Exactly! Our bosses are people who have never experienced anything but the need to consume. We emphasize sports and music over learning. We reward people who spend outrageous time looking good with ridiculous contracts to read the news. We spend obnoxious money on marketeers who don't even know what they're selling.
I'm saddened. We discourage engineers and technical workers from executive level positions. And we do so to our detriment. There was a time when engineers were prized in such positions. However, for some reason the Philosophy and English teachers declared us techies illiterate. I'd be laughing my ass off if they weren't so dogmatically obnoxious about it. Today, we have ignorant marketeers, corrupt accountants and lawyers running companies. And they don't know what their companies even do for a living.
It is widely rumored that the Taliban were practically created by the Pakistani ISI. The government of Pakistan is not alone in this behavior. The US and Soviet governments did similar sorts of covert support during the cold war.
At some point, however, some country is going to have an "accident" with a nuke and it's going to get used by those who have few qualms with setting it off.
The risk is real. The only question is whether the NPT is still an effective tool or whether there ought to be some other foreign policy to replace it.
Turns out, nobody really wants to see the world end -- well, aside from Evangelists -- and that even if you have the capability, just about any government would choose not to use their nuclear arsenal but still want desperately to have one.
There are many more wide-eyed fanatics in this world besides just "Evangelists." I have very little doubt that Aum Shinrikyo, Al-Qaida, or even a survivalist cult in northern Montana would use a nuke without hesitation, if they managed to get their hands on one.
...and those were the terms under which other countries would give assistance with nuclear technology. It seems that Iran has violated the NPT. Sanctions should follow.
This isn't about the morality of the situation. Some countries deliberately opted out of the NPT.
For example, Israel never signed it. They have a reactor in the Negev desert (Dimona) which they will not allow anyone to inspect. Israel has never admitted the existence or extent of their nuclear arsenal, though intelligence and leaks suggest that they may have as many as 300 war heads.The Israelis have left everyone guessing as to what their intentions or capabilities might be.
The question we should be asking is whether the NPT is still a worthwhile vehicle for slowing the growth of nuclear weapon ambitions. The problem faciing us is that lately we have seen some despotic regimes with ambitions toward nuclear weaponry and they're getting increasingly successful. If the NPT isn't worth doing, then what other methods and measures should be taken to slow the spread of nuclear weapons?
Not so fast. See the first paper in this bunch. The authors managed to hack a Koyo and AB PLC Ethernet interfaces. The AB Ethernet card had lots of useful stuff in it, including a symbol table. From the symbol table I saw many backplane calls that you could use to communicate with the PLC. How well do you trust a hacked Ethernet module on a PLC backplane?
Having a physically separate port is nice, but it is no substitute for secure coding. If you think that coding is poorly secured in the PC world, you'll be shocked at what often gets done in embedded system coding.
Some PLCs and Variable Frequency Drives have been noted for their inability to handle Denial of Service traffic. I've seen that demonstrated myself. This is the official cause of a reactor SCRAM at Browns Ferry a few years ago.
Try a port scan of your PLC some time and tell me how many ports it responds to (DO THIS ON A TEST-BENCH --NOT PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT!). If you can identify everything that critter responds to, congratulations. If not, be afraid. Be VERY afraid. I've heard quite a few PLC models that have mysterious responses to ports where you wouldn't expect them to respond.
Real Time embedded systems are not good candidates for direct internet exposure. They're too difficult to patch in a timely fashion. Often the windshield time alone is prohibitive. And if you have any notions of pushing patches to them remotely, remember, these things control some pretty high speed/high power processes. You don't just patch them. There are process and safety implications that you need to consider. This ain't some office application where you can say oops and restore from a backup. Real physical things will happen and real physical problems will be created that you can't clean up with a simple code reversion.
Most of our infrastructure today has not been engineered with security issues in mind. There is still lots of Gee Whiz "Let's Share Data" synergy crap going on. This leads to all sorts of direct interconnections that aren't absolutely necessary. Many controls can be made over links that weren't intended for that purpose. It's not easy to split the data flows up any more because many organizations have been very profligate with their use of SCADA information and it isn't easy to find all the sources and sinks.
I'd love to post data from a PLC directly to the public. But I just can't sleep at night with something like that waiting to screw things up.
Good luck with your security, and I mean that quite sincerely.
