Yeah, because their stock in the the dumps.
I have 100 shares. hoping they'll do something to make it worth selling at a profit. I've had them for a decade. just waiting for a good time to sell. I'll keep my eye on the price.
Not specifically a written law.
The practice started in Rome in the first couple centuries BC. Powerful men were granted license to exclusively produce something. Sometimes it was because they were doing something new. Sometimes because they owned the mine. Patent didn't mean new, just verified.
The meaning of words change over time.
As for the patent system, England did not invent it. Look to Italy.
When a phone has signal, the back channel includes information about neighboring cells. So, it knows where to look for the next back channel. Only a few frequencies to tune to.
The problem starts when contact is lost. Phones use power looking for a signal. Re-tuning the receiver is not free.
They continuously tune over a series of frequencies looking for one. And keep cycling through them.
This bitter cycle of finding nothing uses up a phones battery very quickly. Before smart phones it was the single largest power user.
This is an OLD problem. It was well known in the industry in 1990.
I started writing software for cell phone companies in 1990. I learned more than I ever wanted to know about how cell phones work. Moved on to a different industry in 2000. Some things don't change. At least not quickly.
Someone who has a problem with private code voted my initial post down to troll.
Interesting
What I was trying to point out is that private encryption can be much more secure than public.
obviously there needs to be oversight.
A carefully managed system with a private encryption system can be very safe, and far less costly than an open one. But it does mean you can't publish the code.
Given the recent heartbleed issue. How secure is open source?
A system that few know is far more secure than an open one.
Quit trying to find fault with those who legitimately desire security over openness. Not every close system is suspect.
The stupidest mickey mouse cypher will thwart some of the best hackers, if they don't know the algorithm.
For those that say the count must be open. How can a secret ballot be open? At some point you have NO control. You HAVE to trust someone. If you don't, go home.
Rigging elections is ancient, been done for thousands of years. Computers are just the new toy on the block.
It comes down to if the people that run the system want to game it they can. Actually it's easier to mess with paper ballots. Messing with software leaves a trail.
I've been deliberately conserving my energy use. Adding insulation. Only using room air conditioners (Any one with central air needs to get a clue). For over 2 decades.
Not perfect, but trying to strike a balance. The AC runs less than a few weeks a year.
I'm not sure what this study is about. Probably someone is trying to game the system.
For the guy that's done time. Most likely he has to admit he has.
For the average person caught in this, this isn't likely to make a big difference. They can't afford the costs of trying to have their records hidden. And for the most part, no one cares, beyond the obvious.
This is about RICH, WEALTHY, individuals who have been reasonably damned, and want to hide it.
Can't sue for slander in the US if it's true.
The EU seems to have a different opinion of past records.
Not that it really maters. The EU ban only applies to EU sites. Simple enough to proxy around to get the details. It only deters the casual browser.
It's a brave new world. Despite some country's laws, you don't have the right to be forgotten. Until every country enacts such laws, you're out.
There are other similar battles, will be interesting to see which island wins.
I feel sorry for those who legitimately should have stories removed. Falsely accused, slandered, etc. Though if the site takes the time to put the truthful rebuttals up front it would mitigate that.
For those legitimately outed I have no sympathy. With one exception: someone whose criminal record has been expunged. That is a legal proceeding, which carries weight. Of course the site owner opens himself and the site to prosecution for slander. Forget international borders, someone anywhere in the world can sue you in the US for slander.
The underground economy has many faces.
drugs
Theft
worse crime
far less insidious, unreported labor
All these will have serous problems in a cashless world. There are ways around these with some problems. But, it will drive small players out of the market.
Not a pretty picture for some.
When the DMCA laws were first proposed, there was supposed to be a penalty for making a false claim.
Obviously this needs to be re-visited.
Automated or not, someone set up the system. "Oh. I'm sorry. My Automated script did it". Make them pay a fine. One which increases for each false claim.
