The message received from the anonymous source was first decyphered by MartianBrainBasedDecoder, than translated to (one of) standart earhians languages. We believe it was originally mentally transmitted 2 to 1 years ago. (MartianLeakes comment).
FROM: Central Defensive Strategy Post of Mars TO: ALL ALL ALL TOPIC: Counter Earth-spying mimicry and methane gas TEXT: From last dissasemblies of captured earthians spying devices (codenames Phobos 1, 2, Mars Climate Orbiter and Mars Polar Lander) we believe that earthians are or soon will be able to detect methane gas produced by our units. Therefore Central Defensive Strategy Post of Mars decided the following: 1) Increase HID CON*) state to level 2. 2) Thus strictly forbid any non spacesuit-protected units to move on the opened surface of Mars (anybody, including child units, anywhere, no exclusions). 3) Order special chemical units to remove any traces of methan gas from the atmosphere over the opened surface of Mars ASAP.
*) HID CON = shortcut for the martians units Hiding Condition (MartianLeakes comment): Level 5 - normal martian life status Level 4 - no martians units are allowed to appear in the sighting field of cameras on the earth origin devices Level 3 - no martians units are allowed to appear in the 5 km circle area around earth origin devices; any signs of intelligent life (and any life in fact) must be preemptively removed from the expected direction of earth origin devices movement, while any units on this task must wear appropriate mimicry suits. Level 2 - all activities are suppressed except of deep inside caverns of Mars; special units are allowed to monitor earthians activities only in the special spacesuits. Level 1 - we are doomed; remember indians in the intercepted earthians video transmittions and defend bravely untill the last stand
There are still two other viewpoints to describe this from but I am assuming you are smart enough to construct those two yourself.
I will try to guess one of the two mentioned:
As an European (OR Asian OR Australian OR EVEN American (North or Souht) NOT EXCLUDING any other race be it humanoid or not), do I give a fuck if anybody anywhere all over the Universe is acting against the freedom and human rights? You betcha! Why? There is myriad of possible future events caused by my lack of activity, that can do all sorts of things to me. They can take my house, my family, my job, affect my social environment,, or do lots of other things to me that I care about. I suppose they could kill me... but is that something I really need to worry about from... <supply any location inside or outside of the Universe, either known one or not known one>?
DISCLAIMER: Anybody thinking, that by the form of this post I am joking about the juristic language that esspecially Americans are pulling into bussines correspondence, is hereby noticed that... he is right;-) .
Being freelance data security consultant myself, seeing any (regardless of whether law-aligned or law-breaking) attempt to suppress discussion about security of some product/company initiated by producing/that company, it marks it as heavily suspect. This has nothing to do with the legality of the suppression act, rather with the suppression attempt itself.
Adding CipherCloud on blacklist of non-recommended products/companies for my clients. Point. Issue closed at....
I can offer the first-hand data to explain the sales increase: (For legal reasons I have to speak about "one person I know", but, believe, I have this right from the first hand;-) )
He is rather games fan then the music one, but principals are still the same. His personal shopping policy is exactly "try before buy". Many times he experienced great advertisements, great (paid !?) press reviews, addiction promising trailers while the game itself turned out to be boring half-a-day story, with no cash back chance.
But, on the opposite side, he wants to have many new titles to be produced continually on. So he buys every game he keeps playing more than several days afterwards. Recently he even told me, that it paradoxically turns out, that he very often does not play the game anymore after he buys it - as other new shining title appears at exact that timing.
So he would definitely contribute to this 0.x% increase be the study about games.
There is much more important threat, as AFAIK there where announces predicting ADS-B to be the primary source of information for the new TACAS 3rd gen. Then just a short (30 secs) and based on secondary information sources recoverable (after, say, 2 minutes - yes, or after the crash) misplacement of the position (few NMs) and/or altitude (1000 ft enough, you know what I mean) from where the existing, correct and legal aircraft actually is would be good tool for terroristic attacks...
I think it's worth backing up a step and asking where the hell any crime is here?
If any at all is involved, it is on the accusing side! As I am now writing to US readers, I will allow myself be a little parodist: DISCLAIMER: By no way I say there is ANY crime in action by what I write next, nor that I NAME the US crimes properly...
If I could thing about some crimes, I would see these options: 1) Misuse of trade benefits and monopoly. Reason: the prices of products guarded by state monopoly (copyright acts) are way far from what the market price would be, even at least a bit above what would be general morale dictate.
2) Corrupting the morals of youth (as the accomplice): By blocking the access of the youth (especially from the socially weak groups) to the cultural works increases their allegiance to the less moral activities (e.g. the drugs).
3) Extortion: At least in European region it is defined as "use of force or threat of force to enforce an act, OR REFRAIN FROM ACTING in order to obtain the (e.g. financial) benefits".