I've read at least a couple short story anthologies by Woody Allen. The only one I can remember the name of was _Without_Feathers_, but it's been decades since I read it.
Woody Allen was a very funny guy in the 1970s. He got over it.
Is there global warming? It depends on the level of assurance you require. If your only standard is a preponderance of evidence, then yes, the earth is probably warming. If you're aiming at beyond all reasonable doubt I don't think we'll ever know the answer well enough to say that.
Remember that we're talking about weather and climate. We still discovering new features. We still don't have credible models for cloud cover. There is much about the ocean currents that we still do not understand. And now we have a court of law trying to decide if global warming is real.
Which ever way they rule, it's should never be considered a precedent. And if the judge has any sense, this whole damned case should be thrown out of court on the grounds that nobody has the expertise to make a determination with any accuracy.
And the downside for their company is-- WHAT? Why should they make the extra effort to avoid such flaws? Whose responsibility is it?
The problem is that the liability isn't all theirs. This is the same reason that so many software firms can sell steaming piles of insecure garbage, and there is very little practical consequence.
This is the same feature that led to the downfall of the housing market. If you spread the risk around too thinly, nobody will know who to assign blame to. That's how we got in to the mess we're in. When people start demanding accountability and liability, this nonsense will end.
These credit card processing companies had better get their acts together fast, or they'll be sunk by so many lawsuits that they won't be able to stay in business.
Insurance companies will see this sort of business as a radioactive risk. They'll let existing contracts expire and quietly back out --UNLESS these companies get serious about their data security.
There is a huge opportunity for someone to make some real coin doing this sort of thing, but it will take a mindset that these people have been loath to accept: People really are out to get them.
One of the peculiar things about gathering intelligence on someone or a group is that most of the information you need is not secret. It's right there out in the open.
This is a classic example of what happens when someone gathers public data and then uses it. The Police are upset because they didn't take precautions and they never thought anyone would be so obsessive about their identities and behaviors. This is exactly the same reason that so many police are scared of trunk-tracking scanners. They would like to think their communications amongst their group is private.
If the police are truly interested in maintaining a deep cover, they should do it with full legal backing and not make any half assed efforts, hoping that nobody will bother to track them down.
My guess is that this woman will beat the charge and teach cops across the nation an important lesson: The public is watching.
While we're in the business of banning cell phones while driving, why don't we remove car sound systems? People are constantly fiddling with them. Has anyone studied how many accidents are due to that? How about passengers? How many accidents have been caused by a pair of kids fighting in the back seat or a heated argument with a spouse? How about drinking coffee while driving? How about trying to read directions while driving? How about being tired while driving?
All these things amount to one thing: Personal Responsibility. We can't legislate everything. What's the point? Keep track of a person's driving record and when they've had too many accidents due to inattention of some sort, restrict their license, or confiscate it!
The notion that by making a law we can improve people's behavior is stupid. Awareness is more important than the law. If people haven't already figured out that driving while texting is dangerous, then it's time for some chlorine for the gene pool.
To someone who isn't an experienced pilot, it isn't obvious. But you should know that it is a significant part of the training for all private pilots.
I've been licensed for more than 20 years as a private pilot. I've taken mountain flying instruction. I've flown around and over the Rocky Mountains. This hazard is a simple issue of flight planning.
I know exactly what performance my aircraft is capable of, as should every pilot who sits in the left seat. I read reports of the winds aloft. I set personal minimums for what I'm willing to fly in. I know, for example, that if the winds aloft at 3000' are approaching 30 knots, that I can expect significant turbulence and down-drafts from the Appalachian mountain chain for up to 100 miles East. I might fly in those conditions if I'm going Eastward. However, if the winds aloft are 35 knots or greater at 3000, I know I'm staying on the ground.
It's not that I can't handle those situations; I can and I have. My goal is to have a reserve in case the forecast is wrong. I've seen blown forecasts more times than I care to think about.
Steve Fossett had a momentary lapse of judgment. It happens to the best of us. Every year, people crash while flying around mountains and canyons from exactly the same damned thing that bit him. There is little room for error when flying in the mountains. Each flight should include a careful evaluation of local and regional weather conditions, terrain, and aircraft performance. Yeah, there are people who launch in to the blue without checking this stuff. Most of the time, they survive without incident.
