have incontrovertable proof that they can target an arbitrary inidividual or group of individuals
I think that this is impossible. After all, bacteria and viruses mutate at incredible rates, and a "targeted" virus could very easily change its target, or lose its targeting altogether. Remember learning about exponential math in school? If you have one super-bacterium that multiplies every five minutes, after 1 day you will have:
1 day = 24 hrs = 1440 min = 288 5-minute periods
2^(288 - 1) = 248,661,618,204,893,321,077,691,124,073,410,000,00 0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000 bacteria (or 2.4866161820489332107769112407341 x 10^86 in sci. notation)
Of course, only a extremely small number of those will actually survive in the limited growth medium, and multiplication will slow down and stop eventually. But on the other hand, it is probably possible to engineer a bacterium or virus with a much shorter multiplication period, and the out-of-growth-medium problem can be solved by deploying at many distant locations at once. Even with all of these unknowns, and assuming an error magnitude of a a trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion (10^60) or more either way, the sheer scale of that number gives a sense of how easily this could get out of control.
IANABiologist, and IANAMathematician either, so please correct me if I am wrong.
Well, that's true. But open-source code is seen by many people from all different backgrounds. With all of these people, it is almost impossible to miss something like:
if (!strcmp(password, "netscapeprogrammersareweenies"))
access=FULL;
From the tone of your comment, you seem to think that this M$ backdoor is some kind of bug. It it not a bug, it is an intentional security hole. This is what Open Source can guard against.
Also remember that leaks are not always network leaks. No matter how good the network blocking, no computer network will ever be able to stop someone from charging across a border with a backpack full of CD-Rs. (For that matter, how about a small, cheap unmanned glider plane with a CD-R or two inside?) And then, as you have pointed out, the data is inside and can be spread anonymously. The two ways to combat this are:
Accept data leak as inevitable, and relax the information controls
Enforce all-out electronic, physical, and psychological war on independent data channels
Which option do you think is more sane? Now which option do you think most governments will choose? And this can happen to any country, not just the totalitarian ones. One has to wonder if someday in the US there will be a war on information like the current war on drugs. The US is still one of the most free places on earth. But the trend is rather disturbing.
see if Ricochet wireless modem service is available in your area
IIRC, Ricochets can act like normal peer-to-peer modems without paying for the Ricochet service. Here is some information about hooking up TI calculators to Ricochet modems and using them in direct peer-to-peer mode. It should be about as easy to hook an old Pentium to a land-based server. And Ricochets are very platform-independent; from what I have read they act like regular modems when used in peer-to-peer mode. To avoid paying for the Ricochet service, you need to get a used modem (off of Ebay, etc.)
The idea that one must lose privacy when one steps outside one's home is absurd.
Well, if you are in a public place you can't really expect privacy. However, you can expect not to be followed around. There's a big difference between a cop (or camera) on a street corner scanning for criminal activity, and a cop (or camera network) following a certain person around on the basis that they are probably a criminal. The key is detection of guilt vs. assumption of guilt. Currently, there's more of the former being used and less of the latter. But networking (in both the technical and organizational senses) these isolated cameras gives authorities the ability to, with a single command, track any (or every) citizen's movements. Public place or not, this is absurd.
I don't see this becoming the latest terrorist threat anytime soon.
The whole point is stealth. ICBMs give off a Helluva(tm) lot of heat energy that can be easily detected by oribiting satalites. Whereas, nudging an asteroid out of orbit could easily be done in a covert way. And just like nukes, asteroids come in all shapes and sizes. So you could do anything from wipe out an embassy to wipe out a country (although the latter is more likely). Imagine this: There are two world superpowers. Superpower A launches an asteroid strike at Superpower B. What's left of Superpower B then joins Superpower A in exchange for disaster relief. And Superpower A has no fear of rebellion or protests, because it was "all an accident".
this was a rather tasteless "joke" and I don't blame Mastercard for their actions in this particular case
<sarcasm>
Woah! There's something distasteful on the 'Net? How will I ever deal with this? I know, let's take down the website. After all, speech isn't protected if it insults someone.
