has 32 hexidecimal bits. This is what the MD5 hash algorithm puts out. When I looked up the key that was used to sign John Crain's annoucemnt, it reports this fingerprint:
9A49 B5AF 8C39 83B9 369C 2512 D1B1 A795 D48A 5892
Notice that my PGP Freeware 6.5.8 displays the fingerprint in 40 hexidecimal bits. This is an output of the SHA-1 hash algorithm.
John Crain's PGP signature reports the version of PGP he is using is "PGP Personal Security 7.0.3". Perhaps key fingerprints are displayed in MD5 instead of SHA-1 in this version of PGP? I doubt that, since I think PGP originally used MD5 sum and moved to SHA-1.
I do not now how to compute the MD5 fingerprint of a PGP key either in PGP Freeware 6.5.8 or GnuPG 1.0.6.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
To which I reply:
A well organized network, being necessary for the exchange of informaiton, the right of the users to own computers and operate servers shall not be infringed.
I don't quite see the point of the story beyond the obligatory pandering to the slashdot editors predjudices.
I'm glad to see/. follow up on this on going issue. I work in a Fortune 500 company that has gone almost exclusivley Microsoft. When I bring up issues about vendor lock-in or Microsoft adding additional terms to their end user license agreement (EULA) for service packs, the problem is generally swept under the rug. I've been told by the higher ups that "we've had meetings with Microsoft representatives, and they said the EULA is just being misinterpretted. Besides, Microsoft would get a lot of egg on their face if it was discovered that they are accessing customers' computers in an unauthorized manner."
It is funny how my company has not gotten this in writing, though. I also find it funny how Microsoft doesn't put out a press release or change the terms in the EULA to make it more clear. It is obvious a lot of companies are finding this hard to swallow, yet Microsoft does nothing to explain itself.
So, hearing of other companies' experiences in this area helps me know what to expect for my company, and hopefully will provide enough evidence that my higher ups will do something about it.
I second this, as I've seen it at work. I tried setting up a computer with a minimal amount of programs on it for a customer. I did a custom install of IE, and purposely excluded Outlook Express as part of it. When I tried to install Outlook 2000, it said it couldn't install becuase Outlook Express wasn't installed.
We had no excess zygotes, so there was no issue of killing of humans.
I hadn't heard of that kind of fertility treatment. I've only heard of treatments that either
fertilize many eggs outside the mother, or
giving the woman drugs/hormones to make her ovaries release more eggs, often causing many children to be conceived and thus aborted.
Although this second method doesn't take human life unless an abortion does occur, there is something careless about planning such an event just to have a biological offspring. (The case I have in mind is the couple who take these drugs/hormones and end up having sex-, sep- or octuplets. The health of the children is seriously risked all because the parents just have to have a biological child.)
That is what I meant by objectifying children -- disregarding what is best for the potential children for what the parents want.
As a Catholic I have always felt that the requirement of the Church for you to have children (which, for the benefit of the non-Catholics out there, is one of the stated purposes of marriage) does more to objectify children than anything else.
Well, the church doesn't require you to have children, you just have to be open to the possibility.:-) I know what you mean, though, and I am still coming to an understanding about it, myself. Humane Vitae does get one thinking, though.
He's trying to help people recover from debilitating injuries and diseases.
Which is a noble goal, except embryo stem cell research tries to achieve that goal the the expense of another human's life. (I won't get sucked into the philosophical/religious debate as to whether the embryo is a "person" or not.)
If the church was really after humanitarian causes rather than trying to make sure new disciples spawn as quickly as possible, they would have objected to embryo-juggling in fertility clinics, which had been going on for years before stem cell research got big. But no, they only got the ball rolling now. So transparent.
Um, they have been. Check out the 1968 encyclical letter called Humanae Vitae. The fertility technology came out, the church examined it. They saw that it separated the unitive and creative goods of sex, objectified children as things instead of people, and killed human beings when destroying the excess zygotes. Naturally they came out against it.
