What GPL code are they using? Are they actually using some identifiable GPL code in their distributed software without complying with the GPL licensing requirements? Are they using the original SHAREAZA team's actual software (modified to do the nasty things)? All I see in the article are issues regarding an allegation of a stolen domain and an allegation of a plot to perform a distributed denial of service attack. If they did in fact make any use of GPL software without complying with the GPL licensing (such as making the source code available to anyone they distribute the software to), then by all means pursue legal remedies for that. Otherwise, the standing issues are the stolen domain and DDoS plot.
If you intentionally put that share on an index, that's one thing. If you don't know that some program you downloaded to try out would put it there for you, that's entirely different. If some port scanner dude comes along and finds your open share (I get several attempts per day trying to see if I have open shares) and indexes it and submits it to somewhere that eventually makes it to a public index, that is yet different, still. To some extent, that company that makes these share things so wide open is partly to blame.
You can bet that already by now, at least a few congress people are getting their wallets greased by the RIAA to change laws to specifically outlaw making available.
... that the judge orders Microsoft to do all testing for all versions of Vista and all versions of the next OS they market on these computers they identify as "Vista Capable".
It would never happen. Microsoft will test the next OS home version on dual-socket octal-core 4-GHz 64-bit processesors with 16-GB RAM and 4-way RAID-0 SATA-6 drive arrays.
The prosecutor cannot ask the court to dismiss without prejudice, now. How would that look? You see, unlike Hans, the prosecutor is one of those kinds of people that cares more about how he looks than what he does. If that were not so, he would have a decent job (one with more fulfilling rewards in life). So, of course, he will proceed with the case.
Is this just speculation on your part? Or did he admit this to you? Or were you there when it happened?
I personally do not know if he is guilty or not... because I was not there to be a witness. And I probably will not ever know because I actually do have some specific experience to know that courtroom procedures frequently do prohibit a fair and truthful trial from taking place along the lines of one ruling the judge in this case has already made.
So don't buy the particular song that makes itself available only with abusive DRM. If you do go ahead and buy that song from iTMS, you are effectively supporting the status quo and saying that it is good enough for you. Your own greed to have that particular song exceeds any desire you might have to make things right.
Put the key in a small piece of SRAM. When it gets used to encrypt something, be sure the place of its usage gets wiped back off real fast to minimize the chance of it being exposed to the cold attack. Split data up with different keys for different data, so if a key is exposed, only a minimal amount of data is lost. Another option is to double or triple encrypt the data being sure never to have more than one key at a time in DRAM.
So where do we get this SRAM? A CPU register that is not used, and not saved, for any current purpose is one possible place. For a large amount of SRAM, check out your video card buffer.
you only need to paint the side that faces the earth
Yeah, right. Turn it into a black body radiator. The black side will radiate more of the body's thermal content than the silver side. And you can't cool it far enough to reach the background space temperature.
Where is the fuel for all those generators in case of a long term outage? Or are they going to depend on the small tanks under the generators? Or are they going to depend on a natural gas supply?
I don't block Google ads because Google has avoided obnoxious ads. I won't block Q1 ads unless they decide to make them obnoxious (e.g. flash, animations, large, pop ups, etc). Given the history of the newspaper business not keeping up with the world, I worry that I may end up having to block them. Then I'd become some kind of news freeloader.
I was looking forward to a long format war. I just wanted to see certain big corporations beat themselves to death and turn off most consumers that see only marginal benefits of HD over SD in a disc format, compared to the huge improvement of the DVD over VHS. So now it looks like both the manufacturing cartel and the motion picture cartel will start to make some money out of this. This is so disappointing.
This is only required when the attorney making the contact knows the party is represented. It's unclear if they have to know who is represented and by whom. But they know of at least one attorney involved, so what they could do is sent all the contacts there. I know from a case a relative of mine was involved in, if an attorney receives such communication for a party they do not represent, they are required to communicate back that they do not represent that party, with penalties if they fail to do that. Once that communication comes back, aside from any other reason to believe that student is represented, they can then communicate directly with the student.
Not very many people would try to fake someone else's identity to deposit $10,000 (maybe a lot more would to withdraw $10,000). However, faking an IP and/or MAC address to download infringing music is something that some students might do (those that know how). How many schools are capable of setting up such a secure LAN infrastructure that they can be sure no student can take over another student's IP/MAC when the other shuts their computer off? Of course it is doable, and I might expect it at places like MIT. But at typical state run schools like OSU? While I don't know about OSU specifically, I'm quite sure the majority of schools around the country are not 100% secure with respect to ensuring that no student could ever carry out internet traffic in the name of some other student.
