The courts have been explicit on this point, most recently in In Re: Sealed Case, the 2002 opinion by the special panel of appellate judges established to hear FISA appeals. In its per curiam opinion, the court noted that in a previous FISA case (U.S. v. Truong), a federal "court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue [our emphasis], held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information." And further that "we take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power." http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.ht ml?id=110007703
Hmm. Judicial review disagrees with you. Unfortunitly their opinions matter.
The courts have been explicit on this point, most recently in In Re: Sealed Case, the 2002 opinion by the special panel of appellate judges established to hear FISA appeals. In its per curiam opinion, the court noted that in a previous FISA case (U.S. v. Truong), a federal "court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue [our emphasis], held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information." And further that "we take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power." http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.ht ml?id=110007703
So when a practice is challanged in court (this was in 2002 and 2003), authorized by the Constitution (and found legal over and over by the USSC) and further given authority by a act of congress equal legal(In the 9/11 bills)? == Legal...
Cause that appears to be what happened here. Calling it illegal over and over, and ignoring the past history of executive orders, laws, and court cases doesn't make it so.
Implying a moral equivelence to the USSR simply betrays your political bias. Millions upon millions died for the crime of opposing political leaders. You post trolls that would have landed you somewhere in the middle of siberia with no food and a bunk mate named Sergy.
By the way did you RTFA? Do you know what a soft trigger is? Did you know that Clinton, Reagan and Carter all excercised the exact same authority? Did you know that a federal court declared it legal in 2002? If not, why are you posting. If so, why are you posting?
If the article in question is to believed, and they are scanning 1% of all US calls, they probably aren't distinguishing between foreign and citizen conversations. They're simply eavedropping on everybody and then trying to figure out what's going on.
No, the original article stated that this could cover "hundreds or maybe thousands" of people. 1% of all US calls is completly bogus. Even the NYT makes the provisos that this covers international calls that originate or terminate in the US. Hardly 1%.
Ignoring civil liberties is almost never warranted, and every time we do it, it turns out that not only do we regret it, but most important *it was never necessary to do in the first case*.
Nice plattitude by the reverse has been shown throughout US history. During times of crisis typically civil liberties have been slightly restricted (more so in the Civil War and World War I, less so in World War II). As time has gone by, the tripod of American politics has safely re-established protections. That's what is going on here.
Didn't we learn anything from the internment of Japanese citzens during WWII?
I think we need a follup on Goodwin's Law... Talking about the Japanese citizens when it has nothing to do with the question at hand means automatic mass-deletion of the post.
Did you RTFA or are you just here to dog Bush? The article mentions a variety of situation where taps might be needed and useful, but could not be used by FISA under the pre-emptetory clauses because it is not narrow enough.
On top of that, it clearly falls into line with the supreme court's standards for intellgence (must be linked to a foreign power) as well as historical executive orders issued by Clinton, Regean and Carter and even then can easily be read into the 9/11 bills.
The article talks about "Soft Triggers" which are interesting. A lot of focus has gone on keywords, but there are far more efficent technologies out there for building predective models. Why do you want a predective model? Simply put with Petabytes of data out there from intercepted transmissions you have to predict based on the content of a message if a message in innocent or threat. Replace the words "threat" with "spam" and all of a sudden technologies like Bayes and other data mining techniques are interesting.
If you don't think this is valuable, go read a book on Enigma and find out how much exactly reading your opponents mail helps.
However technologies such as this are not covered by FISA. I think it would have been better to revise FISA to cover technologies such as this, but non-withstanding that, it's really nothing new in terms of excercise of power then anything Clinton or even Carter did.
To try and keep this article from devolving similar to the last one, here are a couple of notes:
This really isn't anything new. In fact Carter used the Exact same Authority that Bush is using now. That executive order became Executive Order 12333 under Reagan in 1981. Gorelick also stated that Clinton used the same authority. From a CATO Report: The Clinton administration claims that it can bypass the warrant clause for "national security" purposes. In July 1994 Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick told the House Select Committee on Intelligence that the president "has inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches for foreign intelligence purposes." [51] According to Gorelick, the president (or his attorney general) need only satisfy himself that an American is working in conjunction with a foreign power before a search can take place. . . .
