Wow, it's LIKE an article. It's just missing any news.
"No one knows" -- Uh, yeah someone knows. The Washington post doesn't know.
Ergo "The Washington Post" == "No one"
It also looks like they've hired high school editors. "The sites' disappearance" is incorrect. Sites don't own anything. Proper phrasing: "The disappearance of the sites". Of course that's not correct in Internet parlance. A real Editor would write "The inability to reach the content of the sites..."
The Washington Post is to a real newspaper like real people who don't give bailouts are to our elected "representatives".
When China traces the spammers in its own backyard, then they should have the gall to ask us to trace people making CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED FREE SPEECH in our back yard.
I'm not saying they're a represssive totalitarian obsolete regime bent on owning the world's raw resources.
I'm just saying in a game show the M.C. would say to China: "You are the biggest problem. Good bye."
Yes, it is. It's also Nissan the month. Welcome to the English spelling of names with different phonemes. Lots of transmorgifications occur. I'm sorry you're not up on those yet.
But like they say, two Israelis, three opinions.
Ehud
If the passport authorities of the world want to authenticate a passport they *MUST* check its signature to ensure it is valid.
Their outright failure to do so for at least a year for the UK and perhaps many more for other countries means that the digital information is less valid than the information imprinted on the card. Less valid because it's far easier to change, and shows no signs of alteration.
In other words, countries that don't authenticate, and rely on the digital information alone are *MORE* insecure and open to falsification than those who do authenticate.
Security: Not a tradeoff of civil liberties, but an intelligent application of a variety of techniques.
Authentication: When available USE IT, don't just put it off and trust easily-modifiable data. When in doubt look at the printed picture and the text. *THAT* is harder to change without showing signs of alternation.
Encryption: I guess if they can't get the key database working for simple authentication (or even a #$&*(#$ hash) they're not going to figure out the encryption stuff either.
I wonder how much of the disagreement that goes on on Slashdot about this issue is really differences in belief or is just a communication mismatch...
I wonder how many people fit into each of the following:
1. Those that don't want number plates on cars at all and want to be completely unaccountable on the roads
2. Those that are happy to have number plates on cars but don't want an automatic system that searches a database for matches of known and wanted persons (make the cops do their jobs!)
3. Those that would be happy to have the system mentioned above if there was an absolute assurance that there would be no 'slippery slope', knowing of course that such an assurance is impossible. This is probably just a special case of #2
4. Those that are happy to have the system mentioned above without any disclaimers
5. Those that would be quite happy to have gps implants in their heads that track and log everywhere they go.
#1 would argue with everyone else and chastise them for giving away their freedoms, except that they'd probably never post on Slashdot anyway for fear that someone might find them.
#2 mostly peacefully coexist with #3
#3 and #4 argue about the existence of the 'slippery slope'
#5 argue with everyone else along the lines of 'if you have nothing to hide then why is there a problem'
I sometimes wonder if there isn't a criminal organization somewhere that every time a new technology comes out that will make it harder for them to get away with stuff they unleash a new wave of 'taking away our freedoms' FUD. I don't really believe it but it gives me a giggle to think about it:)
I also wonder if an argument on Slashdot has ever succeeding in actually changing someone's mind... It's all fun to watch though isn't it!
Quoted for emphasis. You are right on target! (The irony is fun too:)
The common excuse of "new parents" is to lower speed limits, and impose restrictions on everyone else because they are unfit to parent without "safety-izing" the rest of the world.
Grow up. Just because you are a "new father" doesn't give you any rights to remove my rights. It means you have more RESPONSIBILITIES. Try to live up to them.
> 3. What do I have to hide?
You have your ignorance to hide. This country wasn't founded on "I have nothing to hide so come live in my home and search it while you're at it." It was founded on being left alone by our government.
> I have my insurance. I have my registration, I have my inspection. I'm good to go.
Well leave already. Your "paperz are cleerly een order."
Slashdot Mirror
There was no such evidence.
That's because there were no WMDs.
That's why you have no evidence to show, no links to connect to, nothing to provide any shred of evidence.
You can insist your fascist masters are not lying, but you can't find a shred of proof to back that up.
He who asserts must prove.
You've painted yourself with the color of lies and deceipt.
E
WP: No One Knows X Me: Someone knows X
The set of "those who know X" is "someone" but that set also excludes WP by their own admission.
Ergo the WP doesn't know X.