So what we all should really strong address is not to discuss who to convict and who not yet, but how to make our representatives to repeal the corresponding laws (or to change not cooperating representatives until the lucid ones takes place).
[By continuing reading I hereby explicitly agree to hear some boasting] I can be this strong, as ACTA went (by real citizens demonstrations after it get secretly signed by some EU members) really dead in the EU now (during the ratification process). What about SOPA/PIPA and any other laws criminalizing sharing (torrents being just one form of)?
Let's name the community worth issues, government should protect: 1) Inventor's investments into invention (plus RATIONAL success fee) should be protected against "stealing" by simple copying of the published results. 2) Any third person's right to benefit from the already invented knowledges for RATIONAL price should be protected. 3) Protective over-pricing intended to counteract ad 2) above should be suppressed. 4) The parallel development expenses should be protected for both companies, provided they act independently on each other, however such a parallelism should be minimised wherever possible (except of necessary scientific confirmations, studies validations etc,)
As such, any invention registrant (formerly patent applicant) should provide: the list of publications, what re-use should be covered by this protection model AND the expenses declaration for the given development. In each subsequent year he must declare incomes generated by the given invention. The extent covered should be the reuse of the published information, not the "roof-like I-do-patent-any-invention-itself"; newly the simple arrangement model SHOULD be protected (like publishing "use application A's output to feed application B and the device C can be remotely controled then" even if A, B and C are already invented or commercially available parts).
Now (let's say on each year start) we can calculate simple value: <invention's worth> = <initial investment> * <government declared coefficient (e.g. subject to same political decisions and different branch categories as taxes do)> - sum_of(<declared incomes from the given invention for all previous years and from all persons, even from usage (formerly patent fee)>). Then ANYBODY should be LEGALLY ALLOWED to use any registered invention, provided, he pays fee computed as proportional part of business, so <fee> = <this person's yearly incomes related to the invention> / <inventor's yearly incomes related to the invention> * <invention's worth>/ 5 (This 5 here stands for 5 years for invention expenses payout. We can put any rational number here in final version, IMHO anything between 5-20 will do.)
The last thing we have to deal with are free services, which obviously would declare zero incomes, but still reduce the inventor's market. Here I would set some "minimal obligatory income" for this declaration, based on the produced items/copies/etc. count, where each unit should be bottom-limited by the <minimal price publicly offered by the inventor in the last year> * <another government declared coefficient>. This last government set coefficient could even easily be set fixed in the law, IMHO anything between 0.5-0.75 would do. This last free services protection should be limited to no more than 10 years, 5 years preferably. If there is no inventor's offering or the offered units were not sold at all ( we could refine this limit above exact none sold, to some rational minimal sales proving no-nonsens price, in the final version) this limitation is lifted completely for the next year.
In this case, no explicit time-limitation needs to be set while still we have fully transparent, non-subjective (i.e. non-bribeable) processes and inventions will become public as fast as their development get covered.
Final note: This model does not cover ad 4) above which was included in the list in the sake of completeness. Other than copyright/patent mechanisms are already enacted to cover this in various countries and I thing proper care and evidence from the government side and clear rules settings would work.
Did you ever notice how fatal consequences does ruling by NOT politically naive persons have? I am pretty sure we are living the era where this will change simply as the result of the nature laws force.
It is still underestimated by EU governments, that repression can be successful (victorious) in long run only if it is supported at least by the "silent majority" of public. This is not, or at least will not, be the case of ACTA, if ever tried to be really enforced. There REALLY SHOULD be some official government security advisor, that can put together several bits proved by the true human history:
1) "Bread and games" concept and fall of the Roman empire once it (for any good reason) was unwilling or unable to support it anymore. (No way I say it was the only one reason, off course, but still the significant one.)
2) It is generally reproved by historians as well as the humanity to cut the hand for stealing the bread during medieval. It can easily be the same about jailing people because they looked at the film or played the game after several hundred years.
3) Total number of victims in consequence of the Red October Revolution (which was just misuse of general public discontent by selfish political movements) was bigger then the WWII victims count. (And still it failed in long run once it itself turned towards the repressions.)
Such a revolution could hardly occur (or at least be so massive), if capitalism would timely adapted it's hunger for money to some sustainable position, as it was forced to do anyways as the consequence of the revolution. The parallel is in adapting new, sharing based, business models by major content producers (what, I believe, could paradoxically even increase their profit - at least in the middle horizon) instead of provocative and generally ineffective repressions.
4) People suffering large (=unpayable) fees, thus loosing their homes and possession, suffering arresting of their children ("stealers" of the copyrighted content) and lack of access to any relaxation, aggression diminishing, sources (i.e. copyrighted content) will tend to join ANY riots, regardless of how obscure goal they serve behind the curtain.
