If they had used a true one-way function, (definition: infeasible to find an input resulting in certian output), then by definition it would have a larger number of bits in the result.
Let me restate that, and what is in my original post. If Microsoft had used MD5 (more one way than what they used), of course, it would have a wider output, which is just a characteristic of such a function.
I know that multiple inputs to a one way function may generate the same output.
So then, why the hell is it called a one-way function?
Answer: because it is infeasible to find one of the other inputs that result in the same output.
I thought I made this clear in my grandparent post.
The fact that there are multiple possible passwords for this Word document is proof that it is a one-way function.
Um, no. I think I just covered the definition of a one-way function.
I would use CRC-32. Multiple inputs would result in the same output, but it is decidedly NOT a one way function.
The very fact that someone has a utility to give them alternate passwords means by definition that the function in word is NOT a one way function. Otherwise, it would be infeasible to do exactly what this utility does.
MD5 is good because for some given value, it's really hard to find anything which hashes to that value, not because it's somehow 'more one-way'.
MD5 is "more one way" in the sense that it is harder to find an alternate input; using the definition of one way I just gave.
Even if you strictly consider the binary case of "is" or "is not" function X a one way function, rather than a continuum of one-way-ness, then one is "more positive" than zero. And MD5 is "more one way" than Microsoft Word's function.
I don't know what "both ways" you're talking about.
I can assure you it is possible to have secure encryption, secure digital signatures without DRM.
GPG and PGP are examples of both, without DRM.
Try reading the book Applied Cryptography.
It would be most certianly possible to encrypt a document using a password, using a secure encryption mechanism, such that it cannot be decrypted without the password.
Similarly, it is possible to take a secure (i.e. MD5) hash of a document, and then compare that document if it comes back to you to be sure it is the original. Applied Cryptography details numerous protocols for conducting business, signing documents, and many other useful things. All securely. All without DRM.
The word doc doesn't store the password, but a one-way checksum.
It is a checksum. But it must not be a very one-way checksum. If they had used a real one-way function, such as MD5, it would not be possible to come up with another value that hashed to the same result. (Well, it might be possible, but who has time to wait longer than the life of the universe.)
>>Perhaps that would motivate employers to quit as soon as their company starts being vastly evil, which would in itself be a motivation for companies not to be evil.
>On first thought, that sounds quite plausible. But on second thought, i know and you know that if someone bails out of a $25/hr job, the company will be more than happy to try to hire someone into it (read: inexperienced newbs or immigrants) at $9/hr.
Furthermore, by paying someone $9 / hr instead of $25 / hr, the evil company can continue to be evil for a longer period, and can afford to pay lawyers longer.
Has anyone ever considered the fact that there is no conspiracy here? Maybe somebody just said "Hey, this BIOS thing sucks, we should make it better"?
Yeah, let's consider for a moment.
Maybe someone just said, "this voting thing sucks, let's make it better with Diebold closed source e-voting".
Everything always about Microsoft taking over & their secret plans of world domination.
This would be a true statement if you remove the word "secret". The plans don't seem to be so secret. Microsoft people themselves say that they believe that 100% of the market is their fair share.
It's telling how easily you ignore Microsoft's loooong history.
Plain and simple truth people: Microsoft does not lay secret plans, they do not care about preventing linux from big thing.
They seem to care about preventing Linux very much. Have you seen the Haloween documents? Microsoft people discussing how to attack Linux.
They are the giant that everyone hates. Why? Jealousy.
Please.
There are other giants that everyone doesn't hate. In other industries. The reason everyone hates Microsoft is because of Microsoft's behavior. Plain and simple.
Don't like what MS is doing? Find a way to beat them.
Open Source is a way to beat them. There is no other way to beat them.
Microsoft is doing anything and everything possible to destroy open source. First they ignored it. Then they laughed at it. Then they started a FUD campaign.
Microsoft seems awfully interested in DRM, in Trusted Computing, in putting TCPA onto motherboards, and now in changing the BIOS. And I'm supposed to just believe, contrary to past evidence and common sense that this is not an attempt to cut off open source?
Let me summarize...
We are finding a way to beat them. It's called Open Source. Microsoft is trying to prevent Linux from becomming the next big thing. It is part of their not-so-secret plan. Microsoft does want to dominate everything and makes no secret of it.
Maybe someone just said "Hey, this open source thing sucks. We should make the BIOS better."
But you multiply by how ever many CDR's you can cram into the overnight envelope. How many? 20? 30? Also, someone pointed out that you can't beat the cost for this bandwidth.
