It's big government in general. They have gotten so frickin' big the law doesn't apply to them anymore.
Big government? To clarify, you're saying that the government shutting down websites in response to child porn is a government that is too big? Because as long as governments have the power to seize websites and are tasked with using that power, mistakes are going to be made and websites are going to get mistakenly shut down, no matter what other powers or structure that government has.
What liability would an insurance company have?
That seems like a rather large point to make and leave unsubstantiated.
I forgot the IANAL bit. I am not a lawyer, so I don't know and have no more legal information. It seems like if someone were denied insurance, and a note saying "Don't give insurance to this specific individual" were found, that could translate into a lawsuit. Seems is the operative word, sure, this is not legal advice for any HMOs out there.
When you're talking about one specific patient which -may- have a higher chance of higher medical bills, it seems like a pointless risk.
Easily accessible information can and in some cases should still be private information. Just because you're shedding DNA at all times doesn't mean your DNA should be public.
Science: yes.
Scientists: no (compared to people who get on TV and denounce science anyways). This particular scientist: embryologist, so no death rays.
Hela cells came from a cancer biopsy sample with a consent form
From the wiki page on HeLa cells I linked to above (emphasis mine):
The cells were propagated by George Otto Gey shortly before Lacks died in 1951. This was the first human cell line to prove successful in vitro, which was a scientific achievement with profound future benefit to medical research. Yet Gey freely donated both the cells and the tools and processes his lab developed to any scientists requesting them, simply for the benefit of science. Neither Lacks nor her family gave Gey permission, but, at that time, permission was neither required nor customarily sought.[4] The cells were later commercialized, although never patented in their original form. Then, as now, there was no requirement to inform a patient, or their relatives, about such matters because discarded material, or material obtained during surgery, diagnosis, or therapy, was the property of the physician and/or medical institution. This issue and Mrs. Lacks' situation was brought up in the Supreme Court of California case of Moore v. Regents of the University of California. The court ruled that a person's discarded tissue and cells are not their property and can be commercialized.[5]
Reference 5, "The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks" is an interesting read, I'm not done with it yet. The family though is upset due to the lack of consent, and the fact that others profited off of the thing that killed her.
No one should suggest that Henrietta Lacks is still around.
They are cancer cells derived from her, they're her genes. Those genes have been sequenced. Genes from HPV are detectable in the genome, so she had HPV, that's some very private information on her medical history that is public knowledge through HeLa cells. They're not Henrietta Lacks, but they are still cells from her, to imply it's not her at all is a mistake.
God, I'd hate for my DNA to be sequenced and get out into the public so that people would know my secret: that I have HORRIBLE BO! Then I wouldn't be able to lure people into sniffing my armpit anymore and finding out the easy way!
Those sequences would change the expected probability of his relatives having the same sequences, but outside of a twin, it's not definite.
I think any health insurance agency is going to have a hard time finding a way to deny coverage to, say, his sibling if he had markers for a given disease. If someone were to go into his sequences, scan for disease markers, and put a notice on their system to watch out for his sister trying to get insurance, that would be bad, but any evil insurance agent with half a brain would hopefully realize that's opening themselves up to quite a liability for little savings.
If every other person were uploading their DNA sequences, that might make it cost efficient for some unscrupulous insurance company to try to discriminate against siblings, but just one family, I doubt it.
If his siblings were to run for office and their brother had a heritable, neurodegenerative disease, that might be an issue.
You jest, but HeLa cells have been around for about 60 years. They're an immortal line of cancer cells taken from a woman named Henrietta Lacks. HeLa cells have been used in numerous labs around the world, per mass, there is more HeLa than there ever was Henrietta Lacks. I don't think anyone would have ever expected that at the time.
Then again, Lacks never gave consent for the cells to be used, whereas this guy chose to make this data available.
Just where the fuck do you live that it's acceptable that someone can't leave a party alone?
Whoa, calm down, who is saying anything is "acceptable"? I was merely saying that if someone doesn't think to use the buddy system, they're not going to wear some crazy poisoned needle diaphragm.
Aside from the obvious chance of backfiring and sanitary concerns, there's also the fact that not leaving a party by yourself is the much more obvious step that all too often gets disregarded, so I think few people would remember to wear their poisonous needle.
A stun gun, pepper spray, or knife probably would have been a more sane approach, but few people carry those.
Not only do those "powerful" people not pay their way, they are actively "fucking" us.
Just to be clear, we're not talking about -me- are we? I'm a scientist, not a powerful person. I wasn't suggesting I should only have to pay taxes for things I use. And I'm fucking very few of you.
I don't see why this is modded flamebait. It's naive to think that, but naive =/= flamebait necessarily.