My sympathy (and I feel it safe to say the church's) goes out to any couple who cannot naturally conceive children. The end does not justify the end, though.
As for the rest of your comment, baited with anti-Catholic hysteria, I don't think that merits any response. I've got better things to do. If you have issues that you'd like to discuss, please present them in a reasoned format so we can communicate civilly.
I've always found Asus (they use Award's BIOS) to be another notable exception
Agreed. My ASUS P2B-S motherboard came with a wonderful book that explained each setting in detail. Best of all, they make the manual in PDF format available for download.
Ok, let's get this straight -- an IDE drive is Storage media, not Backup media. If you use it as such, great; but I hope you don't EVER call yourself an IT person, and don't EVER touch any of my client's servers.
Why? If you get the caddy like Zeinfeld suggests, you can easily remove the drive and place it in the safe with all the other backups. I believe the drive caddy makes it so you can plug the "backup drive" in and out without rebooting the server.
I would understand if you had to reboot the server each time you inserted or removed the "backup drive". But you sound against it even if you could do that. Why?
Frankly, I think these direct democracy arguments are presumptuous - why do people think that they, who've never tried to govern, are better equipped to do it than someone who has tried, with the help of a smart, devoted staff?
I don't think you mean the above quite the way I took it, but I have to respond. Why do people think that? Wouldn't the alternative to thinking that mean a society with a ruling class and subjects? I always keep in mind that the power of the government comes from the people to the government and that it is with the consent of the people that they are governed. Anything less and you have a system that will trample on human rights and liberties.
I agree that citizens cannot micromanage their government. But I'm all for more accountability and more transparency in the actions of those who are suppose to serve.
This is true, but lawmakers seem intent on banning cloning permanently, even if the problems with it are solved. Many are even against therapeutic cloning, which doesn't involve creating a new person at all, just cell cultures.
It may be your opinion that it doesn't create a "new person", but how about looking at it from a scientific point of view instead of a religious/philosophical one? "Therapeutic" cloning creates a new human being, not "just cell cultures". All humans, at all stages of development, deserve basic dignity and rights.
To quibble over whether a particular human is a "person" or not is a religious/philosophical debate that really has no place in such a scientific/medical discussion. To do so would return to the reasons southern U.S. citizens felt justified in owning other human beings during the 1850's. They weren't "people", after all.
Personally, I find the term "therapeutic" cloning to be one of those buzzwords created by public relations specialists trying to put the most positive spin on a horrendous act of taking human life for selfish gains.
I had a lot of liver problems growing up. I sure didn't think at any time during it that it would have been better if I'd never been born though.
That was by chance, though, not planned. I find it repugnant to purposely create new human life with a known health problem. That human's life is his or hers -- not some scientist's to experiment with.
and the religious will most likely be able to use this as a rationale for banning abortion, stem cell research, and other procedures that involve the sacrifice of young human life.
Why should only the religious be against sacrificing human life? Why do you write the above as if sacrificing human life is an acceptable practice?
As such, it should involve neither smartcards nor Java nor Oracle software. In fact, I don't think it should involve a national database at all. Rather, it should be a difficult-to-forge physical artifact...
I don't understand your proposal. If there is no database -- there is nothing but these cards -- how does that identify anybody? Even if the card was difficult to forge, it would still be possible.
The number should be printed in an OCR font so that it can be read and verified...
So the number is in a national database, but the other information is not? The verification of the number shows that it was assigned, and the fact that it is printed on a card with my picture means that I am really who I say I am. Do I have that right?
Such a card could then be used to establish identity for purposes like immigration, security check-ins, financial transactions, etc. Yet it would resist the creation of a "big brother" database...
If the government is using this for all those things, how would it not be big brotherish? I guess if the database that is used to verify my number doesn't record who is querying (which security check-in or which financial institution) and when, then I can believe that. Do you think such a system would be made that way, though?
