Security through complete obscurity may have it's merits (ie: you don't know what kind of box I'm running, where it is, or what it does, and you can't really find out).
Keeping as much as possible secret about something has it's merits, but only if it's done in totality.
If it's network software we're talking about, that's publicly sold, this doesn't hold up, as the software is there for tons of people to hack away at and find vulnerabilities, source or not.
If it's your own IP stack, on your own hardware, and nobody outside of a trusted group will *ever* see the code, obscurity may give you some cover, as nobody can experiment on you.
What are you comparing this to? Obviously, if *you* know you have a problem, you don't advertise it.
But what if the hacker knows you have a problem, and you don't know about it, and can't find out? *NOW* you have a real problem. At least when vulnerabilites are published, you can *expect* that people will try to haxx0r you.
a) Your lock is defective, and b) only the criminal organization knows that the lock is defective, because someone from the lock company sold them the information.
Folks.. the issue is not that napster is a 'tool that can be used for piracy, among other things'. Certainly that is true.. it has several uses.
The issue is that Napster Inc. Is succeeding solely because they *knew* and *know* that people are using their service almost *exclusively* for pirating music.
It's not simply about technology; it's about a business that has been foudned *solely to help people pirate music*.
Do I think file sharing should be banned or even controlled? No way. I think you don't blame the tool; you blame the people. But in this case napster is more than the tool; it is a company making money off of piracy.
I have a very good friend, that I met online, on the BBSs some half a lifetime ago... and I still refer to him by his handle. Lots of people do. Do I know his given christian name? Certainly. Do I use it? Occasionally.... it's not that anyone dislikes it...
but referring to him by his handle is more affectionate, more personable.
Didn't you ever have nicknames for your buddies? Did they have some for you? I have some names that people have used to call me for as long as I remember... if I hear those names from someone else, it doesn't even register.
Why do you assume that the 'online personality' is not the individual behind the curtain? Just because someone has a different name online doesn't mean they are any less real.
For all the peoplw who whine about 'privacy'. There was never any guarantee on the internet htat people couldn't trace where packets were coming from. The fact that IPv4 allows forged source addresses... well.. there was simply no need to check them.
Why would people have a problem with this? It means if you send spoofed packets, the routers along the way can *still* figure out where the hell it came from (instead of having an admin at each hop do the trace manually).
As much as I believe the right to 'share files' cannot be taken away, and that it is rediculous to try....
Napster, as software, I have no real issue with (I think it's kind of crappy.... but I have no real problem with it). Napster, as a company, I *DO*.
See.. the thing is, Napster, as a company, is making money (or attempting to make money) off of their service, which they *know* is wildly popular because people like to pirate music. This is where the problem is.
They are, even though it's somewhat indirect, making money off helping people pirate music. Period. And that is wrong.
What if it was a 'free' service, sort of distributed? Gnutella-ish? NO problem. WHo's making the money? Nobody, a bunch of people are getting together and simply sharing information for non-commercial reasons. THis is GOOD.
All 'heat' energy is not released as light. A more proper analysis woudl be that the energy released by the burning candle is released in the form of a) EM radiation (light) and b) chemical changes. Most of the 'heat' detected comes from conduction/convection by the hot gasses given off in the reaction. So.. some of the 'energy' given off of the exothermic reaction that is a burning candle is kinetic, some is EM, and some goes into chemical changes themselves.
Yes, with a perfectly reflecting surface *and nothing inside to absorb the light*, you would have a 'photonic battery... but it wouldn't work with a candle in the middle.
I suppose, given the right reflective surface, we would be able to put immense amounts of light into a small enough container and use it as a battery.. however, perfect reflection has it's limits. Enough energy in the form of photons would cause the mirror to stop working.. remember how a mirror works. It doesnt' 'reflect' photons, it 're-emits' them. There is a limit to what it can reflect; a laser with enough juice can still destroy a mirror.
If this was really surplus hardware, non-x86 vector processors... someone would have to write the code to work on seti stuff on them. These poeple claimed that it worked with standard seti@home software; you just plug it in.
Napter, no matter how much of a white knight they want to be, no matter how noble their cause may seem to be, is a company that is in business to do one thing: MAKE MONEY.
