Back in the day (just before the AOL takeover), I was a contract employee for CompuServe Germany ('hi' to Robert Stabl, my boss!). CompuServe, at that time at least, was pushing a technology called RPA (Remote Passphrase Authentication) as a way to prove a user's identity to a third party website, without that third party needing to know anything about the user's passphrase (reasonably well designed too).
CompuServe GmbH also used this RPA technology to control micropayments to some of its more interesting (to some) content. The example that comes to mind was a site called Recht Online, which was a pay-per-view listing of all court judgements in Germany (I believe). However, there were many other areas of content which CompuServe wanted to sell, and not just to their own subscribers.
My job was to create an ISP authenticating proxy. The idea was that if you, as a user from ISP 'blinkenlichten,' wanted to view some pay-per-view CompuServe content, then you could as long as your ISP had a service agreement with CompuServe. It was the ISP's problem to figure out who viewed what, and how to pass the cost on to their customers.
Perhaps the most magical thing of that whole time was going onsite to a couple of ISPs (one in Frankfurt, the other in Dusseldorf), and seeing the highly sceptical sysadmins' jaws drop when I started happily connecting to expensive CompuServe content through their IP range.
Ironic part of the story: CompuServe lost the source code.
If you believe the schedule at Nasa Television, there will be a press conference at 6:30 on Saturday, to be repeated at 1pm, 4pm, 7pm, and 10pm on Sunday (all times are EDT).
"If people don't find those features compelling enough to upgrade," Cullinan said, "they can keep whatever the heck they want. They're not forced to upgrade."
That's all very nice to say, but Microsoft won't let you 'keep whatever the heck you want' and support it (and your decision); they'll eventually force you into purchasing the new OS, because it has features the other's don't.
Personally, I think the next MS case should be over the fact that they no longer support versions of their software; if it could be legally proven that one version of windows (let's say Win95) performed the same tasks as another version (i.e. WinME), but was no longer supported by the company, then they should have to purchase those licenses back (imho). Now *that* would make them suffer.
Surely the whole point of these regulations is that they are attempting to maintain people's privacy. Now, so long as HavenCo decides to have a proactive stance on data protection (it would be ironic if they didn't, seeing as data protection is the whole point of HavenCo in the first place), then they should be spared any problems.
Regardless, with things like FreeNet and other 'clouds of data' springing up, there's going to be no way for the EU to effectively police something like this. Kudos to them for wanting to try though - one of the things I was most impressed about with Germany when I lived there was their bordering-on-paranoia feelings towards privacy. Not even the banks can legally hold complete records after a not-too-long period of time.
JumpTV's regioning isn't anything like DVD regioning. DVD's are regioned to attempt to reduce piracy, make the studios more money and give them more control over what people see.
And the only reason that the networks are fighting companies like iCraveTV and JumpTV is the fact that they're not doing "this Internet thing" yet.
Lawsuits in this arena are most likely a stalling target; as broadband becomes more prevalent, and tools which allow regionalization of users (and thus content), the networks will be all over the Internet like a bad rash. Until they can figure out how to get their advertising all over it in a cost-effective way, however, they're biding their time, and letting other people step on the mines for them.
Do the words "Nuclear War, Rand Corporation, or Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency" mean anything to you?
The point you're making is accurate enough, but it was a group of hackers-at-heart that actually built this thing, regardless of the military interests that were present at its conception.:)
Let's face it, on one hand, most of us love the idea of a company being able to screw the TV companies over, no matter how they manage to do it exactly. It certainly sounds good to me, taken on its own. However, the fact that the company has to put in place regional barriers means that this is a Bad Thing.
Think about it for a minute. The Internet is (or at least, was meant to be) all about inclusion of peoples, freedom to access content wherever it is located, and sharing. Instead, we're now looking at situations where, for instance, I can get a service that others cannot.
Extrapolate that a little further now. Based on region, Big Company Inc is able to charge different amounts of money for their virtually-delivered (i.e. online) service, and for no other reason than the fact that they can.