FISA itself has ruled that: The courts have been explicit on this point, most recently in In Re: Sealed Case, the 2002 opinion by the special panel of appellate judges established to hear FISA appeals. In its per curiam opinion, the court noted that in a previous FISA case (U.S. v. Truong), a federal "court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue [our emphasis], held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information." And further that "we take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power." http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.ht ml?id=110007703
Bush also pointed out that the 9/11 resolution gave him additional authority. Here is the verbage: "use all necessary force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations, or persons [...] "
Wow. Massive information. First of all, Gates throws in about 50% of his net worth, not 10%. For the record, Judiasm and Christianity also have the 10% clause, all though I have never known anyone to enforce that anywhere. It's a central tenet that what you do with your tithe is between you and God.
Actually, I disagree. Open Source isn't magic juju. Few companies that have opened their portfolio rather then starting out open source have been successful.
Sun has little goodwill as it is with the open source community.
Sun's business model has been (IMHO) doomed for years. It's surprising that a company who really recognized the need and use for ethernet has failed to understand that computer decentrilization woudl evenetually include Sun's slightly smaller iron.
Sun is still failing to meet business needs. They pushed thin client because it explained a need that they had: How to sell large iron in a increasingly PC + Internet world.
I don't think that Sun's recent Open Source moves are going to help either. What is the problem that they want to solve? until that statement doesn't involve the words "selling large servers" Sun will continue to spiral into oblivion.
I agree. Hopefully the next Fedora, RedHat ES will support this directory server out of the box for authentication and serving. LDAP is finally begining to mature to the point that it is realistic to use it to control heirarchal information for large and medium (and even small) enterprises. About 8 years ago I did a project to tied sendmail to a LDAP server for email authentication. Tha was painful in the extreme. Now Zimbra has a LDAP and Hula (which I think the two most promising future email platforms) both have some form of LDAP in them to manage their settings.
It's easy to forget in the world of Firefly, Stargate, Farscape, etc just how hard it was to get any real sci-fi series that were not named Trek on the air prior to B5. Babylon 5 struggled it's entire existance with ratings, but the fact that someone actually aired a 5 season arc without having to dumb it down, and change it radically to accomidate the Least Common Denominator is impressive.
My dream is that some day we will get JMS and Joss Whedon to sit down and do a sci-fi series together. With JMS's strengh in plotlines and story development and Joss's characters it would be one of the best series ever. Certainly better then the upcoming SW:TV series. Han with wookies indeed.
I am actually a OS contributor, and have been using the Kernel since 0.95. I hardly consider myself clueless about Open Source.
And yes, I love working with software. I love configuring it, writing it, and ocassionally beating it to a bloody pulp when neccessary.
But my time still has value. Choosing to work on Open Source negates other productive things that I could be doing. It even negates other Open Source projects that I could be working on. Hence it is a question of priorities which are measured once again by values.
OpenSource, as much as Linux enthusiasts want to pretend otherwise is usually harder to maintain at a new software level then other applications. Certainly OpenWRT and some of these other packes are significantly more difficult and time consuming then picking up the latest D-LINK Gamer wireless router.
I actually ended up using the SveaSoft as a wireless bridge to a seperate network (to cut down on broadcasts) to a Linux box (which has a Atheros chipset, but the driver is randomly locking on AMD64 which is a pain in the arse.
In fact, I think a lot of the uses for these WRTG boxes tend to be things like bridges just to deal with crappy linux wireless cards.
Be Afraid. It's good to be cautious when you are talking about possibly bricking your router. At the very least, don't install the latest version. Find out what is stable and solid and go for that.