</sarcasm>
I would agree with you that this is a rather distasteful joke. That doesn't mean that it should be punished. I challenge you to find one important or influential [book|song|movie|artwork|etc] that hasn't been attacked by someone for being "tasteless". It's just one of these "I don't like what you are saying but I will defend your right to say it" (who's quote is this anyway?) things. And as to the association, I would say that the whole "priceless" marketing idea has been so used and abused that it has entered the public domain. As long as you aren't directly slandering Mastercard, I think that it wouldn't be infringement. Note: IANAL.
Computer: $2500
Cable Modem: $40/mo
Slashdot membership: free
Posting a comment that mocks Mastercard by abusing their marketing campaign in a story about Mastercard going after such people: priceless
These "certain groups" are not claiming that violent games make violent kids more violent. They are claiming that two minutes of Quake will make a decent, God-fearing person into a crack-smoking, serial-killing prostitute. I wonder how much the advertisers will have to pay these certain groups to quit their whining. I can just imagine: Focus on the Family does a new article entitled "Why Videogames Are Now Wholesome Family Entertainment, And Have Some Pepsi While You're At It".
who the fuck would want to watch a video of people just walking around
A computer, that's who. Do you really think that Pedagog actually plans to hire thousands of workers to scan the footage from these cameras? No, which is why cameras don't actually prevent crime. But what they can do is hook a supercomputer up to all of these video feeds and pick out faces.
No-one wants to know where you are all the time.
Let's see:
Government (you might be a criminal, so we better make sure we know where you are)
Buisness (DoubleClick in real life)
Private citizens (Is your boy/girlfriend cheating on you? Monitor him/her!)
Surely they could draw a picture of you and show it to someone!
No, this is more like having someone following you and charting where you go on a map. Even though you are in a public place, this person could easily tell what private places you have visited. Oh yeah, and this information is personally identifiable too, so this mysterious cartographer knows where Joe Blatz was on Apr 3, 2010 at 9:36 PM. Now, how would you cope?
But every private place adjoins a public place. It is impossible to go from your house (private) to a friend's house (private) without using a road (public). Imagine a network of cameras, linked into a face-and-car-recognition computer:
10:32 AM: the cameras see you leave your house.
10:34 AM: they see you get on the freeway.
10:45 AM: they see you get off the freeway.
10:47 AM: they see you pull up to another house and go in.
All of these are public places. Yet the cameras can easily tell what private place you are in. And they can track you when you leave, and so on. So public cameras can indirectly spy on private places.
I agree with you that it costs to much to pipe the data back to humans. But I disagree that this makes it any better. Anyone remember this article? I bet that a few petaflop supercomputers could monitor a good percent of the US's cameras and track the whereabouts of criminals. "But that's OK, we don't like criminals!" you say. Well, once the system is in place, it becomes so much easier to abuse it. No, I don't think all government officials or corporate execs are corrupt (only a small number are). But all it takes is one. And conspiracy theories can become reality if nothing is done until it's too late.
MacOS is hard to break into from the outside but it offers little to no control from the inside. So, unlike *nix or Windows NT, MacOS has no access protection, user limits, etc (at least without buying 3rd party software). Running MacOS is like running a *nix on root all day. At least Windows NT has user limits. These admins are just being smart by not letting a user effectively have root access on a networked machine. By not letting them on the network, admins make sure that if the users mess up their machines, they can't hurt anyone else's in the process.
Let's take that post and run it through Babelfish (which is run by SYSTRAN).
English -> Spanish -> English:
I mean later, if I can say the difference between both, why could not the motor? The motor of the grammar is perhaps the incorrect phrase. The " motor of the context " is perhaps plus which I am later. I do not think full taking A.I. of it'd to do it. I think to the individuals like SYSTRAN that make the translation is 80% of the way there. Their motors understand the part of the context.
Or English -> Japanese -> English:
If it can say the difference between 2, as for me and the engine which why is not produced it means? it is the phrase which perhaps as for the grammatical engine you make a mistake. What I afterwards perhaps the " context engine " is many. **time-out** that do when I it'd acquire complete A.I. think. As been 80% there of the method SYSTRAN translating, I think of the person. The engine understands the part of context.
