...better yet: xor a previously agreed upon innocent message with your encrypted message. When asked by the gov't for your key, you give them the encrypted message and tell them it's a on-time pad... lather, rinse, repeat
You've hit tha nail on the head. The people proposing this legislation are under the misapprehension that strong cryto software is something new and that it difficult and expensive to create
The RSA algorithm was published over 20 years ago. By 1986, thanks to Lloyd Miller and the FidoNet BBS you could download a program to RSA encrypt files on your 286 and send them to others. Any high school kid with a little programming experience, a computer and access the internet (or a library) has the tools to create something similar in a couple of days.
We could have got real with Bin Laden after he took out those military barracks a few years ago. Instead, we postured and blew some holes in the sand with a few cruise missiles.
That's because the attack was meant to send a message, not to correct a problem, and the intended audience for that message was NOT Bin Laden; the intended audience was the American public. People wanted a big dramatic gesture so that they could believe that their gov't was "doing something"... then America could forget about those tiresome foreigners and get back to important things: like Jon Benet, the WWF and what naughty Congressmen might do with their interns
A fundamental property of all games is to have some goal. In some games, players compete for the prize, either individually or in teams; in other games players co-operate to share the prize. Traditional blood-sports, such as fox hunting or beagling, where a group works together to catch (and kill) some animal are cooperative games. There are also humane derivatives of hunting games, such as the paper chase or hashing, where the goal is to find and follow a trail.
I was recently involved in a project to correct a minor javascript incompatability (a bug in IE for Mac's jscript) on a for-pay because the TD bank couldn't use it!
The reason these platform issues come up is that the people who have the power to make the decisions don't "get" the fundamental idea of the wwweb: that you should use a common language to communicate rather than a common tool. These people are often higher ups in IS who have a monopoly on technology decisions withing their company (or they are advised by the IS brass). They are driven to lower their overhead (ie. support costs) by simplifying their corporate environment and they do that by limiting their internal customer's choices. They really don't understand that you can't tell your EXTERNAL customers what to do and how to do it. It never occurs to them that, outside the company, their customers have lower cost and lower overhead alternatives.
By becoming the "owner" of each transaction, would AT&T lose its common carrier status and become answerable to any dissatisfied customers? In other words, could I now sue them if a merchant ripped me off, because AT&T was responsible for the transaction?
Slashdot Mirror
...better yet: xor a previously agreed upon innocent message with your encrypted message. When asked by the gov't for your key, you give them the encrypted message and tell them it's a on-time pad... lather, rinse, repeat
The RSA algorithm was published over 20 years ago. By 1986, thanks to Lloyd Miller and the FidoNet BBS you could download a program to RSA encrypt files on your 286 and send them to others. Any high school kid with a little programming experience, a computer and access the internet (or a library) has the tools to create something similar in a couple of days.
You can read about the fidonet crypto at http://195.226.109.55/jhassler/wif/doks/fnews/fido 305.txt
and
http://195.226.109.55/jhassler/wif/doks/fnews/fido 410.txt
That's because the attack was meant to send a message, not to correct a problem, and the intended audience for that message was NOT Bin Laden; the intended audience was the American public. People wanted a big dramatic gesture so that they could believe that their gov't was "doing something"... then America could forget about those tiresome foreigners and get back to important things: like Jon Benet, the WWF and what naughty Congressmen might do with their interns
rm -rf /bin/laden
nb. This is a bash command
(thanks to Damien H. for sending me this)
A fundamental property of all games is to have some goal. In some games, players compete for the prize, either individually or in teams; in other games players co-operate to share the prize. Traditional blood-sports, such as fox hunting or beagling, where a group works together to catch (and kill) some animal are cooperative games. There are also humane derivatives of hunting games, such as the paper chase or hashing, where the goal is to find and follow a trail.
Try Canada or Scandinavia
One reason why OpenBSD development happens primarily in Canada and Scandinavia
...but what is it about this "invention" that is NOT OBVIOUS to someone "skilled in the art"?
> From the file name, it looks like she's called "Sushi". ... and Sushi says "Fugu" to script kiddies
I was recently involved in a project to correct a minor javascript incompatability (a bug in IE for Mac's jscript) on a for-pay because the TD bank couldn't use it!
The reason these platform issues come up is that the people who have the power to make the decisions don't "get" the fundamental idea of the wwweb: that you should use a common language to communicate rather than a common tool. These people are often higher ups in IS who have a monopoly on technology decisions withing their company (or they are advised by the IS brass). They are driven to lower their overhead (ie. support costs) by simplifying their corporate environment and they do that by limiting their internal customer's choices. They really don't understand that you can't tell your EXTERNAL customers what to do and how to do it. It never occurs to them that, outside the company, their customers have lower cost and lower overhead alternatives.
By becoming the "owner" of each transaction, would AT&T lose its common carrier status and become answerable to any dissatisfied customers? In other words, could I now sue them if a merchant ripped me off, because AT&T was responsible for the transaction?
> I'm worried that if I just sign the docs, I'll
> somehow be endorsing the idea that this is a
> unique invention
So in your professional opinion, this is NOT a unique invention? How can they force you to sign? You have a legal obligation NOT TO LIE about it.
Maybe the lower price is because @home has real competition here. You can get DSL service starting at $445 a year ($38/month CDN, ie. $26/month US)