Envelopes, however, can be opened by 3rd parties with a warrant. I think the average citizen would wonder why a program called "Envelope" didn't have this same property. They don't realize that being able to open it with a warrant makes it susceptible to opening it without a warrant.
Eggs are harvested, fetuses are created, kept on ice, and a few are implanted. If the procedure was successful, the remaining 'backup' fetuses are destroyed.
In my opinion, I would prefer that those remaining fetuses be used for research, in the hopes that they can be used to save
someone else. It sure beats destroying them.
What you are talking about is the farming of human beings. It disturbs me that so many people treat children like something to be bought, owned and thrown away if not desired. I feel for an infertile couple wanting to conceive. Yet, their sad situation does not justify the farming of human beings to satisfy their emotional desires.
It is a clear scientific fact that a new human being is created at conception. Every biological characteristic is defined right there at that moment. From that moment in a human's life, there is only natural growth (and at birth, a change of location). "Zygote", "embryo", and "fetus" are terms for our stage of growth, just like "infant" "toddler", "adolescent", and "adult".
So we have the bad situation of these clinically created humans without the intent of caring for them, and needing to dispose(!) of them. To do research on these humans not only multiplies our evil, but will undoubtedly lead us down a path where we will desire even more embryonic stem cells to experiment with.
Perhaps we can allow people to decide what happens to their own fetuses, much like we require permission for organ donations.
See how you are considering this child -- this human being -- as a piece of property? If the embryo wasn't a seperate human being, who would care, as it would be like organ donation. However, this is a case where one human (the egg/sperm donors) is donating the "organs" of a second human, against that second human's will, and to the detriment of that second human!
The problem is, in space heat does not radiate away from components. in order for heat to radiate, it must have air to radiate with, no air and you need to design a cooling system to keep the CPU from overheating.
Not to take away from your other great points, but I think you've accidently mixed up heat transfer via radiation and heat transfer by convection. Radiation does not depend upon air to transfer the heat. That is how energy gets to us from the sun, despite the lack of atmosphere in space. Convection, however, does depend on air, and is the principle on which CPU cooling fans work.
So, I guess the problem is that the onboard components cannot radiate energy away fast enough while kept on. Since there is no convection in space, the best you can do is put them in power save mode and wait.
Ain't that the truth, especially when you read what comes before Mr. Valkonen's quote:
Prerecorded cassettes fell to 76 million shipped last year vs. 123 million in 1999, the industry says.
The last paragraph of the article has some marketdroid explaining why people are going to buy this:
They are going to buy it because it has content they want.
Oh, really? It's going to have content that I can easily copy to my hard drive and add to my multimedia presentations? The content is going to allow me to change it to any format I want? Somehow, I doubt DataPlay is going to have the content I want.
On a different rant, I heard part of a song on Mitch Albom's radio show a couple of weeks ago. It was a song written with Warren Zevon called Hit Somebody! (The Hockey Song). Interested in hearing all of it, I searched Albom's web site only to find a ~15 second Real Audio sample of it. To hear the whole thing, they want $2.79 plus shipping & handling to send me a CD. All that, for one song that I don't even know if I want or not!
Why is that? I thought DeCSS contained not only the key from the reverse-engineered Xing player, but all the keys. Has the DVD-CCA revoked all the keys? If so, how have they updated all the players out there with new ones?
You believe that a "god" created the world and left no evidence and that you or anyone can guess the desires of such a being.
I cannot speak for the original poster, but I believe a god created the world and left ambiguous evidence with which to discern the details of his desires. That is why it is called "faith" instead of "knowing".
It is obvious (to me) that He does not desire for us to physically harm each other, but yet there are secular reasons why we shouldn't, also. Although I think He doesn't like us imagining nasty things, not everybody might come to that conclusion. Until everyone does come to that conclusion, outlawing this (as perverted as it is) would be punishing thought. Punishing thought would serve to take free will away from people.  Whether you believe He gave you free will or not (I do) we can all agree on secular grounds that taking it away will only lead to unjust situations.