JumpTV's service, even if free, manages to have enough parallels with the DVD regioning system that it's not funny.
Aspire:
To have a great ambition or ultimate goal; desire strongly
So, who's going to be writing the self-modifying text message? I can't think of any other type of message that could be considered 'ambitious.'
Then again, maybe the person just meant inspiring.
Slight innacuracy in topeka's review
on
Crypto
·
· Score: 4
To quote:
However, in 1967, when James Ellis (of the secret British agency, GCHQ) first came up with the idea of public key cryptography, his theory was buried.
As far as I know, GCHQ has never been a 'secret' agency; that dubious honour was reserved for MI5 and MI6 (not that it worked or anything). In fact, there are signposts directing you to GCHQ all around Cheltenham where they are based.
As a side note, my grandfather worked for GCHQ for many, many years as a computer operator and programmer, both in the UK and Hong Kong, and of course he told me precisely nothing about what they did there. The only story he ever related to me was regarding a mainframe training course they went on at Lucas Engineering for some IBM beast of a machine. More interesting than the humorous anecdote related there (the instructor telling my grandfather "please don't speak the hallowed name of Thomas J. Watson while urinating") was the fact that GCHQ was behind the curve on the hardware front when compared to British industry; the whole reason for going to Lucas was that they already had the mainframe themselves.
I'm sure he had many more, and better, stories. Unfortunately, He's no longer with us to share them.
It seems clear that no one in the federal government from Congress to the regulatory agencies to the White House -- is in a strong position to oversee or regulate the Net or the increasingly disparate tech nation.
Forgive my ignorance, but surely the whole point of the Internet was to not be regulated by any government agency or appointee? The 'tech nation' may need regulation in a corporate sense, but that's what current company laws are meant to be there for - stopping companies from engaging in practices that are designed only to destroy competition, or otherwise harm others.
Current attempts at regulating the Internet have proven that the memes we have are flawed in this medium. My first example would be ICANN. Created with great fanfare, and initially headed by one of the Large Brains Of The Internet (and now, an even Larger Brain), today we find that the group is almost universally villified as having no power and no point. This certainly isn't the media's fault, though they may have written about what they had seen from the public at large.
The worst example (or best, depending on your point of view) of an attempt at keeping old-school practices in the new medium is, of course, WIPO. They have what is meant to be a universal arbitration system for the ownership of domain names, and yet this is open to local interpretation; different groups under the same agency acting under the same rules will give differing opinions. Worst of all, if you don't like the outcome of their arbitration, it doesn't matter, because in many jurisdictions (such as the US) they have no enforcement power, so you can go to court instead! Again, they serve no real purpose.
We live in a highly fragmented age. There are many new forces and ways of thinking being created, and yet those which already exist are attempting to stifle them. Add this to the normal bickering that is international politics, and we end up with what is technically termed "a big mess." In many ways, the Internet is before it's time.
The decision at that time appeared to be that advertising, though annoying, was important if the site maintainers (rusty and Inoshiro primarily) were to have the ability to maintain and upgrade the site. And anyways, surely something like PayPal would be more useful? They only take a small cut of the money (though the cut on $1 would be pretty big, I admit).
Trust me to jump on the bandwagon before it's even started rolling:)
IBM has actually been advertising this device on their website for a couple of months now, it seems to me to be a great way to keep your 4096 bit RSA keys in a safe, non-computer-hosted location, along with any really important stuff that you really can't handle being stolen. All the staff based in Canada have been telling me that they won't have them in stock for at least six weeks, but they can't give me details about the situation south of the border, so I can't comment on that.
All I can hope now is that the protocol is really simple so those of us that prefer free OSes will be able to mount it too:)
Fortunately, Daily Radar hasn't gone so far as to make the link on slashdot illegal without payment, but be warned: with the alleged failure of online advertising (news.com would make me think otherwise with it's huge annoying flash ads) and the deaths of so many 'networks', you can expect people to attempt to enforce things like this more and more in the future.