Another problem is third party enforcement. Rights holders hire companies to do this for them, then wash their hands of it. Make the original rights holders responsible. That's the way is works in the brick and mortar world. Own a building, you're liable. If a contractor does shoddy, you're responsible. Though you may be able to sue the contractor.
As people and companies are claiming (and in many cases justly so) real rights to content on the internet. It's time to bring the other side of that coin into play. If someone wrongly says they own part of your yard, you're entitled to damages.
Get off my yard.
This is just a guess, but I believe your assessment why you were modded down is correct. Making comments that might offend people has consequences.
Your post is off topic, and bashes Microsoft for things not relevant. As for your previous posts, having modded comments, previous posts are pretty much impossible to find. Modding is based on the current comment.
I'm not a fan of Microsoft. I've been playing and working with computers since before Microsoft existed. I've posted on this thread. Canada is the party at fault, Microsoft is just responding to a stupid law.
I love bashing Microsoft, but the pickings have been slim lately, they're failing. They won't go out of business, but their clout is gone.
A security notice for a purchased product could be considered to be of a commercial nature.
Are you willing to bet the farm on it?
Your legal fees will be over $1,000,000 even if you win.
OH! and the idiot that sued you is penniless, forget recovery.
Seemed like a good idea. I don't think so, but someone did.
What an absolute fail of a law.
It might work if the sender could reasonably presume that if the email address didn't end in.ca it wasn't a problem.
The cost. of defense is too high. Canada just screwed the pooch.
There may be a bright side. It will force international law to cross the internet. As this is a Canadian law, only addresses ending in.ca should matter. Of course that opens a much bigger can of worms.
Then again it could just result in an explicit opt in: I AM NOT A CANADIAN! If you check it an lie you are guilty of perjury. NO Canadians allowed.
Perhaps the future of an internet second class.
Of course I'm being melodramatic. But this law is melodramatic. Some idiot with no clue wrote it, and got it passed. It deserves derision.
well, you just described a way to tweak an algorithm.
wouldn't even have to go to a 256 bit key. Doing that into MD5 would probably foil anything less than a concerted financial attack.
No media outlet could afford the computing power to attack that.
I used the same approach, with some further tweaks to secure financial communications a decade ago.
Lack of understanding security doesn't surprise me. I'm an engineer who does. I designed and wrote a suite that passed a 3d party, hostile, security audit.
nope, it has to do with the key. given a tag # and license # you can dictionary attack the hash. especially since the the source data is known, easy to break.
You've elegantly described why stiff federal penalties are needed.
Interesting that when a direct line to someone's pocketbook is defined everyone gets on board, but when it's just a chance someone's drinking water would be tainted with cancer causing chemicals most can't find the connection.
Corporate malfeasance comes in all forms.
Small problem.
Taxi Hack numbers are available in a publicly accessible data base.
A determined individual probably could find license numbers, they may be publicly accessible.
Failure to understand the vulnerability is the design failure.
A simple solution would have been to order the hashes numerically and re-number them cardinally. ie. 1,2,3...
Would take less than a minute, for someone than knew how.
Perhaps a few hours if the right person had to be tracked down.
Never release source data.
Using any public hash exposes you to dictionary attacks. Especially when you publish which one you've used.
The quality of the encryption is irrelevant.
Security through obscurity, using a custom algorithm, is the only way.
Taking MD5, it's published, and tweaking a few points (though who ever did this needs to be very competent) would have been sufficient.
Some manager probably said any work for addition security wasn't worth the cost. Ooops!
OK, my subject is an exaggeration.
The ship is still sinking.
Apple isn't winning the desktop space. But Microsoft is still losing. Linux never really made the field.
I won't go into the mobile space, where desktop is going, but MS is losing badly there.
Slashdot Mirror
Over 1000 times $125,000 is over $1 Billion. ....
Fiscal penalties can work
They're ruined.
Civil rights violations are a federal crime.
Yeah, because their stock in the the dumps.
I have 100 shares. hoping they'll do something to make it worth selling at a profit. I've had them for a decade. just waiting for a good time to sell. I'll keep my eye on the price.
