as far as I can see everything this service provides has been done better for free elsewhere. nothing novel. but it'll probably be pushed hard by the german government. and if it works even poorly then other governments will follow their lead because since what happened in egypt, tunisia and libya governments the world over are suddenly terrified of the net.
I'm curious about the legal status of such property.
If someone dumps an old, broken TV in my yard can I claim it as my own?
If someone sticks some piece of trash to my car, can I claim it as my own?
If someone claims ownership of something which they claim to have put inside my car against my wishes can I insist that they prove ownership in court before giving it back to them?
because when this story hit the news the first time there were so very very many people on here gleefully talking about checking their own cars for such bugs. mainly because they wanted a chance to take them apart and examine them.
the comment in question was damned tame too. I see worse here on slashdot daily.
"bombing a mall seems so easy to do. i mean all you really need is a bomb, a regular outfit so you arent the crazy guy in a trench coat trying to blow up a mall and a shopping bag. i mean if terrorism were actually a legitimate threat, think about how many fucking malls would have blown up already.. you can put a bag in a million different places, there would be no way to foresee the next target, and really no way to prevent it unless CTU gets some intel at the last minute in which case every city but LA is fucked...so...yea...now i'm surely bugged :/"
The really sad thing is that he really did have to fear being bugged/tracked as a result simply because he's brown where you or I wouldn't get any such bullshit.
anyone who thinks being put in positions of authority doesn't turn ordinary nice people into sadists needs to read up on the Stanford Prison Experiment.
his friend made a comment on reddit about how insane it is to obsess about terrorists blowing up shopping malls.
"bombing a mall seems so easy to do. i mean all you really need is a bomb, a regular outfit so you arent the crazy guy in a trench coat trying to blow up a mall and a shopping bag. i mean if terrorism were actually a legitimate threat, think about how many fucking malls would have blown up already.. you can put a bag in a million different places, there would be no way to foresee the next target, and really no way to prevent it unless CTU gets some intel at the last minute in which case every city but LA is fucked...so...yea...now i'm surely bugged :/"
that in and of itself wouldn't be a big deal, half of slashdot would be under permanent surveillance.
but he did so while being brown which makes it far far more serious.
and? and if it weren't for the rising food prices and various other factors it's likely he would only be remembered as just another suicide. arguably wikileaks could have been one of those factors.
If he'd been more specific it would be easier to defend him: for example if he'd only leaked reports about the killings of civilians which didn't get reported accuratly at home or the collateral murder video.
If the only thing he'd revealed had been serious crimes which had been shielded from scrutiny by the classification laws then I'd be leaping to defend him.
But he just seemed to download everything and sent it to a foreign journalistic(ish) entity.
There's a difference between exposing something unconscionable to light of day and just throwing the doors open and giving everything away.
The former should be lauded and rewarded, agreement or no, the latter should be punished even if there are some horrible things discovered as a result.
when it comes to publishing information almost everything about the effects is "Arguably".
The leaks about the leaders of the countries in question wouldn't have helped. The government there was afraid enough of the information in the cables to censor wikileaks and sites which referenced the cables about tunisia.
of course they might not have actually done much to accelerate the revolutions either. we can't be sure.
it's not falsifiable either way unless you can think of some objective way of deciding beyond your ironclad certainty that wikileaks could have had no effect at all.
A dog can't be charged with a crime but if it kills someone it's shot. simply apply the same to corporations. commit a serious enough crime, company gets liquidated.
it was for the data collection step: she needed prompts/information to appear on the screen for a very specific amount of time then for it to prompt people for answers.
I got an appendix. Her supervisor even asked me about coding up a couple more for other students.
actually my girlfriend of 4 years I first started going out with her after coding a trivial little java app for her final year project. so it does sometimes go beyond "thank you".
it's almost impossible to find any images on any news site which don't show some kind of tampering.
I studied this quite extensively a while back. It's straightforward enough to decide if an image is pristine, never been edited especially if you know the make/model of the camera in question or, better yet, have the camera in question to hand to take a lot of other photos to compare.
