavior), but i would for not bothering to check a hash for a new mail server package.
I like this thought. In addition, innovation in technology and business models has continued to surpise almost everyone, especially the market. Even if it proves to be too expensive to lay billions of dollars in new phiber with the current model, someone else will come up with a more efficient method. So if traditionally the bandwidth bottleneck was at the core and now it's at the fringes, then that's where innovation will produce. When there's a buck to be made, someone's on it. Many of these doomsday scenarios hold attributes constant to make a point, which is not the way the internet has evolved and is short sighted. IMO, constraints in a demanding market produce innovation, it's absurd to say it will stifle it.
i think you're absolutely right. something that companies seem to be routinely missing lately is focusing on their core competency. adobe is (was) not in the business of making money from add revenue, yet here they are. well, what the gold mine they thought they found was actually a drastic miscalculation nearly assuring everyone uses a third party viewer application (depending on the severity of the annoyance) as i highly doubt they can effectively insert an add into a pdf document that has to display on other viewers. these guys need to get a clue.
are they ready to get into the business of patching remote exploits now too? how about help desk when the application freezes every time a firewall prevents it from pulling adds?
what about companies that have paid for publisher- is it appropriate to display an add in front of their employees? do they think the corporate environment of high efficiency (gulp well i am am on/.) will allow their employees getting distracted like that? likely not. i started to notice something was awry when acrobat updater started executing every time i opened a pdf.
thats a lot of laptops being spread around, so i hope they have a good plan to recycle them once they've lived out their usefulness. computers, while warm and fuzzy, aren't as friendly when they are buried whole in the ground
honestly, i think this is different for the tech development / hacker world than for say a stock analyst or lawyer where "appearances" are way (WAY) too important. and dude, everyone has a dumb handle;)
uhm.. people's consuming habits change over time, and their reletive economic situation influences that greatly.
the way i see it:
worst case scenario (to the corporate interests)- they never buy a movie or cd in their life and just "steal" them all. so what? they were apparently never going to anyway so they aren't actually losing anything other than the right to say - "hey you didnt pay me so you cant watch or listen". thats not much. at least they arent taking them out of the stores.. "the other option"
best case- they become avid movie and music fans and when they get good jobs after school they start buying lots and lots of it.
likely case- they'll download a bunch of crap and lose it over time between drive failures and lost ipods. they'll fall out of the scene or get distracted by other stuff and be normal consumers the companies like.
they (the hellbent company police) need to be careful. if they alienate everyone by spying on them (and subjecting them to invasion by the truely dark spots on the internet), getting their schools financial aid pulled, getting their right to use the internet taken away, suing the pants off broke people, they could start an underground revolution that seeks only to destroy them back. as a matter of fact, it sounds to me like this might have already begun. that is the only real long term threat to their businesses i see, but they won't unless it bites them on the ass.
i don't think i even understand his point, if there is one. ars hit it on the head, it doesn't matter which protocol you use to download. for that matter, BT is more efficient and might actually use less bandwidth overall than http between more stable connections and sophisticated download resume options. AND it's safer if you trust the hash. for that matter, he's a billionaire right?? dude, get a t1 if you need an SLA to surf the freekin web and watch google video
this is not directly inline with what you mentioned, but something i have been thinking about lately is the usefullness of encryption with information this valuable. sure, it needs to be used to mitigate in the event of lost data, but consider this- in many instances, and across industries where personal information is stored or transported, there is an encryption standard. for arguements sake let's say 128 is the standard for many things now, i.e. "the least they are supposed to use". now lets consider the future advances of computing and math. i have a bad feeling that a lot of us are going to outlive the usefullness of these encryption standards. so whats the problem? well, many current encryption standards may be considered weak or trivial in 5-10 years, but if I'm alive my SS#, birthdate, name, and possibly even my bank account number won't change, so the information may still be good. sure you can monitor your credit and whatnot, but really thats just to detect having already been taken advantage of and does not account for medical, employment, criminal, civil, voting, donating, and the like.
