That was my thought on reading this. Try taking a baby boomer's TV, radio, newspaper and telephone away. I bet they'd feel alone and secluded in their lives as well, and feel a sense of anxiety over their loss.
Yes, this the kind of IP enforcement I can actually agree with.
The other kind, I can't. Filesharing is not fraud.
I also wish there were different names for the two things. This doesn't deserve the label 'piracy'. It does not deserve to be lobbied for by the pirate party.
I agree with you. I've been wanting 4k by 2k displays for awhile now, and it's so I can have good anti-aliased text that's as tiny as I like my text to be. And 1920x1080 is fine for games, but games are not why I want a nicer display.
Because judges aren't generally empowered to prevent a case from going to trial because they don't believe the facts alleged. A judge can prevent a case from going to trial because the facts alleged, if viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, don't support a legal cause of action.
And, of course, the light here is definitely not favorable to the plaintiff.
What, the giant government contractor doesn't want to compete? What a surprise. I guess without making things overly expensive, budget overruns and miles of red tape they just can't get enough money from the public trough.
I see this as a complete vindication of this plan. IMHO, Lockheed Martin and companies like them are some of the worst crooks our government (and by extension, all of us) does business with. There's no crook like the one that does it legally.
I agree. It's a stupid marketing trick. I especially thought this once I saw that Sony was thinking of coming out with all this 3D home theatre equipment. Stupid. Reminds me of the rash of 'clear' products in the early 90s.
In order to get into a position where you can apply the locks and holds you have to make a good product. After you get there you can stop.
IMHO the industry is full of examples of companies that made excellent products and stopped getting any better or weren't able to move on when a new idea upset the applecart because they were so wedded to the lock-in and high profits they had with their original software, even after that software had become more of an albatross to most companies using it rather than an asset.
I think IBM would've been better too. It's too bad they wanted to lowball on their offer and missed their chance.
And, yes, I think Oracle is more "evil". I think this is for several reasons:
Oracle hasn't really truly found a way to live with Open Source yet and their core database business is under threat by Open Source solutions.
Oracle still makes their money on software. Making money by selling people extremely expensive software licenses only really works if you can get various kinds of locks and holds on them, if you can control their behavior. You can sell them consulting, support and hardware all day without needing any kind of lock, but not software.
Oracle has very little real in-house innovation to speak of. The most innovative things I know of happening at Oracle is btrfs, and that's only really happening at Oracle because the main people who work on it are there.
Oracle thinks it can kill an Open Source competitor by buying it or the technologies it relies on.
All of those things contrast with IBM. IBM makes its money on hardware and consulting, they've mostly learned to live with Open Source (patent threats not withstanding), and there is some real innovation that happens there from time to time. And I think IBM would be smarter than to think they could really kill an Open Source project by buying it.
*sigh* And... (I forgot to put this in) Intel's new instructions only make things twice as fast with CBC mode because CBC mode can't be pipelined. CBC mode requires the results of the previous operation before doing the next.
That also implies that if you're going to be using them to increase the speed of CTR mode you are best doing several blocks before you switch to doing something non-AES related. That also argues for pre-computing blocks in CTR mode. So really, the whole pre-computation thing should be done regardless of whether you're using Intel's new instructions or not.
The other thing, I was thinking of getting an Intel CPU for my next firewall for that very reason, and I went to their website to try to go through the options and pick one. Turns out, they demand I use Flash. Oops. I guess I can't figure out which one I want, so I'm not buying one.
Well, the Intel AES instructions would benefit even more from parallelized AES CTR mode pre-computation than straight multiple cores, so that doesn't invalidate what I'm saying at all.:-)
Of course, it's related to a similar fine-grained parallelism idea for crypto that I wish would be widely implemented, and that's offloading most of AES CTR mode onto a separate thread, or several separate processes since each block has a computation step that can be computed in advance in parallel with all the other blocks. I might start doing multi-gigabyte transfers over ssh if that were implemented. As it is, on even my fastest computers, multi-gigabyte transfers are very CPU bound over ssh with the ssh process pegged at 100% (and just 100%) CPU.
I don't necessarily think the idea is a good idea, but your criticism needs criticism.:-)
You do not need a gigawatt of laser light to light up the area. You are presuming that the entire area is lit up at once. You could cut that by 90% by only lighting up any given square foot for 100 milliseconds out of every second. 100 megawatts is certainly still a whole ton of power. But it's a lot less than 1 gigawatt.