And we haven't even discussed the exposure of victim students who had trojan proxies planted on their computers, yet.
In cases where a plaintiff is suing a "John Doe" identified by IP address and time, then I agree that the university needs to provide that identification... if it is reliable (and I believe in a great many schools it is not reliable because IP and MAC spoofing is easy if the school uses typical LAN equipment). However, the RIAA tactic has been to merely contact students with these settlement letters demanding amounts of money the students cannot afford, and refusing to discuss issues like mis-identification. The RIAA can then do things like attack the student's credit rating and other things with no basis for the student to seek redress (because at that point they have to hire a lawyer they cannot afford and initiate the lawsuit).
And maybe it is because a lot of these schools realize that their networks are only 99.9% secure.
And no one told them that MAC addresses can be faked? What the know is that their equipment is getting ethernet frames with the expected MAC address once the student has logged in.
I've done such faking several times. I even have a couple computers that regularly run with a faked MAC address (for development testing purposes at work, using Intel ethernet chips). All someone needs to do is figure out a working MAC address of some other student that regularly turns off their computer, ping it every now and then to see when it goes off, and when it does, start using it along with the IP address it had acquired.
They will need to go the extra step of requiring students operate through encrypted tunnels to prevent MAC spoofing (such tunnels running through a private IP network layer that cannot reach to internet... to a central set of tunnel servers). If the MAC address is the only continuing authentication after the student logs in, and the traffic is not encrypted, then students that know what they are doing (and willing to do it) can take over in place of many others.
And then there is the whole issue of planted proxies.
Slashdot Mirror
... free pr0n in exchange for correctly answering the page question practices?
... it's how you get the next bunch of free pr0n.
What GPL code are they using? Are they actually using some identifiable GPL code in their distributed software without complying with the GPL licensing requirements? Are they using the original SHAREAZA team's actual software (modified to do the nasty things)? All I see in the article are issues regarding an allegation of a stolen domain and an allegation of a plot to perform a distributed denial of service attack. If they did in fact make any use of GPL software without complying with the GPL licensing (such as making the source code available to anyone they distribute the software to), then by all means pursue legal remedies for that. Otherwise, the standing issues are the stolen domain and DDoS plot.
You mean like losing the data after a few hours of no power?
If you intentionally put that share on an index, that's one thing. If you don't know that some program you downloaded to try out would put it there for you, that's entirely different. If some port scanner dude comes along and finds your open share (I get several attempts per day trying to see if I have open shares) and indexes it and submits it to somewhere that eventually makes it to a public index, that is yet different, still. To some extent, that company that makes these share things so wide open is partly to blame.
You can bet that already by now, at least a few congress people are getting their wallets greased by the RIAA to change laws to specifically outlaw making available.
And ultimately, is that cell phone being used to plot a terrorist attack against Earth.
... that the judge orders Microsoft to do all testing for all versions of Vista and all versions of the next OS they market on these computers they identify as "Vista Capable".
It would never happen. Microsoft will test the next OS home version on dual-socket octal-core 4-GHz 64-bit processesors with 16-GB RAM and 4-way RAID-0 SATA-6 drive arrays.
The prosecutor cannot ask the court to dismiss without prejudice, now. How would that look? You see, unlike Hans, the prosecutor is one of those kinds of people that cares more about how he looks than what he does. If that were not so, he would have a decent job (one with more fulfilling rewards in life). So, of course, he will proceed with the case.
That presumes they want to get out of jury duty.
Is this just speculation on your part? Or did he admit this to you? Or were you there when it happened?
I personally do not know if he is guilty or not ... because I was not there to be a witness. And I probably will not ever know because I actually do have some specific experience to know that courtroom procedures frequently do prohibit a fair and truthful trial from taking place along the lines of one ruling the judge in this case has already made.
So don't buy the particular song that makes itself available only with abusive DRM. If you do go ahead and buy that song from iTMS, you are effectively supporting the status quo and saying that it is good enough for you. Your own greed to have that particular song exceeds any desire you might have to make things right.
Make all file trading done over IPv6 legal under a 4 year copyright moratorium.