"big deal"? i guess... then again, lame and unfair contracts forced upon you due to monopolistic practices in limited supplier regions should be stood up too... they have us by the short hairs so often. they could say anything they want in the contract, so if we don't agree should we just forgoe and cut ourselves off? maybe you can only afford it if you share, or maybe after you got done paying for all that bandwidth you don't use, you feel like you have a right, regardless of what the revenue strategist executives thought up in the contract, to share it with your buddy who lives next door. or maybe offer it as an emergency service to others. or hell anything you damn well please and screw the contract- you aren't hurting anyone, your bandwidth is still limited by your service level. if they cant support it, then dont sell it. from the article- "depriving the isps of revenue" yeah... ok. give me a break
i have an opinion on IP that I don't want to discuss. instead, how about the fact that an old pervert is trying to make a case? seriously, pray your girlfriend never runs into this preditor as mine has.
I don't share your point of view. However, something i have noticed that you reminded me of is that, in fact, many large companies who produce these television shows and other IP content they agressively protected with various claims ACTUALLY ADVETISE ON THESE SITES! whether they know it or not, I have observed it time and time again. I've not used this site in particular, but on _many_ others you will find advertisements for microsoft, fox, musicians, and everything in between. I find it absolutely hilarious. I hope someone uses this as a defense (hopefully theyll never need to) or as a means to file a counter claim (hopefully they will).
i cant tell you how bummed i was to read the opinion that the year of linux has already come and gnome/kde let way to mac osx. i own a mac, and thats what lead me to get linux! the bsd underlay on macs are not all that. yes, aqua is nice, but the *unix integration is hidden and confused in many ways (which i will not get into here.) at any rate, i hadn't used linux a very long time except on servers, but when i started a project recently that required oodles of high-performance processing and the kick-a legally free software to support it, i bought a new (well, used) box and installed ubuntu. let me tell you, im a bit of a hacker compared to the average joe and bit of a newbie compared to probably 75% of the slash readers, but linux has come a long way and i do not want to use my mac anymore. besides, you can buy a decent x86(64) for cheap and revive it with linux MUCH more cost-effectively than you can buy a mac (i spent $200), and obviously you'll get more out of it then if you used windows (esp. from the store! leave the corporate spyware garbage behind). considering the one laptop per child campaign and the easy to use advances like ubuntu, i will be shocked if linux isn't a global household name within 10 years. imo, the year of linux is upon us as i continue to be impressed over and over without crashes or loss of performance. now if only 64 bit was a little more supported...
Slashdot Mirror
agreed. the author suggests that "the net effect of the regs would be to make it practically impossible for members of Congress to use social media tools to discuss official business or share video of the same with the public while creating a partisan disparity in what little approved messages might be permitted"
.. governing the content of official communications." additionally, where in the world is nancy pelosi's name in any of this? i dont see it in the letter, but i dont know much about politics; is it implied?
but the letter states "current CHA regulations have been interpreted to prohibit Members from posting official content outside of the House.gov domain."
while i won't pretend to know "House rules", it would seem they are trying to increase methods of communicating, not decrease them, as long as they follow the current rules. Hell, he even says so: "Please note that nothing in these recommendations should be construed as a recommendation to change the current House rules
"Nancy Pelosi has finally arrived at a historical pinnacle - as an enemy of free speech and the public's right to know." wtf?
agreed. unless a real crime was committed using false information to help perpetrate it, then i don't see how using an alias in itself should be a criminal offense.
unfortunately, losing money is worse for the mafiaa
blah blah blah. i wonder if the punishment really fits the "crime". therefore, i pose a question: in today's technologically driven society, do you think having your permission to use the internet "revoked" is an un-due burden? it could seriously hamper- paying bills, using banking services, reading the news, finding a job/submitting a resume, finding an apartment, reporting unfair business practices, researching your rights/laws, identifying and contacting relevant regulatory/administrative agencies, working off-site, contacting family, making purchases, finding a date (grin) and sooo many more. what if they extend your punishment to the work place? i think i would get fired because it's a basic business requirement i wouldn't be legally allowed to perform.
additionally, who do you think is going to be monitoring this, and how much trust would you put into their findings? i'm too lazy to link, but i think we all know that there are legitimate concerns in the US about the accuracy of media sentry/riaa's findings. i hope they never pass this law in the US.
