I still miss the days of mp3.com when artists could avoid the music industry entirely and market themselves directly to listeners
Sorry, just want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding. Are you saying that since that one particular company isn't around anymore, artists can no longer market themselves directly to listeners? (Or that it's maybe not as easy or convenient as it was back then?)
Imagine you're an ISP who paid your congressperson to vote for this law. Someone wants to use your freshly-purchased law to embarrass you and your law vendor.
If I were in that position, I would tell Search Internet History, "Sorry, we don't sell that." (At first, and then when I later got caught selling it to others, it'd become a more combative "Sorry, we don't sell that to you.")
Brits took their election as seriously as we Americans took ours. You don't get do-overs; the pain of the entire country losing is supposed to be a lesson, so you take the next election seriously.
It can't be dead due to the enormous security risk, because the industry has supposedly accepted proprietary EME "content decryption modules." The one aspect of Flash that really mattered is still with us; it's just theoretically smaller (provided people abstain from installing the ones that will have them join botnets, mine bitcoins, etc).
I like the idea of moving as much decision making as possible to the phone, but I don't want a whitelist. That would require me to make the effort to whitelist people, plus having the prescient power of anticipating which strangers I want to hear from (e.g. whoever found my dog and called the number on her collar). I'm ok with getting a call from a stranger, as long as their "return address" isn't forged. If the return address is correct, and they are annoying, I can blacklist 'em. Allowing strangers to call me is the best default. Not perfect (it's easy to imagine some failure scenarios), but best.
This just removes the fig leaf... Anyone who's serious about security wouldn't rely on the ISP being on their side-- one would already be using strong encryption etc. for all communication if one were actually concerned about security.
This really is the best way to look at things.
If people want "privacy laws" then those laws shouldn't be about what's not allowed to happen; the laws need to be about what is required to happen (the goal being to encourage common sense practices, because nobody can protect your privacy for you.). Make it so that businesses and people can't access government's network services without going through a darknet, for example. Do not allow any plaintext email communication with the government. Put into "REAL ID" that the issuing authority also has to sign the identified person's key and include the fingerprint on the ID card. Don't allow government money to be spent on computers containing any software which can't be audited and maintained. And so on.
Don't make anyone protect their privacy overall, but do make it so that they have to pay lip service to common sense in any interaction with government (and then let convenience and economy of scale take it from there; lazy people will then do the right thing). Or, just don't have privacy laws since, obviously, we don't really care. Pick one or the other.
Anyone without a red flag is pretty damn suspicious. Step one in being discreet is to get your red flag immedi-- wait.. in the average amount of time. (But not too average!)
I understand why people do it; I just think the costs outweigh the relatively minor benefits. (And yes, I realize other people weigh things differently) Having a mailreader on your desktop(s) isn't a big deal. The only time it matters much, is when it's someone else's desktop, since a lot of mail clients make the initial setup somewhat of a pain in the ass. (And I get how a layman might not remember whether their server uses starttls vs ssl; I'll admit there are barriers to fast setup, where you want to ask your friend, "Hey, can I use your machine to check my email real quick?") But while maybe some people were having to borrow other peoples' PCs a lot more around the turn of the century, nowdays nearly everyone carries one in their pocket.
And across from the relatively minor benefit of webmail, is the cost: it means you can't do encryption sanely, for example. And since it doesn't have a standard interface, now Google is proposing a proprietary one, to try to do some of the things that you could do with IMAP. That's just going to lock people into gmail specifically. I get why they are doing that, but from a user's PoV, this is wastful and harmful.
Just Say No. Now that you have a smartphone, perhaps webmail is obsolete and it's time to start phasing it out. Whereever you go, there you are.
I have an HDHomeRun with a cable card, and VLC talks to it just great on Linux.
When did this happen?! (I fear I'm probably misinterpreting your comment.)
I have one of the older non-CableCard HDHomeRuns and it worked great for a while.. but ClearQAM gradually phased out so that CableCard was the only option that could receive everything you pay for. At the time the CableCard version of HDHomeRun came out, it was not interoperable with whatever software you wanted; you had to use Microsoft's whatever-it's-called or else "fuck you, fucking customer, we don't want your fucking money, you fucking fuckity fuckfuck." (I paraphrase the lack of API.)
Did they really later open it up so that it works? (You're not going to tell me this is really a VLC-specific proprietary blob thing, I hope.)
Any claims based on the assertion that they behave lawfully is flawed and not to be considered credible.
