My apologies -- I wasn't trying to troll, but thought that it was "impossible" for an open source project to go under. If there is pulblic interest, then how can it die? I thought Mozilla was Netscrape. Misinformation...ugh (mental note: stop posting so damn early.) --
...when you do go under, release the source code so that the/. community create a better browser. No corporate bullshit like Netscrape's AOL IM addition or IE's "distributed update" or ActiveX garbage. No more trying to squeeze advertising gimics into our software (M$ passport anyone?)
We've all sat back and watched how Netscrape has floundered in the market, giving IE even more of a consumer edge. Opera is a great browser, but who is going to pay for it when you can get the others for free.
Eventually, services like "passport" will be built into your Micro$oft browser or even operating system! Ever noticed how they're trying to integrate everything?
The "techies" will always have the privacy edge, because we know how to set up proxies and firewalls and use alternatives to popular browsers. Hell, I've even gone back to using Lynx sometimes.
The problem is this: Joe Consumer who doesn't understand computers or the internet isn't going to object to this sort of thing because it makes his/her life easier. Unfortunately, there are a whole lot of Joe Consumers out there capable of voting into law some pretty scary privacy violating legistlation.
The only thing we can do is to get involved in the technical side and help prevent stupid legistlation from interferring with our protocols and standards.
What about Starblazers and Robotech? I wish Cartoon Network (or shall I say, Hanna Barbera) would get off their asses and get licenses for Akira, Fist of the Northstar and Guyver.
I'm sure a lot of you would agree that they need to spin off a Toonami channel!
So where do you draw the line between 'good' and 'evil'?
When it comes to censorship, there are no clear lines. Consider a gun control law that decides which guns are 'bad' and which guns are 'good'? Does that make any sense?
Tomorrow, if I decided to share information about how to build bombs on the internet, there's not a lot anyone can do about it. My ISP could drop me, but I can just post the information in a free NG or a host overseas.
We must tread lightly into areas dealing with such powerful, precedence-setting censorship laws. The next thing you know, they'll be banning books like I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings and Huckleberry Finn in schools...oh wait they've already done that.
You make a very good point: 99% of the MP3's that I download never make (or will never make) the top 10.
However, what are we to do when restrictions are placed on FTP, newsgroups or other services? Are we required to prove that the software (or plaintext or whatever) we are transmitting is not bound by any copyright law merely to protect those that are providing the service?
The other day, I was watching CSPAN2 coverage of the FBI's Carnivore hearings when I realized that our government cannot handle these sorts of cases. Most of the questions being asked were from non-technical people who really didn't understand what questions to ask in the first place. As a technical person, I could have thought of 100 better questions to ask.
Take the Napster trial into account: What they are telling us is that it's illegal to provide a service that shares information. Napster, in my view, has not done anything wrong. The problem was that they were trying to apply age-old laws to a medium that changes every nano-second -- it just doesn't work out.
So boycott it is -- we won out over the PID on Intel chips...lets hit the RIAA where it hurts! --
I guess they can listen in when you call the doctor, or the Workman's compensation claim division, or any number of things.
Yeah...there's a good idea: make your workman's comp claim on company time using company resources.
You want to call the doctor or dentist or union -- then do it on your own time if you don't want your company to potentially be listening in on your phone call! --
I think it's OK for employers to read incomming/outgoing email. gasp
First off, they are providing the service to aid their business -- not for your own personal pleasure. If you are conducting business as usual...then what do you have to hide? Internally, a company should not be so paranoid as to keep things from itself.
Second, if you are giving away trade-secrets or perhaps mailing your resume to competitors, I think they have every right to know about it.
So what's the different between reading email and scanning proxy logs? Or even drug testing or checking your bag/suitcase at the door?
I hate for this to sound like a 'me too' post, but Deja is not doing anything wrong. They are providing their service for free and you are thus bound by their interface, their thread structure and yes even their ad hyperlinks.
Now, if they started inserting text into your UseNet posts that did not reflect your opinion about a product (like an ad saying that Micro$oft is great,) then that would be a problem. --
You know, after working in communications for a large company for 4 years, I have learned a lot about what can take down a network.
The network is always going to be vulnerable to some sort of attack -- be it DDS, electro-magnetic pulse, SYN Flood, email virus, spam or whatever. Some well placed, unexpected volume will even do the trick.
Let's think outside the M$ box for a minute and consider what a 'virus' could do to routers and switches. Everything that carries configurable software is vulnerable to some sort of attack!. --
The only problem is that the data resides on an FBI owned and operated box and they are more bound to the law than most companies/ISPs.
It's one thing for Toysmart to violate your 4th Ammendment rights, but when the FBI does it -- all hell breaks loose and people actually get punished for it. Or at least, that's how it's supposed to work. --
or add the sender and reciever to a special 'potential trouble' list.
You're kidding right -- please tell me you're kidding.
So what are they going to do -- set up a phone wiretap, van surveillance and garbage picking brigade just because you sent an encrypted email to your Grandma asking how her operation went?
Think again -- they could really care less if you send encrypted email or not. Sending encrypted email is not a crime. --
Let's all get a grip -- the government is not going to "shut-down" the internet.
