I have one, simple question regarding this powerpoint presentation:
Why should I believe that the source is valid?
Any one of us could come up with a realistic looking presentation, complete with spy-like obfuscated data... why should I believe that this is the real thing? Is there any additional, hard evidence (such as paper documentation) to back up the facts presented? Furthermore, what is the track record of the authors of "thespywhobilledme.com" regarding their factual, impartial representation of factual data? What are their sources, and are they credible?
I think the idea of IP Telephony is great, until you need to have a system that works 24/7.
Consider that "works" doesn't just apply to your local setup; it also applies to your internet provider.
As an example, yesterday in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware (USA) Verizon's internet service was interrupted. The end result was no internet traffic.
In such a situation, while it's great to have the low cost of IP telephony, how are you going to send or receive calls when you have no internet service?
The traditional telecoms have a very robust physical network, which is independantly powered. Even while internet service was down, Verizon's phone network was still running, without a hiccup.
Take into account the cost of having the same reliability when caluclating the overall cost of an IP telephony system.
Before you rain holy fire down upon me, please consider my statement.
This article is slanted toward a paranoid, the-commies-are-out-to-get-us attitude. In addition, it calls upon evidence that has little to do with corporate espianoge; it deals more with military and state espianoge. In addition, just by taking a look at the sources used, it is clear that these "sources" are as slanted toward a paranoid view as the suck article.
Consider the following:
- A majority of the sources were either quoted out of context, or they provide a skewed viewpoint.
- No evidence is produced to attempt to refute the evidence presented. Any credible work attempts to do this.
- The evidence is used out of context. For example, the case of Harold Nicholson is about a state level espianoge case. What does this have to do with corporate espianoge?
- Take a look at who owns the sites. The information is publicly available using the whois database.
- Consider where this information comes from.
I have no doubt in my mind that corporate espianoge does happen. However, I think that instead of buying into poorly supported media content that an effort should be made to research the activities in question. This includes clearly documented, complete records of said activities, alternative suggestions, and clearly supported resons for disagreeing with those suggestions, and reputable sources of information.
- Nathaniel Cosgrove
[ I am free because I think for myself, and I choose how I act ]
Slashdot Mirror
I have one, simple question regarding this powerpoint presentation:
Why should I believe that the source is valid?
Any one of us could come up with a realistic looking presentation, complete with spy-like obfuscated data... why should I believe that this is the real thing? Is there any additional, hard evidence (such as paper documentation) to back up the facts presented? Furthermore, what is the track record of the authors of "thespywhobilledme.com" regarding their factual, impartial representation of factual data? What are their sources, and are they credible?
I think the idea of IP Telephony is great, until you need to have a system that works 24/7.
Consider that "works" doesn't just apply to your local setup; it also applies to your internet provider.
As an example, yesterday in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware (USA) Verizon's internet service was interrupted. The end result was no internet traffic.
In such a situation, while it's great to have the low cost of IP telephony, how are you going to send or receive calls when you have no internet service?
The traditional telecoms have a very robust physical network, which is independantly powered. Even while internet service was down, Verizon's phone network was still running, without a hiccup.
Take into account the cost of having the same reliability when caluclating the overall cost of an IP telephony system.
Before you rain holy fire down upon me, please consider my statement. This article is slanted toward a paranoid, the-commies-are-out-to-get-us attitude. In addition, it calls upon evidence that has little to do with corporate espianoge; it deals more with military and state espianoge. In addition, just by taking a look at the sources used, it is clear that these "sources" are as slanted toward a paranoid view as the suck article. Consider the following: - A majority of the sources were either quoted out of context, or they provide a skewed viewpoint. - No evidence is produced to attempt to refute the evidence presented. Any credible work attempts to do this. - The evidence is used out of context. For example, the case of Harold Nicholson is about a state level espianoge case. What does this have to do with corporate espianoge? - Take a look at who owns the sites. The information is publicly available using the whois database. - Consider where this information comes from. I have no doubt in my mind that corporate espianoge does happen. However, I think that instead of buying into poorly supported media content that an effort should be made to research the activities in question. This includes clearly documented, complete records of said activities, alternative suggestions, and clearly supported resons for disagreeing with those suggestions, and reputable sources of information. - Nathaniel Cosgrove [ I am free because I think for myself, and I choose how I act ]