Put the key in a small piece of SRAM. When it gets used to encrypt something, be sure the place of its usage gets wiped back off real fast to minimize the chance of it being exposed to the cold attack. Split data up with different keys for different data, so if a key is exposed, only a minimal amount of data is lost. Another option is to double or triple encrypt the data being sure never to have more than one key at a time in DRAM.
So where do we get this SRAM? A CPU register that is not used, and not saved, for any current purpose is one possible place. For a large amount of SRAM, check out your video card buffer.
You mean there are 2 Robert X. Cringely? What are the odds of there being two of them AND both writing major blogs?
Yeah, right. Turn it into a black body radiator. The black side will radiate more of the body's thermal content than the silver side. And you can't cool it far enough to reach the background space temperature.
Where is the fuel for all those generators in case of a long term outage? Or are they going to depend on the small tanks under the generators? Or are they going to depend on a natural gas supply?
We are running out of dot-quads. They have this new supply of colon-hex things, but they are sooooo big.
And this is also a reason Dell doesn't like Linux on consumer desktop PCs; they lose all that recurring ad revenue.
I don't block Google ads because Google has avoided obnoxious ads. I won't block Q1 ads unless they decide to make them obnoxious (e.g. flash, animations, large, pop ups, etc). Given the history of the newspaper business not keeping up with the world, I worry that I may end up having to block them. Then I'd become some kind of news freeloader.
I was looking forward to a long format war. I just wanted to see certain big corporations beat themselves to death and turn off most consumers that see only marginal benefits of HD over SD in a disc format, compared to the huge improvement of the DVD over VHS. So now it looks like both the manufacturing cartel and the motion picture cartel will start to make some money out of this. This is so disappointing.
This is only required when the attorney making the contact knows the party is represented. It's unclear if they have to know who is represented and by whom. But they know of at least one attorney involved, so what they could do is sent all the contacts there. I know from a case a relative of mine was involved in, if an attorney receives such communication for a party they do not represent, they are required to communicate back that they do not represent that party, with penalties if they fail to do that. Once that communication comes back, aside from any other reason to believe that student is represented, they can then communicate directly with the student.
Not very many people would try to fake someone else's identity to deposit $10,000 (maybe a lot more would to withdraw $10,000). However, faking an IP and/or MAC address to download infringing music is something that some students might do (those that know how). How many schools are capable of setting up such a secure LAN infrastructure that they can be sure no student can take over another student's IP/MAC when the other shuts their computer off? Of course it is doable, and I might expect it at places like MIT. But at typical state run schools like OSU? While I don't know about OSU specifically, I'm quite sure the majority of schools around the country are not 100% secure with respect to ensuring that no student could ever carry out internet traffic in the name of some other student.
And we haven't even discussed the exposure of victim students who had trojan proxies planted on their computers, yet.
In cases where a plaintiff is suing a "John Doe" identified by IP address and time, then I agree that the university needs to provide that identification ... if it is reliable (and I believe in a great many schools it is not reliable because IP and MAC spoofing is easy if the school uses typical LAN equipment). However, the RIAA tactic has been to merely contact students with these settlement letters demanding amounts of money the students cannot afford, and refusing to discuss issues like mis-identification. The RIAA can then do things like attack the student's credit rating and other things with no basis for the student to seek redress (because at that point they have to hire a lawyer they cannot afford and initiate the lawsuit).
And maybe it is because a lot of these schools realize that their networks are only 99.9% secure.
And no one told them that MAC addresses can be faked? What the know is that their equipment is getting ethernet frames with the expected MAC address once the student has logged in.
I've done such faking several times. I even have a couple computers that regularly run with a faked MAC address (for development testing purposes at work, using Intel ethernet chips). All someone needs to do is figure out a working MAC address of some other student that regularly turns off their computer, ping it every now and then to see when it goes off, and when it does, start using it along with the IP address it had acquired.
They will need to go the extra step of requiring students operate through encrypted tunnels to prevent MAC spoofing (such tunnels running through a private IP network layer that cannot reach to internet ... to a central set of tunnel servers). If the MAC address is the only continuing authentication after the student logs in, and the traffic is not encrypted, then students that know what they are doing (and willing to do it) can take over in place of many others.
And then there is the whole issue of planted proxies.
Maybe it won't. Maybe you will be able to get away with activities they don't like. Maybe they will just never know.