5) Final prove is the recent Greece history, where EU-enforced saving rules (which in general and especially compared to the ACTA targets are very reasonable) showed to be even more cost consumptive (because of the productivity decrease by strikes and cost increase due to suppressions of public riots plus collateral damage) than would be the status quo. This fact is not too publicly disseminated, but is confirmed by EU officials in some public sources and is behind the very recent statements of the Angela Merkel admitting the ability of the Greece bankrupt.
On the site note: yes, I do agree that any repressive push is just in the favor of the International Pirate Movement (which I foresee to be in the similar position now as Green Movement was in 70 years of last century, large uprise ahead), but still I do not support "the end justifies the means" approach if such a collateral damage is predictable.
Really? I installed my Whirlpool microwave and neither my cell nor my GF's cell (ATT & Verizon) receives any text, call, or email while in the microwave. I test it often.
[joke]
Well, I repeated your tests and I can confirm: not only my cell does not receive any text, call, or email while in the microwave, but even for infinite time afterwards. Maybe due to the apparent design change, which occurred during the microwave exposition? You did not mention any visible changes...
Used methodology: put cell into microwave, set at least 700 W power, apply for at least 1 minute. Visible changes comes after some first 10 secs. My neighbor even reported (using the same methodology) explosion (probably caused by battery) after some 40 secs.
[/joke ]
Sorry for this lightweight spam, but I could not help myself.
Sorry, was not logged when replied. I authorize that the following comment is my own:
I do agree with you in (almost) all points. However I was provoked by the commenter, speaking "Hey, I have SSH so I am safe, because somebody told me so."
And for the rest - all depends on the awareness and will to care among population. Oh, what did I say? Oh no, we are so doomed...
This is of course your own managerial responsibility. However I HAVE TO say word here. I was analyst of the team, developing the really safe alternative to the RSA algorithm, which later turned out to the whole PKI alternative, much higher safety level was confirmed by independent experts and based on this was the team scattered because there is NO POLITICAL WILL to have something, governements are not able to read.
I may not say more (do not need any lawsuits), but my recommendention: unless you see real alternative and mathematically approved 100% system unbreakability (yes, there exists something offering true (as the E=mc2 approvable) 100% safety) used worldwide, allways expect your data readable by at least but not limited to government experts. Whatever nice wording their supporters use...
And be sure many backdoors in Microsoft software are NOT bugs or just company measures.
I even have outlines of the model in the drawer. Why IMHO it is not set on the gaming market is, that any such a plan must work with clean stating real costs and profit. By hiding this behind just psychologically set price of every copy (higher then just fair share of costs + reasonable profit) game industry streams to make much more many than it deserves, while not reinvesting them (at least fully) to inventing incentive high-tech games.
The world piracy movement is the only working regulatory in this, as state regulators act weakly and can easily get corrupted (sorry, lobbied).
Once this forces get into equilibrium (and I do foresee this in middle time horizon with improved FOSS games establishing as the third player in the equation), such a model will briefly emerge.
Anyways count me in for any attempts to put it working just now.
This kind of comment (require human co-driver) repeats multiple times, so I can not help: There was a law in old times Great Britain that required that there must be a red flag (human) runner before any car (=cab) driven by combustion engine. Off course it was soon outdated and just a bit later outcomissioned. Don't you see strong resemblance here ?
Lets assume postal office will somehow write down (in database) used codes. So what will they do, if SMS went from the anonymous SIM card and the same code is used on two letters from two different senders (if even sender could be identified - in Czech it is not obligatory for standard mails).
1)Refuse both letters ? Who will rely on such unreliable service?
I won't touch the debate on students' rights or cell phone policies, but it seems odd that teachers would be allowed to delete items. It puts them in a very precarious position, in a couple of ways.
Absolutely agreed.
Deletion of information should by my meaning be crime under any circumstances, all over the world. Blocking access is at least opened to discussion, even if I assume it is overused even in the current world and after all much less effective and unbreakable then expected in many lawyers should-work-like-this stories.
Anyways I (as multiple children parent) postulated a theorem what I would call "Psychological quantum law": You can either watch (either openly or secretly) someones information, or directly act according to (against) it. Period.
There are many examples in the wilderness (and I mean real children wilderness), that shows, that any other approach has just one of the following outcomes:
1) Any further information in such area gets hidden from you. Children are more clever than humans, didn't you know? And not knowing what your children REALLY do is dangerous weakness.
2) Your action will be forcefully (any means available from the nature of situation; no sorry or collateral damage considerations) immediately countered or long term undermined.
3) The child will hate you (even if in very moderate level, but the effects are cumulative over all the children life) because of strong injustice feeling; too bad should you be the teacher, fatal should you be parent.
There however ARE many good ways how to act regarding the information you know and here is the exception of the above mentioned "Children are more clever than humans" rule: in long term deep thought strategies you should always have top over children, stress on DEEP THOUGHT.
And there is one more psychological rule (this time even postulated by real psychologist), humans (including children) tends to act in the manner you assume they are when you interact with them. So the more responsibility you can pass to the children and the more you can make them to absorb, the best.