Louisiana, US is run with a civil code/law. not saying it's great, but people around here seem to like it http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/tsrssearch.htm
i have not performed the legal research myself, but from what i have been told you are correct. there are really two different goals or interests at stake here:
1. being reasonably sure the person submitting the "request" is who they say they are
2. having a legal contract to protect against long-term recourse to the agreement
while a faxed signature alone may not ensure 1 is met, it should reasonably ensure 2 is met provided it wasn't fraudulent. so, it's important to both create controls to verify identity (authentication), and retain legally binding agreements.
i bet The Consumerist http://consumerist.com/ has caused enough executive headaches that they are begging to have it taken down. i don't know how they will justify it, but they will probably try to convince with a slew of $15 rebate cards
consider this-
1. internet
2. you on lan using internet
3. your emulated session to private sub-network
4. company's critical components, i.e. mainframe based applications
4 isn't connected to the internet, but you are. too many people often need access to these components either by operational or technological design flaws/constraints. in the end, a targeted attack only really needs to take control of your desktop computer.
the article alludes to misinformation by the US government... tall trees in ohio and a computer virus were blamed. what is the real truth, and would we ever be able to tell? i agree that a 13 yo script kid could probably pull off the same (depending on the actual circumstances), so how would we ever know?
energy technicians need to send email and surf /. too. I don't work for an energy company, but at the company I do work for, plenty of people connected to mission-critical applications use the internet.
"I suspect, as the system went down, the PLA hacker said something like, 'Oops, my bad,' in Chinese." haha had to post it
agreed. this "tool" will be more prevelent with crackers then law enforcement soon if it's not already. dd if of done. i agree that similar tools exist already, but with script kids and low brow criminals, the easier it is to use, i.e. plug into a usb drive and select from a menu, the more likely they will.
while a combination of auditing tools/techniques can be used to gather the same info already, this will make it all too convenient to get at the valuable personal info. of course the really dangerous ones will be the mods that incorporate malware, although they probably have it already anyways. next step, lock out usb devices without authentication.
in this case, you are at least assuming that the package file server is the same as the web server, and the login/password stolen is good to both machines and/or both directories with write access.. not to mention comparing the hash is how this was discovered. i wouldn't qualify stealing a developer's password, changing the code and writing a remote exploit as lazy/inept (although it is poor behavior), but i would for not bothering to check a hash for a new mail server package.
I like this thought. In addition, innovation in technology and business models has continued to surpise almost everyone, especially the market. Even if it proves to be too expensive to lay billions of dollars in new phiber with the current model, someone else will come up with a more efficient method. So if traditionally the bandwidth bottleneck was at the core and now it's at the fringes, then that's where innovation will produce. When there's a buck to be made, someone's on it. Many of these doomsday scenarios hold attributes constant to make a point, which is not the way the internet has evolved and is short sighted. IMO, constraints in a demanding market produce innovation, it's absurd to say it will stifle it.
i think you're absolutely right. something that companies seem to be routinely missing lately is focusing on their core competency. adobe is (was) not in the business of making money from add revenue, yet here they are. well, what the gold mine they thought they found was actually a drastic miscalculation nearly assuring everyone uses a third party viewer application (depending on the severity of the annoyance) as i highly doubt they can effectively insert an add into a pdf document that has to display on other viewers. these guys need to get a clue.
/.) will allow their employees getting distracted like that? likely not. i started to notice something was awry when acrobat updater started executing every time i opened a pdf.
are they ready to get into the business of patching remote exploits now too? how about help desk when the application freezes every time a firewall prevents it from pulling adds?
what about companies that have paid for publisher- is it appropriate to display an add in front of their employees? do they think the corporate environment of high efficiency (gulp well i am am on
thats a lot of laptops being spread around, so i hope they have a good plan to recycle them once they've lived out their usefulness. computers, while warm and fuzzy, aren't as friendly when they are buried whole in the ground
honestly, i think this is different for the tech development / hacker world than for say a stock analyst or lawyer where "appearances" are way (WAY) too important. and dude, everyone has a dumb handle ;)
I agree. I'm no scientist, but it sounds like philosophy and science just had a nasty one night stand they will soon regret
uhm.. people's consuming habits change over time, and their reletive economic situation influences that greatly. the way i see it: worst case scenario (to the corporate interests)- they never buy a movie or cd in their life and just "steal" them all. so what? they were apparently never going to anyway so they aren't actually losing anything other than the right to say - "hey you didnt pay me so you cant watch or listen". thats not much. at least they arent taking them out of the stores.. "the other option" best case- they become avid movie and music fans and when they get good jobs after school they start buying lots and lots of it. likely case- they'll download a bunch of crap and lose it over time between drive failures and lost ipods. they'll fall out of the scene or get distracted by other stuff and be normal consumers the companies like. they (the hellbent company police) need to be careful. if they alienate everyone by spying on them (and subjecting them to invasion by the truely dark spots on the internet), getting their schools financial aid pulled, getting their right to use the internet taken away, suing the pants off broke people, they could start an underground revolution that seeks only to destroy them back. as a matter of fact, it sounds to me like this might have already begun. that is the only real long term threat to their businesses i see, but they won't unless it bites them on the ass.