Re:well why don't you...
on
EULA In Games
·
· Score: 1
TBadiuk wrote:
Take a virgin Windows install, make a copy of the reg, install Office. Write some code to do a diff. between the before/after, write a little installer that adds the extra bits.
I think this would violate the no-reverse-engineering clause of the EULA.
6. Normal investigative procedures to decrypt the codes and keys necessary to decipher the "factors" encrypted computer file have been tried and have failed.
I wonder what the "normal investigative procedures" are. Are they
serious crypto-analyst attacks on the encrypted files & key, or are they
just "Well, I tried his wife's maiden name, his dog's name and his SSN.
None of them worked. We better go get a warrant!"
I'm glad to hear of the system-tray functionality being available for Windows users. This is a feature that truly makes PGP easy to use with *any* Windows based e-mail program and will only spread the use of GPG in this area. (I am concerned, though, with whether GPG should be used on Windows as Stormie points out above.)
What I am wondering is when a system-tray like program will be written for the Linux version of GPG. Is there such a thing that I have just not heard of? I have no in-depth programming skills, so the difficulty of such a task is not known to me. I imagine it might be kind of tough since each window manager has its own way of doing things -- no standard clipboard to write and read things to like Windows has.
Although I have no love for people who intentionally try to mislead others, (can you say "fraud"?) I think the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act is an being used unjustly. Take, for instance, this quote from the article:
---
> By registering variations of Electronics Boutique's
> domain names, Zuccarini "mousetrapped" users who
> mistyped the retailer's domain name, forcing users to
> view numerous advertisements and making it difficult
> for them to leave, according to the court. Zuccarini
---
"...difficult for them to leave"?! Give me a break! Are web users really so incapable of pressing "Ctrl-O" and typing the correct URL in? Is this piddly little stuff the scope of what the U.S. citizens' *Federal* government is involving themselves in? If the above description is true (the sites are down now, so I cannot check) then it should have been obvious to the web users that they weren't were they intended to browse to.
Is what is Zuccarini doing respectable? No! However I don't think it is such a problem that the U.S. Federal government, with fines of $100,000 per domain name, has to get involved.
---
> All your ISP sees is you accessing a
> Freedom server, and all the website
> you're accessing sees is a Freedom
> server.
---
I'm hoping the Zero-Knowledge white papers address these questions: won't ZK be classified as a service provider, thus making them a target for Carnivore to be installed (under court order, of course) on their network? How does installing a Carnivore system on the ZK network affect the privacy ensuring capabilities of the system?
Slashdot Mirror
John Crain's PGP signature reports the version of PGP he is using is "PGP Personal Security 7.0.3". Perhaps key fingerprints are displayed in MD5 instead of SHA-1 in this version of PGP? I doubt that, since I think PGP originally used MD5 sum and moved to SHA-1.
I do not now how to compute the MD5 fingerprint of a PGP key either in PGP Freeware 6.5.8 or GnuPG 1.0.6.
To which I reply:
A well organized network, being necessary for the exchange of informaiton, the right of the users to own computers and operate servers shall not be infringed.
I'm glad to see
It is funny how my company has not gotten this in writing, though. I also find it funny how Microsoft doesn't put out a press release or change the terms in the EULA to make it more clear. It is obvious a lot of companies are finding this hard to swallow, yet Microsoft does nothing to explain itself.
So, hearing of other companies' experiences in this area helps me know what to expect for my company, and hopefully will provide enough evidence that my higher ups will do something about it.
I second this, as I've seen it at work. I tried setting up a computer with a minimal amount of programs on it for a customer. I did a custom install of IE, and purposely excluded Outlook Express as part of it. When I tried to install Outlook 2000, it said it couldn't install becuase Outlook Express wasn't installed.
Although this second method doesn't take human life unless an abortion does occur, there is something careless about planning such an event just to have a biological offspring. (The case I have in mind is the couple who take these drugs/hormones and end up having sex-, sep- or octuplets. The health of the children is seriously risked all because the parents just have to have a biological child.)
