There are (arguably) good reasons to ignore the Presidential election, although I don't personally agree with them. However, that doesn't excuse not voting at all, especially in State and Local elections that often happen on the same ballots. My ballot will not only include the Presidential election, but also candidates for County Sherrif, District Attorney, and several important State offices and bills that will have a huge impact on my daily life.
Even if you don't vote for president, it's in all of our best interest to vote intelligently on the local positions that will make a huge difference regardless of what happens at the national level.
Always remember: The difference between "good" and "better" is much smaller and much less distinct than that between "bad" and "worse."
If a process is genuinely safe from attack, then it doesn't matter if the specification is released or not. A good example of this principle is PGP. All of these encryption algorithms are known (RSA is patented, but still known) This allows everyone to be sure of the safety, given large enough key sizes.
In fact, releasing the spec helps find potential holes faster. Yes, it also helps potential attackers in, but attackers are going to get into an insecure system regardless.
I beleive that we as citizens have a right to know exacly how systems we pay for work and what vulnrabilities exist that could be potentially harmful, not only to FBI investigations but to ourselves.
In summary, if the system is really secure, the FBI has no reason to fear telling us how it works. If the system isn't secure, it doesn't matter much whether the spec is public or not, it will be broken.
Cramming more pixels into a small screen doesn't help those with less-than-perfect eyesight. There is only so far you can go in that direction before larger physical real estate is essential.
If a company needs to use large anonymous statistical samples of DNA in order to develop treatments, that is acceptable, but there is no need for my name, or anyone else's to be associated with the samples. It is only when a sample (DNA or otherwise) can uniquely identify me that it becomes a privacy concern, especially if the party to whom I give my information then gives the info to others without my knowlege or approval. So, I personally find no cause for concern if drug companies need DNA samples to develop treatments, or even if one of the samples is mine. My only concern is whether they or anyone else can use these research smaples to identify me, which isn't a problem if the samples truly are anonymous.
Slashdot Mirror
There are (arguably) good reasons to ignore the Presidential election, although I don't personally agree with them. However, that doesn't excuse not voting at all, especially in State and Local elections that often happen on the same ballots. My ballot will not only include the Presidential election, but also candidates for County Sherrif, District Attorney, and several important State offices and bills that will have a huge impact on my daily life.
Even if you don't vote for president, it's in all of our best interest to vote intelligently on the local positions that will make a huge difference regardless of what happens at the national level.
Always remember: The difference between "good" and "better" is much smaller and much less distinct than that between "bad" and "worse."
If a process is genuinely safe from attack, then it doesn't matter if the specification is released or not. A good example of this principle is PGP. All of these encryption algorithms are known (RSA is patented, but still known) This allows everyone to be sure of the safety, given large enough key sizes.
In fact, releasing the spec helps find potential holes faster. Yes, it also helps potential attackers in, but attackers are going to get into an insecure system regardless.
I beleive that we as citizens have a right to know exacly how systems we pay for work and what vulnrabilities exist that could be potentially harmful, not only to FBI investigations but to ourselves.
In summary, if the system is really secure, the FBI has no reason to fear telling us how it works. If the system isn't secure, it doesn't matter much whether the spec is public or not, it will be broken.
Cramming more pixels into a small screen doesn't help those with less-than-perfect eyesight. There is only so far you can go in that direction before larger physical real estate is essential.
If a company needs to use large anonymous statistical samples of DNA in order to develop treatments, that is acceptable, but there is no need for my name, or anyone else's to be associated with the samples. It is only when a sample (DNA or otherwise) can uniquely identify me that it becomes a privacy concern, especially if the party to whom I give my information then gives the info to others without my knowlege or approval. So, I personally find no cause for concern if drug companies need DNA samples to develop treatments, or even if one of the samples is mine. My only concern is whether they or anyone else can use these research smaples to identify me, which isn't a problem if the samples truly are anonymous.