"The information about an individual should be the property of the individual, not the company (or govt. agency) that holds and collects it."
I couldn't agree more. It's not just a fancy idea you propose here, but it is a very fundamental issue for individual freedom. It is a matter of basic human freedom and dignity to be in command of your own representation, be it physical (i.e. dress code), digital or otherwise.
The current way in which organizations are collecting and storing many individuals' descriptions together in an aggregated, centralized database of some sort, is a remnant (unnecessary continuation) of our pre-internet past. Presently, it should not be as difficult or expensive to consult many individually authored, disparately stored representations of the many clients an organization has (like you and me). Each individual should be free (as in freedom) to create his/her own representation, kept at a provider of choice (or DYI), which could then be (partially) exposed (if so desired), to the many organizations that provide their service to you.
This ideal situation would ultimately shift the power from the organizations who now own your data (but don't have any incentives to care about it, as Mr. Schneier recently observed) to you and me, the people being represented. I am, like you, very concerned with the fact that the data which is supposed to represent me, is not under my own control.
-- aadrink
local police publishes some files in .nl
on
Open Source Spying
·
· Score: 1
a local police department in the Netherlands has started publishing files about cold cases, old unsolved crimes. They invite the general public to do more than just providing eye witness reports, but to come up with new angles and explanations.
Re:Two questions, one answer, about the encryption
on
New VOIP App. Profiled
·
· Score: 1
I'll go for the first question.
And the key exchange is handled by... ? AES is a symmetric cypher, so there has to be some kind of key exchange. I
Normally, a session is started with an assymetric (public key) encrypted connection, which is actually quit slow in encryption of streaming data. So the only exchange (under encryption) is a symmetric key for both parties. This encryption (much faster for streams) is then used during the actual communication.
Their FAQ is very light on details, and geared towards non-techies (why else would you reassure people with 'the government does it too' arguments;)
I agree. You cannot whine without proposing an alternative...
My group has been planning for something quite similar as the HailstormTM thing. We discovered more similarity as we saw more information about Hailstorm released.
Instead of sitting back be cause we discovered we had competition from MS, we decided to continue. There has to be an open alternative that allows a user to choose any server to store his data.
We welcome any open source initiatives that explore the functionality promised by our scheme, and now Hailstorm as wel.
We can't say more at the moment be cause of ongoing negotiations, but expect to hear more in the near future.
The slashdot team could just add categories for other countries than United States. Users could then filter out categories the normal way (preferences) to block irrelevant info.
Wouldn't it be nice to see all the news there is already _and_ some local stuff like events or local law issues.
The problem that the existence (now) of Freenet adresses most accutely is that there is now information with no known sender.
This is nothing new of course. Prank calls before the CLI, anonymous remailers etc.
But, for normal day use, you are likely to first identify the (presumed) source of the message before judging its contents.
Freenet is different from the above examples in that it is not a derived use that allows anonimity in certain cases, but that is is *designed* to be anonymous by default.
Main point: this poses us as information users with a question: how do you judge information if you only have the information (and no context) ?????
As mentioned in earlier posts, it is difficult to seperate carefully designed falsness from the
"truth".
These quotes mean trouble.
Looking at how the basic problem of judging information, and the natural tendency to identify a source, there will arise a *need* to be known (not anonymous)
Groups discussing scientific matter could be seriously harmed if false information "leeks in". Haha. As if that doesn't happen right now. Only thing is, now the person (scientist) is corrected and referenced to in a later work (by some other scientist).
In the Freenet world, you don't have a name of a person to address, so you comment on the document itself.
I think that documents (content without the context) are going to be the main "players".
If a company wants to 'sell' you his information, (like 'our OS is really cool, look!':) it can make the message more plausible, by getting its name (Microsoft anyone) 'known' and all over the place so it must be trustworthy.
The decoupling of names and messages/information is a real problem for everyone, be it person, company, the feds, whatever.
What if you made a proprietary game-engine (i.e. Quake), and you provided tools for character-developement, both graphical (skins) or behavioristic (skills, performance). More than editor-levels, these provide interesting oportunities: a programmer and an artist could work on both parts of the character, and the user (player of the game, directs the character) can be a totally different person, feeding his experience and preferences to the character developers.
I would like to see what happened i.e. bin Mortal Kombat style games!
Off course, the same could be true for the levels as well. Consider a very evil level building team, that invites your (self developed)"army" to come and invade.... (as in Red Alert).
The main tasks for the gaming company would be to release a 'closed' gaming engine (physics, basical character interactions, levels), some initial (open source) levels and characters.
And, in agreement with the Linux Today article, editors and programming tools, and artist tools are perfectly suited for bazaar style developement. So it would be kind and wise for the gaming company to turn these over to the community.
Also, I think it is necessary to stay clear of implying that the same licencing models apply to source code and art works. In the above scenario, an artist could well copyright his arts (skins or something).
Slashdot Mirror
"The information about an individual should be the property of the individual, not the company (or govt. agency) that holds and collects it."