However it's virtually impossible to tell if the image has simply been resaved, lightened, darkened, cropped, rotated or recompressed. And normally the images which make it on to the front page aren't the high quality images that came from the camera simply because of bandwidth. They almost always get re-compressed.
Do you think any photographer would take photos at as low resolution as the linked image?
I've made tools which overlap with what jpegsnoop does and it's by no means a precise science. looking for JPEG ghosts can be a good way to spot insertions and duplicated regions can be very well hidden from the human eye but easily found.
but the "this may have been tampered with" from JPEGsnoop is about as meaningless as it's possible to get unless the photographer gave you the images direct from the camera and told you they hadn't been touched.
even if you simply had to register a work by sending a full unencrypted copy to a Legal deposit library that would kill 2 birds with 1 stone. Preserve culture and make copyright more sane. give it 10 years or so automatic and require people to renew it every 5 or 10 years after that up to some reasonably long limit. let the forogotten works drift into the general culture and let people make a living off particularly good ones.
no design documents were stolen or left in a bar. they examined the hardware and used a flaw to derive their own signing key... which also happened to be the same as sonys.
So when exactly did geohot ever sign any agreement to keep their crypto key secret? he's not their employee. he has no privileged access.
If I analyse coca cola in a lab and figure out their secret formula I don't have to keep my findings secret because I've never signed up to any agreement with coca cola. It's not my responsibility to keep their secrets secret.
"learning to get around half-assed technical limitations might be a real useful skill "
++
I don't really think blocking teenagers from porn should be any kind of priority and isn't going to make any difference but I actually do think putting a half ass block in is a good idea: it teaches them to get around such blocks.
Slashdot Mirror
as far as I can see everything this service provides has been done better for free elsewhere.
nothing novel.
but it'll probably be pushed hard by the german government.
and if it works even poorly then other governments will follow their lead because since what happened in egypt, tunisia and libya governments the world over are suddenly terrified of the net.
ah the great slashdot dissapearance of 2010... it all makes sense now.
it's deeper than we thought!
I'm curious about the legal status of such property.
If someone dumps an old, broken TV in my yard can I claim it as my own?
If someone sticks some piece of trash to my car, can I claim it as my own?
If someone claims ownership of something which they claim to have put inside my car against my wishes can I insist that they prove ownership in court before giving it back to them?
actually that's a post his friend made.
the guy who got bugged didn't even post that.
because when this story hit the news the first time there were so very very many people on here gleefully talking about checking their own cars for such bugs.
mainly because they wanted a chance to take them apart and examine them.
the comment in question was damned tame too.
I see worse here on slashdot daily.
"bombing a mall seems so easy to do. i mean all you really need is a bomb, a regular outfit so you arent the crazy guy in a trench coat trying to blow up a mall and a shopping bag. i mean if terrorism were actually a legitimate threat, think about how many fucking malls would have blown up already.. you can put a bag in a million different places, there would be no way to foresee the next target, and really no way to prevent it unless CTU gets some intel at the last minute in which case every city but LA is fucked...so...yea...now i'm surely bugged : /"
The really sad thing is that he really did have to fear being bugged/tracked as a result simply because he's brown where you or I wouldn't get any such bullshit.
anyone who thinks being put in positions of authority doesn't turn ordinary nice people into sadists needs to read up on the Stanford Prison
Experiment.
no.
you've got your facts wrong.
his friend made a comment on reddit about how insane it is to obsess about terrorists blowing up shopping malls.
"bombing a mall seems so easy to do. i mean all you really need is a bomb, a regular outfit so you arent the crazy guy in a trench coat trying to blow up a mall and a shopping bag. i mean if terrorism were actually a legitimate threat, think about how many fucking malls would have blown up already.. you can put a bag in a million different places, there would be no way to foresee the next target, and really no way to prevent it unless CTU gets some intel at the last minute in which case every city but LA is fucked...so...yea...now i'm surely bugged : /"
that in and of itself wouldn't be a big deal, half of slashdot would be under permanent surveillance.
but he did so while being brown which makes it far far more serious.
oh look! an idiotic biggot.
go back over to conservapedia or fox news.
isn't this fairly straightforward frontrunning?
and?
and if it weren't for the rising food prices and various other factors it's likely he would only be remembered as just another suicide.
arguably wikileaks could have been one of those factors.