I respect Raskin, he's a very clever man that got a short deal many years ago. Some of his ideas are very clever, but not all of them are truly applicable.
"Raskin goes on to illustrate that a computer should be as easy to use as to start typing on a keyboard to open a word processor -- with no lost keystrokes, or to put a stylus to a tablet and start drawing in a graphics app."
This is all very nice and good, but what if you wanted to use a spreadsheet instead? Not everyone wants to only use a word processor. You have to decide what you're going to do mentally, then tell the computer "I'd like to do this now." Just because I start typing numbers doesn't mean I want to create a spreadsheet, but then again typing words doesn't mean that I'm continuing with my novel - I could be typing the headings for my spreadsheet.
"The idea of walking up to a PC in sleep mode and hitting a button, which would instantly activate a specific app, is compelling. The OS would manage all the applications in the background. If you wanted to switch apps, you hit another hot key. Work files could be stored in yet another "button." Interactivity between the apps could be facilitated the same way they are now, with a GUI shell, but without the preponderance of icons, start menus and switchers, and without the tedious effort of installing apps via the GUI or customizing your environment."
Okay, so now I need a keyboard which has an extra 20 buttons for the apps that I want to be able to access. Great. Saving state on exit is a good idea, but that can already be done. You may have already seen it - it's the 'document changed; save?' dialog box.
You're not giving anyone more usability through this. You're giving people something close to PalmOS on a computer, which a few might like, but many would disapprove of. What happens when I want to have two spreadsheets open? do I have two of my keyboard buttons allocated now, or is this even possible? Multitasking on a user level gets thrown out the window with a system like this, and that's a loss in functionality.
"'One big mistake is the idea of an operating system... It does nothing for you, wastes your time, is unnecessary'"
This is where I laughed the most. The OS doesn't "get in the way", it provides basic services that all applications need. The whole reason that Windows or Linux or the BSDs (even PalmOS is big when you consider the total amount of storage available to the devices) are big is that they don't just act as system kernel, but they come bundled with tons of standardised libraries that make your life as an app writer easier. Probably the most dumb thing I've ever seen someone in the industry say.
I wouldn't be following these guidelines too much if I was a system designer.
We've had this in Canada since last year, and it really hasn't made any difference. However, I think that the people that set the levy realised that corporations were only out to save themselves... or the people were vocal enough that the amount chosen was really small.
Slashdot Mirror
... then all you have to do is own a Handspring. There is a module to do that from Xircom (Intel)
Back in the day (just before the AOL takeover), I was a contract employee for CompuServe Germany ('hi' to Robert Stabl, my boss!). CompuServe, at that time at least, was pushing a technology called RPA (Remote Passphrase Authentication) as a way to prove a user's identity to a third party website, without that third party needing to know anything about the user's passphrase (reasonably well designed too).
CompuServe GmbH also used this RPA technology to control micropayments to some of its more interesting (to some) content. The example that comes to mind was a site called Recht Online, which was a pay-per-view listing of all court judgements in Germany (I believe). However, there were many other areas of content which CompuServe wanted to sell, and not just to their own subscribers.
My job was to create an ISP authenticating proxy. The idea was that if you, as a user from ISP 'blinkenlichten,' wanted to view some pay-per-view CompuServe content, then you could as long as your ISP had a service agreement with CompuServe. It was the ISP's problem to figure out who viewed what, and how to pass the cost on to their customers.
Perhaps the most magical thing of that whole time was going onsite to a couple of ISPs (one in Frankfurt, the other in Dusseldorf), and seeing the highly sceptical sysadmins' jaws drop when I started happily connecting to expensive CompuServe content through their IP range.
Ironic part of the story: CompuServe lost the source code.
Is fixed here.
... which should answer you question quite nicely.
for those that don't want to shell out for the book, you can read it here. That's certainly what I've been doing.
Actually, the server farm is in one leg; the othe leg is accomodation.
This will take you to the site of the story.