So as the conclusion I always tend to offer children more liberty than usual, however based on two pillars:
1) They prove in advance psychical and technical ability to cope with the situation under my supervision, eventually in prepared model situations.
2) They never betray the trust I put in them. Should they fail, the rights they poses are revoked appropriately. This is the best tool to deal with behavior like defiance, vandalism and even more subtle, like not willingness to help to old or incapable. Children like their freedom so much, that you can find just little more (if any) motivating things.
So far fully verified by my own results, however looking forward to check them in the stress testing of the puberty. Off course, application of this approach requires strong nerves and hypertrophic self- and in-children-confidence. And maybe plenty of undeserved luck as my wife use to say.
Exactly. And this is why I would especially in the countries with Zimbabwe-like historical background vote for complete trade cut-off. Even humanitarian, call me unethical should you want. These days North Africa events shows, that nothing will move, when civilized (?) countries step back before intimidation and basically feed population of otherwise incapable totalitarian despots. Once this "humanitarian help" falls below sufficient level, the things moves and (even with some ((un)necessary ?) casualties) turns to the better future. So conclusion, so-called humanists are collaborators (or at least unwilling supporters) of non-democratic rulers (not all and not under any circumstances, off course !).
Other such a county is North Korea, where people should either die of starving (solving the problem anyways - call me a cynical one) or (and more probably by me) move and through the rulers away, should there not be a massive food supplies sent every year (if I remember well, it is more than 50% of yearly consumption after all).
Please may I have your XXX (please fill-in yourself, I am not sure which of the three most important you serve) agent ID nr? I wonder, if you are just a PR department or "real" hardcore operative and I can check this from the ID, this is the reason I ask.
No other conscious human would say such an unargumented blackmailing to innocent man, would he?
Strange, that (if my browser search is not corrupted already) noone mentioned SkyNet or Terminator(s) here so far. Even if SkyNet booting is somehow overdue now, still:
1) such a things happens regullarly in technics
2) that may be the latest Terminator's timing correction after Connor reached Cheyene mountain in the third sequel...
YES, THERE IS (who to vote)! In EU there is (even if still much overseen) pirate parties movement on it's (long term) ascent. Seek for your countires Pirate party and read carefully their pages...
I forsee big future of this movement, maybee even bigger than the green movement's one in 20th century - once the oppression will come high enough to raise silent citizens (we are near this level allready).
I don't know how much the reputation of open source developers transfers from one project to another in the minds of the end users.
Oh yes ! They do ! Even if not in minds of end users, the community reputation is fair enough motivation not to make stupid bugs (well, at least not to do them often, ehm).
Finally, after this last reply, I can agree with your in many points.
Just remove the following point
3. Nobody to hold accountable if something horrible happens because of some piece of FOSS
as this does not differentiate FOSS and non-FOSS product. If you read carefully in EULAs, you can see that this situation is exactly same for most of commercial products. Nobody is responsible for collateral or consequent damages, as maximum you can get price of the product back (which is immanent in the case of FOSS;-) ).
Regarding the rest the key is your wording
some of the same problems can exist in closed source projects
except that I would say "exists", not just "can exist".
Further I agree with
I'm not saying either approach is better in and of itself. That is why you need to weight each potential solution on it's own merits instead of just going OMG!
but my good praxis includes the following points in the software choice:
Allways search for suitable FOSS project first, allways check whether it fullfills all your needs (but see 3. bellow), if in doubts, with no prejudice compare with commercial products, based on your preferences weights list.
Account some +20% point value for OSS concept, another +10% for even FOSS (if not covered by points for price as separate item)
Compensate properly for slower development curve of FOSS project with the higher features standard in future on mind.
Do not stress about rapid versioning in FOSS projects. You can allways follow "if it works, do not touch (=upgrade)" approach in the production environment (as I do).
So far I got negative client reaction for my recommendation (even after longer usage experience) just once, and it was of the "it is not Microsoft" nature.
FOSS is nice, but it doesn't automatically make something better than anything else.
I simply disagree: it does ! At least in longer horizon.
1) No vendor jail, no discontinuity due sudden increase of selling price on specific version.
2) FOSS projects (bigger than some limit of course) tends to never stop it's development. While progress in commercial projects tends to (brutally simplified off course) fast-but-flattening (features=sqrt(version_number)) learning curve, FOSS tends to slower but linear one (features=0.1*version_number)
Coefficient 0.1 is just an ideal example number, I want to show that from the begining the feature development can be even by order higher in commercial than FOSS one, but in the long horizon the crossing point of FOSS over comercial is inevitable. This is (managerialy said) due to novelty premium every comercial subject is eager to gain. Once the project lives longer time, money are redirected to other, more novelty projects. In opposite, FOSS development is real user needs driven, so no need for such redirections, trade mark changes, sudden "buy newer product line from scratch" proposals etc.