Finally, I should mention that you could use DVD-R's instead of CDR's.
Now pay attention to the date on that last job opening. That is Monday following SCOX's 5-Dec lame oral arguments.
Why suddenly is this position vacant? Some theories...
Are they looking for a more compliant director who will report to the SEC what they want reported? Maybe not, the new position says that the person must be familiar with the Serbanes-Oxley act of 2002 (passed after Enron) which makes the CEO have to sign SEC statements and be criminally liable for misstatements. (So was the last Director of Financial Reporting unaware of this?)
Does this have anything to do with SCO moving their financial results from Dec 8 back to Dec 3 to be before the lame Dec 5 oral arguments, and then suddenly delaying the results to Dec 22 due to "internal audit problems"? I thought one of the investors said that they need an external auditor?
Is Darl trying to book the recent $50 Million investment as "revenue" so that he can get his 4th and 5th profitable quarter? (Background: Darl gets a big golden parachute if he pulls off four profitable quarters, and he needs a fifth in which to dump his stock before the house of cards collapses.) It seems like SCO's recent "revenue guidance" suggests something in the 22 to 25 million range for this and next quarter. (Am I mistaken here?) For the benefit of those slashdotters who cannot add, this and next sounds to me like they add up to about the $50 million.
finally, another theory would be connected to rats and sinking ships
Maybe looking for a fall guy?
So, if you're out of work and qualified, a great career opportunity would be to work at SCO!
Director of Financial Reporting and SEC/GAAP Compliance
Requisition# 40238
Job Description:
Responsible for the financial reporting of quarterly and annual results in
accordance with SEC rules and regulations. Responsible for the filing of
registration statements and other periodic filings as required. Duties will
include the drafting and review of quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, annual
reports on Form 10-K, periodic reports on Form 8-K, as well as assist in the
preparation of registration and proxy statements and any other filings. Other
responsibilities will include the monitoring of the Company's compliance with
current SEC, FASB and other regulatory literature that pertains to accounting
and financial reporting. This position will also lead the Company's effort on
maintaining an effective system of internal control, and ensuring the internal
control structure is in compliance with the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act. Additional special projects will be given on an "as occurring"
basis.
Job Responsibilities:
Financial reporting of quarterly and annual results in accordance with SEC rules
and regulations
Filing of registration statements and other periodic filings as required
Drafting and review of quarterly and annual reports
Assist in the preparation of registration and proxy statements and any other
filings
Monitoring of the Company's compliance with current SEC, FASB and other
regulatory literature that pertains to accounting and financial reporting
Additional special projects will be given on an "as occurring"
basis.
Job Requirements:
Masters degree in accounting and experience as a manager with a public
accounting firm and a minimum of 8 years accounting experience.
Extensive financial reporting experience
An extremely high bandwidth information channel is to send CD-R's overnight via. FedEx.
Extremely high bandwidth
Extremely high reliability
Unfortunantly, poor latency, but still good enough for many uses.
650 (MB) x 1024 x 1024 / 24 / 60 / 60 = 7888.59 bytes per second throughput. And that's only for 650 MB on a CD, and only 1 CD in the FedEx envelope. Multiply this "throughput" by how ever many CDR's you can stuff into a FedEx overnight envelope. And by doing so, you do not increase your latency.
So if you have a mountain of data, say from a supercomputer, this may be the fastest (not lowest latency) way to send it to a remote location. Faster than any real Internet connection.
This is also a good way to explain the difference between "bandwidth" and "latency". Good to know when someone is wanting to sell you a "high speed" satellite based internet connection. Just what do you mean by high-speed? Latency or Bandwidth, or both, or niether?
And of course reinstall lilo to the MBR by running/sbin/lilo.
Or not, if you are running Grub, which will find those files by their filename and path. You can reconfigure Grub by just editing a text file. Grub will find its config text file, by pathname, and obey it. Really convenient if you really do switch kernels or manage several of them.
Furthermore, you could use the same/boot partition under several different ?NIX like OSes, and conveniently edit your grub config.
Initrd is something for the good new days, not good old days. The idea is that during boot, the boot loader load two things: (1) kernel, and (2) initrd. The initrd is a ramdisk image of a smallish filesystem. The kernel is started with the smallish filesystem. The kernel runs a program from this filesystem prior to completing the boot process and running/sbin/init. The program that gets run prior to boot completion could do anything you needed to do prior to starting/sbin/init. Some useful ideas...