That's true, but that's not the same as being sent from one personal email account to another. My main point is that the police are our servants, not our masters. A lot of people seem to lose sight of that fact.
They are at fault because they violated a trust placed in them by the public. We are are not paying them to snap photos of things and make them public. When they are on duty, they are working for us. And while I do not begrudge them a water cooler conversation, I do not think I am happy with paying them to snap personal photos of the poor dead people they encounter in their line of work and distributing them on the Internet.
As for exactly how she ended up dead or her personal habits, I don't think they're relevant to this discussion. I don't think it matters if the pictures in question are of someone who was brutally tortured to death by a serial killer or someone who blew their own brains out with a shotgun by accident while blasted out of their head on PCP and going on a murder rampage through a local shopping mall.
This isn't what we are paying the police to do, and their private actions in the course of carrying out their official duties can have a manifestly large impact on the public. They shouldn't be doing it. They are abusing our trust and the authority they acquire at our behest if they do.
Yeah, I had the same thought. This has about as much chance of making it to the iPhone as Microsoft has of officially declaring that Linux doesn't infringe any of its patents tomorrow.
And Apple and Microsoft are both evil. Years ago, when I didn't consider Apple evil I knew they had the potential to become so, and they have fulfilled that potential, though not in quite the way I would've guessed they would years ago.
I agree that the problems aren't insurmountable, but they are not trivial either. And the web-of-trust stuff is confusing, yes. But so are all the options about what kind of key, bit-length, user ids and all that stuff.
I think it's slowly getting better, but even the GUIs I've seen do little to hide the confusion.
But no real authentication systems that accomplish the goals you lay out. Even PGP (if you can convince people to use it and educate people on how it works) only accomplishes signing. It will not track these documents in the manner you describe.
And PGP has significant problems. People understand what passwords are. They do not have a clue what a 'private key' is, or what it means to use one. This requires significant education effort. And unfortunately the user interfaces surrounding products that use PGP do little to help this educational process. Most of them seem to be designed by crypto-geeks who assume that everybody already knows these things and just wants a convenient way to manage them.
And, unfortunately, PGP is not widely supported in email clients outside of the GNU/Linux sphere. Even Thunderbird requires a plugin for adequate support. Everybody else seems to have assumed that the bletcherous, ugly, stupid mess that is an X.509 certificate is what people will use, if they use anything at all.
In my opinion, this state of affairs is ripe for some kind of solution. It was one of the problems I meant to address when I started CAKE years ago. But that project has stalled out because of time and a the general fact that unless I'm being paid, I tend to drop things as soon as I prove to myself that they work.
I know. The question to ask them then is if a murderer should have the right to punish any witness who talks.
Maybe the solution to our national security problems is to stop doing stupid useless stuff that makes people angry. The levels of incompetence, stupidity and willful ignorance involved at the highest levels shouldn't amaze me, but it does all the same.
All the stuff wikileaks has leaked has been in the category of avoiding embarrassment rather than anything that was truly a sensitive matter of national security.
For example, a detailed report on the exact weaknesses of various pieces of military equipment, identities of our spies, details of planned troop movements are all things I would consider important to national security.
Covering up the fact that we're torturing people because it would make a lot of people upset to learn that is not a matter of national security.
Wikileaks has performed an invaluable service for the years its been in operation.
I also have this desire. And it alternately gets me in trouble or lets me write really good code. It also lets me detect when a system is so poorly documented that nobody really understands the impact of the changes they're making to it.
When I worked at Amazon, my desire to fully understand the system I was working on really got in my way. About the only system I could really effectively work on was one I wrote myself.
I don't know what their patents are on, but ever since the idea of a smartphone existed (5-10 years ago), I've thought this exact application was a perfect fit. I didn't know the EM side of how to make it work, but I knew exactly how to make the cryptography work. It seemed obvious to me. I assumed the reason everybody wasn't already doing it was some nefarious profit motive on the part of credit card companies or banks in which they made money from how horribly insecure credit cards are.
OK, so a credit card isn't exactly a key (except in the movies) but the article itself points out that the exact same technology that would make an iPhone into an excellent key would also work to make an iPhone into a decent electronic wallet. And I thought the same thing. I just thought the wallet side of it was more important than a garage door opener. Possibly because I don't drive.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, no, your poor behavior has caused me to hurt my fist when I punched your face in for it. I guess I'll just have to punch some more!