Those who don't do adequate flight planning in this terrain are accidents waiting to happen.
DX from the other side of the earth on 10 meters at 1 AM? I remember those days. Now if only we could find a way to get the LIDS to learn how to troll the Internet, why we might actually have a civilized conversation on the air!
"When companies sell "tools" like censoring/filtering software to for example China or Iran, they know damn well what it is going to be used for. In the same way you can also consider firearms "tools", but would you ever sell a firearm to a known criminal?"
This is a gray area. How much do you really know about the ISP you're selling to? How much are you obligated to know? Yes, I know this seems obvious to you, but it's not obvious to everyone. It's not like selling firearms to criminals. It's like selling rice to North Korea. They may use that rice to feed their troops while managing an economy that is just shy of starvation so that they can threaten others.
"Oh, lots of people. We have ISP customers from around the world."
"What do they use it for?"
"You know, censoring kiddie porn sites, blocking mail spammers, and so on."...
I think that's a pretty good description of what this is about. People are selling tools. The problem is how those tools are used. There are evil shit-heads all over the world. That does not mean the tools themselves are evil.
One reason why Comcast might be doing this is to put a stop to viruses that might redirect you to a malicious DNS that redirects your bank web page requests to their own servers.
Remember, they're not aiming at slashdotters, they're aiming at Joe and Jane Sixpack who haven't got the faintest idea what a DNS is or why they should care. That said, the do owe us an explanation before the conspiracy theories get out of hand.
That depends upon where you live. If you're writing this in from some village in the middle of farm country, what you say is pretty close to accurate (The actual numbers are 700 AGL near air fields and up to 1200 AGL in remote areas, away from airways). However, if you live near a major city, finding airspace that isn't controlled right to the surface isn't so easy. And for those of you who live anywhere from Richmond, Virginia to some area north of Baltimore, Maryland CONGRATULATIONS! You can deal with that idiotic Air Defense Interrogation Zone (ADIZ).
Very little is tolerated in that zone that isn't already flight planned, cleared by TRACON, and tracked by transponder.
Good luck getting a UAV to fly there unless you're the military.
The difference between RC aircraft and a UAV is that with an RC aircraft someone is flying it in a wide open area where they can see it from the ground and steer it away from hitting anyone or anything. You can't say that for a UAV unless you have a bunch of high resolution cameras sending video back to you in real time. That would make it pretty heavy. Above certain surprisingly low weight limits, you'll need to coordinate your activities with air traffic control. Chances are that most cities are covered with Class B or Class C airspace; so, yes, there will be an air traffic controller to coordinate with.
This issue has come up before from police departments trying to use military class UAV gear for aerial surveillance in urban areas. They want to do this because it is much cheaper to operate than a helicopter. The problem is that they need to reserve large swaths of airspace and they need to have emergency landing areas where the UAV can head to if it fails. In an urban area, there simply aren't many places to put something like this on the ground safely.
Furthermore, if your UAV fails for any reason you could be held liable for millions. These things may look like scale models, but they sure don't fly at scale model speeds. Ten pounds of UAV flying at a relatively slow speed of 100 MPH could cause significant damage or injury. You get extra points if it's on fire. Think long and hard about where you'll be flying this thing.
Oh and one other thing: The good folk at DHS are telling the FAA to look in to model RC aircraft and licensing them because they think it could be used for all sorts of nefarious deeds. Personally, I think that's just plain stupid, but stupidity hasn't stopped DHS/TSA before.
It's a distribution problem. The old model is obsolete, and these idiots have lived like kings on it for too long.
It's like fighting an economic wave. They can hang on to their leaky boat, they can try to bail it out, or they can go swimming. One way or another, it's going down. The sad thing is how much will be lost in the mists of copyright law if the corporate ship of Sony sinks.
Anyone who hunts down old Jazz recordings for the purpose of republication will know exactly what I'm talking about.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly! Our bosses are people who have never experienced anything but the need to consume. We emphasize sports and music over learning. We reward people who spend outrageous time looking good with ridiculous contracts to read the news. We spend obnoxious money on marketeers who don't even know what they're selling.
I'm saddened. We discourage engineers and technical workers from executive level positions. And we do so to our detriment. There was a time when engineers were prized in such positions. However, for some reason the Philosophy and English teachers declared us techies illiterate. I'd be laughing my ass off if they weren't so dogmatically obnoxious about it. Today, we have ignorant marketeers, corrupt accountants and lawyers running companies. And they don't know what their companies even do for a living.