I think you missed the point.
"innocent until proven guilty" not "well he did the crime" when no court has actually pronounced him guilty of the crime.
If he'd been more specific it would be easier to defend him: for example if he'd only leaked reports about the killings of civilians which didn't get reported accuratly at home or the collateral murder video.
If the only thing he'd revealed had been serious crimes which had been shielded from scrutiny by the classification laws then I'd be leaping to defend him.
But he just seemed to download everything and sent it to a foreign journalistic(ish) entity.
There's a difference between exposing something unconscionable to light of day and just throwing the doors open and giving everything away.
The former should be lauded and rewarded, agreement or no, the latter should be punished even if there are some horrible things discovered as a result.
when it comes to publishing information almost everything about the effects is "Arguably".
The leaks about the leaders of the countries in question wouldn't have helped.
The government there was afraid enough of the information in the cables to censor wikileaks and sites which referenced the cables about tunisia.
of course they might not have actually done much to accelerate the revolutions either.
we can't be sure.
it's not falsifiable either way unless you can think of some objective way of deciding beyond your ironclad certainty that wikileaks could have had no effect at all.
Anonymous is more the entire chaotic side of the table rolled into one.
A dog can't be charged with a crime but if it kills someone it's shot.
simply apply the same to corporations.
commit a serious enough crime, company gets liquidated.
you don't have to be human to be punished.
oh no.
it was all above board.
it was for the data collection step: she needed prompts/information to appear on the screen for a very specific amount of time then for it to prompt people for answers.
I got an appendix.
Her supervisor even asked me about coding up a couple more for other students.
actually my girlfriend of 4 years I first started going out with her after coding a trivial little java app for her final year project.
so it does sometimes go beyond "thank you".
Similar claims have been made about drilling for geothermal.
it's almost impossible to find any images on any news site which don't show some kind of tampering.
I studied this quite extensively a while back.
It's straightforward enough to decide if an image is pristine, never been edited especially if you know the make/model of the camera in question or, better yet, have the camera in question to hand to take a lot of other photos to compare.
However it's virtually impossible to tell if the image has simply been resaved, lightened, darkened, cropped, rotated or recompressed.
And normally the images which make it on to the front page aren't the high quality images that came from the camera simply because of bandwidth.
They almost always get re-compressed.
Do you think any photographer would take photos at as low resolution as the linked image?
I've made tools which overlap with what jpegsnoop does and it's by no means a precise science.
looking for JPEG ghosts can be a good way to spot insertions and duplicated regions can be very well hidden from the human eye but easily found.
but the "this may have been tampered with" from JPEGsnoop is about as meaningless as it's possible to get unless the photographer gave you the images direct from the camera and told you they hadn't been touched.
even if you simply had to register a work by sending a full unencrypted copy to a Legal deposit library that would kill 2 birds with 1 stone. Preserve culture and make copyright more sane.
give it 10 years or so automatic and require people to renew it every 5 or 10 years after that up to some reasonably long limit.
let the forogotten works drift into the general culture and let people make a living off particularly good ones.
and?
no design documents were stolen or left in a bar.
they examined the hardware and used a flaw to derive their own signing key... which also happened to be the same as sonys.
still no violation of trade secrets.
So when exactly did geohot ever sign any agreement to keep their crypto key secret?
he's not their employee.
he has no privileged access.
If I analyse coca cola in a lab and figure out their secret formula I don't have to keep my findings secret because I've never signed up to any agreement with coca cola.
It's not my responsibility to keep their secrets secret.
the court(Judicial Branch of government) banned him from talking about the entire subject in public.
"learning to get around half-assed technical limitations might be a real useful skill "
++
I don't really think blocking teenagers from porn should be any kind of priority and isn't going to make any difference but I actually do think putting a half ass block in is a good idea: it teaches them to get around such blocks.