There is a model of how a hypothetical Internet site called "Slashdot" behaves.
There is a model of how text entered into this hyprothetical site changes state, through unseen processes called "moderating".
They have detected something that accepts text and causes it to change state based on this hypothetical event called "moderating".
They have concluded this must therefore be "Slashdot".
As "proof" goes, that's fairly feeble.
I am very skeptical about the very existance of this supposed "Slashdot" object, and adhere to the alternate hypothesis that it is in fact thousands of monkeys pounding on typewriters.
Try to prove me wrong. You cannot. There is no scientific proof that "Slashdot" exists, apart from certain observed phenomenon that follow the predicted behavior.
That's the whole problem. Why should we sit by and let these things happen? What you're doing isn't illegal now, perhaps, but what about when it becomes illegal?
Consider the things that were illegal or could otherwise result in official harassment just a generation or 2 ago: - Termination of pregnancy - ANY sort of birth control (in some states - the prohibition wasn't declared unconstitutional until the 1960's) - Sex outside of marriage - not just homosexual relations, but adultery and seduction were also a crime in many jurisdictions - Possessing sexually oriented material that by today's standards wouldn't be worth a shrug - Being of Japanese ancestry during the wrong war - Being vocally opposed to US intervention in Southeast Asia in the 1960's - Supporting ending racial segregation - Joining an anti-fascist organization in one's youth in the 1930's, and being called on it 15 years later. - Organizing or supporting a labor union
If the power of the government was used in the past to prosecute or harass individuals doing these things, what would the future bring? When our entire life history is transparent will there be any excape?
What will happen when some equally repressive law gets through and you entire past is an open book? What current legal activities will be a cause for persecution 20 years from now?
This may (in my darkest paranoia) be a pre-emptive move against some sort of large scale reaction against a major war. The people proposing these things all have very vivid memories of the Vietnam war and of how extreme the opposition to it was, and how this opposition made it very very difficult to prosecute that war.
In the next war, the next Daniel Ellsberg will vanish into military detention never to be heard from again.
Dissenters will be tracked closely and neutralized very effectively.
Fought by the telecomm industry - too expensive to build in the capability to monitor 1% of all calls (a tremendous number). Now a requirement, despite their objections.
Expect something similar here, except in many cases the gov't could just buy the data. Ever wonder how all that junk mail gets to you? Yup, commercial mailing lists cleverly organized by target demographics and build from almost anything you have bought or thought about buying.
The November 2001 issue of QST magazine had a "messiest ham radio shack" contest. No link unfortunately - even as an ARRL member, I could not get the article online. Some amazing stuff, though the proprietors have about 30-40 years on the supposed owners of the Slashdot geek-spaces. Of course, ham radio operators get to clutter up their roof and backyard with all sorts of interesting antennae as well.
Something to look forward to in your old age?
BTW, ARRL = American Radio Relay League, an amateur radio organization, which publishes QST their monthly magazine.
Much of the world would like America's prosperity and much of the world envies it. Well, these are the sorts of things you have to do if you want that prosperity.
And thanks to this judge's ruling, California is no longer part of America?
Much of the world would like America's prosperity and much of the world envies it. Well, these are the sorts of things you have to do if you want that prosperity.
Wresting control of reproduction out of the anarchic whims of parents and placing it under state control was essential to Huxley's totalitarian dystopia.
Brave New World was a satire of what the world was and could become. It was meant to warn of the consequences of unchecked technologically advanced social control.
Controlled reproduction was as important to Brave New World as telescreens were to 1984.
Right. Try having a public speech in support of forming a Nazi party and see how free you are to speak.
All men are created free and equal... *bzzzt* Nope, not under a Nazi regime. Every country has its own ghosts. I wonder how it was like trying to start a communist party in the "land of the free" before the USSR collapsed in on itself.
(Emphasis added). No need to wonder. They had this thing called the Smith Act . Being affiliated in any way with the Communist Party was a sure ticket to hell on earth. Imagine the combination of this law and this sort of political climate & the surveillance technology in this proposal. I am very afraid.