The original napster software, though interesting, was *CRAP*. The idea was good, it filled a niche, but is in no way technically advanced. It was *easy*. The world already has much better software; napster was just dumbed down enough for the sheep to use. And once you get the sheep involved, the network effect takes over, and it becomes a force in it's own right.
But the software is still crap; no new technology is coming about; napster tries to fight the good fight, but isn't at all interested in the technological advancements. They are interested in money.
Actually, this simply refines the LSA from the Hawaiian woodrose seeds. Morning glory would work as well, in larger quantities.
LSA has similar effects to LSD, though it (I believe) has a shorter half-life and more toxicity.
Simply eating the seeds works just as well as refining, though you must make sure the seeds you have obtained have not been adulterated (toxins added to make you sick if you eat them, to prevent kiddies from tripping on K-mart seeds).
So. Writing an essay describing the mathematical methods of breaking a certain type of encryption *IS* protected speech, and is most certainly expressive, however, computer source is not?
You are partialy correct; however, bluetooth is definately the first step.
Without a common layer1/2, it won't happen at all, period.. and by forming the Bluetooth SIG. and now bluetooth implementations, it is cheap and easy for manufacturers to make devices that can talk to each other via bluetooth. Certainly, they still have to aggree on higher layer protocol... but without bluetooth, they wouldn't get the chance.
And the same manufacturers that developed this technology, and put the money into the research would understand the network effect of compatability.
Why would people, especially those that use linux and know it at all, be surprised at all? Linux can be installed to *any* media where the appropriate drivers (read: kernel code) exists.
Zip. Superdisk. Floppies. M-systems Disk-on-chip, hard disk, network boot.... all kinds of flash...
Everyone getting all irate about it. It's simple. If you like the story, pay up. If you don't like it, or can't pay up, don't.
IF enough people pay, and King sees the $$$, then he'll have the incentive to write the next part of the story. If the story sucks, and nobody wants to see it, they won't pay!
Is the Internet largely composed of US nodes? I don't know the real numbers.. but I'd bet it is.
Does the US monopolize the technology? No. Could the internet change shape many different ways? Yes.
The Internet is a phenomenon, not a thing.
We must remember the roots.
1) Everyone makes their own private networks, not necessarily hooked up to anything else all the time. 2) People got the address space for their networks assigned by a big plan, so they could hook them together without conflict later. This was not competitive in the beginning. there was more than enough address space to go around, it was only centralized to keep it all unique. (Sort of like radio, eh?)
3) People hook stuff together however they manage.
This will continue, no matter what. THe world is now connected, and will only continue to be more connected.
In order to keep an orderly society, nobody should have a problem if laws are passed that require merchants to be *clear* and *concise* with regards to the money their fees and prices.
This is required of phone companies now, that they have a clear and concise way of explaining the increasingly complex phone billing structures.
In normal business, it is considered fraud in some cases to 'mislead' people into purchasing something, even if there is fine print..
Why shouldn't a porn merchant be held accountable for misleading poeple? They make their sites purposely misleading because they *know* people will fall into the trap, and not dispute it afterwards. They are therefore making money off of *deceit*, which is fraud.
Really. The first thing to realize is that your credit card is your *friend*. And so is the credit company *as long as you pay up!*.
The fine print on my card says that if my *card* is stolen, I must report it immediately, and that I may be responsible for all charges in between when my card was stolen and when I reported it stolen (or up to $50, I forget the details).
The fact is.. if my card is still in my wallet, then my card is not stolen. So.. if someone elses gets the number, somehow, and uses it.. I have no problem. Call company, tell them I didn't do it, and they refund it. IT' sup to the merchant to *prove* that I used my card to charge something. If he has no signature, and no other identifying info (shipping address, etc..) he's out of luck.
As for these sneaky porn charges, the fact is... Even if there is fine-print, you can call your credit company and say 'they said nothing about blah-blah-blah'. The fact that you didn't see something is not directly relevant. You did not agree to those charges. You were under the impression that you would pay $X and that's why you did it. If it was otherwise, that's their problem. Your credit card company *will* cancel the debt and take it back to the merchant.
It's simple, really. As a matter of security; Whenever a router is aware of all address space on one port, it should block inappropriate traffic; Core network routers cannot do this. ISP routers should all be able to do this.