That is what I meant by objectifying children -- disregarding what is best for the potential children for what the parents want.
Well, the church doesn't require you to have children, you just have to be open to the possibility.My sympathy (and I feel it safe to say the church's) goes out to any couple who cannot naturally conceive children. The end does not justify the end, though.
As for the rest of your comment, baited with anti-Catholic hysteria, I don't think that merits any response. I've got better things to do. If you have issues that you'd like to discuss, please present them in a reasoned format so we can communicate civilly.
I would understand if you had to reboot the server each time you inserted or removed the "backup drive". But you sound against it even if you could do that. Why?
I agree that citizens cannot micromanage their government. But I'm all for more accountability and more transparency in the actions of those who are suppose to serve.
It may be your opinion that it doesn't create a "new person", but how about looking at it from a scientific point of view instead of a religious/philosophical one? "Therapeutic" cloning creates a new human being, not "just cell cultures". All humans, at all stages of development, deserve basic dignity and rights.
To quibble over whether a particular human is a "person" or not is a religious/philosophical debate that really has no place in such a scientific/medical discussion. To do so would return to the reasons southern U.S. citizens felt justified in owning other human beings during the 1850's. They weren't "people", after all.
Personally, I find the term "therapeutic" cloning to be one of those buzzwords created by public relations specialists trying to put the most positive spin on a horrendous act of taking human life for selfish gains.That was by chance, though, not planned. I find it repugnant to purposely create new human life with a known health problem. That human's life is his or hers -- not some scientist's to experiment with.
Walter Bell (User #535520) wrote:
Why should only the religious be against sacrificing human life? Why do you write the above as if sacrificing human life is an acceptable practice?I don't understand your proposal. If there is no database -- there is nothing but these cards -- how does that identify anybody? Even if the card was difficult to forge, it would still be possible.
So the number is in a national database, but the other information is not? The verification of the number shows that it was assigned, and the fact that it is printed on a card with my picture means that I am really who I say I am. Do I have that right?
If the government is using this for all those things, how would it not be big brotherish? I guess if the database that is used to verify my number doesn't record who is querying (which security check-in or which financial institution) and when, then I can believe that. Do you think such a system would be made that way, though?
Envelopes, however, can be opened by 3rd parties with a warrant. I think the average citizen would wonder why a program called "Envelope" didn't have this same property. They don't realize that being able to open it with a warrant makes it susceptible to opening it without a warrant.
mz001b (user #122709) wrote:
What you are talking about is the farming of human beings. It disturbs me that so many people treat children like something to be bought, owned and thrown away if not desired. I feel for an infertile couple wanting to conceive. Yet, their sad situation does not justify the farming of human beings to satisfy their emotional desires. It is a clear scientific fact that a new human being is created at conception. Every biological characteristic is defined right there at that moment. From that moment in a human's life, there is only natural growth (and at birth, a change of location). "Zygote", "embryo", and "fetus" are terms for our stage of growth, just like "infant" "toddler", "adolescent", and "adult".So we have the bad situation of these clinically created humans without the intent of caring for them, and needing to dispose(!) of them. To do research on these humans not only multiplies our evil, but will undoubtedly lead us down a path where we will desire even more embryonic stem cells to experiment with.
See how you are considering this child -- this human being -- as a piece of property? If the embryo wasn't a seperate human being, who would care, as it would be like organ donation. However, this is a case where one human (the egg/sperm donors) is donating the "organs" of a second human, against that second human's will, and to the detriment of that second human!Where did you get this quote from? It didn't appear in Craig Mundie's speech.
Marauder2 wrote:
Not to take away from your other great points, but I think you've accidently mixed up heat transfer via radiation and heat transfer by convection. Radiation does not depend upon air to transfer the heat. That is how energy gets to us from the sun, despite the lack of atmosphere in space. Convection, however, does depend on air, and is the principle on which CPU cooling fans work.So, I guess the problem is that the onboard components cannot radiate energy away fast enough while kept on. Since there is no convection in space, the best you can do is put them in power save mode and wait.