You've got excellent hands-on experience managing a warehouse, along with a CS degree that indicates some smarts and an aptitude for math. There is a place for people like you in the area of logistics, operations research, and production planning.
I would also reccomend this field for other burned out CS types. You have the advantage of working with real tangible goods and a very down-to-earth set of people.
where do I go? Since this topic has attracted all the./ mainframers maybe one of you guys can suggest some books/websites/etc. for:
- An overview of mainframe architecture and operations, not too "marketing like", one that assumes a basic computer science background but not mainframe
- A kind of basic "how to" for someone who is starting to program on these beasts. Cover basic JCL, TSO commands, file (oops, dataset) management, etc.
I've been trying to find something like this, as I've had to pick up this topic quickly. All I can find are the IBM manuals on-line (too detailed, and assume lots 'o prior MF background) or some rather superficial marketing type books (e.g. "Exploring IBM S/390 Computers") with little practical technical meat.
Can you Mainframe guys help a poor suffering UNIX-type get up to speed on z/OS, OS/390, MVS or whatever its called nowadays?
Al Queda's crypto wasn't the issue, it was the fact that a sensitive computer managed to be looted then sold in the black market to an American journalist.
This is a failure of physical security, not cryptography. If Al Queda had good procedures to destroy sensitive materials in the event of a military loss, we would not be discussing crypto here.
- A clearance is much more intrusive than any background check a private employer might do. You are required to answer very personal questions that would be absolutely illegal for a private employer to ask. You are required to answer them under oath, and in some cases with a polygraph attached.
- Once you have a clearance, your ability to engage in otherwise legal (and sometimes otherwise constitutionally protected) activities is restricted. Be careful if the magazine you read advocates doing things "contrary to a government employee's bosses interest".
I think I'd rather be a free citizen than live this way. Others thinking about "the clearance route" should think hard about what they are giving up.
Having to live your life so that you always need to be concerned whether an associate, organization, or legal spare-time activity may result in your clearance being revoked is a very sad way to live in my opinion.
If you believe that your activities or politics (for instance, the same guy in the 1950s, when his bedroom antics were illegal, well, unless your last name was Hoover;-) are fundamentally incompatible with a clearance, then be honest with yourself and your potential employer, and don't ask for one, nor expect to work on projects that require one.
And how would one know if they are compatible with a clearance?
I can only write what I observe, which is many people I know with TS (and in some cases secret) clearances are very nervous about activities which are entirely legal. I don't know if they would in fact lose their clearances or not for these activities, but somehow they have gotten the idea they will (or could). Why would someone be afraid to post a commentary critical of US govt' crypto export policies on their person Web page? Be concerned about possessing a copy of 2600 magazine? Refuse to go to a rowdy (though very legal) nightclub? I've run into all of these. Are these folks are paranoid, or are your non-work activities really scrutinized this closely?
So you agree that a security clearance is not a trivial matter (as some prior posters have implied)?
And you also agree that people wishing a clearance should submit recognize that they may no longer be able to exercise the full range of legal, constitutionally protected activities that citizens are permitted?
Having to live your life so that you always need to be concerned whether an associate, organization, or legal spare-time activity may result in your clearance being revoked is a very sad way to live in my opinion.
A security clearance is not as trivial as some make it.
Let's look at some choice questions on DD Form 398-2:
13. Foreign Travel / Connections
Under oath, provide a detailed list of every foreign country you ever visited, including Mexico or Canada. Of course if you live write next to the border of our NAFTA neighbors, you can summarize trips of less than one day's duration without providing all details.
19. Credit History
In addition to the usual public records tuff (bankruptcy, etc.) you must list any time you were significantly delinquent on debt, even if the creditor did not take any legal action against you.
20. Drug/Alcohol Use and Mental Health
Be prepared to list EVERY time you indulged in an illegal substance, purchased such items, misused a prescription drug. Provide dates, places, etc. for EACH instance.