This I feel value for itself, however I agree, that FOSS is not automatically better for short horizon targeting companies. However, I would not like to work for (or even be employed in) short horizon targeting company;-).
Slashdot Mirror
The message received from the anonymous source was first decyphered by MartianBrainBasedDecoder, than translated to (one of) standart earhians languages. We believe it was originally mentally transmitted 2 to 1 years ago. (MartianLeakes comment).
FROM: Central Defensive Strategy Post of Mars
TO: ALL ALL ALL
TOPIC: Counter Earth-spying mimicry and methane gas
TEXT: From last dissasemblies of captured earthians spying devices (codenames Phobos 1, 2, Mars Climate Orbiter and Mars Polar Lander) we believe that earthians are or soon will be able to detect methane gas produced by our units. Therefore Central Defensive Strategy Post of Mars decided the following:
1) Increase HID CON*) state to level 2.
2) Thus strictly forbid any non spacesuit-protected units to move on the opened surface of Mars (anybody, including child units, anywhere, no exclusions).
3) Order special chemical units to remove any traces of methan gas from the atmosphere over the opened surface of Mars ASAP.
*) HID CON = shortcut for the martians units Hiding Condition (MartianLeakes comment):
Level 5 - normal martian life status
Level 4 - no martians units are allowed to appear in the sighting field of cameras on the earth origin devices
Level 3 - no martians units are allowed to appear in the 5 km circle area around earth origin devices; any signs of intelligent life (and any life in fact) must be preemptively removed from the expected direction of earth origin devices movement, while any units on this task must wear appropriate mimicry suits.
Level 2 - all activities are suppressed except of deep inside caverns of Mars; special units are allowed to monitor earthians activities only in the special spacesuits.
Level 1 - we are doomed; remember indians in the intercepted earthians video transmittions and defend bravely untill the last stand
There are still two other viewpoints to describe this from but I am assuming you are smart enough to construct those two yourself.
I will try to guess one of the two mentioned:
As an European (OR Asian OR Australian OR EVEN American (North or Souht) NOT EXCLUDING any other race be it humanoid or not), do I give a fuck if anybody anywhere all over the Universe is acting against the freedom and human rights? You betcha! Why? There is myriad of possible future events caused by my lack of activity, that can do all sorts of things to me. They can take my house, my family, my job, affect my social environment,, or do lots of other things to me that I care about. I suppose they could kill me... but is that something I really need to worry about from ... <supply any location inside or outside of the Universe, either known one or not known one>?
DISCLAIMER: Anybody thinking, that by the form of this post I am joking about the juristic language that esspecially Americans are pulling into bussines correspondence, is hereby noticed that ... he is right ;-) .
Being freelance data security consultant myself, seeing any (regardless of whether law-aligned or law-breaking) attempt to suppress discussion about security of some product/company initiated by producing/that company, it marks it as heavily suspect. This has nothing to do with the legality of the suppression act, rather with the suppression attempt itself.
Adding CipherCloud on blacklist of non-recommended products/companies for my clients. Point. Issue closed at....
I can offer the first-hand data to explain the sales increase: ;-) )
(For legal reasons I have to speak about "one person I know", but, believe, I have this right from the first hand
He is rather games fan then the music one, but principals are still the same. His personal shopping policy is exactly "try before buy". Many times he experienced great advertisements, great (paid !?) press reviews, addiction promising trailers while the game itself turned out to be boring half-a-day story, with no cash back chance.
But, on the opposite side, he wants to have many new titles to be produced continually on. So he buys every game he keeps playing more than several days afterwards. Recently he even told me, that it paradoxically turns out, that he very often does not play the game anymore after he buys it - as other new shining title appears at exact that timing.
So he would definitely contribute to this 0.x% increase be the study about games.
There is much more important threat, as AFAIK there where announces predicting ADS-B to be the primary source of information for the new TACAS 3rd gen. Then just a short (30 secs) and based on secondary information sources recoverable (after, say, 2 minutes - yes, or after the crash) misplacement of the position (few NMs) and/or altitude (1000 ft enough, you know what I mean) from where the existing, correct and legal aircraft actually is would be good tool for terroristic attacks...
I think it's worth backing up a step and asking where the hell any crime is here?
If any at all is involved, it is on the accusing side! As I am now writing to US readers, I will allow myself be a little parodist: DISCLAIMER: By no way I say there is ANY crime in action by what I write next, nor that I NAME the US crimes properly...
If I could thing about some crimes, I would see these options:
1) Misuse of trade benefits and monopoly. Reason: the prices of products guarded by state monopoly (copyright acts) are way far from what the market price would be, even at least a bit above what would be general morale dictate.
2) Corrupting the morals of youth (as the accomplice): By blocking the access of the youth (especially from the socially weak groups) to the cultural works increases their allegiance to the less moral activities (e.g. the drugs).