What do you want to use the router for? If the default features work okay for you, and you don't need things like WDS, routable subnets, QoS, you are better of staying put.
I spent a lot of time working with SveaSoft's images. In general, if you have a old linksys floating around, it's a pretty good way to go. The time requirements for setting things up is non-trivial. This is especially true if you want to do anything sophisticated, ie, bridging, WDS or strange NAT tricks.
I am surprised CISCO doesn't do their own Linux adaptation for these boxes. I had no idea they were so popular that they actually would consider a different model for them.
Strangly QoS does not work very well with the latest versions from SveaSoft, as well as SveaSoft now locking downloads to a particular MAC address. I also had trouble getting the newer firmware (Talisman) to work cleanly with my box. I ended up buying a D-Link Gamer Wireless router and things just worked well. Having built in 1GBPS ethernet, QoS without the configuration headaches of OpenWRT and Linksys was cool. As with all opensource, it's only free if your time is worthless.
The impressive part is just how good fansubbing has gotten. I worked on several fansubs back around ~95-2000 and I remember futzing with various software and hardware to get subtitles added. Now add the computer and video feeds and the difference in quality is shocking.
In particular the Champloo subs have been phenominal.
I will say this, a lot of this just comes down to loving what you are working on. The old Kodocha subs for Kodomo no Omacha are still the best I have seen...
10 years ago, the cost of anime was far far greater then it currently is. I remember shelving all of Neon Genesis for around $29.99 per _two episodes_. $360 looks a lot more painful then the box sets you can grab for $60-90 recently. In general, I think the Anime industy has done well maintaining the price, but adding more episodes as the market for anime gets larger and larger.
ADV was almost critically wounded after the bidding war the surrounded Neon Genesis as well. NGE pretty much bankrupted them. They recovered quite nicely when NGE actually started to sell. On the other hand, they then started a massive mother of all buying binges which terminated with the illfated Anime TV network.
Also, GAINEX itself nearly didn't survive Evangelion. This is nothing too surprising. GAINEX has been notoriously ill-managed over the years oscillating between disaster and success.
Anime is also really cyclical... It's almost airline industry cyclical. At one point on the back of Bubble Gum Crisis it looked like Animeigo would rule forever. Then Came Us Manga Corp, Manga and even a software company (Software Sculptors) which scored a suprise with Slayers. All of thoose companies were at the top now the bottom.
The big surprise has been Tokyo Pop's success with Shoujo Manga. If someone had asked me 10 years ago if any shoujo would every make it over here, I would have said no with the exception of a few blockbusters (X, Please Save My Earth, just about anything CLAMP).
ADV did do a great job with NewType magazine. It is a constant top seller and their margins (even with whatever they have to pay to Newtype Japan) is pretty solid.
It is used (although probably in it's last days as new the Ethernet etc standards come alive) for some long haul fiber and backbone connections. Even so that's a pretty modified version of ATM, with different flow control etc then what was originally proposed.
As far as why 53 bytes is bad, imagine that you have some sort of fast filtering solution you want to implement in hardware. You want to make it as fast as possible to a) dereference and cast pointers so you can fish around the headers and data content, and b) move data quickly in and out of buffers.
Computers tend to use boundries on the -2's for maximum sizes. So logically, you want to move at least 48 or 64 bytes at once into a buffer to move it along. 53 bytes means you waste 11 bytes if you use simple hardware to move a full buffer.
It's also because 48 bytes (at the time) arguably was the best data size for voice transmission. 64 bytes is the best for data transmission. ATM trying to be the best of both worlds picked a number near the middle which meant that it did neither voice nor data well.
As noted above, it is now used as the prime example for why design by committee (or trying to do too much with one protocol) is a bad bad idea.
Slashdot Mirror
The courts have been explicit on this point, most recently in In Re: Sealed Case, the 2002 opinion by the special panel of appellate judges established to hear FISA appeals. In its per curiam opinion, the court noted that in a previous FISA case (U.S. v. Truong), a federal "court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue [our emphasis], held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information." And further that "we take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power." http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.ht ml?id=110007703
Hmm. Judicial review disagrees with you. Unfortunitly their opinions matter.