Load kernel modules for additional hardware that was not compiled into the kernel. This allows you to use a more generic stripped down kernel and focus on customizing the initrd which is much more flexible.
Load kernel modules for filesystems not compiled into the kernel. In fact, you could compile a kernel with none or only one filesystem. This leads to fewer generic kernels, and you focus on editing the initrd script to load which modules you need.
In fact, in past versions of SuSE, the entire installation process was actually run from initrd! You boot from the CD ROM. The kernel loads, mounts the initrd ramdisk. Runs the initrd program from ramdisk. This is an extremely large, complex program, that not only loads the additional kernel modules needed, but then goes through a GUI installation process (frambeuffer device, no X) and then after the hard disk has been partitioned, filesystems written, and jillions or maybe even gazillions of files copied from multiple cd's into those newly created filesystems; then the initrd program ends, and the kernel "finishes" booting into the hard disk system that did not even exist when you started the kerenel booting up.
You could conceivably have a server running for several years whose kernel was first loaded from the CD during installation onto an empty hard disk. Compare to number of reboots during Windows install.
I was not aware that the alternatives were bug ridden. I use Grub because it was what SuSE 8.2 wanted to run by default. My first reaction was "Oh God, why did they have to change what I was already familiar with?". But after reading up on Grub, I would never want to go back to LILO. Grub is extremely convenient. What you can do at boot time is more powerful. Changing kernels or initrd images is much easier. You can just rename kernel files so that the new kernel has the name of your old kernel. Grub goes by the filename, because it has a mini-filesystem driver for several filesystems.
You setup a smallish/boot partition in any of the supported filesystems, and put the kernel and initrd into it.
I can think of a number of enhancements for modern bloat loaders....
Screensaver while idle at boot screen
games while booting up
support for latest 3D chipsets and audio drivers for the eye/ear candy while booting
...of course the end result of these enhancements will mean that we'll have to make Linux more like Windows so that people will see the boot loader more often.
Wal-Mart needs to understand that people don't want to download music online. They want to visit a physical store and pay artificially high prices for a limited selection of music that are willing to be raped by the RIAA.
After all, which kinds of businesses usually succeed? Businesses that offer consumers what they want at a reasonable price? Or businesses that screw the consumer, call them thieves, sue them, pass draconian legislation, and restrict choices? After all, the only good music is RIAA music.
Maybe now that I've posted this, Wal-Mart will reconsider. And others will stop jumping onto this music downloading fad which is not what people really want.
Language changes and evolves. (Often driven by stupid people.)
An operating system is now commonly understood to be what Microsoft calls an operating system.
A hacker is now commonly understood to be someone who breaks into computers. A cracker is commonly understood to be something you eat.
Piracy is now commonly understood to mean copyright infringement, even though the behavior of the RIAA, MPAA and Disney actually fit the classic definition of piracy.
For a long spell in the 80's when microcomputers weren't very powerful, every new database product under the sun called itself a "relational database" even though it wasn't.
Perhaps what I describe is more a contamination of language than evolution. But it is a fact of life. Get used to it, or sound like a fool. This despite the fact that your use of the word is technically correct.
The one I really liked was how Blake said that the GPL violates antitrust laws and US export control laws. That's even more novel than it violating the constitution or US copyright laws.
I'd love to hear the theory of how GPL violates export control laws, or even antitrust laws. Does MS EULA violate antitrust laws?
There is no word copywritten. Or copywrite either.
The opposite of Copyright is CopyWrong, not CopyLeft. The "right" in Copyright is not "write" as something you do with a pencil, nor "right" as in the opposite of "left", but "right" as in the "right to copy".
Copywrong would be a word with the same flavor as the RIAA and MPAA. Copyleft, which the FSF uses is the wrong opposite of "right". It is the opposite of the wrong "right".
I believe one of IBM's counterclaims is for copyright infringement based on violation of the GPL. This was previously covered on slashdot. IBM has written code, contributed it to Linux under the GPL, and SCO has violated IBM's copyright interest in that code.
You link to a friends page because you like him. Unbenonst to you, he links to infringing material. An over-zealous RIAA decides that the "only possible reason" for you to have linked to such a malcontent was that you must share his every view.
Didn't we have this evil linking business before? If you merely know someone on the communist blacklist, then you are on the blacklist. Then recurse for those who know you.
Are you now or have you ever been a pirate sympathizer? Do you share in their anti-corporate views? God bless America.
At that point, they've won the war, although battles will continue to be fought for some time.
Maybe only if they produce something that people want to listen to so badly that they must buy from the RIAA and put up with their restrictions instead of from less draconian artists.