Finally, let's try English -> French -> German -> English:
I want to say, if I cannot make the difference between the two then why could the engine? Perhaps the grammar engine is the false printout. Perhaps the " connection engine " is more that thereafter are I. I think the seizure fully A. it'i. d not, in order to make it. I think the types such as Systran, those the translation make am 80% of the way there. Their engines cover a part of the connection.
...then pass a law that makes computer sellers ask if the customer wants it installed.
And how would this question be phrased? "Would you like your kids to be protected from porn, weapons, and cyberstalkers? Or do you want your kids to turn into psycho freaks?" Giving the customer an accurate description of censorware is not something that the computer manufacturors want to do. If the Dell order form mentions that their censorware only has a 25% accuracy rate, they will lose their whole "protect your kids from the evil internet" marketing ploy. So we will end up with the same "it's for the kids, and it works great" crap that has always been used to justify censorware.
P.S. I have nothing against Dell, it is just faster to type than Gateway 2000 or Compaq:-).
Of course it's not video games and cartoons. People are missing the real menace here: cheese.
---
Is cheese turning your kids into killers?
A recent study by a group of food scientists showed that, out of ten thousand high school students, one was more likely to have violent thoughts after eating a slice of cheese. This proves what many people have been suggesting for years: that cheese causes violence in schools. Conventional wisdom says that the Internet is mostly to blame, with video games and TV playing a major role also. Of absolutely no importance are social problems at school or overly-conformist teachers. But this new study is already changing people's thoughts about youth violence. One team researcher, who wishes to remain anonymous to protect himself from "those cheese-eating goons", remarked that "None of that matters anymore. Cheese is the only important factor."
It has already been shown that, at sometime in their lives, the shooters at Columbine and Santee high schools have eaten cheese. This proves that there is a strong correlation between cheese and violent acts. Said one researcher, "The harmful effects of cheese can affect one's behavior for up to ten years after eating the cheese. Our two-week study has proven this conclusively."
Parent groups are already protesting the use of cheese in so many of the foods that we eat every day. One parent said, "The food industry has a responsibility to make sure that their products don't cause kids to become violent." Concerned parents have formed so-called "CRAPPY" (Cheese Restriction And Protection Programs For Our Youth) groups throughout the country. Vocal CRAPPY parent John Blatz gave us his opinion on the matter: "It's just terrible how much cheese is being used in the foods we eat every day. I for one am urging Congress to pass the C-chip bill." The C-chip is a small device attached to a refrigerator. It prevents anyone under eighteen years old from removing any cheese-based product from the refrigerator. Says Blatz, "If this bill passes, the C-chip would be required in all new refrigerators. Also, simple add-on kits will be made available for all current refrigerator models. This will make it easy for parents to protect their kids from the cheese menace."
Schools everywhere have removed cheese from their school lunch menus. Schools are also craking down on cheese users. One school administrator remarked, "We are trying to find out which students at our school have eaten cheese recently. Those students will recieve special psychiatric counseling to compensate for the effects of the cheese. We must not let any cheese users remain at our school!"
An executive for a large cheese company responded to threats of legal action: "Cheese does not cause violence by itself. Parents need to be more aware of their kids' feelings, and talk to their kids on a regular basis." He was then trampled by a mob of CRAPPY parents bearing signs such as "Cheese Kills!" and "We Demand Cheese Restrictions!". Future action by CRAPPY is already planned. Said Blatz, "If we can't get the C-chip put into every refrigerator in the USA, we will take each and every cheese manufacturer to court for endangering our children. We will stop at nothing to protect our kids!"
---
Yes, I wrote all of this. It is copyrighted under the GNU Satire Licence (if such a thing exists).
My @home cable modem is $40/mo with included modem rental, and my best speed ever was 2.4Mbps (from a Debian mirror, not some local @home server.) @home claims that it can reach 10Mbps. With a few Mbps of speed, the bottleneck is usually on the remote site's end anyway. My average downloading speed is around 640Kbps, which is 80KB per second, so most web pages take ~3 seconds to load & display.