The courts have been explicit on this point, most recently in In Re: Sealed Case, the 2002 opinion by the special panel of appellate judges established to hear FISA appeals. In its per curiam opinion, the court noted that in a previous FISA case (U.S. v. Truong), a federal "court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue [our emphasis], held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information." And further that "we take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power." http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.ht ml?id=110007703
So when a practice is challanged in court (this was in 2002 and 2003), authorized by the Constitution (and found legal over and over by the USSC) and further given authority by a act of congress equal legal(In the 9/11 bills)? == Legal...
Cause that appears to be what happened here. Calling it illegal over and over, and ignoring the past history of executive orders, laws, and court cases doesn't make it so.
Implying a moral equivelence to the USSR simply betrays your political bias. Millions upon millions died for the crime of opposing political leaders. You post trolls that would have landed you somewhere in the middle of siberia with no food and a bunk mate named Sergy.
By the way did you RTFA? Do you know what a soft trigger is? Did you know that Clinton, Reagan and Carter all excercised the exact same authority? Did you know that a federal court declared it legal in 2002? If not, why are you posting. If so, why are you posting?
If the article in question is to believed, and they are scanning 1% of all US calls, they probably aren't distinguishing between foreign and citizen conversations. They're simply eavedropping on everybody and then trying to figure out what's going on.
No, the original article stated that this could cover "hundreds or maybe thousands" of people. 1% of all US calls is completly bogus. Even the NYT makes the provisos that this covers international calls that originate or terminate in the US. Hardly 1%.
Ignoring civil liberties is almost never warranted, and every time we do it, it turns out that not only do we regret it, but most important *it was never necessary to do in the first case*.
Nice plattitude by the reverse has been shown throughout US history. During times of crisis typically civil liberties have been slightly restricted (more so in the Civil War and World War I, less so in World War II). As time has gone by, the tripod of American politics has safely re-established protections. That's what is going on here.
Didn't we learn anything from the internment of Japanese citzens during WWII?
I think we need a follup on Goodwin's Law... Talking about the Japanese citizens when it has nothing to do with the question at hand means automatic mass-deletion of the post.
Did you RTFA or are you just here to dog Bush? The article mentions a variety of situation where taps might be needed and useful, but could not be used by FISA under the pre-emptetory clauses because it is not narrow enough.
On top of that, it clearly falls into line with the supreme court's standards for intellgence (must be linked to a foreign power) as well as historical executive orders issued by Clinton, Regean and Carter and even then can easily be read into the 9/11 bills.
The article talks about "Soft Triggers" which are interesting. A lot of focus has gone on keywords, but there are far more efficent technologies out there for building predective models. Why do you want a predective model? Simply put with Petabytes of data out there from intercepted transmissions you have to predict based on the content of a message if a message in innocent or threat. Replace the words "threat" with "spam" and all of a sudden technologies like Bayes and other data mining techniques are interesting.
If you don't think this is valuable, go read a book on Enigma and find out how much exactly reading your opponents mail helps.
However technologies such as this are not covered by FISA. I think it would have been better to revise FISA to cover technologies such as this, but non-withstanding that, it's really nothing new in terms of excercise of power then anything Clinton or even Carter did.
This really isn't anything new. In fact Carter used the Exact same Authority that Bush is using now. That executive order became Executive Order 12333 under Reagan in 1981. Gorelick also stated that Clinton used the same authority. From a CATO Report:
The Clinton administration claims that it can bypass the warrant clause for "national security" purposes. In July 1994 Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick told the House Select Committee on Intelligence that the president "has inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches for foreign intelligence purposes." [51] According to Gorelick, the president (or his attorney general) need only satisfy himself that an American is working in conjunction with a foreign power before a search can take place. . . .