If you believe the schedule at Nasa Television, there will be a press conference at 6:30 on Saturday, to be repeated at 1pm, 4pm, 7pm, and 10pm on Sunday (all times are EDT).
- stealing code: SQL Server (code from IBM and Oracle);
- disabling competitor's functionality: DR-DOS (now owned, I believe, by Caldera);
- the like: Stacker from Stac Electronics (remember them?)
Those examples don't even scratch the surface of Microsoft's misdeeds in the corporate arena. And it's all in the name of 'increasing consumer value.'Personally, I think the next MS case should be over the fact that they no longer support versions of their software; if it could be legally proven that one version of windows (let's say Win95) performed the same tasks as another version (i.e. WinME), but was no longer supported by the company, then they should have to purchase those licenses back (imho). Now *that* would make them suffer.
Surely the whole point of these regulations is that they are attempting to maintain people's privacy. Now, so long as HavenCo decides to have a proactive stance on data protection (it would be ironic if they didn't, seeing as data protection is the whole point of HavenCo in the first place), then they should be spared any problems.
Regardless, with things like FreeNet and other 'clouds of data' springing up, there's going to be no way for the EU to effectively police something like this. Kudos to them for wanting to try though - one of the things I was most impressed about with Germany when I lived there was their bordering-on-paranoia feelings towards privacy. Not even the banks can legally hold complete records after a not-too-long period of time.
See my response to your line of argument. I'll agree with you, the military was what it was all about, but that's the Cold War for you.
Lawsuits in this arena are most likely a stalling target; as broadband becomes more prevalent, and tools which allow regionalization of users (and thus content), the networks will be all over the Internet like a bad rash. Until they can figure out how to get their advertising all over it in a cost-effective way, however, they're biding their time, and letting other people step on the mines for them.
Let's face it, on one hand, most of us love the idea of a company being able to screw the TV companies over, no matter how they manage to do it exactly. It certainly sounds good to me, taken on its own. However, the fact that the company has to put in place regional barriers means that this is a Bad Thing.
Think about it for a minute. The Internet is (or at least, was meant to be) all about inclusion of peoples, freedom to access content wherever it is located, and sharing. Instead, we're now looking at situations where, for instance, I can get a service that others cannot.
Extrapolate that a little further now. Based on region, Big Company Inc is able to charge different amounts of money for their virtually-delivered (i.e. online) service, and for no other reason than the fact that they can.
JumpTV's service, even if free, manages to have enough parallels with the DVD regioning system that it's not funny.
eBay was doing something similar to this (in terms of unsolicited emails, not suing spammers) recently. Can anyone else smell a potential lawsuit?
Then again, maybe the person just meant inspiring.
As a side note, my grandfather worked for GCHQ for many, many years as a computer operator and programmer, both in the UK and Hong Kong, and of course he told me precisely nothing about what they did there. The only story he ever related to me was regarding a mainframe training course they went on at Lucas Engineering for some IBM beast of a machine. More interesting than the humorous anecdote related there (the instructor telling my grandfather "please don't speak the hallowed name of Thomas J. Watson while urinating") was the fact that GCHQ was behind the curve on the hardware front when compared to British industry; the whole reason for going to Lucas was that they already had the mainframe themselves.
I'm sure he had many more, and better, stories. Unfortunately, He's no longer with us to share them.
Current attempts at regulating the Internet have proven that the memes we have are flawed in this medium. My first example would be ICANN. Created with great fanfare, and initially headed by one of the Large Brains Of The Internet (and now, an even Larger Brain), today we find that the group is almost universally villified as having no power and no point. This certainly isn't the media's fault, though they may have written about what they had seen from the public at large.
The worst example (or best, depending on your point of view) of an attempt at keeping old-school practices in the new medium is, of course, WIPO. They have what is meant to be a universal arbitration system for the ownership of domain names, and yet this is open to local interpretation; different groups under the same agency acting under the same rules will give differing opinions. Worst of all, if you don't like the outcome of their arbitration, it doesn't matter, because in many jurisdictions (such as the US) they have no enforcement power, so you can go to court instead! Again, they serve no real purpose.