How hard is it to route traffic around the 'Carnivore' box -- um...two clicks of an RJ-45 cable. Remember what happened when radio stations were knocked out in WWII by the Germans? --
Slashdot Mirror
So what's worse: schools rejecting science or schools rejecting the separation of church and state?
--
My apologies -- I wasn't trying to troll, but thought that it was "impossible" for an open source project to go under. If there is pulblic interest, then how can it die? I thought Mozilla was Netscrape. Misinformation...ugh (mental note: stop posting so damn early.)
--
Less features -- more standards adherence!
--
But can we trust a guy named 'Dick Armey'? tee hee
sorry...couldn't resist
--
Eventually, services like "passport" will be built into your Micro$oft browser or even operating system! Ever noticed how they're trying to integrate everything?
The "techies" will always have the privacy edge, because we know how to set up proxies and firewalls and use alternatives to popular browsers. Hell, I've even gone back to using Lynx sometimes.
The problem is this: Joe Consumer who doesn't understand computers or the internet isn't going to object to this sort of thing because it makes his/her life easier. Unfortunately, there are a whole lot of Joe Consumers out there capable of voting into law some pretty scary privacy violating legistlation.
The only thing we can do is to get involved in the technical side and help prevent stupid legistlation from interferring with our protocols and standards.
don (steps down from soapbox)
--
I'm sure a lot of you would agree that they need to spin off a Toonami channel !
--
According to them, it's OK if sites violate their privacy policy and collect personal information as long as they don't use the web to do it...
--
When it comes to censorship, there are no clear lines. Consider a gun control law that decides which guns are 'bad' and which guns are 'good'? Does that make any sense?
Tomorrow, if I decided to share information about how to build bombs on the internet, there's not a lot anyone can do about it. My ISP could drop me, but I can just post the information in a free NG or a host overseas.
We must tread lightly into areas dealing with such powerful, precedence-setting censorship laws. The next thing you know, they'll be banning books like I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings and Huckleberry Finn in schools...oh wait they've already done that.
--
You make a very good point: 99% of the MP3's that I download never make (or will never make) the top 10.
However, what are we to do when restrictions are placed on FTP, newsgroups or other services? Are we required to prove that the software (or plaintext or whatever) we are transmitting is not bound by any copyright law merely to protect those that are providing the service?
Just a thought...
--
Take the Napster trial into account: What they are telling us is that it's illegal to provide a service that shares information. Napster, in my view, has not done anything wrong. The problem was that they were trying to apply age-old laws to a medium that changes every nano-second -- it just doesn't work out.
So boycott it is -- we won out over the PID on Intel chips...lets hit the RIAA where it hurts!
--
Anybody want my level 48 /. character with 784 karma points?
--
Now they're going to have a higher SETI@Home ranking than my unsuspecting network of NT machines here at the office!
--
Now if only someone would create a card that boosted my /. karma...
--
I guess they can listen in when you call the doctor, or the Workman's compensation claim division, or any number of things.
Yeah...there's a good idea: make your workman's comp claim on company time using company resources.
You want to call the doctor or dentist or union -- then do it on your own time if you don't want your company to potentially be listening in on your phone call!
--
I think it's OK for employers to read incomming/outgoing email. gasp
First off, they are providing the service to aid their business -- not for your own personal pleasure. If you are conducting business as usual...then what do you have to hide? Internally, a company should not be so paranoid as to keep things from itself.
Second, if you are giving away trade-secrets or perhaps mailing your resume to competitors, I think they have every right to know about it.
So what's the different between reading email and scanning proxy logs? Or even drug testing or checking your bag/suitcase at the door?
Don't think flame...think company protection
--
Don
--
Now, if they started inserting text into your UseNet posts that did not reflect your opinion about a product (like an ad saying that Micro$oft is great,) then that would be a problem.
--
"Hey look over there!", swipes your PGP key. "Oh, I guess it was nothing.
--
The network is always going to be vulnerable to some sort of attack -- be it DDS, electro-magnetic pulse, SYN Flood, email virus, spam or whatever. Some well placed, unexpected volume will even do the trick.
Let's think outside the M$ box for a minute and consider what a 'virus' could do to routers and switches. Everything that carries configurable software is vulnerable to some sort of attack!.
--
It's one thing for Toysmart to violate your 4th Ammendment rights, but when the FBI does it -- all hell breaks loose and people actually get punished for it. Or at least, that's how it's supposed to work.
--
You're kidding right -- please tell me you're kidding.
So what are they going to do -- set up a phone wiretap, van surveillance and garbage picking brigade just because you sent an encrypted email to your Grandma asking how her operation went?
Think again -- they could really care less if you send encrypted email or not. Sending encrypted email is not a crime.
--
How hard is it to route traffic around the 'Carnivore' box -- um...two clicks of an RJ-45 cable. Remember what happened when radio stations were knocked out in WWII by the Germans?
--
Doesn't it bother anyone that Earthlink is doing this because of customer disruption rather than privacy concerns?
Encrypt your email -- screw the FBI.
--
The sheer fact that Micro$oft is adding new 'features' is really going to make it tough on developers.
--
They should redesign the machine to disallow smelly passengers on airplanes.
--