FISA itself has ruled that:t ml?id=110007703
The courts have been explicit on this point, most recently in In Re: Sealed Case, the 2002 opinion by the special panel of appellate judges established to hear FISA appeals. In its per curiam opinion, the court noted that in a previous FISA case (U.S. v. Truong), a federal "court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue [our emphasis], held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information." And further that "we take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power." http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.h
Bush also pointed out that the 9/11 resolution gave him additional authority. Here is the verbage:
"use all necessary force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations, or persons [...] "
Wow. Massive information. First of all, Gates throws in about 50% of his net worth, not 10%. For the record, Judiasm and Christianity also have the 10% clause, all though I have never known anyone to enforce that anywhere. It's a central tenet that what you do with your tithe is between you and God.
(In other words, go troll somewhere else)
Am I the only one not scared....
;-)
That I am streaming video from Microsoft.com, on a story that is front page on slashdot right now? That's a lot of bandwidth
If the analysis was so limited, Sun would be making money. It isn't and they're not.
Are there niches? Yep. Is sun a company that can survive in present circumstances as a niche company? Nope.
Actually, I disagree. Open Source isn't magic juju. Few companies that have opened their portfolio rather then starting out open source have been successful.
Sun has little goodwill as it is with the open source community.
Sun's business model has been (IMHO) doomed for years. It's surprising that a company who really recognized the need and use for ethernet has failed to understand that computer decentrilization woudl evenetually include Sun's slightly smaller iron.
Sun is still failing to meet business needs. They pushed thin client because it explained a need that they had: How to sell large iron in a increasingly PC + Internet world.
I don't think that Sun's recent Open Source moves are going to help either. What is the problem that they want to solve? until that statement doesn't involve the words "selling large servers" Sun will continue to spiral into oblivion.
I agree. Hopefully the next Fedora, RedHat ES will support this directory server out of the box for authentication and serving. LDAP is finally begining to mature to the point that it is realistic to use it to control heirarchal information for large and medium (and even small) enterprises. About 8 years ago I did a project to tied sendmail to a LDAP server for email authentication. Tha was painful in the extreme. Now Zimbra has a LDAP and Hula (which I think the two most promising future email platforms) both have some form of LDAP in them to manage their settings.
It's easy to forget in the world of Firefly, Stargate, Farscape, etc just how hard it was to get any real sci-fi series that were not named Trek on the air prior to B5. Babylon 5 struggled it's entire existance with ratings, but the fact that someone actually aired a 5 season arc without having to dumb it down, and change it radically to accomidate the Least Common Denominator is impressive.
My dream is that some day we will get JMS and Joss Whedon to sit down and do a sci-fi series together. With JMS's strengh in plotlines and story development and Joss's characters it would be one of the best series ever. Certainly better then the upcoming SW:TV series. Han with wookies indeed.
I am actually a OS contributor, and have been using the Kernel since 0.95. I hardly consider myself clueless about Open Source.
And yes, I love working with software. I love configuring it, writing it, and ocassionally beating it to a bloody pulp when neccessary.
But my time still has value. Choosing to work on Open Source negates other productive things that I could be doing. It even negates other Open Source projects that I could be working on. Hence it is a question of priorities which are measured once again by values.
OpenSource, as much as Linux enthusiasts want to pretend otherwise is usually harder to maintain at a new software level then other applications. Certainly OpenWRT and some of these other packes are significantly more difficult and time consuming then picking up the latest D-LINK Gamer wireless router.
I actually ended up using the SveaSoft as a wireless bridge to a seperate network (to cut down on broadcasts) to a Linux box (which has a Atheros chipset, but the driver is randomly locking on AMD64 which is a pain in the arse.
In fact, I think a lot of the uses for these WRTG boxes tend to be things like bridges just to deal with crappy linux wireless cards.
In this case, they provide downloads for a lot of the source, but not everything. It's been very very controversial.