Also, state under oath whether you've ever been counseled by a mental health professional, and be prepared to give details (the shrink's name, dates, nature of the "problem" etc.).
21. Organizations
"List all organizations in which you hold or have held membership since you were 16". You must provide the name of the organization, address, type of organization, and dates of membership.
For a secret clearance, I'm told you provide this all in writing under oath. For top secret, I've been told you are subject to polygraph examination regarding these points.
I do not have a clearance myself, but folks I know with high level clearances are very careful about their activities, who they associate with, etc. It seems a very guarded life.
In any event, this is far beyond what private employers require (or can even legally ask), which at most is a criminal records, public records, and maybe credit check.
In general, false speech that results in harm CAN be litigated (see slander and libel).
Now, to defend this effort, keep in mind that liability does not exist for any flaw in a product (unless you have strict liability, which actually applies to very few things). It must be shown that:
- The flaw existed in the software
- The plaintiff suffered some economic loss
- The flaw result from a failure of due care on the part of the defendant.
You don't have to write perfect software. You only have to write software according to currently accepted practices in the field of software engineering. Someone trying to sue would have to prove you are negligent in that area. If you can defend your design, development, and QA process, they don't have a case.
Your software would also have to be of a mission-critical nature that it causes enough damage to justify a suit. You'd have a hard time proving a bug in TuxRider qualifies.
The you have to convince a judge or jury of all of the above. This means you'd have to have a very very strong case against the software company.
Finally, for handling ordinary cases, many small businesses, independent professionals and non-profits carry insurance. Is there a reason RedHat, etc. couldn't do so? And that if they followed good software engineering practices, the premiums would not be excessive. In fact, open source software which is designed to be secure (OpenBSD, etc.) would probably pay minimum premiums, as a reward for their efforts.
Slashdot Mirror
There is a model of how a hypothetical Internet site called "Slashdot" behaves.
There is a model of how text entered into this hyprothetical site changes state, through unseen processes called "moderating".
They have detected something that accepts text and causes it to change state based on this hypothetical event called "moderating".
They have concluded this must therefore be "Slashdot".
As "proof" goes, that's fairly feeble.
I am very skeptical about the very existance of this supposed "Slashdot" object, and adhere to the alternate hypothesis that it is in fact thousands of monkeys pounding on typewriters.
Try to prove me wrong. You cannot. There is no scientific proof that "Slashdot" exists, apart from certain observed phenomenon that follow the predicted behavior.
Who needs an elite h4xx0r? Just throw a bundle of money at some underpaid government flunky and you will get all the data quicker and cheaper.
Do you think the people maintaining all this very valuable very sensitive data will be incorruptible? Do you still believe in Santa Claus?
That's the whole problem. Why should we sit by and let these things happen? What you're doing isn't illegal now, perhaps, but what about when it becomes illegal?
Consider the things that were illegal or could otherwise result in official harassment just a generation or 2 ago:
- Termination of pregnancy
- ANY sort of birth control (in some states - the prohibition wasn't declared unconstitutional until the 1960's)
- Sex outside of marriage - not just homosexual relations, but adultery and seduction were also a crime in many jurisdictions
- Possessing sexually oriented material that by today's standards wouldn't be worth a shrug
- Being of Japanese ancestry during the wrong war
- Being vocally opposed to US intervention in Southeast Asia in the 1960's
- Supporting ending racial segregation
- Joining an anti-fascist organization in one's youth in the 1930's, and being called on it 15 years later.
- Organizing or supporting a labor union
If the power of the government was used in the past to prosecute or harass individuals doing these things, what would the future bring? When our entire life history is transparent will there be any excape?
What will happen when some equally repressive law gets through and you entire past is an open book? What current legal activities will be a cause for persecution 20 years from now?
In the next war, the next Daniel Ellsberg will vanish into military detention never to be heard from again.