i don't think i even understand his point, if there is one. ars hit it on the head, it doesn't matter which protocol you use to download. for that matter, BT is more efficient and might actually use less bandwidth overall than http between more stable connections and sophisticated download resume options. AND it's safer if you trust the hash. for that matter, he's a billionaire right?? dude, get a t1 if you need an SLA to surf the freekin web and watch google video
this is not directly inline with what you mentioned, but something i have been thinking about lately is the usefullness of encryption with information this valuable. sure, it needs to be used to mitigate in the event of lost data, but consider this- in many instances, and across industries where personal information is stored or transported, there is an encryption standard. for arguements sake let's say 128 is the standard for many things now, i.e. "the least they are supposed to use". now lets consider the future advances of computing and math. i have a bad feeling that a lot of us are going to outlive the usefullness of these encryption standards. so whats the problem? well, many current encryption standards may be considered weak or trivial in 5-10 years, but if I'm alive my SS#, birthdate, name, and possibly even my bank account number won't change, so the information may still be good. sure you can monitor your credit and whatnot, but really thats just to detect having already been taken advantage of and does not account for medical, employment, criminal, civil, voting, donating, and the like.
"big deal"? i guess... then again, lame and unfair contracts forced upon you due to monopolistic practices in limited supplier regions should be stood up too ... they have us by the short hairs so often. they could say anything they want in the contract, so if we don't agree should we just forgoe and cut ourselves off? maybe you can only afford it if you share, or maybe after you got done paying for all that bandwidth you don't use, you feel like you have a right, regardless of what the revenue strategist executives thought up in the contract, to share it with your buddy who lives next door. or maybe offer it as an emergency service to others. or hell anything you damn well please and screw the contract- you aren't hurting anyone, your bandwidth is still limited by your service level. if they cant support it, then dont sell it. from the article- "depriving the isps of revenue" yeah... ok. give me a break
i have an opinion on IP that I don't want to discuss. instead, how about the fact that an old pervert is trying to make a case? seriously, pray your girlfriend never runs into this preditor as mine has.
I don't share your point of view. However, something i have noticed that you reminded me of is that, in fact, many large companies who produce these television shows and other IP content they agressively protected with various claims ACTUALLY ADVETISE ON THESE SITES! whether they know it or not, I have observed it time and time again. I've not used this site in particular, but on _many_ others you will find advertisements for microsoft, fox, musicians, and everything in between. I find it absolutely hilarious. I hope someone uses this as a defense (hopefully theyll never need to) or as a means to file a counter claim (hopefully they will).
i cant tell you how bummed i was to read the opinion that the year of linux has already come and gnome/kde let way to mac osx. i own a mac, and thats what lead me to get linux! the bsd underlay on macs are not all that. yes, aqua is nice, but the *unix integration is hidden and confused in many ways (which i will not get into here.) at any rate, i hadn't used linux a very long time except on servers, but when i started a project recently that required oodles of high-performance processing and the kick-a legally free software to support it, i bought a new (well, used) box and installed ubuntu. let me tell you, im a bit of a hacker compared to the average joe and bit of a newbie compared to probably 75% of the slash readers, but linux has come a long way and i do not want to use my mac anymore. besides, you can buy a decent x86(64) for cheap and revive it with linux MUCH more cost-effectively than you can buy a mac (i spent $200), and obviously you'll get more out of it then if you used windows (esp. from the store! leave the corporate spyware garbage behind). considering the one laptop per child campaign and the easy to use advances like ubuntu, i will be shocked if linux isn't a global household name within 10 years. imo, the year of linux is upon us as i continue to be impressed over and over without crashes or loss of performance. now if only 64 bit was a little more supported...