3) Extortion: At least in European region it is defined as "use of force or threat of force to enforce an act, OR REFRAIN FROM ACTING in order to obtain the (e.g. financial) benefits".
So what we all should really strong address is not to discuss who to convict and who not yet, but how to make our representatives to repeal the corresponding laws (or to change not cooperating representatives until the lucid ones takes place).
[By continuing reading I hereby explicitly agree to hear some boasting] I can be this strong, as ACTA went (by real citizens demonstrations after it get secretly signed by some EU members) really dead in the EU now (during the ratification process). What about SOPA/PIPA and any other laws criminalizing sharing (torrents being just one form of)?
Let's name the community worth issues, government should protect:
1) Inventor's investments into invention (plus RATIONAL success fee) should be protected against "stealing" by simple copying of the published results.
2) Any third person's right to benefit from the already invented knowledges for RATIONAL price should be protected.
3) Protective over-pricing intended to counteract ad 2) above should be suppressed.
4) The parallel development expenses should be protected for both companies, provided they act independently on each other, however such a parallelism should be minimised wherever possible (except of necessary scientific confirmations, studies validations etc,)
As such, any invention registrant (formerly patent applicant) should provide: the list of publications, what re-use should be covered by this protection model AND the expenses declaration for the given development. In each subsequent year he must declare incomes generated by the given invention. The extent covered should be the reuse of the published information, not the "roof-like I-do-patent-any-invention-itself"; newly the simple arrangement model SHOULD be protected (like publishing "use application A's output to feed application B and the device C can be remotely controled then" even if A, B and C are already invented or commercially available parts).
Now (let's say on each year start) we can calculate simple value: <invention's worth> = <initial investment> * <government declared coefficient (e.g. subject to same political decisions and different branch categories as taxes do)> - sum_of(<declared incomes from the given invention for all previous years and from all persons, even from usage (formerly patent fee)>). Then ANYBODY should be LEGALLY ALLOWED to use any registered invention, provided, he pays fee computed as proportional part of business, so <fee> = <this person's yearly incomes related to the invention> / <inventor's yearly incomes related to the invention> * <invention's worth>/ 5 (This 5 here stands for 5 years for invention expenses payout. We can put any rational number here in final version, IMHO anything between 5-20 will do.)
The last thing we have to deal with are free services, which obviously would declare zero incomes, but still reduce the inventor's market. Here I would set some "minimal obligatory income" for this declaration, based on the produced items/copies/etc. count, where each unit should be bottom-limited by the <minimal price publicly offered by the inventor in the last year> * <another government declared coefficient>. This last government set coefficient could even easily be set fixed in the law, IMHO anything between 0.5-0.75 would do. This last free services protection should be limited to no more than 10 years, 5 years preferably. If there is no inventor's offering or the offered units were not sold at all ( we could refine this limit above exact none sold, to some rational minimal sales proving no-nonsens price, in the final version) this limitation is lifted completely for the next year.
In this case, no explicit time-limitation needs to be set while still we have fully transparent, non-subjective (i.e. non-bribeable) processes and inventions will become public as fast as their development get covered.
Final note: This model does not cover ad 4) above which was included in the list in the sake of completeness. Other than copyright/patent mechanisms are already enacted to cover this in various countries and I thing proper care and evidence from the government side and clear rules settings would work.
Did you ever notice how fatal consequences does ruling by NOT politically naive persons have? I am pretty sure we are living the era where this will change simply as the result of the nature laws force.
It is still underestimated by EU governments, that repression can be successful (victorious) in long run only if it is supported at least by the "silent majority" of public. This is not, or at least will not, be the case of ACTA, if ever tried to be really enforced. There REALLY SHOULD be some official government security advisor, that can put together several bits proved by the true human history:
1) "Bread and games" concept and fall of the Roman empire once it (for any good reason) was unwilling or unable to support it anymore. (No way I say it was the only one reason, off course, but still the significant one.)
2) It is generally reproved by historians as well as the humanity to cut the hand for stealing the bread during medieval. It can easily be the same about jailing people because they looked at the film or played the game after several hundred years.
3) Total number of victims in consequence of the Red October Revolution (which was just misuse of general public discontent by selfish political movements) was bigger then the WWII victims count. (And still it failed in long run once it itself turned towards the repressions.)
Such a revolution could hardly occur (or at least be so massive), if capitalism would timely adapted it's hunger for money to some sustainable position, as it was forced to do anyways as the consequence of the revolution. The parallel is in adapting new, sharing based, business models by major content producers (what, I believe, could paradoxically even increase their profit - at least in the middle horizon) instead of provocative and generally ineffective repressions.