No wonder we're in trouble.
My thoughts exactly.
I think you're being naive here.
Many wide eye groups like this are funded by formal governments to do the dirty work that accomplishes their goals while giving them semi-plausible deniability.
It is widely rumored that the Taliban were practically created by the Pakistani ISI. The government of Pakistan is not alone in this behavior. The US and Soviet governments did similar sorts of covert support during the cold war.
At some point, however, some country is going to have an "accident" with a nuke and it's going to get used by those who have few qualms with setting it off.
The risk is real. The only question is whether the NPT is still an effective tool or whether there ought to be some other foreign policy to replace it.
Turns out, nobody really wants to see the world end -- well, aside from Evangelists -- and that even if you have the capability, just about any government would choose not to use their nuclear arsenal but still want desperately to have one.
There are many more wide-eyed fanatics in this world besides just "Evangelists." I have very little doubt that Aum Shinrikyo, Al-Qaida, or even a survivalist cult in northern Montana would use a nuke without hesitation, if they managed to get their hands on one.
...and those were the terms under which other countries would give assistance with nuclear technology. It seems that Iran has violated the NPT. Sanctions should follow.
This isn't about the morality of the situation. Some countries deliberately opted out of the NPT.
For example, Israel never signed it. They have a reactor in the Negev desert (Dimona) which they will not allow anyone to inspect. Israel has never admitted the existence or extent of their nuclear arsenal, though intelligence and leaks suggest that they may have as many as 300 war heads.The Israelis have left everyone guessing as to what their intentions or capabilities might be.
The question we should be asking is whether the NPT is still a worthwhile vehicle for slowing the growth of nuclear weapon ambitions. The problem faciing us is that lately we have seen some despotic regimes with ambitions toward nuclear weaponry and they're getting increasingly successful. If the NPT isn't worth doing, then what other methods and measures should be taken to slow the spread of nuclear weapons?
Dang, you beat me to it. I can't imagine that anyone is still using that stuff in production, are they?
Not so fast. See the first paper in this bunch. The authors managed to hack a Koyo and AB PLC Ethernet interfaces. The AB Ethernet card had lots of useful stuff in it, including a symbol table. From the symbol table I saw many backplane calls that you could use to communicate with the PLC. How well do you trust a hacked Ethernet module on a PLC backplane?
Having a physically separate port is nice, but it is no substitute for secure coding. If you think that coding is poorly secured in the PC world, you'll be shocked at what often gets done in embedded system coding.
Some PLCs and Variable Frequency Drives have been noted for their inability to handle Denial of Service traffic. I've seen that demonstrated myself. This is the official cause of a reactor SCRAM at Browns Ferry a few years ago.
Try a port scan of your PLC some time and tell me how many ports it responds to (DO THIS ON A TEST-BENCH --NOT PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT!). If you can identify everything that critter responds to, congratulations. If not, be afraid. Be VERY afraid. I've heard quite a few PLC models that have mysterious responses to ports where you wouldn't expect them to respond.
Real Time embedded systems are not good candidates for direct internet exposure. They're too difficult to patch in a timely fashion. Often the windshield time alone is prohibitive. And if you have any notions of pushing patches to them remotely, remember, these things control some pretty high speed/high power processes. You don't just patch them. There are process and safety implications that you need to consider. This ain't some office application where you can say oops and restore from a backup. Real physical things will happen and real physical problems will be created that you can't clean up with a simple code reversion.
Most of our infrastructure today has not been engineered with security issues in mind. There is still lots of Gee Whiz "Let's Share Data" synergy crap going on. This leads to all sorts of direct interconnections that aren't absolutely necessary. Many controls can be made over links that weren't intended for that purpose. It's not easy to split the data flows up any more because many organizations have been very profligate with their use of SCADA information and it isn't easy to find all the sources and sinks.
I'd love to post data from a PLC directly to the public. But I just can't sleep at night with something like that waiting to screw things up.
Good luck with your security, and I mean that quite sincerely.
to get a haircut!
I've read at least a couple short story anthologies by Woody Allen. The only one I can remember the name of was _Without_Feathers_, but it's been decades since I read it.