Not specifically a written law.
The practice started in Rome in the first couple centuries BC. Powerful men were granted license to exclusively produce something. Sometimes it was because they were doing something new. Sometimes because they owned the mine. Patent didn't mean new, just verified.
The meaning of words change over time.
As for the patent system, England did not invent it. Look to Italy.
Sounds like it.
When I'm where I know I'm not likely to have signal I either turn my phone off or put it airplane mode.
When a phone has signal, the back channel includes information about neighboring cells. So, it knows where to look for the next back channel. Only a few frequencies to tune to. The problem starts when contact is lost. Phones use power looking for a signal. Re-tuning the receiver is not free.
They continuously tune over a series of frequencies looking for one. And keep cycling through them.
This bitter cycle of finding nothing uses up a phones battery very quickly. Before smart phones it was the single largest power user.
This is an OLD problem. It was well known in the industry in 1990.
I started writing software for cell phone companies in 1990. I learned more than I ever wanted to know about how cell phones work. Moved on to a different industry in 2000. Some things don't change. At least not quickly.
roflmfao
too funny for words. amazing.
From an old limerick: ...
Latin is a dead language, dead as can be.
Some previous posts mention other current platforms. Try those. Palm is dead.
side note. a 2E that sill works? Mine died years ago.
In the current terrorist, not nation state world, what does this service.
Except to waste my tax dollars!
Someone who has a problem with private code voted my initial post down to troll.
Interesting
What I was trying to point out is that private encryption can be much more secure than public.
obviously there needs to be oversight.
A carefully managed system with a private encryption system can be very safe, and far less costly than an open one. But it does mean you can't publish the code.
Given the recent heartbleed issue. How secure is open source?
A system that few know is far more secure than an open one.
Quit trying to find fault with those who legitimately desire security over openness. Not every close system is suspect.
The stupidest mickey mouse cypher will thwart some of the best hackers, if they don't know the algorithm.
For those that say the count must be open. How can a secret ballot be open? At some point you have NO control. You HAVE to trust someone. If you don't, go home.
Rigging elections is ancient, been done for thousands of years. Computers are just the new toy on the block.
It comes down to if the people that run the system want to game it they can. Actually it's easier to mess with paper ballots. Messing with software leaves a trail.
I've been deliberately conserving my energy use. Adding insulation. Only using room air conditioners (Any one with central air needs to get a clue). For over 2 decades.
Not perfect, but trying to strike a balance. The AC runs less than a few weeks a year.
I'm not sure what this study is about. Probably someone is trying to game the system.
For the guy that's done time. Most likely he has to admit he has.
For the average person caught in this, this isn't likely to make a big difference. They can't afford the costs of trying to have their records hidden. And for the most part, no one cares, beyond the obvious.
This is about RICH, WEALTHY, individuals who have been reasonably damned, and want to hide it.
Can't sue for slander in the US if it's true.
The EU seems to have a different opinion of past records.
Not that it really maters. The EU ban only applies to EU sites. Simple enough to proxy around to get the details. It only deters the casual browser.
It's a brave new world. Despite some country's laws, you don't have the right to be forgotten. Until every country enacts such laws, you're out.
There are other similar battles, will be interesting to see which island wins.
I feel sorry for those who legitimately should have stories removed. Falsely accused, slandered, etc. Though if the site takes the time to put the truthful rebuttals up front it would mitigate that.
For those legitimately outed I have no sympathy. With one exception: someone whose criminal record has been expunged. That is a legal proceeding, which carries weight. Of course the site owner opens himself and the site to prosecution for slander. Forget international borders, someone anywhere in the world can sue you in the US for slander.
The underground economy has many faces.
drugs
Theft
worse crime
far less insidious, unreported labor
All these will have serous problems in a cashless world. There are ways around these with some problems. But, it will drive small players out of the market.
Not a pretty picture for some.
When the DMCA laws were first proposed, there was supposed to be a penalty for making a false claim.
Obviously this needs to be re-visited.