Yes, Freenet is a sea of porn. But it is not degenerating. It is becoming more and more useful as more people use it for other things. And searching is one of the main issues that are being worked on. Now my offtopic note:
We have centralized peer-to-peer networks (Napster) and completely decentralized p2p networks (Gnutella, Freenet). Would not a dynamically-centralizing network be better? It would be something like a Napster system where every client also has OpenNap code in it. So it is basically a two-part p2p system. Clients on the lower part (dialup) pass up searches to the upper part (some of the fastest cable, dsl, etc users), who then perform the search like any OpenNap server. The only completely decentralized part would be the passing of search server lists. When each client gets a server list, it will update its own internal list. It then pings each server on the list. If at least one is below a certain ping time, the client just passes on the server list. But if no servers get a fast enough ping, the client turns itself into a server, and adds itself to the list. When a client does a search, it will send the search to the closest (ping-wise) server, and those servers will contact the other servers, and so on. The system will limit the number of servers to a small percentage of the client population, and high-bandwith machines will be favored as servers. Servers could choose to only remain a server for a few minutes, and then give up their server status. This would make it almost impossible to bust those people who are running the servers. Does anyone know of a project that works like this?
Slashdot Mirror
You could produce a tone through the PC speaker untill the user ejects the cd, or for a specified amount of time.
I think that this is impossible. After all, bacteria and viruses mutate at incredible rates, and a "targeted" virus could very easily change its target, or lose its targeting altogether. Remember learning about exponential math in school? If you have one super-bacterium that multiplies every five minutes, after 1 day you will have:
1 day = 24 hrs = 1440 min = 288 5-minute periods0 0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000 bacteria (or 2.4866161820489332107769112407341 x 10^86 in sci. notation)
2^(288 - 1) = 248,661,618,204,893,321,077,691,124,073,410,000,0
Of course, only a extremely small number of those will actually survive in the limited growth medium, and multiplication will slow down and stop eventually. But on the other hand, it is probably possible to engineer a bacterium or virus with a much shorter multiplication period, and the out-of-growth-medium problem can be solved by deploying at many distant locations at once. Even with all of these unknowns, and assuming an error magnitude of a a trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion (10^60) or more either way, the sheer scale of that number gives a sense of how easily this could get out of control.
IANABiologist, and IANAMathematician either, so please correct me if I am wrong.
Yeah, let's set up them the bomb. For great justice.
Sorry, just had to say it :-)
Yeah, it doesn't matter. War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. 2+2=5.
if (!strcmp(password, "netscapeprogrammersareweenies"))
access=FULL;
From the tone of your comment, you seem to think that this M$ backdoor is some kind of bug. It it not a bug, it is an intentional security hole. This is what Open Source can guard against.
Also remember that leaks are not always network leaks. No matter how good the network blocking, no computer network will ever be able to stop someone from charging across a border with a backpack full of CD-Rs. (For that matter, how about a small, cheap unmanned glider plane with a CD-R or two inside?) And then, as you have pointed out, the data is inside and can be spread anonymously. The two ways to combat this are:
Which option do you think is more sane? Now which option do you think most governments will choose? And this can happen to any country, not just the totalitarian ones. One has to wonder if someday in the US there will be a war on information like the current war on drugs. The US is still one of the most free places on earth. But the trend is rather disturbing.
Text-to-speech is for weenies.
---
---
IIRC, Ricochets can act like normal peer-to-peer modems without paying for the Ricochet service. Here is some information about hooking up TI calculators to Ricochet modems and using them in direct peer-to-peer mode. It should be about as easy to hook an old Pentium to a land-based server. And Ricochets are very platform-independent; from what I have read they act like regular modems when used in peer-to-peer mode. To avoid paying for the Ricochet service, you need to get a used modem (off of Ebay, etc.)
---
---
---
Well, if you are in a public place you can't really expect privacy. However, you can expect not to be followed around. There's a big difference between a cop (or camera) on a street corner scanning for criminal activity, and a cop (or camera network) following a certain person around on the basis that they are probably a criminal. The key is detection of guilt vs. assumption of guilt. Currently, there's more of the former being used and less of the latter. But networking (in both the technical and organizational senses) these isolated cameras gives authorities the ability to, with a single command, track any (or every) citizen's movements. Public place or not, this is absurd.