Woody Allen was a very funny guy in the 1970s. He got over it.
While Woody Allen's comedy can get deep at times, I doubt that he was thinking that deeply when he wrote this.
Woody Allen once wrote a short story on a man who was tasked by God to find the happiest couple on Earth. He actually finds them.
And they're dumb as a pair of sheep.
Laugh all you want, there is much truth in this.
Is there global warming? It depends on the level of assurance you require. If your only standard is a preponderance of evidence, then yes, the earth is probably warming. If you're aiming at beyond all reasonable doubt I don't think we'll ever know the answer well enough to say that.
Remember that we're talking about weather and climate. We still discovering new features. We still don't have credible models for cloud cover. There is much about the ocean currents that we still do not understand. And now we have a court of law trying to decide if global warming is real.
Which ever way they rule, it's should never be considered a precedent. And if the judge has any sense, this whole damned case should be thrown out of court on the grounds that nobody has the expertise to make a determination with any accuracy.
I agree.
And the downside for their company is-- WHAT? Why should they make the extra effort to avoid such flaws? Whose responsibility is it?
The problem is that the liability isn't all theirs. This is the same reason that so many software firms can sell steaming piles of insecure garbage, and there is very little practical consequence.
This is the same feature that led to the downfall of the housing market. If you spread the risk around too thinly, nobody will know who to assign blame to. That's how we got in to the mess we're in. When people start demanding accountability and liability, this nonsense will end.
These credit card processing companies had better get their acts together fast, or they'll be sunk by so many lawsuits that they won't be able to stay in business.
Insurance companies will see this sort of business as a radioactive risk. They'll let existing contracts expire and quietly back out --UNLESS these companies get serious about their data security.
There is a huge opportunity for someone to make some real coin doing this sort of thing, but it will take a mindset that these people have been loath to accept: People really are out to get them.
One of the peculiar things about gathering intelligence on someone or a group is that most of the information you need is not secret. It's right there out in the open.
This is a classic example of what happens when someone gathers public data and then uses it. The Police are upset because they didn't take precautions and they never thought anyone would be so obsessive about their identities and behaviors. This is exactly the same reason that so many police are scared of trunk-tracking scanners. They would like to think their communications amongst their group is private.
If the police are truly interested in maintaining a deep cover, they should do it with full legal backing and not make any half assed efforts, hoping that nobody will bother to track them down.
My guess is that this woman will beat the charge and teach cops across the nation an important lesson: The public is watching.
Enough of this nonsense!
While we're in the business of banning cell phones while driving, why don't we remove car sound systems? People are constantly fiddling with them. Has anyone studied how many accidents are due to that? How about passengers? How many accidents have been caused by a pair of kids fighting in the back seat or a heated argument with a spouse? How about drinking coffee while driving? How about trying to read directions while driving? How about being tired while driving?
All these things amount to one thing: Personal Responsibility . We can't legislate everything. What's the point? Keep track of a person's driving record and when they've had too many accidents due to inattention of some sort, restrict their license, or confiscate it!
The notion that by making a law we can improve people's behavior is stupid. Awareness is more important than the law. If people haven't already figured out that driving while texting is dangerous, then it's time for some chlorine for the gene pool.
To someone who isn't an experienced pilot, it isn't obvious. But you should know that it is a significant part of the training for all private pilots.
I've been licensed for more than 20 years as a private pilot. I've taken mountain flying instruction. I've flown around and over the Rocky Mountains. This hazard is a simple issue of flight planning.
I know exactly what performance my aircraft is capable of, as should every pilot who sits in the left seat. I read reports of the winds aloft. I set personal minimums for what I'm willing to fly in. I know, for example, that if the winds aloft at 3000' are approaching 30 knots, that I can expect significant turbulence and down-drafts from the Appalachian mountain chain for up to 100 miles East. I might fly in those conditions if I'm going Eastward. However, if the winds aloft are 35 knots or greater at 3000, I know I'm staying on the ground.
It's not that I can't handle those situations; I can and I have. My goal is to have a reserve in case the forecast is wrong. I've seen blown forecasts more times than I care to think about.
Steve Fossett had a momentary lapse of judgment. It happens to the best of us. Every year, people crash while flying around mountains and canyons from exactly the same damned thing that bit him. There is little room for error when flying in the mountains. Each flight should include a careful evaluation of local and regional weather conditions, terrain, and aircraft performance. Yeah, there are people who launch in to the blue without checking this stuff. Most of the time, they survive without incident.