I couldn't agree more. It's not just a fancy idea you propose here, but it is a very fundamental issue for individual freedom. It is a matter of basic human freedom and dignity to be in command of your own representation, be it physical (i.e. dress code), digital or otherwise.
The current way in which organizations are collecting and storing many individuals' descriptions together in an aggregated, centralized database of some sort, is a remnant (unnecessary continuation) of our pre-internet past. Presently, it should not be as difficult or expensive to consult many individually authored, disparately stored representations of the many clients an organization has (like you and me). Each individual should be free (as in freedom) to create his/her own representation, kept at a provider of choice (or DYI), which could then be (partially) exposed (if so desired), to the many organizations that provide their service to you.
This ideal situation would ultimately shift the power from the organizations who now own your data (but don't have any incentives to care about it, as Mr. Schneier recently observed) to you and me, the people being represented. I am, like you, very concerned with the fact that the data which is supposed to represent me, is not under my own control.
-- aadrink
a local police department in the Netherlands has started publishing files about cold cases, old unsolved crimes. They invite the general public to do more than just providing eye witness reports, but to come up with new angles and explanations.
see http://www.politieonderzoeken.nl/ (in Dutch, and uses flash)
I'll go for the first question. And the key exchange is handled by... ? AES is a symmetric cypher, so there has to be some kind of key exchange. I Normally, a session is started with an assymetric (public key) encrypted connection, which is actually quit slow in encryption of streaming data. So the only exchange (under encryption) is a symmetric key for both parties. This encryption (much faster for streams) is then used during the actual communication. Their FAQ is very light on details, and geared towards non-techies (why else would you reassure people with 'the government does it too' arguments ;)
You just reinvented the affiliate program ;)
I agree. You cannot whine without proposing an alternative...
My group has been planning for something quite similar as the HailstormTM thing. We discovered more similarity as we saw more information about Hailstorm released.
Instead of sitting back be cause we discovered we had competition from MS, we decided to continue. There has to be an open alternative that allows a user to choose any server to store his data.
We welcome any open source initiatives that explore the functionality promised by our scheme, and now Hailstorm as wel.
We can't say more at the moment be cause of ongoing negotiations, but expect to hear more in the near future.
The slashdot team could just add categories for other countries than United States. Users could then filter out categories the normal way (preferences) to block irrelevant info.
Wouldn't it be nice to see all the news there is already _and_ some local stuff like events or local law issues.
The problem that the existence (now) of Freenet adresses most accutely is that there is now information with no known sender.
:) it can make the message more plausible, by getting its name (Microsoft anyone) 'known' and all over the place so it must be trustworthy.
This is nothing new of course. Prank calls before the CLI, anonymous remailers etc.
But, for normal day use, you are likely to first identify the (presumed) source of the message before judging its contents.
Freenet is different from the above examples in that it is not a derived use that allows anonimity in certain cases, but that is is *designed* to be anonymous by default.
Main point: this poses us as information users with a question: how do you judge information if you only have the information (and no context) ?????
As mentioned in earlier posts, it is difficult to seperate carefully designed falsness from the
"truth".
These quotes mean trouble.
Looking at how the basic problem of judging information, and the natural tendency to identify a source, there will arise a *need* to be known (not anonymous)
Groups discussing scientific matter could be seriously harmed if false information "leeks in". Haha. As if that doesn't happen right now.
Only thing is, now the person (scientist) is corrected and referenced to in a later work (by some other scientist).
In the Freenet world, you don't have a name of a person to address, so you comment on the document itself.
I think that documents (content without the context) are going to be the main "players".
If a company wants to 'sell' you his information, (like 'our OS is really cool, look!'
The decoupling of names and messages/information is a real problem for everyone, be it person, company, the feds, whatever.
IBM japan has the prototype online. Should have learnded Japanese first tho. Pictures I can understand.... ;)
t ml
http://www.jp.ibm.com/News/leads/980912/index.h
What if you made a proprietary game-engine (i.e. Quake), and you provided tools for character-developement, both graphical (skins) or behavioristic (skills, performance). More than editor-levels, these provide interesting oportunities: a programmer and an artist could work on both parts of the character, and the user (player of the game, directs the character) can be a totally different person, feeding his experience and preferences to the character developers.
I would like to see what happened i.e. bin Mortal Kombat style games!
Off course, the same could be true for the levels as well. Consider a very evil level building team, that invites your (self developed)"army" to come and invade.... (as in Red Alert).
The main tasks for the gaming company would be to release a 'closed' gaming engine (physics, basical character interactions, levels), some initial (open source) levels and characters.
And, in agreement with the Linux Today article, editors and programming tools, and artist tools are perfectly suited for bazaar style developement. So it would be kind and wise for the gaming company to turn these over to the community.
Also, I think it is necessary to stay clear of implying that the same licencing models apply to source code and art works. In the above scenario, an artist could well copyright his arts (skins or something).