The cost of prosecuting him is not to be counted against what he cost the city unless I get to charge you for hurting my fist when I punch you.
That was my thought on reading this. Try taking a baby boomer's TV, radio, newspaper and telephone away. I bet they'd feel alone and secluded in their lives as well, and feel a sense of anxiety over their loss.
Yes, this the kind of IP enforcement I can actually agree with.
The other kind, I can't. Filesharing is not fraud.
I also wish there were different names for the two things. This doesn't deserve the label 'piracy'. It does not deserve to be lobbied for by the pirate party.
I agree with you. I've been wanting 4k by 2k displays for awhile now, and it's so I can have good anti-aliased text that's as tiny as I like my text to be. And 1920x1080 is fine for games, but games are not why I want a nicer display.
Because judges aren't generally empowered to prevent a case from going to trial because they don't believe the facts alleged. A judge can prevent a case from going to trial because the facts alleged, if viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, don't support a legal cause of action.
And, of course, the light here is definitely not favorable to the plaintiff.
What, the giant government contractor doesn't want to compete? What a surprise. I guess without making things overly expensive, budget overruns and miles of red tape they just can't get enough money from the public trough.
I see this as a complete vindication of this plan. IMHO, Lockheed Martin and companies like them are some of the worst crooks our government (and by extension, all of us) does business with. There's no crook like the one that does it legally.
People have already mentioned 'Crystal Pepsi and 'Tab Clear'. I believe someone tried to make a clear beer, and Zima came out at around that time too.
I agree. It's a stupid marketing trick. I especially thought this once I saw that Sony was thinking of coming out with all this 3D home theatre equipment. Stupid. Reminds me of the rash of 'clear' products in the early 90s.
In order to get into a position where you can apply the locks and holds you have to make a good product. After you get there you can stop.
IMHO the industry is full of examples of companies that made excellent products and stopped getting any better or weren't able to move on when a new idea upset the applecart because they were so wedded to the lock-in and high profits they had with their original software, even after that software had become more of an albatross to most companies using it rather than an asset.
I think IBM would've been better too. It's too bad they wanted to lowball on their offer and missed their chance.
And, yes, I think Oracle is more "evil". I think this is for several reasons:
All of those things contrast with IBM. IBM makes its money on hardware and consulting, they've mostly learned to live with Open Source (patent threats not withstanding), and there is some real innovation that happens there from time to time. And I think IBM would be smarter than to think they could really kill an Open Source project by buying it.
Well, I believe he has done this, and it's worked for him. Oops.
*sigh* And... (I forgot to put this in) Intel's new instructions only make things twice as fast with CBC mode because CBC mode can't be pipelined. CBC mode requires the results of the previous operation before doing the next.
That also implies that if you're going to be using them to increase the speed of CTR mode you are best doing several blocks before you switch to doing something non-AES related. That also argues for pre-computing blocks in CTR mode. So really, the whole pre-computation thing should be done regardless of whether you're using Intel's new instructions or not.
The other thing, I was thinking of getting an Intel CPU for my next firewall for that very reason, and I went to their website to try to go through the options and pick one. Turns out, they demand I use Flash. Oops. I guess I can't figure out which one I want, so I'm not buying one.
Well, the Intel AES instructions would benefit even more from parallelized AES CTR mode pre-computation than straight multiple cores, so that doesn't invalidate what I'm saying at all. :-)
I wish I'd thought of it.
Of course, it's related to a similar fine-grained parallelism idea for crypto that I wish would be widely implemented, and that's offloading most of AES CTR mode onto a separate thread, or several separate processes since each block has a computation step that can be computed in advance in parallel with all the other blocks. I might start doing multi-gigabyte transfers over ssh if that were implemented. As it is, on even my fastest computers, multi-gigabyte transfers are very CPU bound over ssh with the ssh process pegged at 100% (and just 100%) CPU.
I don't necessarily think the idea is a good idea, but your criticism needs criticism. :-)
You do not need a gigawatt of laser light to light up the area. You are presuming that the entire area is lit up at once. You could cut that by 90% by only lighting up any given square foot for 100 milliseconds out of every second. 100 megawatts is certainly still a whole ton of power. But it's a lot less than 1 gigawatt.