Does anyone here actually think everything the US does that annoys people with computers is necessary? I mean, former ambassador John Bolton runs around yelling on Fox that we should bomb Iran pretty much every day. If Iran were -reasonable- they'd think about putting child porn on his computer. It certainly doesn't discourage them from funding cyberwarfare against the rest of us.
I think if our government were to take a reasonable response to Wikileaks rather than trying to burn Asange at the stake, Anonymous might be ever-so-slightly less inclined to do some damage to government networks.
There will always be people attacking the US as long as there is a US, sure, but we do encourage a lot of it, and we could ruffle fewer feathers definitely.
I'd assume he's actually just oversimplifying things for his target audience. I got the impression that this was a list to be forwarded to someone's CEO or boss who didn't understand that norton antivirus wasn't protecting against corporate espionage. A primer for getting people used to thinking about there being different types of dangerous types online. Such people hopefully wouldn't have much reason to be concerned with script kiddies shutting down more than their own website.
If this list is meant for people who design networks (which I don't understand the first thing about) then I'd hope such people had much more in-depth knowledge about the dangers here than the list presents. Maybe I'm being wildly optimistic due to ignorance, but I'd hope a head engineer type person at, say, Cisco would have already heard of script kiddies and wouldn't be reading this list and would take steps.
Doesn't that fall under #7 (put by itself on the second page, so it's easy to miss):
"Malicious hacker No. 7: Rogue hackers
There are hundreds of thousands of hackers who simply want to prove their skills, brag to friends, and are thrilled to engage in unauthorized activities. They may participate in other types of hacking (crimeware), but it isn't their only objective and motivation. These are the traditional stereotyped figures popularized by the 1983 film "War Games," hacking late at night, while drinking Mountain Dew and eating Doritos. These are the petty criminals of the cyber world. They're a nuisance, but they aren't about to disrupt the Internet and business as we know it -- unlike members of the other groups."
Doesn't say anything about skill there.
The real pros. (The ones you never hear about)
Seems like focusing on a group that is defined as "the ones you know nothing about and therefore have no idea how to counter them or even if they exist" is a good way to do nothing more than stress out. Seems like the steps you'd take to counter the other ones are about all you can do.
Doctors treat symptoms mostly, once you know you have a disease, you know how to fight it (hopefully). Preventative steps like vaccinations, diet, exercise, and being on the lookout for symptoms are about all you can do for your health otherwise. You have to realize that you, right now, may have some horrible disease or cancer that hasn't gone symptomatic yet. Worrying about that is pointless though. Seems like the same would be true of uber hackers you don't know about. Take the steps to prevent the other ones, and common sense steps. Don't spend a lot of time worrying that you have an evil Iranian 007 infiltrating your security unless you have evidence that there is. You can always find something unfounded to be paranoid about.
I suppose you think that without corporations we'd live in a fantasy land with unicorns and fairies where hundreds of people and millions of dollars can appear out of nowhere to start making quality video games.
I didn't see anything in his post suggesting that corporations are something we'd be better off without. He can't idly criticize something unless there's a viable alternative?
That's usually the case, yes, but in this case I think the corporation actually was helping mirror's edge 2's chances. The president of EA was pushing for a sequel when the game didn't actually sell very well.
How is that a thing? It's a videogame, your character dies all the... Wait, you mean -ACTUAL- player deaths?!? Like the game kills people? Whoa man... I really dodged a bullet there...
It's controls where also horrible and the game atleast the demo was very unplayable
It sounds like you mean that you hadn't played a hundred clones of the game before and thus didn't know how to play the game before you picked it up. Maybe you thought that since it was first person perspective, it should play like every other FPS out there. That's not possible since the game was about navigating obstacles, unlike almost any other game. Once you got used to them, the controls worked great.
If you share a drink with someone should Coke get a check?
I could be wrong, but I don't think that would fall under first sale doctrine since you're splitting the same first sale. Coke does actually get paid for both halves of the drink that's consumed. For that metaphor to work, coke would have to demand money for all future uses of the drink.
And actually, I'm okay with an exception being made in Coke's case. I'd really like to see them try to claim a cut if and when you sold your urine.
I've started to see some things along those lines. NCBI has started hosting some older versions of biology textbooks online. Professors don't generally know about them, and they're outdated so most students just assume they won't work (having the page numbers off so you might have to skim a bit to find the exact two pages of required reading? Oh God no!). Some of the texts state that you can search in them but not just browse, which seems to be completely pointless. And obviously, it's in publishers interests to push the new expensive versions rather than old low-demand stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
That was hela funny.
In short, who cares, nearly everyone has HPV. You probably do too.
I know I do. It should still be private if I want it to be. Even if one has nothing to be embarrassed about, they should still have privacy.
It's big government in general. They have gotten so frickin' big the law doesn't apply to them anymore.
