For some good background, read Ed Foster's columns in InfoWorld. This guy has (thanfully) been waging a war in print against UCITA since it was first proposed. Here's his latest column on this very topic (ABA consideration of UCITA):
Re:Isn't deleting logs an obstruction of justice?
on
Cryptome Log Subpoenaed
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
We, as true Americans, aren't obligated to collect and archive every little drop of information about ourselves, our neighbors, and our customers on the off chance that it may someday be useful to law enforcement in solving or preventing a crime. Especially when you consider that the potential for abuse of randomly-collected information is much higher than the potential for its utility.
As has been said elsewhere, if they deleted the logs regularly (i.e., not in response to a subpoena), it would be hard to pin "obstruction of justice" on them. Naturally, IANAL and all that. But that would be like pinning an obstruction charge on a janitor for sweeping the hallways like she does every night because this time some evidence was swept up.
I realize you were trying to be funny, but you're also perpetuating a myth that the McDonald's coffee incident was somehow an unreasonable lawsuit. In fact, McDonald's was seriously in the wrong, and deserved a judgment against them. See this site on lawandhelp.com for the truth.
Although it did turn out to be to our benefit, I'm sure that RCA wasn't worried about us when they lobbied the FCC, just their own bottom line.
I wish that more corporations would realize that "their own bottom line" and the customers' interests are tied together, not conflicting. Then stories like this Cable-Company-hating-the-PVR wouldn't be nearly as common.
I'm sure they can make an ad free version of National Geographic for you at ~$50US an issue. And no, I'm not kidding about that price one bit. I work in the IT department for a newspaper and without ads the cost of a daily newspaper would go from 75 cents to nearly 20 dollars iirc.
If that's the case, then how can Consumer Reports and Ms Magazine both publish regularly without charging exorbitant subscription fees and without accepting advertising? Granted, both organizations could have tons more money if they did accept ads (non-profit doesn't mean "no operating expenses"), but they don't, and they survive just fine.
Your estimates of US$50 an issue don't jibe with the facts. Any explanation?
iCab has now jumped from 2.0 prerelease to 2.1 prerelease (www.icab.de, Mac only), and has much more (I don't think they're claiming full even now) support for JavaScript.
The benefit to using iCab, even in prerelease form, is that it adheres to standards extremely well, has built-in validators for 3.2, 4.0 transitional, and 4.0 strict, and has some very robust banner-ad and cookie blocking that is unrivaled in most other browsers.
Slashdot Mirror
For some good background, read Ed Foster's columns in InfoWorld. This guy has (thanfully) been waging a war in print against UCITA since it was first proposed. Here's his latest column on this very topic (ABA consideration of UCITA):
Gripe Line Column from Jan 31 2003We, as true Americans, aren't obligated to collect and archive every little drop of information about ourselves, our neighbors, and our customers on the off chance that it may someday be useful to law enforcement in solving or preventing a crime. Especially when you consider that the potential for abuse of randomly-collected information is much higher than the potential for its utility.
As has been said elsewhere, if they deleted the logs regularly (i.e., not in response to a subpoena), it would be hard to pin "obstruction of justice" on them. Naturally, IANAL and all that. But that would be like pinning an obstruction charge on a janitor for sweeping the hallways like she does every night because this time some evidence was swept up.
I realize you were trying to be funny, but you're also perpetuating a myth that the McDonald's coffee incident was somehow an unreasonable lawsuit. In fact, McDonald's was seriously in the wrong, and deserved a judgment against them. See this site on lawandhelp.com for the truth.
Although it did turn out to be to our benefit, I'm sure that RCA wasn't worried about us when they lobbied the FCC, just their own bottom line.
I wish that more corporations would realize that "their own bottom line" and the customers' interests are tied together, not conflicting. Then stories like this Cable-Company-hating-the-PVR wouldn't be nearly as common.
I'm sure they can make an ad free version of National Geographic for you at ~$50US an issue. And no, I'm not kidding about that price one bit. I work in the IT department for a newspaper and without ads the cost of a daily newspaper would go from 75 cents to nearly 20 dollars iirc.
If that's the case, then how can Consumer Reports and Ms Magazine both publish regularly without charging exorbitant subscription fees and without accepting advertising? Granted, both organizations could have tons more money if they did accept ads (non-profit doesn't mean "no operating expenses"), but they don't, and they survive just fine.
Your estimates of US$50 an issue don't jibe with the facts. Any explanation?
iCab has now jumped from 2.0 prerelease to 2.1 prerelease (www.icab.de, Mac only), and has much more (I don't think they're claiming full even now) support for JavaScript.
The benefit to using iCab, even in prerelease form, is that it adheres to standards extremely well, has built-in validators for 3.2, 4.0 transitional, and 4.0 strict, and has some very robust banner-ad and cookie blocking that is unrivaled in most other browsers.
Hope it's released soon...