Give me a break. If they *wanted* to do it without the public finding out, they would be(or maybe are) already doing it. Doesn't mean we have to accept it.. but get real.
BLuetooth and 802.11b are not even in the same ballpark. They are totally different technologies for totally different purposes.
802.11b is the wireless extension of ethernet; it's for doing real networking.
Bluetooth is extremely short range, extremely low power, and desigend for applications similiar to IRDA. Short-range, low-speed communications. From your cellphone to your PDA. From your PDA to a nearby printer, etc...
Bluetooth exists as a single (or pair) of chips, containing all the radio transmitters and everything. THe idea is that a manufacturer can 'bluetooth enable' a device for like $5/device.
802.11 is MUCH higher power, and totally unsuitable for this kind of thing.
Anyone who suggests bluetooth is for 'wireless newtorking' is full of it.
DO you use AirMiles? IT's sole purpose is to track your movement and purchases. Do you use those grocery-store 'customer cards'? Same deal (I *HATE* those things, and almost think there oughtta be a law... you should be able to buy food at a fair price without being tracked)
American Express charge card? Same deal. Credit cards? Same deal.
Have your name/address published in a phone book? Same deal.
Give me a break. Your personal information is *everywhere*
Please. I hate MS as much as the next guy.. however...
1) WinCE licensing fees are *nothing* compared to the cost of the hardware. Really. In software development, often, licencing fees are *FAR* from the biggest cost in the product.
2) One cannot compare the percieved speed of WinCE over 98, ME, or NT, or 2k. THey are *all* different, *especially* wince. Now, I'm no wince fan... but have you used some window managers lately? They actually feel much SLOWER than windows, (though to a seasoned user, the machine is obviously faster in the end)
Slashdot Mirror
Security through complete obscurity may have it's merits (ie: you don't know what kind of box I'm running, where it is, or what it does, and you can't really find out).
Keeping as much as possible secret about something has it's merits, but only if it's done in totality.
If it's network software we're talking about, that's publicly sold, this doesn't hold up, as the software is there for tons of people to hack away at and find vulnerabilities, source or not.
If it's your own IP stack, on your own hardware, and nobody outside of a trusted group will *ever* see the code, obscurity may give you some cover, as nobody can experiment on you.
What are you comparing this to?
Obviously, if *you* know you have a problem, you don't advertise it.
But what if the hacker knows you have a problem, and you don't know about it, and can't find out? *NOW* you have a real problem. At least when vulnerabilites are published, you can *expect* that people will try to haxx0r you.
a) Your lock is defective, and
b) only the criminal organization knows that the lock is defective, because someone from the lock company sold them the information.
You are far safer
Folks.. the issue is not that napster is a 'tool that can be used for piracy, among other things'. Certainly that is true.. it has several uses.
The issue is that Napster Inc. Is succeeding solely because they *knew* and *know* that people are using their service almost *exclusively* for pirating music.
It's not simply about technology; it's about a business that has been foudned *solely to help people pirate music*.
Do I think file sharing should be banned or even controlled? No way. I think you don't blame the tool; you blame the people.
But in this case napster is more than the tool; it is a company making money off of piracy.
It's true tihs happens.... but is it really bad?
I have a very good friend, that I met online, on the BBSs some half a lifetime ago... and I still refer to him by his handle. Lots of people do.
Do I know his given christian name? Certainly. Do I use it? Occasionally.... it's not that anyone dislikes it...
but referring to him by his handle is more affectionate, more personable.
Didn't you ever have nicknames for your buddies? Did they have some for you? I have some names that people have used to call me for as long as I remember... if I hear those names from someone else, it doesn't even register.
Why do you assume that the 'online personality' is not the individual behind the curtain? Just because someone has a different name online doesn't mean they are any less real.
For all the peoplw who whine about 'privacy'.
There was never any guarantee on the internet htat people couldn't trace where packets were coming from. The fact that IPv4 allows forged source addresses... well.. there was simply no need to check them.
Why would people have a problem with this? It means if you send spoofed packets, the routers along the way can *still* figure out where the hell it came from (instead of having an admin at each hop do the trace manually).
As much as I believe the right to 'share files' cannot be taken away, and that it is rediculous to try....
Napster, as software, I have no real issue with (I think it's kind of crappy.... but I have no real problem with it).