Big government? To clarify, you're saying that the government shutting down websites in response to child porn is a government that is too big? Because as long as governments have the power to seize websites and are tasked with using that power, mistakes are going to be made and websites are going to get mistakenly shut down, no matter what other powers or structure that government has.
What liability would an insurance company have? That seems like a rather large point to make and leave unsubstantiated.
I forgot the IANAL bit. I am not a lawyer, so I don't know and have no more legal information. It seems like if someone were denied insurance, and a note saying "Don't give insurance to this specific individual" were found, that could translate into a lawsuit. Seems is the operative word, sure, this is not legal advice for any HMOs out there. When you're talking about one specific patient which -may- have a higher chance of higher medical bills, it seems like a pointless risk.
Easily accessible information can and in some cases should still be private information. Just because you're shedding DNA at all times doesn't mean your DNA should be public.
Science isn't powerful? Two Words. Death Ray.
Science: yes.
Scientists: no (compared to people who get on TV and denounce science anyways).
This particular scientist: embryologist, so no death rays.
Hela cells came from a cancer biopsy sample with a consent form
From the wiki page on HeLa cells I linked to above (emphasis mine):
The cells were propagated by George Otto Gey shortly before Lacks died in 1951. This was the first human cell line to prove successful in vitro, which was a scientific achievement with profound future benefit to medical research. Yet Gey freely donated both the cells and the tools and processes his lab developed to any scientists requesting them, simply for the benefit of science. Neither Lacks nor her family gave Gey permission, but, at that time, permission was neither required nor customarily sought.[4] The cells were later commercialized, although never patented in their original form. Then, as now, there was no requirement to inform a patient, or their relatives, about such matters because discarded material, or material obtained during surgery, diagnosis, or therapy, was the property of the physician and/or medical institution. This issue and Mrs. Lacks' situation was brought up in the Supreme Court of California case of Moore v. Regents of the University of California. The court ruled that a person's discarded tissue and cells are not their property and can be commercialized.[5]
Reference 5, "The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks" is an interesting read, I'm not done with it yet. The family though is upset due to the lack of consent, and the fact that others profited off of the thing that killed her.
No one should suggest that Henrietta Lacks is still around.
They are cancer cells derived from her, they're her genes. Those genes have been sequenced. Genes from HPV are detectable in the genome, so she had HPV, that's some very private information on her medical history that is public knowledge through HeLa cells. They're not Henrietta Lacks, but they are still cells from her, to imply it's not her at all is a mistake.
and offensive body-odor'
God, I'd hate for my DNA to be sequenced and get out into the public so that people would know my secret: that I have HORRIBLE BO! Then I wouldn't be able to lure people into sniffing my armpit anymore and finding out the easy way!
Those sequences would change the expected probability of his relatives having the same sequences, but outside of a twin, it's not definite. I think any health insurance agency is going to have a hard time finding a way to deny coverage to, say, his sibling if he had markers for a given disease. If someone were to go into his sequences, scan for disease markers, and put a notice on their system to watch out for his sister trying to get insurance, that would be bad, but any evil insurance agent with half a brain would hopefully realize that's opening themselves up to quite a liability for little savings. If every other person were uploading their DNA sequences, that might make it cost efficient for some unscrupulous insurance company to try to discriminate against siblings, but just one family, I doubt it. If his siblings were to run for office and their brother had a heritable, neurodegenerative disease, that might be an issue.
You jest, but HeLa cells have been around for about 60 years. They're an immortal line of cancer cells taken from a woman named Henrietta Lacks. HeLa cells have been used in numerous labs around the world, per mass, there is more HeLa than there ever was Henrietta Lacks. I don't think anyone would have ever expected that at the time.
Then again, Lacks never gave consent for the cells to be used, whereas this guy chose to make this data available.
Just where the fuck do you live that it's acceptable that someone can't leave a party alone?
Whoa, calm down, who is saying anything is "acceptable"? I was merely saying that if someone doesn't think to use the buddy system, they're not going to wear some crazy poisoned needle diaphragm.
As most rape cases are not assault cases against sober victims
If Jackie Chan has taught me anything, being drunk gives you UNSTOPPABLE kung fu powers.
Aside from the obvious chance of backfiring and sanitary concerns, there's also the fact that not leaving a party by yourself is the much more obvious step that all too often gets disregarded, so I think few people would remember to wear their poisonous needle. A stun gun, pepper spray, or knife probably would have been a more sane approach, but few people carry those.
Not only do those "powerful" people not pay their way, they are actively "fucking" us.
Just to be clear, we're not talking about -me- are we? I'm a scientist, not a powerful person. I wasn't suggesting I should only have to pay taxes for things I use. And I'm fucking very few of you.
I don't see why this is modded flamebait. It's naive to think that, but naive =/= flamebait necessarily.