---
The whole point is stealth. ICBMs give off a Helluva(tm) lot of heat energy that can be easily detected by oribiting satalites. Whereas, nudging an asteroid out of orbit could easily be done in a covert way. And just like nukes, asteroids come in all shapes and sizes. So you could do anything from wipe out an embassy to wipe out a country (although the latter is more likely). Imagine this: There are two world superpowers. Superpower A launches an asteroid strike at Superpower B. What's left of Superpower B then joins Superpower A in exchange for disaster relief. And Superpower A has no fear of rebellion or protests, because it was "all an accident".
---
<sarcasm>
Woah! There's something distasteful on the 'Net? How will I ever deal with this? I know, let's take down the website. After all, speech isn't protected if it insults someone.
</sarcasm>
I would agree with you that this is a rather distasteful joke. That doesn't mean that it should be punished. I challenge you to find one important or influential [book|song|movie|artwork|etc] that hasn't been attacked by someone for being "tasteless". It's just one of these "I don't like what you are saying but I will defend your right to say it" (who's quote is this anyway?) things. And as to the association, I would say that the whole "priceless" marketing idea has been so used and abused that it has entered the public domain. As long as you aren't directly slandering Mastercard, I think that it wouldn't be infringement. Note: IANAL.
Computer: $2500
Cable Modem: $40/mo
Slashdot membership: free
Posting a comment that mocks Mastercard by abusing their marketing campaign in a story about Mastercard going after such people: priceless
---
---
A computer, that's who. Do you really think that Pedagog actually plans to hire thousands of workers to scan the footage from these cameras? No, which is why cameras don't actually prevent crime. But what they can do is hook a supercomputer up to all of these video feeds and pick out faces.
No-one wants to know where you are all the time.
Let's see:
- Government (you might be a criminal, so we better make sure we know where you are)
- Buisness (DoubleClick in real life)
- Private citizens (Is your boy/girlfriend cheating on you? Monitor him/her!)
Surely they could draw a picture of you and show it to someone!No, this is more like having someone following you and charting where you go on a map. Even though you are in a public place, this person could easily tell what private places you have visited. Oh yeah, and this information is personally identifiable too, so this mysterious cartographer knows where Joe Blatz was on Apr 3, 2010 at 9:36 PM. Now, how would you cope?
---
All of these are public places. Yet the cameras can easily tell what private place you are in. And they can track you when you leave, and so on. So public cameras can indirectly spy on private places.
---
I agree with you that it costs to much to pipe the data back to humans. But I disagree that this makes it any better. Anyone remember this article? I bet that a few petaflop supercomputers could monitor a good percent of the US's cameras and track the whereabouts of criminals. "But that's OK, we don't like criminals!" you say. Well, once the system is in place, it becomes so much easier to abuse it. No, I don't think all government officials or corporate execs are corrupt (only a small number are). But all it takes is one. And conspiracy theories can become reality if nothing is done until it's too late.
---
---
English -> Spanish -> English:
I mean later, if I can say the difference between both, why could not the motor? The motor of the grammar is perhaps the incorrect phrase. The " motor of the context " is perhaps plus which I am later. I do not think full taking A.I. of it'd to do it. I think to the individuals like SYSTRAN that make the translation is 80% of the way there. Their motors understand the part of the context.
Or English -> Japanese -> English:
If it can say the difference between 2, as for me and the engine which why is not produced it means? it is the phrase which perhaps as for the grammatical engine you make a mistake. What I afterwards perhaps the " context engine " is many. **time-out** that do when I it'd acquire complete A.I. think. As been 80% there of the method SYSTRAN translating, I think of the person. The engine understands the part of context.
Finally, let's try English -> French -> German -> English:
I want to say, if I cannot make the difference between the two then why could the engine? Perhaps the grammar engine is the false printout. Perhaps the " connection engine " is more that thereafter are I. I think the seizure fully A. it'i. d not, in order to make it. I think the types such as Systran, those the translation make am 80% of the way there. Their engines cover a part of the connection.
80%, eh?