Automated or not, someone set up the system. "Oh. I'm sorry. My Automated script did it". Make them pay a fine. One which increases for each false claim.
Another problem is third party enforcement. Rights holders hire companies to do this for them, then wash their hands of it. Make the original rights holders responsible. That's the way is works in the brick and mortar world. Own a building, you're liable. If a contractor does shoddy, you're responsible. Though you may be able to sue the contractor.
As people and companies are claiming (and in many cases justly so) real rights to content on the internet. It's time to bring the other side of that coin into play. If someone wrongly says they own part of your yard, you're entitled to damages.
Get off my yard.
This is just a guess, but I believe your assessment why you were modded down is correct. Making comments that might offend people has consequences.
Your post is off topic, and bashes Microsoft for things not relevant. As for your previous posts, having modded comments, previous posts are pretty much impossible to find. Modding is based on the current comment.
I'm not a fan of Microsoft. I've been playing and working with computers since before Microsoft existed. I've posted on this thread. Canada is the party at fault, Microsoft is just responding to a stupid law.
I love bashing Microsoft, but the pickings have been slim lately, they're failing. They won't go out of business, but their clout is gone.
A security notice for a purchased product could be considered to be of a commercial nature.
Are you willing to bet the farm on it?
Your legal fees will be over $1,000,000 even if you win.
OH! and the idiot that sued you is penniless, forget recovery.
Seemed like a good idea. I don't think so, but someone did. .ca it wasn't a problem.
.ca should matter. Of course that opens a much bigger can of worms.
What an absolute fail of a law.
It might work if the sender could reasonably presume that if the email address didn't end in
The cost. of defense is too high. Canada just screwed the pooch.
There may be a bright side. It will force international law to cross the internet. As this is a Canadian law, only addresses ending in
Then again it could just result in an explicit opt in: I AM NOT A CANADIAN! If you check it an lie you are guilty of perjury. NO Canadians allowed.
Perhaps the future of an internet second class.
Of course I'm being melodramatic. But this law is melodramatic. Some idiot with no clue wrote it, and got it passed. It deserves derision.
well, you just described a way to tweak an algorithm.
wouldn't even have to go to a 256 bit key. Doing that into MD5 would probably foil anything less than a concerted financial attack.
No media outlet could afford the computing power to attack that.
I used the same approach, with some further tweaks to secure financial communications a decade ago.
Lack of understanding security doesn't surprise me. I'm an engineer who does. I designed and wrote a suite that passed a 3d party, hostile, security audit.
nope, it has to do with the key. given a tag # and license # you can dictionary attack the hash. especially since the the source data is known, easy to break.
they didn't pre-anonamize the keys
You've elegantly described why stiff federal penalties are needed.
Interesting that when a direct line to someone's pocketbook is defined everyone gets on board, but when it's just a chance someone's drinking water would be tainted with cancer causing chemicals most can't find the connection.
Corporate malfeasance comes in all forms.
Small problem. ...
Taxi Hack numbers are available in a publicly accessible data base.
A determined individual probably could find license numbers, they may be publicly accessible.
Failure to understand the vulnerability is the design failure.
A simple solution would have been to order the hashes numerically and re-number them cardinally. ie. 1,2,3
Would take less than a minute, for someone than knew how.
Perhaps a few hours if the right person had to be tracked down.
Never release source data.
Using any public hash exposes you to dictionary attacks. Especially when you publish which one you've used.
The quality of the encryption is irrelevant.
Security through obscurity, using a custom algorithm, is the only way.
Taking MD5, it's published, and tweaking a few points (though who ever did this needs to be very competent) would have been sufficient.
Some manager probably said any work for addition security wasn't worth the cost. Ooops!
OK, my subject is an exaggeration.
The ship is still sinking.
Apple isn't winning the desktop space. But Microsoft is still losing. Linux never really made the field.
I won't go into the mobile space, where desktop is going, but MS is losing badly there.
US campaign laws are tissue paper.
SO thin you wouldn't want to wipe with them.