Does anyone here actually think everything the US does that annoys people with computers is necessary? I mean, former ambassador John Bolton runs around yelling on Fox that we should bomb Iran pretty much every day. If Iran were -reasonable- they'd think about putting child porn on his computer. It certainly doesn't discourage them from funding cyberwarfare against the rest of us.
I think if our government were to take a reasonable response to Wikileaks rather than trying to burn Asange at the stake, Anonymous might be ever-so-slightly less inclined to do some damage to government networks.
There will always be people attacking the US as long as there is a US, sure, but we do encourage a lot of it, and we could ruffle fewer feathers definitely.
I can see that, but that doesn't explain charging cell phone users for the poison control centers.
I'd assume he's actually just oversimplifying things for his target audience. I got the impression that this was a list to be forwarded to someone's CEO or boss who didn't understand that norton antivirus wasn't protecting against corporate espionage. A primer for getting people used to thinking about there being different types of dangerous types online. Such people hopefully wouldn't have much reason to be concerned with script kiddies shutting down more than their own website. If this list is meant for people who design networks (which I don't understand the first thing about) then I'd hope such people had much more in-depth knowledge about the dangers here than the list presents. Maybe I'm being wildly optimistic due to ignorance, but I'd hope a head engineer type person at, say, Cisco would have already heard of script kiddies and wouldn't be reading this list and would take steps.
Script kiddies. (They believe they are hackers)
Doesn't that fall under #7 (put by itself on the second page, so it's easy to miss):
"Malicious hacker No. 7: Rogue hackers There are hundreds of thousands of hackers who simply want to prove their skills, brag to friends, and are thrilled to engage in unauthorized activities. They may participate in other types of hacking (crimeware), but it isn't their only objective and motivation. These are the traditional stereotyped figures popularized by the 1983 film "War Games," hacking late at night, while drinking Mountain Dew and eating Doritos. These are the petty criminals of the cyber world. They're a nuisance, but they aren't about to disrupt the Internet and business as we know it -- unlike members of the other groups."
Doesn't say anything about skill there.
The real pros. (The ones you never hear about)
Seems like focusing on a group that is defined as "the ones you know nothing about and therefore have no idea how to counter them or even if they exist" is a good way to do nothing more than stress out. Seems like the steps you'd take to counter the other ones are about all you can do.
Doctors treat symptoms mostly, once you know you have a disease, you know how to fight it (hopefully). Preventative steps like vaccinations, diet, exercise, and being on the lookout for symptoms are about all you can do for your health otherwise. You have to realize that you, right now, may have some horrible disease or cancer that hasn't gone symptomatic yet. Worrying about that is pointless though. Seems like the same would be true of uber hackers you don't know about. Take the steps to prevent the other ones, and common sense steps. Don't spend a lot of time worrying that you have an evil Iranian 007 infiltrating your security unless you have evidence that there is. You can always find something unfounded to be paranoid about.
I suppose you think that without corporations we'd live in a fantasy land with unicorns and fairies where hundreds of people and millions of dollars can appear out of nowhere to start making quality video games.
I didn't see anything in his post suggesting that corporations are something we'd be better off without. He can't idly criticize something unless there's a viable alternative?
That's usually the case, yes, but in this case I think the corporation actually was helping mirror's edge 2's chances. The president of EA was pushing for a sequel when the game didn't actually sell very well.
and an awful lot of player deaths
How is that a thing? It's a videogame, your character dies all the... Wait, you mean -ACTUAL- player deaths?!? Like the game kills people? Whoa man... I really dodged a bullet there...
It's controls where also horrible and the game atleast the demo was very unplayable
It sounds like you mean that you hadn't played a hundred clones of the game before and thus didn't know how to play the game before you picked it up. Maybe you thought that since it was first person perspective, it should play like every other FPS out there. That's not possible since the game was about navigating obstacles, unlike almost any other game. Once you got used to them, the controls worked great.
If you share a drink with someone should Coke get a check?
I could be wrong, but I don't think that would fall under first sale doctrine since you're splitting the same first sale. Coke does actually get paid for both halves of the drink that's consumed. For that metaphor to work, coke would have to demand money for all future uses of the drink. And actually, I'm okay with an exception being made in Coke's case. I'd really like to see them try to claim a cut if and when you sold your urine.
Slashdot needs a "-1 pointless cynicism" mod.
I've started to see some things along those lines. NCBI has started hosting some older versions of biology textbooks online. Professors don't generally know about them, and they're outdated so most students just assume they won't work (having the page numbers off so you might have to skim a bit to find the exact two pages of required reading? Oh God no!). Some of the texts state that you can search in them but not just browse, which seems to be completely pointless. And obviously, it's in publishers interests to push the new expensive versions rather than old low-demand stuff.