That's true, but that's not the same as being sent from one personal email account to another. My main point is that the police are our servants, not our masters. A lot of people seem to lose sight of that fact.
They are at fault because they violated a trust placed in them by the public. We are are not paying them to snap photos of things and make them public. When they are on duty, they are working for us. And while I do not begrudge them a water cooler conversation, I do not think I am happy with paying them to snap personal photos of the poor dead people they encounter in their line of work and distributing them on the Internet.
As for exactly how she ended up dead or her personal habits, I don't think they're relevant to this discussion. I don't think it matters if the pictures in question are of someone who was brutally tortured to death by a serial killer or someone who blew their own brains out with a shotgun by accident while blasted out of their head on PCP and going on a murder rampage through a local shopping mall.
This isn't what we are paying the police to do, and their private actions in the course of carrying out their official duties can have a manifestly large impact on the public. They shouldn't be doing it. They are abusing our trust and the authority they acquire at our behest if they do.
Yeah, I had the same thought. This has about as much chance of making it to the iPhone as Microsoft has of officially declaring that Linux doesn't infringe any of its patents tomorrow.
And Apple and Microsoft are both evil. Years ago, when I didn't consider Apple evil I knew they had the potential to become so, and they have fulfilled that potential, though not in quite the way I would've guessed they would years ago.
I agree that the problems aren't insurmountable, but they are not trivial either. And the web-of-trust stuff is confusing, yes. But so are all the options about what kind of key, bit-length, user ids and all that stuff.
I think it's slowly getting better, but even the GUIs I've seen do little to hide the confusion.
But no real authentication systems that accomplish the goals you lay out. Even PGP (if you can convince people to use it and educate people on how it works) only accomplishes signing. It will not track these documents in the manner you describe.
And PGP has significant problems. People understand what passwords are. They do not have a clue what a 'private key' is, or what it means to use one. This requires significant education effort. And unfortunately the user interfaces surrounding products that use PGP do little to help this educational process. Most of them seem to be designed by crypto-geeks who assume that everybody already knows these things and just wants a convenient way to manage them.
And, unfortunately, PGP is not widely supported in email clients outside of the GNU/Linux sphere. Even Thunderbird requires a plugin for adequate support. Everybody else seems to have assumed that the bletcherous, ugly, stupid mess that is an X.509 certificate is what people will use, if they use anything at all.
In my opinion, this state of affairs is ripe for some kind of solution. It was one of the problems I meant to address when I started CAKE years ago. But that project has stalled out because of time and a the general fact that unless I'm being paid, I tend to drop things as soon as I prove to myself that they work.
I know. The question to ask them then is if a murderer should have the right to punish any witness who talks.
Maybe the solution to our national security problems is to stop doing stupid useless stuff that makes people angry. The levels of incompetence, stupidity and willful ignorance involved at the highest levels shouldn't amaze me, but it does all the same.
All the stuff wikileaks has leaked has been in the category of avoiding embarrassment rather than anything that was truly a sensitive matter of national security.
For example, a detailed report on the exact weaknesses of various pieces of military equipment, identities of our spies, details of planned troop movements are all things I would consider important to national security.
Covering up the fact that we're torturing people because it would make a lot of people upset to learn that is not a matter of national security.
Wikileaks has performed an invaluable service for the years its been in operation.
I also have this desire. And it alternately gets me in trouble or lets me write really good code. It also lets me detect when a system is so poorly documented that nobody really understands the impact of the changes they're making to it.
When I worked at Amazon, my desire to fully understand the system I was working on really got in my way. About the only system I could really effectively work on was one I wrote myself.
I don't know what their patents are on, but ever since the idea of a smartphone existed (5-10 years ago), I've thought this exact application was a perfect fit. I didn't know the EM side of how to make it work, but I knew exactly how to make the cryptography work. It seemed obvious to me. I assumed the reason everybody wasn't already doing it was some nefarious profit motive on the part of credit card companies or banks in which they made money from how horribly insecure credit cards are.
OK, so a credit card isn't exactly a key (except in the movies) but the article itself points out that the exact same technology that would make an iPhone into an excellent key would also work to make an iPhone into a decent electronic wallet. And I thought the same thing. I just thought the wallet side of it was more important than a garage door opener. Possibly because I don't drive.