So if "No One knows X" (wp) and if "WP doesn't know X" (logic, me) then WP= "No One"
Pedantic, but it's mid evening and the F1 race isn't on, and there's thousands of us looking for things to do until something interesting happens.
Cheers and best regards,
E
E
"No one knows" -- Uh, yeah someone knows. The Washington post doesn't know.
Ergo "The Washington Post" == "No one"
It also looks like they've hired high school editors. "The sites' disappearance" is incorrect. Sites don't own anything. Proper phrasing: "The disappearance of the sites". Of course that's not correct in Internet parlance. A real Editor would write "The inability to reach the content of the sites..."
The Washington Post is to a real newspaper like real people who don't give bailouts are to our elected "representatives".
Ehud
I'm sorry you took it personally.
Ehud
I guess while putting down the rest of America for being easily led by the nose, the author forgot to read about how to use simple punctuation.
While we're on it, perhaps Barnum was right, but perhaps he was more right in the second less-well-known part of his statement.
"There's a sucker born every minute -- and two to take him." -- P.T. Barnum.
Google 101 is over. The rest is left as an exercise for the reader.
Ehud
I'm not saying they're a represssive totalitarian obsolete regime bent on owning the world's raw resources.
I'm just saying in a game show the M.C. would say to China: "You are the biggest problem. Good bye."
Ehud
Yes, it is. It's also Nissan the month. Welcome to the English spelling of names with different phonemes. Lots of transmorgifications occur. I'm sorry you're not up on those yet. But like they say, two Israelis, three opinions. Ehud
> ...mixed ethnicity...
You prefer some sort of racial purity? Please share.
Ehud
Their outright failure to do so for at least a year for the UK and perhaps many more for other countries means that the digital information is less valid than the information imprinted on the card. Less valid because it's far easier to change, and shows no signs of alteration.
In other words, countries that don't authenticate, and rely on the digital information alone are *MORE* insecure and open to falsification than those who do authenticate.
Security: Not a tradeoff of civil liberties, but an intelligent application of a variety of techniques.
Authentication: When available USE IT, don't just put it off and trust easily-modifiable data. When in doubt look at the printed picture and the text. *THAT* is harder to change without showing signs of alternation.
Encryption: I guess if they can't get the key database working for simple authentication (or even a #$&*(#$ hash) they're not going to figure out the encryption stuff either.
Hi Bruce.
Ehud
:)
I wonder how much of the disagreement that goes on on Slashdot about this issue is really differences in belief or is just a communication mismatch...
I wonder how many people fit into each of the following: 1. Those that don't want number plates on cars at all and want to be completely unaccountable on the roads 2. Those that are happy to have number plates on cars but don't want an automatic system that searches a database for matches of known and wanted persons (make the cops do their jobs!) 3. Those that would be happy to have the system mentioned above if there was an absolute assurance that there would be no 'slippery slope', knowing of course that such an assurance is impossible. This is probably just a special case of #2 4. Those that are happy to have the system mentioned above without any disclaimers 5. Those that would be quite happy to have gps implants in their heads that track and log everywhere they go.
#1 would argue with everyone else and chastise them for giving away their freedoms, except that they'd probably never post on Slashdot anyway for fear that someone might find them. #2 mostly peacefully coexist with #3 #3 and #4 argue about the existence of the 'slippery slope' #5 argue with everyone else along the lines of 'if you have nothing to hide then why is there a problem'
I sometimes wonder if there isn't a criminal organization somewhere that every time a new technology comes out that will make it harder for them to get away with stuff they unleash a new wave of 'taking away our freedoms' FUD. I don't really believe it but it gives me a giggle to think about it :)
I also wonder if an argument on Slashdot has ever succeeding in actually changing someone's mind... It's all fun to watch though isn't it!
Quoted for emphasis. You are right on target! (The irony is fun too :)
E
Giving up your freedom because "My papers are in order" and "I have nothing to hide" is unAmerican.
E
The common excuse of "new parents" is to lower speed limits, and impose restrictions on everyone else because they are unfit to parent without "safety-izing" the rest of the world.
Grow up. Just because you are a "new father" doesn't give you any rights to remove my rights. It means you have more RESPONSIBILITIES. Try to live up to them.
> 3. What do I have to hide?
You have your ignorance to hide. This country wasn't founded on "I have nothing to hide so come live in my home and search it while you're at it." It was founded on being left alone by our government.
> I have my insurance. I have my registration, I have my inspection. I'm good to go.
Well leave already. Your "paperz are cleerly een order."
> Tell me different[sic] if you think so.
I've just done so.
Ehud