Cars crash. We all know that. But if you say a car crashed at a certain place at a certain time -- but all the people who were at the intersection at that time say they didn't see anything, and the alleged cars aren't showing signs of damage (or repair) -- then the subject matter is your dishonesty, not whether or not sometimes cars crash.
Trump lied again, and got caught again. Think back to whoever you thought was probably the most dishonest president, before Trump came along and broke all the records so quickly. How often did that president get caught lying?
Pretty much the only way this motherfucker might ever get credibility with Americans at this point, is if he announced that he's getting psychiatric sessions.
Plato talked about trying to use radio to learn about music, but the company insisted that it would sell better if he wrote about caves and shadows. (To be fair, caves were HYUUGE in that market at that time.)
You sound like someone who lost their intell sources. (I remember going through that, as a metalhead in the 1990s when metal didn't die even slightly, but nevertheless disappeared from radio, neighborhood brick'n'mortar stores, etc. I went through some dismal years before I learned to research, and then started to discover a portion of what had been happening under my nose.)
All that stuff about autotune, Disney, focus-group-tested lyrics represents a virtually non-existent share of music. You are flaming obscure things, while the other 99.99% of music is going un-noticed. Find your people. They're almost certain still around, somewhere.
And while I certainly don't want to discourage you from researching music from the far reaches of the globe, you might also want to check the bars in your own city. (But FFS you have the Internet now, too!)
BTW, I'm not saying 98% of everything isn't crap. But it was true in 1970 too. For every Stone the Crows or Jethro Tull, there were a hundred bands trying to be be a sonic and financial clone of The Beatles.
I'm sure it will make sense to plenty of non-google engineers.
Unless those non-Google engineers have already heard of ftp, scp, rsync, etc.
The only real problem with sharing on home connections involves NAT, ISP ToS, etc: being findable and connectable. Rent a VPS and install OpenVPN on it, have your home fileserver connect to it, and it's solved.
Does it really make sense economically for Uber to get 100% of the cost of a ride this way but having to spend money to buy main, maintain and insure cars?
If you hypothesize that robot drivers can really do the job sufficiently well, the conclusion is an extremely strong and obvious yes. Taxis, limo services, etc are already viable business models even when you have all those same expenses plus a driver to pay. Remove the driver expense and it only gets more viable.
Or is this another sign of a company that doesn't know what it is doing, perhaps most recently suggested by the recent charges of sexism and sexual harassment?
It's possible they don't know what they're doing, but this certainly isn't a sign. It all comes down to whether or not you think robots perform as well as humans, and this story merely works from the conclusion that they can; it doesn't show any strengths or weaknesses of the premise itself.
There is a pretty easy middle ground: multiple signatures per identity. You could then have authority(s) vouching for your identity, plus other people too. This makes it much easier to catch a defector. "Hey, how come the Turkish intelligence service (a CA that almost everyone trusts on the web) just signed this guy's brand new key, but Verisign hasn't?" (or better: "how come the federal CA and this guy's state CA disagree?")
You simply can't have people not do "anything extra" while also being resistance to MitM. Part of HTTPS' success story is that it's easy enough to set up, but at the cost of being extremely vulnerable (by PGP standards) to MitM. So to anyone who knows how it works, it's "insecure" but people actually bother to use it, so it's about a trillion times more secure against totally passive attacks, than plaintext is. Thus, on average for all persons, the web is more secure than email.
PGP email needs some kind of "lame" mode (where people have keys but they're not carefully certified, maybe just signed by a robot CA), but easy enough that passive attacks are defeated. And it needs to be compatible with doing things right, so that people-who-care and people-who-don't-care get combined into the same network-effect.
The only problem with that, should be webmail. People would have to do something that compromises the secret key (either upload it to server, or make it available to javascript) and that would make it harder for anyone to ever transition from don't-care to care. We really need to wipe webmail off the planet; it offers nothing and costs a lot. And that's not going to happen, is it?:(
For us cash strapped kids, cutting holes into single sided floppy disks was the only option, shortsighted or not.
No, there was one other, though it did require spending a little money. You go to Radio Shack and buy a switch/button/whatever. (Many to choose from.) Open up your 1541 (which is probably permanently semi-open anyway, from all the times you need to re-align the head), cut the wirse to the optical sensor which detects the hole, drill a hole in the front of the 1541's case, mount the switch into there, connect the sensor's wires to the switch....