4) People suffering large (=unpayable) fees, thus loosing their homes and possession, suffering arresting of their children ("stealers" of the copyrighted content) and lack of access to any relaxation, aggression diminishing, sources (i.e. copyrighted content) will tend to join ANY riots, regardless of how obscure goal they serve behind the curtain.
5) Final prove is the recent Greece history, where EU-enforced saving rules (which in general and especially compared to the ACTA targets are very reasonable) showed to be even more cost consumptive (because of the productivity decrease by strikes and cost increase due to suppressions of public riots plus collateral damage) than would be the status quo. This fact is not too publicly disseminated, but is confirmed by EU officials in some public sources and is behind the very recent statements of the Angela Merkel admitting the ability of the Greece bankrupt.
On the site note: yes, I do agree that any repressive push is just in the favor of the International Pirate Movement (which I foresee to be in the similar position now as Green Movement was in 70 years of last century, large uprise ahead), but still I do not support "the end justifies the means" approach if such a collateral damage is predictable.
Really? I installed my Whirlpool microwave and neither my cell nor my GF's cell (ATT & Verizon) receives any text, call, or email while in the microwave. I test it often.
[joke]
Well, I repeated your tests and I can confirm: not only my cell does not receive any text, call, or email while in the microwave, but even for infinite time afterwards. Maybe due to the apparent design change, which occurred during the microwave exposition? You did not mention any visible changes...
Used methodology: put cell into microwave, set at least 700 W power, apply for at least 1 minute. Visible changes comes after some first 10 secs. My neighbor even reported (using the same methodology) explosion (probably caused by battery) after some 40 secs.
[/joke ]
Sorry for this lightweight spam, but I could not help myself.
Sorry, was not logged when replied. I authorize that the following comment is my own:
I do agree with you in (almost) all points. However I was provoked by the commenter, speaking "Hey, I have SSH so I am safe, because somebody told me so."
And for the rest - all depends on the awareness and will to care among population. Oh, what did I say? Oh no, we are so doomed...
This is of course your own managerial responsibility. However I HAVE TO say word here. I was analyst of the team, developing the really safe alternative to the RSA algorithm, which later turned out to the whole PKI alternative, much higher safety level was confirmed by independent experts and based on this was the team scattered because there is NO POLITICAL WILL to have something, governements are not able to read.
I may not say more (do not need any lawsuits), but my recommendention: unless you see real alternative and mathematically approved 100% system unbreakability (yes, there exists something offering true (as the E=mc2 approvable) 100% safety) used worldwide, allways expect your data readable by at least but not limited to government experts. Whatever nice wording their supporters use...
And be sure many backdoors in Microsoft software are NOT bugs or just company measures.
I even have outlines of the model in the drawer. Why IMHO it is not set on the gaming market is, that any such a plan must work with clean stating real costs and profit. By hiding this behind just psychologically set price of every copy (higher then just fair share of costs + reasonable profit) game industry streams to make much more many than it deserves, while not reinvesting them (at least fully) to inventing incentive high-tech games. The world piracy movement is the only working regulatory in this, as state regulators act weakly and can easily get corrupted (sorry, lobbied).
Once this forces get into equilibrium (and I do foresee this in middle time horizon with improved FOSS games establishing as the third player in the equation), such a model will briefly emerge.
Anyways count me in for any attempts to put it working just now.
This kind of comment (require human co-driver) repeats multiple times, so I can not help: There was a law in old times Great Britain that required that there must be a red flag (human) runner before any car (=cab) driven by combustion engine. Off course it was soon outdated and just a bit later outcomissioned. Don't you see strong resemblance here ?
I won't touch the debate on students' rights or cell phone policies, but it seems odd that teachers would be allowed to delete items. It puts them in a very precarious position, in a couple of ways.
Absolutely agreed.
Deletion of information should by my meaning be crime under any circumstances, all over the world. Blocking access is at least opened to discussion, even if I assume it is overused even in the current world and after all much less effective and unbreakable then expected in many lawyers should-work-like-this stories.
Anyways I (as multiple children parent) postulated a theorem what I would call "Psychological quantum law": You can either watch (either openly or secretly) someones information, or directly act according to (against) it. Period. There are many examples in the wilderness (and I mean real children wilderness), that shows, that any other approach has just one of the following outcomes: 1) Any further information in such area gets hidden from you. Children are more clever than humans, didn't you know? And not knowing what your children REALLY do is dangerous weakness. 2) Your action will be forcefully (any means available from the nature of situation; no sorry or collateral damage considerations) immediately countered or long term undermined. 3) The child will hate you (even if in very moderate level, but the effects are cumulative over all the children life) because of strong injustice feeling; too bad should you be the teacher, fatal should you be parent.
There however ARE many good ways how to act regarding the information you know and here is the exception of the above mentioned "Children are more clever than humans" rule: in long term deep thought strategies you should always have top over children, stress on DEEP THOUGHT.
