This isn't surprising from the virus protection companies. There have been persistent rumors from years ago where anti-virus programmers released virii into the wild to help enhance their job security. I don't know if there is any verifiable evidence of this, but as this article mentions there is PLENTY of incentive for the anti-virus folks to create threats, both real and make-belive.
Because Libertarians are an independent lot that rarely speaks with one voice, it is safe to say that Roger is not necessarily speaking for everyone. And in this case, I can promise you that not everyone that works at Cato, supports Cato or even just plain tolerates Cato agrees with what Roger is saying.
Just because Roger Pilon of Cato says it, does not mean that it is Cato's or most Libertarian's viewpoint. Frankly, Roger may be an intelligent legal scholar, but his opinion on this issue is just plain naive.
Actually, Cato gets the majority of it's money from individuals who give under a thousand dollars. It's operating budget is actually the lowest of the three major think tanks in DC (Brookings and Heritage being the other two).
1) If all the state databases are hooked together, how secure is a distributed database like that? Is it more secure than a fort knox like central DB or do all the connections make it easier to get into the system?
2) Extending from that, would it now be easier to mess with someone's records or for records to be confused? What's to keep them from mistaking me for Mark X. who is a drug dealer in NH? Are fingerprints really that secure? Will I be able to check my records so that I know the state doesn't have me listed as something I'm not?
3) Why does Time pay this particular journalist to write? When a journalist puts in a section like "The Real concern" and, instead of citing sources, tells his readers what to be concerned about, you can be sure his objectivity is lacking. Did anyone else feel like this guy was lecturing the civil libertarians as to why they shouldn't complain.
Well, I could be totally wrong about this, but isn't Amazon losing money almost daily? Aren't they pretty much not making any profits at the moment? If that is the case, then all of these patents make perfect sense. How else are they going to suceed as a business unless they make it almost impossible for anyone else to have a successful e-business?
Also, doesn't anyone else kind of think it is odd that even though other companies also use similar "one click" transaction methods, Amazon only goes after their main competition online?
It's times like these that make me want to dump the MPAA, the RIAA, DoubleClick and Amazon (along with the NSA, CIA and FBI) all on an island somewhere. They can then spend the rest of their days monitoring each other and trying to monopolize all expression and commerce on their island.
Well, I've noticed that a lot of smaller sites are nearly impossible to get to as well as the big ones. The worst part about this is that: 1) The media gets a new excuse to talk about the evil "hackers" 2) It doesn't take a "hacker" to do this type of stuff 3) This will give the government and government agencies new excuses to try and exert further control over the Internet's infrastructural development I think we are all better off if we try to make e-commerce work. If people sabatoge the big internet companies, no one will get to play with the Internet (exaggeration, but you know what I mean). God, I remember 8 years ago, going on the net using a 2400 baud modem. Back then, you could never expect to get around the net consistently. Now we expect everything to always be available. I just realized how spoiled I've become...heh Mr. Eff Z?
Slashdot Mirror
This isn't surprising from the virus protection companies. There have been persistent rumors from years ago where anti-virus programmers released virii into the wild to help enhance their job security. I don't know if there is any verifiable evidence of this, but as this article mentions there is PLENTY of incentive for the anti-virus folks to create threats, both real and make-belive.
Because Libertarians are an independent lot that rarely speaks with one voice, it is safe to say that Roger is not necessarily speaking for everyone. And in this case, I can promise you that not everyone that works at Cato, supports Cato or even just plain tolerates Cato agrees with what Roger is saying.
Just because Roger Pilon of Cato says it, does not mean that it is Cato's or most Libertarian's viewpoint. Frankly, Roger may be an intelligent legal scholar, but his opinion on this issue is just plain naive.
Actually, Cato gets the majority of it's money from individuals who give under a thousand dollars. It's operating budget is actually the lowest of the three major think tanks in DC (Brookings and Heritage being the other two).
Who Let the Dogs Out at Scientific American? by Patrick J. Michaels.
It's just another perspective.
1) If all the state databases are hooked together, how secure is a distributed database like that? Is it more secure than a fort knox like central DB or do all the connections make it easier to get into the system?
2) Extending from that, would it now be easier to mess with someone's records or for records to be confused? What's to keep them from mistaking me for Mark X. who is a drug dealer in NH? Are fingerprints really that secure? Will I be able to check my records so that I know the state doesn't have me listed as something I'm not?
3) Why does Time pay this particular journalist to write? When a journalist puts in a section like "The Real concern" and, instead of citing sources, tells his readers what to be concerned about, you can be sure his objectivity is lacking. Did anyone else feel like this guy was lecturing the civil libertarians as to why they shouldn't complain.
Grr.
Well, I could be totally wrong about this, but isn't Amazon losing money almost daily? Aren't they pretty much not making any profits at the moment? If that is the case, then all of these patents make perfect sense. How else are they going to suceed as a business unless they make it almost impossible for anyone else to have a successful e-business?
Also, doesn't anyone else kind of think it is odd that even though other companies also use similar "one click" transaction methods, Amazon only goes after their main competition online?
It's times like these that make me want to dump the MPAA, the RIAA, DoubleClick and Amazon (along with the NSA, CIA and FBI) all on an island somewhere. They can then spend the rest of their days monitoring each other and trying to monopolize all expression and commerce on their island.
Well, I've noticed that a lot of smaller sites are nearly impossible to get to as well as the big ones. The worst part about this is that:
1) The media gets a new excuse to talk about the evil "hackers"
2) It doesn't take a "hacker" to do this type of stuff
3) This will give the government and government agencies new excuses to try and exert further control over the Internet's infrastructural development
I think we are all better off if we try to make e-commerce work. If people sabatoge the big internet companies, no one will get to play with the Internet (exaggeration, but you know what I mean). God, I remember 8 years ago, going on the net using a 2400 baud modem. Back then, you could never expect to get around the net consistently. Now we expect everything to always be available. I just realized how spoiled I've become...heh
Mr. Eff
Z?