BTW, whole discussion is Slashdot trolling old people into admitting they're old people.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, just want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding. Are you saying that since that one particular company isn't around anymore, artists can no longer market themselves directly to listeners? (Or that it's maybe not as easy or convenient as it was back then?)
Imagine you're an ISP who paid your congressperson to vote for this law. Someone wants to use your freshly-purchased law to embarrass you and your law vendor.
If I were in that position, I would tell Search Internet History, "Sorry, we don't sell that." (At first, and then when I later got caught selling it to others, it'd become a more combative "Sorry, we don't sell that to you.")
Brits took their election as seriously as we Americans took ours. You don't get do-overs; the pain of the entire country losing is supposed to be a lesson, so you take the next election seriously.
It can't be dead due to the enormous security risk, because the industry has supposedly accepted proprietary EME "content decryption modules." The one aspect of Flash that really mattered is still with us; it's just theoretically smaller (provided people abstain from installing the ones that will have them join botnets, mine bitcoins, etc).
Have one of your Linux machines be its gateway.
SCOTUS says anything and everything you can possibly conceive of, can be viewed as Interstate Commerce and regulated by the federal government.
Those people are turing their cameras on, more often than you do.
HTH.
I like the idea of moving as much decision making as possible to the phone, but I don't want a whitelist. That would require me to make the effort to whitelist people, plus having the prescient power of anticipating which strangers I want to hear from (e.g. whoever found my dog and called the number on her collar). I'm ok with getting a call from a stranger, as long as their "return address" isn't forged. If the return address is correct, and they are annoying, I can blacklist 'em. Allowing strangers to call me is the best default. Not perfect (it's easy to imagine some failure scenarios), but best.
This really is the best way to look at things.
If people want "privacy laws" then those laws shouldn't be about what's not allowed to happen; the laws need to be about what is required to happen (the goal being to encourage common sense practices, because nobody can protect your privacy for you.). Make it so that businesses and people can't access government's network services without going through a darknet, for example. Do not allow any plaintext email communication with the government. Put into "REAL ID" that the issuing authority also has to sign the identified person's key and include the fingerprint on the ID card. Don't allow government money to be spent on computers containing any software which can't be audited and maintained. And so on.
Don't make anyone protect their privacy overall, but do make it so that they have to pay lip service to common sense in any interaction with government (and then let convenience and economy of scale take it from there; lazy people will then do the right thing). Or, just don't have privacy laws since, obviously, we don't really care. Pick one or the other.
I don't think you're scaring anyone. People could do it, and fear wouldn't stop them.
Laziness and apathy, on the other hand...
Is that a problem?
Anyone without a red flag is pretty damn suspicious. Step one in being discreet is to get your red flag immedi-- wait.. in the average amount of time. (But not too average!)
I understand why people do it; I just think the costs outweigh the relatively minor benefits. (And yes, I realize other people weigh things differently) Having a mailreader on your desktop(s) isn't a big deal. The only time it matters much, is when it's someone else's desktop, since a lot of mail clients make the initial setup somewhat of a pain in the ass. (And I get how a layman might not remember whether their server uses starttls vs ssl; I'll admit there are barriers to fast setup, where you want to ask your friend, "Hey, can I use your machine to check my email real quick?") But while maybe some people were having to borrow other peoples' PCs a lot more around the turn of the century, nowdays nearly everyone carries one in their pocket.
And across from the relatively minor benefit of webmail, is the cost: it means you can't do encryption sanely, for example. And since it doesn't have a standard interface, now Google is proposing a proprietary one, to try to do some of the things that you could do with IMAP. That's just going to lock people into gmail specifically. I get why they are doing that, but from a user's PoV, this is wastful and harmful.
Just Say No. Now that you have a smartphone, perhaps webmail is obsolete and it's time to start phasing it out. Whereever you go, there you are.
The more specialized logic you add to your mailreader, the worse fit webmail is. IMAP, on the other hand, already is a standard interface!
If they can perform enough of the "installation" work prior to actually having the batteries present, then I'd make -j 1000000 that thing.
When did this happen?! (I fear I'm probably misinterpreting your comment.)
I have one of the older non-CableCard HDHomeRuns and it worked great for a while.. but ClearQAM gradually phased out so that CableCard was the only option that could receive everything you pay for. At the time the CableCard version of HDHomeRun came out, it was not interoperable with whatever software you wanted; you had to use Microsoft's whatever-it's-called or else "fuck you, fucking customer, we don't want your fucking money, you fucking fuckity fuckfuck." (I paraphrase the lack of API.)