IMHO, at some point the restrictions / price tipping point of the RIAA vs. other sources of music will be reached.
The only way I can see the outcome you suggest is to fundamentally change the way the Internet works. They would need to have control of my connection at the packet level. They would have to filter based on protocol. No protocols not approved by the government, etc.
As long as I can send IP packets between my computer and yours, we still will be able to communicate much as is done today. The value of this is great enough that large numbers of people will do it. Even if it takes new implementations of mail, irc, the web, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
If they had used a true one-way function, (definition: infeasible to find an input resulting in certian output), then by definition it would have a larger number of bits in the result.
Let me restate that, and what is in my original post. If Microsoft had used MD5 (more one way than what they used), of course, it would have a wider output, which is just a characteristic of such a function.
Uh, you're confusing two things.
I'm not confused at all.
I know that multiple inputs to a one way function may generate the same output.
So then, why the hell is it called a one-way function?
Answer: because it is infeasible to find one of the other inputs that result in the same output.
I thought I made this clear in my grandparent post.
The fact that there are multiple possible passwords for this Word document is proof that it is a one-way function.
Um, no. I think I just covered the definition of a one-way function.
I would use CRC-32. Multiple inputs would result in the same output, but it is decidedly NOT a one way function.
The very fact that someone has a utility to give them alternate passwords means by definition that the function in word is NOT a one way function. Otherwise, it would be infeasible to do exactly what this utility does.
MD5 is good because for some given value, it's really hard to find anything which hashes to that value, not because it's somehow 'more one-way'.
MD5 is "more one way" in the sense that it is harder to find an alternate input; using the definition of one way I just gave.
Even if you strictly consider the binary case of "is" or "is not" function X a one way function, rather than a continuum of one-way-ness, then one is "more positive" than zero. And MD5 is "more one way" than Microsoft Word's function.
I don't know what "both ways" you're talking about.
I can assure you it is possible to have secure encryption, secure digital signatures without DRM.
GPG and PGP are examples of both, without DRM.
Try reading the book Applied Cryptography.
It would be most certianly possible to encrypt a document using a password, using a secure encryption mechanism, such that it cannot be decrypted without the password.
Similarly, it is possible to take a secure (i.e. MD5) hash of a document, and then compare that document if it comes back to you to be sure it is the original. Applied Cryptography details numerous protocols for conducting business, signing documents, and many other useful things. All securely. All without DRM.
The word doc doesn't store the password, but a one-way checksum.
It is a checksum. But it must not be a very one-way checksum. If they had used a real one-way function, such as MD5, it would not be possible to come up with another value that hashed to the same result. (Well, it might be possible, but who has time to wait longer than the life of the universe.)
>>Perhaps that would motivate employers to quit as soon as their company starts being vastly evil, which would in itself be a motivation for companies not to be evil.
>On first thought, that sounds quite plausible. But on second thought, i know and you know that if someone bails out of a $25/hr job, the company will be more than happy to try to hire someone into it (read: inexperienced newbs or immigrants) at $9/hr.
Furthermore, by paying someone $9 / hr instead of $25 / hr, the evil company can continue to be evil for a longer period, and can afford to pay lawyers longer.
I know I shouldn't feed the trolls but....
Has anyone ever considered the fact that there is no conspiracy here? Maybe somebody just said "Hey, this BIOS thing sucks, we should make it better"?
Yeah, let's consider for a moment.
Maybe someone just said, "this voting thing sucks, let's make it better with Diebold closed source e-voting".
Everything always about Microsoft taking over & their secret plans of world domination.
This would be a true statement if you remove the word "secret". The plans don't seem to be so secret. Microsoft people themselves say that they believe that 100% of the market is their fair share.
It's telling how easily you ignore Microsoft's loooong history.
Plain and simple truth people: Microsoft does not lay secret plans, they do not care about preventing linux from big thing.
They seem to care about preventing Linux very much. Have you seen the Haloween documents? Microsoft people discussing how to attack Linux.
They are the giant that everyone hates. Why? Jealousy.
Please.
There are other giants that everyone doesn't hate. In other industries. The reason everyone hates Microsoft is because of Microsoft's behavior. Plain and simple.
Don't like what MS is doing? Find a way to beat them.
Open Source is a way to beat them. There is no other way to beat them.
Microsoft is doing anything and everything possible to destroy open source. First they ignored it. Then they laughed at it. Then they started a FUD campaign.