And there is one more psychological rule (this time even postulated by real psychologist), humans (including children) tends to act in the manner you assume they are when you interact with them. So the more responsibility you can pass to the children and the more you can make them to absorb, the best.
So as the conclusion I always tend to offer children more liberty than usual, however based on two pillars: 1) They prove in advance psychical and technical ability to cope with the situation under my supervision, eventually in prepared model situations. 2) They never betray the trust I put in them. Should they fail, the rights they poses are revoked appropriately. This is the best tool to deal with behavior like defiance, vandalism and even more subtle, like not willingness to help to old or incapable. Children like their freedom so much, that you can find just little more (if any) motivating things. So far fully verified by my own results, however looking forward to check them in the stress testing of the puberty. Off course, application of this approach requires strong nerves and hypertrophic self- and in-children-confidence. And maybe plenty of undeserved luck as my wife use to say.
Exactly. And this is why I would especially in the countries with Zimbabwe-like historical background vote for complete trade cut-off. Even humanitarian, call me unethical should you want. These days North Africa events shows, that nothing will move, when civilized (?) countries step back before intimidation and basically feed population of otherwise incapable totalitarian despots. Once this "humanitarian help" falls below sufficient level, the things moves and (even with some ((un)necessary ?) casualties) turns to the better future. So conclusion, so-called humanists are collaborators (or at least unwilling supporters) of non-democratic rulers (not all and not under any circumstances, off course !).
Other such a county is North Korea, where people should either die of starving (solving the problem anyways - call me a cynical one) or (and more probably by me) move and through the rulers away, should there not be a massive food supplies sent every year (if I remember well, it is more than 50% of yearly consumption after all).
Please may I have your XXX (please fill-in yourself, I am not sure which of the three most important you serve) agent ID nr? I wonder, if you are just a PR department or "real" hardcore operative and I can check this from the ID, this is the reason I ask.
No other conscious human would say such an unargumented blackmailing to innocent man, would he?
Strange, that (if my browser search is not corrupted already) noone mentioned SkyNet or Terminator(s) here so far. Even if SkyNet booting is somehow overdue now, still:
1) such a things happens regullarly in technics
2) that may be the latest Terminator's timing correction after Connor reached Cheyene mountain in the third sequel...
Joking, of course... hey, do I ?
Hey, quote it properly: did this not say that evolution strategy setting dinosaur some 64 mil. years ago ?
YES, THERE IS (who to vote)! In EU there is (even if still much overseen) pirate parties movement on it's (long term) ascent. Seek for your countires Pirate party and read carefully their pages...
;-)
I forsee big future of this movement, maybee even bigger than the green movement's one in 20th century - once the oppression will come high enough to raise silent citizens (we are near this level allready).
Ahoy! Sails up
I don't know how much the reputation of open source developers transfers from one project to another in the minds of the end users.
Oh yes ! They do ! Even if not in minds of end users, the community reputation is fair enough motivation not to make stupid bugs (well, at least not to do them often, ehm).
Just remove the following point
3. Nobody to hold accountable if something horrible happens because of some piece of FOSS
as this does not differentiate FOSS and non-FOSS product. If you read carefully in EULAs, you can see that this situation is exactly same for most of commercial products. Nobody is responsible for collateral or consequent damages, as maximum you can get price of the product back (which is immanent in the case of FOSS ;-) ).
Regarding the rest the key is your wording
some of the same problems can exist in closed source projects
except that I would say "exists", not just "can exist".
Further I agree with
I'm not saying either approach is better in and of itself. That is why you need to weight each potential solution on it's own merits instead of just going OMG!
but my good praxis includes the following points in the software choice:
So far I got negative client reaction for my recommendation (even after longer usage experience) just once, and it was of the "it is not Microsoft" nature.
FOSS is nice, but it doesn't automatically make something better than anything else.
I simply disagree: it does ! At least in longer horizon.
;-).
1) No vendor jail, no discontinuity due sudden increase of selling price on specific version.
2) FOSS projects (bigger than some limit of course) tends to never stop it's development. While progress in commercial projects tends to (brutally simplified off course) fast-but-flattening (features=sqrt(version_number)) learning curve, FOSS tends to slower but linear one (features=0.1*version_number)
Coefficient 0.1 is just an ideal example number, I want to show that from the begining the feature development can be even by order higher in commercial than FOSS one, but in the long horizon the crossing point of FOSS over comercial is inevitable. This is (managerialy said) due to novelty premium every comercial subject is eager to gain. Once the project lives longer time, money are redirected to other, more novelty projects. In opposite, FOSS development is real user needs driven, so no need for such redirections, trade mark changes, sudden "buy newer product line from scratch" proposals etc.
This I feel value for itself, however I agree, that FOSS is not automatically better for short horizon targeting companies. However, I would not like to work for (or even be employed in) short horizon targeting company
This would be enough evidence for me to leave such a church. Simply as that can not be the enlightened one ;-D_