Did they really later open it up so that it works? (You're not going to tell me this is really a VLC-specific proprietary blob thing, I hope.)
Cars crash. We all know that. But if you say a car crashed at a certain place at a certain time -- but all the people who were at the intersection at that time say they didn't see anything, and the alleged cars aren't showing signs of damage (or repair) -- then the subject matter is your dishonesty, not whether or not sometimes cars crash.
Trump lied again, and got caught again. Think back to whoever you thought was probably the most dishonest president, before Trump came along and broke all the records so quickly. How often did that president get caught lying?
Pretty much the only way this motherfucker might ever get credibility with Americans at this point, is if he announced that he's getting psychiatric sessions.
What are you talking about?
Plato talked about trying to use radio to learn about music, but the company insisted that it would sell better if he wrote about caves and shadows. (To be fair, caves were HYUUGE in that market at that time.)
You sound like someone who lost their intell sources. (I remember going through that, as a metalhead in the 1990s when metal didn't die even slightly, but nevertheless disappeared from radio, neighborhood brick'n'mortar stores, etc. I went through some dismal years before I learned to research, and then started to discover a portion of what had been happening under my nose.)
All that stuff about autotune, Disney, focus-group-tested lyrics represents a virtually non-existent share of music. You are flaming obscure things, while the other 99.99% of music is going un-noticed. Find your people. They're almost certain still around, somewhere.
And while I certainly don't want to discourage you from researching music from the far reaches of the globe, you might also want to check the bars in your own city. (But FFS you have the Internet now, too!)
BTW, I'm not saying 98% of everything isn't crap. But it was true in 1970 too. For every Stone the Crows or Jethro Tull, there were a hundred bands trying to be be a sonic and financial clone of The Beatles.
Put the whole list on a publicly-available web page, and then fix the page if someone notices and reports an error.
Unless those non-Google engineers have already heard of ftp, scp, rsync, etc.
The only real problem with sharing on home connections involves NAT, ISP ToS, etc: being findable and connectable. Rent a VPS and install OpenVPN on it, have your home fileserver connect to it, and it's solved.
If you hypothesize that robot drivers can really do the job sufficiently well, the conclusion is an extremely strong and obvious yes. Taxis, limo services, etc are already viable business models even when you have all those same expenses plus a driver to pay. Remove the driver expense and it only gets more viable.
It's possible they don't know what they're doing, but this certainly isn't a sign. It all comes down to whether or not you think robots perform as well as humans, and this story merely works from the conclusion that they can; it doesn't show any strengths or weaknesses of the premise itself.
There is a pretty easy middle ground: multiple signatures per identity. You could then have authority(s) vouching for your identity, plus other people too. This makes it much easier to catch a defector. "Hey, how come the Turkish intelligence service (a CA that almost everyone trusts on the web) just signed this guy's brand new key, but Verisign hasn't?" (or better: "how come the federal CA and this guy's state CA disagree?")
You simply can't have people not do "anything extra" while also being resistance to MitM. Part of HTTPS' success story is that it's easy enough to set up, but at the cost of being extremely vulnerable (by PGP standards) to MitM. So to anyone who knows how it works, it's "insecure" but people actually bother to use it, so it's about a trillion times more secure against totally passive attacks, than plaintext is. Thus, on average for all persons, the web is more secure than email.
PGP email needs some kind of "lame" mode (where people have keys but they're not carefully certified, maybe just signed by a robot CA), but easy enough that passive attacks are defeated. And it needs to be compatible with doing things right, so that people-who-care and people-who-don't-care get combined into the same network-effect.
The only problem with that, should be webmail. People would have to do something that compromises the secret key (either upload it to server, or make it available to javascript) and that would make it harder for anyone to ever transition from don't-care to care. We really need to wipe webmail off the planet; it offers nothing and costs a lot. And that's not going to happen, is it? :(
No, there was one other, though it did require spending a little money. You go to Radio Shack and buy a switch/button/whatever. (Many to choose from.) Open up your 1541 (which is probably permanently semi-open anyway, from all the times you need to re-align the head), cut the wirse to the optical sensor which detects the hole, drill a hole in the front of the 1541's case, mount the switch into there, connect the sensor's wires to the switch....
BTW, whole discussion is Slashdot trolling old people into admitting they're old people.