We live in a highly fragmented age. There are many new forces and ways of thinking being created, and yet those which already exist are attempting to stifle them. Add this to the normal bickering that is international politics, and we end up with what is technically termed "a big mess." In many ways, the Internet is before it's time.
... was dealt with some time ago at that site.
The decision at that time appeared to be that advertising, though annoying, was important if the site maintainers (rusty and Inoshiro primarily) were to have the ability to maintain and upgrade the site. And anyways, surely something like PayPal would be more useful? They only take a small cut of the money (though the cut on $1 would be pretty big, I admit).
Trust me to jump on the bandwagon before it's even started rolling :)
:)
IBM has actually been advertising this device on their website for a couple of months now, it seems to me to be a great way to keep your 4096 bit RSA keys in a safe, non-computer-hosted location, along with any really important stuff that you really can't handle being stolen. All the staff based in Canada have been telling me that they won't have them in stock for at least six weeks, but they can't give me details about the situation south of the border, so I can't comment on that.
All I can hope now is that the protocol is really simple so those of us that prefer free OSes will be able to mount it too
Check it out:
- Want to use this article? Click here for options!
Fortunately, Daily Radar hasn't gone so far as to make the link on slashdot illegal without payment, but be warned: with the alleged failure of online advertising (news.com would make me think otherwise with it's huge annoying flash ads) and the deaths of so many 'networks', you can expect people to attempt to enforce things like this more and more in the future.- "Raskin goes on to illustrate that a computer should be as easy to use as to start typing on a keyboard to open a word processor -- with no lost keystrokes, or to put a stylus to a tablet and start drawing in a graphics app."
This is all very nice and good, but what if you wanted to use a spreadsheet instead? Not everyone wants to only use a word processor. You have to decide what you're going to do mentally, then tell the computer "I'd like to do this now." Just because I start typing numbers doesn't mean I want to create a spreadsheet, but then again typing words doesn't mean that I'm continuing with my novel - I could be typing the headings for my spreadsheet.- "The idea of walking up to a PC in sleep mode and hitting a button, which would instantly activate a specific app, is compelling. The OS would manage all the applications in the background. If you wanted to switch apps, you hit another hot key. Work files could be stored in yet another "button." Interactivity between the apps could be facilitated the same way they are now, with a GUI shell, but without the preponderance of icons, start menus and switchers, and without the tedious effort of installing apps via the GUI or customizing your environment."
Okay, so now I need a keyboard which has an extra 20 buttons for the apps that I want to be able to access. Great. Saving state on exit is a good idea, but that can already be done. You may have already seen it - it's the 'document changed; save?' dialog box.You're not giving anyone more usability through this. You're giving people something close to PalmOS on a computer, which a few might like, but many would disapprove of. What happens when I want to have two spreadsheets open? do I have two of my keyboard buttons allocated now, or is this even possible? Multitasking on a user level gets thrown out the window with a system like this, and that's a loss in functionality.
- "'One big mistake is the idea of an operating system... It does nothing for you, wastes your time, is unnecessary'"
This is where I laughed the most. The OS doesn't "get in the way", it provides basic services that all applications need. The whole reason that Windows or Linux or the BSDs (even PalmOS is big when you consider the total amount of storage available to the devices) are big is that they don't just act as system kernel, but they come bundled with tons of standardised libraries that make your life as an app writer easier. Probably the most dumb thing I've ever seen someone in the industry say.I wouldn't be following these guidelines too much if I was a system designer.
We've had this in Canada since last year, and it really hasn't made any difference. However, I think that the people that set the levy realised that corporations were only out to save themselves... or the people were vocal enough that the amount chosen was really small.
In any event, I would consider us lucky.
The average in-game time for the ball is less than a minute! Geez, talk about people getting stuff that they can't use to it's fullest! :)
Still, interfacing it the way he did is helluva cool.