Dissenters will be tracked closely and neutralized very effectively.
Not that I'm paranoid or anything...
Fought by the telecomm industry - too expensive to build in the capability to monitor 1% of all calls (a tremendous number). Now a requirement, despite their objections.
Expect something similar here, except in many cases the gov't could just buy the data. Ever wonder how all that junk mail gets to you? Yup, commercial mailing lists cleverly organized by target demographics and build from almost anything you have bought or thought about buying.
As described in a very bad Ken Russell movie, Gothic . Based on just the slightest bit of truth
Cold device connection cable
Real men have one 17" flat panel display and a KVM switch.
Something to look forward to in your old age?
BTW, ARRL = American Radio Relay League, an amateur radio organization, which publishes QST their monthly magazine.
Take it to Black Rock Desert for the Burning Man Festival
Burn it
And thanks to this judge's ruling, California is no longer part of America?
Much of the world would like America's prosperity and much of the world envies it. Well, these are the sorts of things you have to do if you want that prosperity.
Utopia = a vision of a perfect society
Dystopia = a vision of a society gone perfectly wrong
Yes, dystopia is a real word.
No, Aldous Huxley NEVER intended Brave New World to be a vision of what the future ought to be.
See this review at Amazon.com
Wresting control of reproduction out of the anarchic whims of parents and placing it under state control was essential to Huxley's totalitarian dystopia.
Brave New World was a satire of what the world was and could become. It was meant to warn of the consequences of unchecked technologically advanced social control.
Controlled reproduction was as important to Brave New World as telescreens were to 1984.
(Emphasis added). No need to wonder. They had this thing called the Smith Act . Being affiliated in any way with the Communist Party was a sure ticket to hell on earth. Imagine the combination of this law and this sort of political climate & the surveillance technology in this proposal. I am very afraid.
You've got excellent hands-on experience managing a warehouse, along with a CS degree that indicates some smarts and an aptitude for math. There is a place for people like you in the area of logistics, operations research, and production planning.
Look into the American Production and Inventory Control Society and their certifications . These are well regarded in the field.
I would also reccomend this field for other burned out CS types. You have the advantage of working with real tangible goods and a very down-to-earth set of people.
where do I go? Since this topic has attracted all the ./ mainframers maybe one of you guys can suggest some books/websites/etc. for:
- An overview of mainframe architecture and operations, not too "marketing like", one that assumes a basic computer science background but not mainframe
- A kind of basic "how to" for someone who is starting to program on these beasts. Cover basic JCL, TSO commands, file (oops, dataset) management, etc.
I've been trying to find something like this, as I've had to pick up this topic quickly. All I can find are the IBM manuals on-line (too detailed, and assume lots 'o prior MF background) or some rather superficial marketing type books (e.g. "Exploring IBM S/390 Computers") with little practical technical meat.
Can you Mainframe guys help a poor suffering UNIX-type get up to speed on z/OS, OS/390, MVS or whatever its called nowadays?
Al Queda's crypto wasn't the issue, it was the fact that a sensitive computer managed to be looted then sold in the black market to an American journalist.
This is a failure of physical security, not cryptography. If Al Queda had good procedures to destroy sensitive materials in the event of a military loss, we would not be discussing crypto here.
So my original post was correct:
- A clearance is much more intrusive than any background check a private employer might do. You are required to answer very personal questions that would be absolutely illegal for a private employer to ask. You are required to answer them under oath, and in some cases with a polygraph attached.
- Once you have a clearance, your ability to engage in otherwise legal (and sometimes otherwise constitutionally protected) activities is restricted. Be careful if the magazine you read advocates doing things "contrary to a government employee's bosses interest".
I think I'd rather be a free citizen than live this way. Others thinking about "the clearance route" should think hard about what they are giving up.
Having to live your life so that you always need to be concerned whether an associate, organization, or legal spare-time activity may result in your clearance being revoked is a very sad way to live in my opinion.