Be Afraid. It's good to be cautious when you are talking about possibly bricking your router. At the very least, don't install the latest version. Find out what is stable and solid and go for that.
What do you want to use the router for? If the default features work okay for you, and you don't need things like WDS, routable subnets, QoS, you are better of staying put.
I spent a lot of time working with SveaSoft's images. In general, if you have a old linksys floating around, it's a pretty good way to go. The time requirements for setting things up is non-trivial. This is especially true if you want to do anything sophisticated, ie, bridging, WDS or strange NAT tricks.
I am surprised CISCO doesn't do their own Linux adaptation for these boxes. I had no idea they were so popular that they actually would consider a different model for them.
Strangly QoS does not work very well with the latest versions from SveaSoft, as well as SveaSoft now locking downloads to a particular MAC address. I also had trouble getting the newer firmware (Talisman) to work cleanly with my box. I ended up buying a D-Link Gamer Wireless router and things just worked well. Having built in 1GBPS ethernet, QoS without the configuration headaches of OpenWRT and Linksys was cool. As with all opensource, it's only free if your time is worthless.
The impressive part is just how good fansubbing has gotten. I worked on several fansubs back around ~95-2000 and I remember futzing with various software and hardware to get subtitles added. Now add the computer and video feeds and the difference in quality is shocking.
In particular the Champloo subs have been phenominal.
I will say this, a lot of this just comes down to loving what you are working on. The old Kodocha subs for Kodomo no Omacha are still the best I have seen...
10 years ago, the cost of anime was far far greater then it currently is. I remember shelving all of Neon Genesis for around $29.99 per _two episodes_. $360 looks a lot more painful then the box sets you can grab for $60-90 recently. In general, I think the Anime industy has done well maintaining the price, but adding more episodes as the market for anime gets larger and larger.
People forget a couple of things:
ADV was almost critically wounded after the bidding war the surrounded Neon Genesis as well. NGE pretty much bankrupted them. They recovered quite nicely when NGE actually started to sell. On the other hand, they then started a massive mother of all buying binges which terminated with the illfated Anime TV network.
Also, GAINEX itself nearly didn't survive Evangelion. This is nothing too surprising. GAINEX has been notoriously ill-managed over the years oscillating between disaster and success.
Anime is also really cyclical... It's almost airline industry cyclical. At one point on the back of Bubble Gum Crisis it looked like Animeigo would rule forever. Then Came Us Manga Corp, Manga and even a software company (Software Sculptors) which scored a suprise with Slayers. All of thoose companies were at the top now the bottom.
The big surprise has been Tokyo Pop's success with Shoujo Manga. If someone had asked me 10 years ago if any shoujo would every make it over here, I would have said no with the exception of a few blockbusters (X, Please Save My Earth, just about anything CLAMP).
ADV did do a great job with NewType magazine. It is a constant top seller and their margins (even with whatever they have to pay to Newtype Japan) is pretty solid.
It is used (although probably in it's last days as new the Ethernet etc standards come alive) for some long haul fiber and backbone connections. Even so that's a pretty modified version of ATM, with different flow control etc then what was originally proposed.
As far as why 53 bytes is bad, imagine that you have some sort of fast filtering solution you want to implement in hardware. You want to make it as fast as possible to a) dereference and cast pointers so you can fish around the headers and data content, and b) move data quickly in and out of buffers.
Computers tend to use boundries on the -2's for maximum sizes. So logically, you want to move at least 48 or 64 bytes at once into a buffer to move it along. 53 bytes means you waste 11 bytes if you use simple hardware to move a full buffer.
It's also because 48 bytes (at the time) arguably was the best data size for voice transmission. 64 bytes is the best for data transmission. ATM trying to be the best of both worlds picked a number near the middle which meant that it did neither voice nor data well.
As noted above, it is now used as the prime example for why design by committee (or trying to do too much with one protocol) is a bad bad idea.
Yep. My Jaw dropped when Evi Nemeth at CU went over that particular part of the negotiation.