Napster, as a company, I *DO*.
See.. the thing is, Napster, as a company, is making money (or attempting to make money) off of their service, which they *know* is wildly popular because people like to pirate music. This is where the problem is.
They are, even though it's somewhat indirect, making money off helping people pirate music. Period. And that is wrong.
What if it was a 'free' service, sort of distributed? Gnutella-ish? NO problem. WHo's making the money? Nobody, a bunch of people are getting together and simply sharing information for non-commercial reasons. THis is GOOD.
Yes, the idea woudl be somewhat correct.
All 'heat' energy is not released as light. A more proper analysis woudl be that the energy released by the burning candle is released in the form of a) EM radiation (light) and b) chemical changes. Most of the 'heat' detected comes from conduction/convection by the hot gasses given off in the reaction. So.. some of the 'energy' given off of the exothermic reaction that is a burning candle is kinetic, some is EM, and some goes into chemical changes themselves.
Yes, with a perfectly reflecting surface *and nothing inside to absorb the light*, you would have a 'photonic battery... but it wouldn't work with a candle in the middle.
I suppose, given the right reflective surface, we would be able to put immense amounts of light into a small enough container and use it as a battery.. however, perfect reflection has it's limits. Enough energy in the form of photons would cause the mirror to stop working.. remember how a mirror works. It doesnt' 'reflect' photons, it 're-emits' them. There is a limit to what it can reflect; a laser with enough juice can still destroy a mirror.
That nobody seemed to mention is this:
If this was really surplus hardware, non-x86 vector processors... someone would have to write the code to work on seti stuff on them. These poeple claimed that it worked with standard seti@home software; you just plug it in.
This simply can't be. That's not how things work.
Napter, no matter how much of a white knight they want to be, no matter how noble their cause may seem to be, is a company that is in business to do one thing: MAKE MONEY.
The original napster software, though interesting, was *CRAP*. The idea was good, it filled a niche, but is in no way technically advanced. It was *easy*. The world already has much better software; napster was just dumbed down enough for the sheep to use. And once you get the sheep involved, the network effect takes over, and it becomes a force in it's own right.
But the software is still crap; no new technology is coming about; napster tries to fight the good fight, but isn't at all interested in the technological advancements. They are interested in money.
Napster does not deserve the support it gets.
Actually, this simply refines the LSA from the Hawaiian woodrose seeds. Morning glory would work as well, in larger quantities.
LSA has similar effects to LSD, though it (I believe) has a shorter half-life and more toxicity.
Simply eating the seeds works just as well as refining, though you must make sure the seeds you have obtained have not been adulterated (toxins added to make you sick if you eat them, to prevent kiddies from tripping on K-mart seeds).
If they have, you must refine first.
So. Writing an essay describing the mathematical methods of breaking a certain type of encryption *IS* protected speech, and is most certainly expressive, however, computer source is not?
You are partialy correct; however, bluetooth is definately the first step.
Without a common layer1/2, it won't happen at all, period.. and by forming the Bluetooth SIG. and now bluetooth implementations, it is cheap and easy for manufacturers to make devices that can talk to each other via bluetooth. Certainly, they still have to aggree on higher layer protocol... but without bluetooth, they wouldn't get the chance.
And the same manufacturers that developed this technology, and put the money into the research would understand the network effect of compatability.
Why would people, especially those that use linux and know it at all, be surprised at all? Linux can be installed to *any* media where the appropriate drivers (read: kernel code) exists.
Zip. Superdisk. Floppies. M-systems Disk-on-chip, hard disk, network boot.... all kinds of flash...
Seriously.. where's the news?
Everyone getting all irate about it.
It's simple. If you like the story, pay up. If you don't like it, or can't pay up, don't.
IF enough people pay, and King sees the $$$, then he'll have the incentive to write the next part of the story.
If the story sucks, and nobody wants to see it, they won't pay!
Solaris really performs on sparc.
And it's not designed for 'serving pages'. THat is a computationally light task.
Try a real server, serving many users on interactive X sessions at once, all with wierd simulation packages running. Solaris reigns.
Is the Internet largely composed of US nodes? I don't know the real numbers.. but I'd bet it is.
Does the US monopolize the technology? No. Could the internet change shape many different ways? Yes.