---
And how would this question be phrased? "Would you like your kids to be protected from porn, weapons, and cyberstalkers? Or do you want your kids to turn into psycho freaks?" Giving the customer an accurate description of censorware is not something that the computer manufacturors want to do. If the Dell order form mentions that their censorware only has a 25% accuracy rate, they will lose their whole "protect your kids from the evil internet" marketing ploy. So we will end up with the same "it's for the kids, and it works great" crap that has always been used to justify censorware.
P.S. I have nothing against Dell, it is just faster to type than Gateway 2000 or Compaq :-).
---
---
Is cheese turning your kids into killers?
A recent study by a group of food scientists showed that, out of ten thousand high school students, one was more likely to have violent thoughts after eating a slice of cheese. This proves what many people have been suggesting for years: that cheese causes violence in schools. Conventional wisdom says that the Internet is mostly to blame, with video games and TV playing a major role also. Of absolutely no importance are social problems at school or overly-conformist teachers. But this new study is already changing people's thoughts about youth violence. One team researcher, who wishes to remain anonymous to protect himself from "those cheese-eating goons", remarked that "None of that matters anymore. Cheese is the only important factor."
It has already been shown that, at sometime in their lives, the shooters at Columbine and Santee high schools have eaten cheese. This proves that there is a strong correlation between cheese and violent acts. Said one researcher, "The harmful effects of cheese can affect one's behavior for up to ten years after eating the cheese. Our two-week study has proven this conclusively."
Parent groups are already protesting the use of cheese in so many of the foods that we eat every day. One parent said, "The food industry has a responsibility to make sure that their products don't cause kids to become violent." Concerned parents have formed so-called "CRAPPY" (Cheese Restriction And Protection Programs For Our Youth) groups throughout the country. Vocal CRAPPY parent John Blatz gave us his opinion on the matter: "It's just terrible how much cheese is being used in the foods we eat every day. I for one am urging Congress to pass the C-chip bill." The C-chip is a small device attached to a refrigerator. It prevents anyone under eighteen years old from removing any cheese-based product from the refrigerator. Says Blatz, "If this bill passes, the C-chip would be required in all new refrigerators. Also, simple add-on kits will be made available for all current refrigerator models. This will make it easy for parents to protect their kids from the cheese menace."
Schools everywhere have removed cheese from their school lunch menus. Schools are also craking down on cheese users. One school administrator remarked, "We are trying to find out which students at our school have eaten cheese recently. Those students will recieve special psychiatric counseling to compensate for the effects of the cheese. We must not let any cheese users remain at our school!"
An executive for a large cheese company responded to threats of legal action: "Cheese does not cause violence by itself. Parents need to be more aware of their kids' feelings, and talk to their kids on a regular basis." He was then trampled by a mob of CRAPPY parents bearing signs such as "Cheese Kills!" and "We Demand Cheese Restrictions!". Future action by CRAPPY is already planned. Said Blatz, "If we can't get the C-chip put into every refrigerator in the USA, we will take each and every cheese manufacturer to court for endangering our children. We will stop at nothing to protect our kids!"
---
Yes, I wrote all of this. It is copyrighted under the GNU Satire Licence (if such a thing exists).
---
---
We have centralized peer-to-peer networks (Napster) and completely decentralized p2p networks (Gnutella, Freenet). Would not a dynamically-centralizing network be better? It would be something like a Napster system where every client also has OpenNap code in it. So it is basically a two-part p2p system. Clients on the lower part (dialup) pass up searches to the upper part (some of the fastest cable, dsl, etc users), who then perform the search like any OpenNap server. The only completely decentralized part would be the passing of search server lists. When each client gets a server list, it will update its own internal list. It then pings each server on the list. If at least one is below a certain ping time, the client just passes on the server list. But if no servers get a fast enough ping, the client turns itself into a server, and adds itself to the list. When a client does a search, it will send the search to the closest (ping-wise) server, and those servers will contact the other servers, and so on. The system will limit the number of servers to a small percentage of the client population, and high-bandwith machines will be favored as servers. Servers could choose to only remain a server for a few minutes, and then give up their server status. This would make it almost impossible to bust those people who are running the servers. Does anyone know of a project that works like this?
---