Those who don't do adequate flight planning in this terrain are accidents waiting to happen.
DX from the other side of the earth on 10 meters at 1 AM? I remember those days. Now if only we could find a way to get the LIDS to learn how to troll the Internet, why we might actually have a civilized conversation on the air!
No, but I know how to make a pretty foul batch of home brew beer...
"When companies sell "tools" like censoring/filtering software to for example China or Iran, they know damn well what it is going to be used for. In the same way you can also consider firearms "tools", but would you ever sell a firearm to a known criminal?"
This is a gray area. How much do you really know about the ISP you're selling to? How much are you obligated to know? Yes, I know this seems obvious to you, but it's not obvious to everyone. It's not like selling firearms to criminals. It's like selling rice to North Korea. They may use that rice to feed their troops while managing an economy that is just shy of starvation so that they can threaten others.
Even food can be a weapon.
"...so, what do you do?"
"I sell net censoring software."
"Really? Who buys that stuff?"
"Oh, lots of people. We have ISP customers from around the world."
"What do they use it for?"
"You know, censoring kiddie porn sites, blocking mail spammers, and so on." ...
I think that's a pretty good description of what this is about. People are selling tools. The problem is how those tools are used. There are evil shit-heads all over the world. That does not mean the tools themselves are evil.
One reason why Comcast might be doing this is to put a stop to viruses that might redirect you to a malicious DNS that redirects your bank web page requests to their own servers.
Remember, they're not aiming at slashdotters, they're aiming at Joe and Jane Sixpack who haven't got the faintest idea what a DNS is or why they should care. That said, the do owe us an explanation before the conspiracy theories get out of hand.
That depends upon where you live. If you're writing this in from some village in the middle of farm country, what you say is pretty close to accurate (The actual numbers are 700 AGL near air fields and up to 1200 AGL in remote areas, away from airways). However, if you live near a major city, finding airspace that isn't controlled right to the surface isn't so easy. And for those of you who live anywhere from Richmond, Virginia to some area north of Baltimore, Maryland CONGRATULATIONS! You can deal with that idiotic Air Defense Interrogation Zone (ADIZ).
Very little is tolerated in that zone that isn't already flight planned, cleared by TRACON, and tracked by transponder.
Good luck getting a UAV to fly there unless you're the military.
A UAV is a collision hazard.
The difference between RC aircraft and a UAV is that with an RC aircraft someone is flying it in a wide open area where they can see it from the ground and steer it away from hitting anyone or anything. You can't say that for a UAV unless you have a bunch of high resolution cameras sending video back to you in real time. That would make it pretty heavy. Above certain surprisingly low weight limits, you'll need to coordinate your activities with air traffic control. Chances are that most cities are covered with Class B or Class C airspace; so, yes, there will be an air traffic controller to coordinate with.
This issue has come up before from police departments trying to use military class UAV gear for aerial surveillance in urban areas. They want to do this because it is much cheaper to operate than a helicopter. The problem is that they need to reserve large swaths of airspace and they need to have emergency landing areas where the UAV can head to if it fails. In an urban area, there simply aren't many places to put something like this on the ground safely.
Furthermore, if your UAV fails for any reason you could be held liable for millions. These things may look like scale models, but they sure don't fly at scale model speeds. Ten pounds of UAV flying at a relatively slow speed of 100 MPH could cause significant damage or injury. You get extra points if it's on fire. Think long and hard about where you'll be flying this thing.
Oh and one other thing: The good folk at DHS are telling the FAA to look in to model RC aircraft and licensing them because they think it could be used for all sorts of nefarious deeds. Personally, I think that's just plain stupid, but stupidity hasn't stopped DHS/TSA before.
It's not an entitlement problem.
It's a distribution problem. The old model is obsolete, and these idiots have lived like kings on it for too long.
It's like fighting an economic wave. They can hang on to their leaky boat, they can try to bail it out, or they can go swimming. One way or another, it's going down. The sad thing is how much will be lost in the mists of copyright law if the corporate ship of Sony sinks.
Anyone who hunts down old Jazz recordings for the purpose of republication will know exactly what I'm talking about.