Ain't that the truth, especially when you read what comes before Mr. Valkonen's quote:
The last paragraph of the article has some marketdroid explaining why people are going to buy this:
Oh, really? It's going to have content that I can easily copy to my hard drive and add to my multimedia presentations? The content is going to allow me to change it to any format I want? Somehow, I doubt DataPlay is going to have the content I want.On a different rant, I heard part of a song on Mitch Albom's radio show a couple of weeks ago. It was a song written with Warren Zevon called Hit Somebody! (The Hockey Song). Interested in hearing all of it, I searched Albom's web site only to find a ~15 second Real Audio sample of it. To hear the whole thing, they want $2.79 plus shipping & handling to send me a CD. All that, for one song that I don't even know if I want or not!
Needless to say, I'm doing without.
Why is that? I thought DeCSS contained not only the key from the reverse-engineered Xing player, but all the keys. Has the DVD-CCA revoked all the keys? If so, how have they updated all the players out there with new ones?
You believe that a "god" created the world and left no evidence and that you or anyone can guess the desires of such a being.
I cannot speak for the original poster, but I believe a god created the world and left ambiguous evidence with which to discern the details of his desires. That is why it is called "faith" instead of "knowing".
It is obvious (to me) that He does not desire for us to physically harm each other, but yet there are secular reasons why we shouldn't, also. Although I think He doesn't like us imagining nasty things, not everybody might come to that conclusion. Until everyone does come to that conclusion, outlawing this (as perverted as it is) would be punishing thought. Punishing thought would serve to take free will away from people.  Whether you believe He gave you free will or not (I do) we can all agree on secular grounds that taking it away will only lead to unjust situations.
I wonder what the "normal investigative procedures" are. Are they serious crypto-analyst attacks on the encrypted files & key, or are they just "Well, I tried his wife's maiden name, his dog's name and his SSN. None of them worked. We better go get a warrant!"
I'm glad to hear of the system-tray functionality being available for Windows users. This is a feature that truly makes PGP easy to use with *any* Windows based e-mail program and will only spread the use of GPG in this area. (I am concerned, though, with whether GPG should be used on Windows as Stormie points out above.)
What I am wondering is when a system-tray like program will be written for the Linux version of GPG. Is there such a thing that I have just not heard of? I have no in-depth programming skills, so the difficulty of such a task is not known to me. I imagine it might be kind of tough since each window manager has its own way of doing things -- no standard clipboard to write and read things to like Windows has.
Although I have no love for people who intentionally try to mislead others, (can you say "fraud"?) I think the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act is an being used unjustly. Take, for instance, this quote from the article:
---
> By registering variations of Electronics Boutique's
> domain names, Zuccarini "mousetrapped" users who
> mistyped the retailer's domain name, forcing users to
> view numerous advertisements and making it difficult
> for them to leave, according to the court. Zuccarini
---
"...difficult for them to leave"?! Give me a break! Are web users really so incapable of pressing "Ctrl-O" and typing the correct URL in? Is this piddly little stuff the scope of what the U.S. citizens' *Federal* government is involving themselves in? If the above description is true (the sites are down now, so I cannot check) then it should have been obvious to the web users that they weren't were they intended to browse to.
Is what is Zuccarini doing respectable? No! However I don't think it is such a problem that the U.S. Federal government, with fines of $100,000 per domain name, has to get involved.
---
> All your ISP sees is you accessing a
> Freedom server, and all the website
> you're accessing sees is a Freedom
> server.
---
I'm hoping the Zero-Knowledge white papers address these questions: won't ZK be classified as a service provider, thus making them a target for Carnivore to be installed (under court order, of course) on their network? How does installing a Carnivore system on the ZK network affect the privacy ensuring capabilities of the system?