The Internet is a phenomenon, not a thing.
We must remember the roots.
1) Everyone makes their own private networks, not necessarily hooked up to anything else all the time.
2) People got the address space for their networks assigned by a big plan, so they could hook them together without conflict later. This was not competitive in the beginning. there was more than enough address space to go around, it was only centralized to keep it all unique. (Sort of like radio, eh?)
3) People hook stuff together however they manage.
This will continue, no matter what. THe world is now connected, and will only continue to be more connected.
In order to keep an orderly society, nobody should have a problem if laws are passed that require merchants to be *clear* and *concise* with regards to the money their fees and prices.
This is required of phone companies now, that they have a clear and concise way of explaining the increasingly complex phone billing structures.
In normal business, it is considered fraud in some cases to 'mislead' people into purchasing something, even if there is fine print..
Why shouldn't a porn merchant be held accountable for misleading poeple? They make their sites purposely misleading because they *know* people will fall into the trap, and not dispute it afterwards. They are therefore making money off of *deceit*, which is fraud.
Really. The first thing to realize is that your credit card is your *friend*. And so is the credit company *as long as you pay up!*.
The fine print on my card says that if my *card* is stolen, I must report it immediately, and that I may be responsible for all charges in between when my card was stolen and when I reported it stolen (or up to $50, I forget the details).
The fact is.. if my card is still in my wallet, then my card is not stolen. So.. if someone elses gets the number, somehow, and uses it.. I have no problem. Call company, tell them I didn't do it, and they refund it. IT' sup to the merchant to *prove* that I used my card to charge something. If he has no signature, and no other identifying info (shipping address, etc..) he's out of luck.
As for these sneaky porn charges, the fact is...
Even if there is fine-print, you can call your credit company and say 'they said nothing about blah-blah-blah'. The fact that you didn't see something is not directly relevant. You did not agree to those charges. You were under the impression that you would pay $X and that's why you did it. If it was otherwise, that's their problem. Your credit card company *will* cancel the debt and take it back to the merchant.
What do you mean would it be called the internet? If you can route your assigned IP, it's internet.
Why should you be able to forge packets?
It's simple, really. As a matter of security; Whenever a router is aware of all address space on one port, it should block inappropriate traffic; Core network routers cannot do this. ISP routers should all be able to do this.
Give me a break. If they *wanted* to do it without the public finding out, they would be(or maybe are) already doing it. Doesn't mean we have to accept it.. but get real.
BLuetooth and 802.11b are not even in the same ballpark. They are totally different technologies for totally different purposes.
802.11b is the wireless extension of ethernet; it's for doing real networking.
Bluetooth is extremely short range, extremely low power, and desigend for applications similiar to IRDA. Short-range, low-speed communications. From your cellphone to your PDA. From your PDA to a nearby printer, etc...
Bluetooth exists as a single (or pair) of chips, containing all the radio transmitters and everything. THe idea is that a manufacturer can 'bluetooth enable' a device for like $5/device.
802.11 is MUCH higher power, and totally unsuitable for this kind of thing.
Anyone who suggests bluetooth is for 'wireless newtorking' is full of it.
It's not *your* email address.
It's an address that, at the moment, you have access to. You are renting it.
Another reason for encryption. Really.
The only email address that I would really consider *mine* is the one on the server I own at the domain I own...
OTher than that, I'm just 'renting' it.
All these privacy complainers.
DO you use AirMiles? IT's sole purpose is to track your movement and purchases.
Do you use those grocery-store 'customer cards'? Same deal (I *HATE* those things, and almost think there oughtta be a law... you should be able to buy food at a fair price without being tracked)
American Express charge card? Same deal.
Credit cards? Same deal.
Have your name/address published in a phone book? Same deal.
Give me a break. Your personal information is *everywhere*
Please. I hate MS as much as the next guy.. however...
1) WinCE licensing fees are *nothing* compared to the cost of the hardware. Really. In software development, often, licencing fees are *FAR* from the biggest cost in the product.
2) One cannot compare the percieved speed of WinCE over 98, ME, or NT, or 2k. THey are *all* different, *especially* wince. Now, I'm no wince fan... but have you used some window managers lately? They actually feel much SLOWER than windows, (though to a seasoned user, the machine is obviously faster in the end)