;-) are fundamentally incompatible with a clearance, then be honest with yourself and your potential employer, and don't ask for one, nor expect to work on projects that require one.
If you believe that your activities or politics (for instance, the same guy in the 1950s, when his bedroom antics were illegal, well, unless your last name was Hoover
And how would one know if they are compatible with a clearance?
I can only write what I observe, which is many people I know with TS (and in some cases secret) clearances are very nervous about activities which are entirely legal. I don't know if they would in fact lose their clearances or not for these activities, but somehow they have gotten the idea they will (or could). Why would someone be afraid to post a commentary critical of US govt' crypto export policies on their person Web page? Be concerned about possessing a copy of 2600 magazine? Refuse to go to a rowdy (though very legal) nightclub? I've run into all of these. Are these folks are paranoid, or are your non-work activities really scrutinized this closely?
So you agree that a security clearance is not a trivial matter (as some prior posters have implied)?
And you also agree that people wishing a clearance should submit recognize that they may no longer be able to exercise the full range of legal, constitutionally protected activities that citizens are permitted?
Having to live your life so that you always need to be concerned whether an associate, organization, or legal spare-time activity may result in your clearance being revoked is a very sad way to live in my opinion.
A security clearance is not as trivial as some make it.
Let's look at some choice questions on DD Form 398-2:
13. Foreign Travel / Connections
Under oath, provide a detailed list of every foreign country you ever visited, including Mexico or Canada. Of course if you live write next to the border of our NAFTA neighbors, you can summarize trips of less than one day's duration without providing all details.
19. Credit History
In addition to the usual public records tuff (bankruptcy, etc.) you must list any time you were significantly delinquent on debt, even if the creditor did not take any legal action against you.
20. Drug/Alcohol Use and Mental Health
Be prepared to list EVERY time you indulged in an illegal substance, purchased such items, misused a prescription drug. Provide dates, places, etc. for EACH instance.
Also, state under oath whether you've ever been counseled by a mental health professional, and be prepared to give details (the shrink's name, dates, nature of the "problem" etc.).
21. Organizations
"List all organizations in which you hold or have held membership since you were 16". You must provide the name of the organization, address, type of organization, and dates of membership.
For a secret clearance, I'm told you provide this all in writing under oath. For top secret, I've been told you are subject to polygraph examination regarding these points.
I do not have a clearance myself, but folks I know with high level clearances are very careful about their activities, who they associate with, etc. It seems a very guarded life.
In any event, this is far beyond what private employers require (or can even legally ask), which at most is a criminal records, public records, and maybe credit check.
But you may have a point. One of the government employees in another post here said:
Wow. This is his response to mass slaughter. Maybe governments are amoral. Maybe this does rub off on government employees.
In general, false speech that results in harm CAN be litigated (see slander and libel).
Now, to defend this effort, keep in mind that liability does not exist for any flaw in a product (unless you have strict liability, which actually applies to very few things). It must be shown that:
- The flaw existed in the software
- The plaintiff suffered some economic loss
- The flaw result from a failure of due care on the part of the defendant.
You don't have to write perfect software. You only have to write software according to currently accepted practices in the field of software engineering. Someone trying to sue would have to prove you are negligent in that area. If you can defend your design, development, and QA process, they don't have a case.
Your software would also have to be of a mission-critical nature that it causes enough damage to justify a suit. You'd have a hard time proving a bug in TuxRider qualifies.
The you have to convince a judge or jury of all of the above. This means you'd have to have a very very strong case against the software company.
Finally, for handling ordinary cases, many small businesses, independent professionals and non-profits carry insurance. Is there a reason RedHat, etc. couldn't do so? And that if they followed good software engineering practices, the premiums would not be excessive. In fact, open source software which is designed to be secure (OpenBSD, etc.) would probably pay minimum premiums, as a reward for their efforts.
...if Open Source developers have no liability as you say, the business world will have a very difficult embracing it.
But closed source software already has no liability, and businesses embrace it anyway.