Microsoft seems awfully interested in DRM, in Trusted Computing, in putting TCPA onto motherboards, and now in changing the BIOS. And I'm supposed to just believe, contrary to past evidence and common sense that this is not an attempt to cut off open source?
Let me summarize...
We are finding a way to beat them. It's called Open Source. Microsoft is trying to prevent Linux from becomming the next big thing. It is part of their not-so-secret plan. Microsoft does want to dominate everything and makes no secret of it.
Maybe someone just said "Hey, this open source thing sucks. We should make the BIOS better."
Maybe the same types of statistical learning techniques that we use for the best anti-spam filters could be applied to recognizing tv commercials?
How about a Bayesean tv commercial recognizer?
But you multiply by how ever many CDR's you can cram into the overnight envelope. How many? 20? 30? Also, someone pointed out that you can't beat the cost for this bandwidth.
Finally, I should mention that you could use DVD-R's instead of CDR's.
SCO now has the following job openings available...
Now pay attention to the date on that last job opening. That is Monday following SCOX's 5-Dec lame oral arguments.
Why suddenly is this position vacant? Some theories...
So, if you're out of work and qualified, a great career opportunity would be to work at SCO!
Director of Financial Reporting and SEC/GAAP Compliance Requisition# 40238
http://www.sco.com/company/jobs/
Type: Exempt
Posted 08 December, 2003
Location: Lindon, UT
Department:
Reports To: Controller
Apply Now
Job Description:
Responsible for the financial reporting of quarterly and annual results in accordance with SEC rules and regulations. Responsible for the filing of registration statements and other periodic filings as required. Duties will include the drafting and review of quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, annual reports on Form 10-K, periodic reports on Form 8-K, as well as assist in the preparation of registration and proxy statements and any other filings. Other responsibilities will include the monitoring of the Company's compliance with current SEC, FASB and other regulatory literature that pertains to accounting and financial reporting. This position will also lead the Company's effort on maintaining an effective system of internal control, and ensuring the internal control structure is in compliance with the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Additional special projects will be given on an "as occurring" basis.
Job Responsibilities:
Financial reporting of quarterly and annual results in accordance with SEC rules and regulations Filing of registration statements and other periodic filings as required Drafting and review of quarterly and annual reports Assist in the preparation of registration and proxy statements and any other filings Monitoring of the Company's compliance with current SEC, FASB and other regulatory literature that pertains to accounting and financial reporting Additional special projects will be given on an "as occurring" basis.
Job Requirements:
Masters degree in accounting and experience as a manager with a public accounting firm and a minimum of 8 years accounting experience. Extensive financial reporting experience
- Extremely high bandwidth
- Extremely high reliability
Unfortunantly, poor latency, but still good enough for many uses.650 (MB) x 1024 x 1024 / 24 / 60 / 60 = 7888.59 bytes per second throughput. And that's only for 650 MB on a CD, and only 1 CD in the FedEx envelope. Multiply this "throughput" by how ever many CDR's you can stuff into a FedEx overnight envelope. And by doing so, you do not increase your latency.
So if you have a mountain of data, say from a supercomputer, this may be the fastest (not lowest latency) way to send it to a remote location. Faster than any real Internet connection.
This is also a good way to explain the difference between "bandwidth" and "latency". Good to know when someone is wanting to sell you a "high speed" satellite based internet connection. Just what do you mean by high-speed? Latency or Bandwidth, or both, or niether?
And of course reinstall lilo to the MBR by running /sbin/lilo.
/boot partition under several different ?NIX like OSes, and conveniently edit your grub config.
Or not, if you are running Grub, which will find those files by their filename and path. You can reconfigure Grub by just editing a text file. Grub will find its config text file, by pathname, and obey it. Really convenient if you really do switch kernels or manage several of them.
Furthermore, you could use the same
- Load kernel modules for additional hardware that was not compiled into the kernel. This allows you to use a more generic stripped down kernel and focus on customizing the initrd which is much more flexible.
- Load kernel modules for filesystems not compiled into the kernel. In fact, you could compile a kernel with none or only one filesystem. This leads to fewer generic kernels, and you focus on editing the initrd script to load which modules you need.
In fact, in past versions of SuSE, the entire installation process was actually run from initrd! You boot from the CD ROM. The kernel loads, mounts the initrd ramdisk. Runs the initrd program from ramdisk. This is an extremely large, complex program, that not only loads the additional kernel modules needed, but then goes through a GUI installation process (frambeuffer device, no X) and then after the hard disk has been partitioned, filesystems written, and jillions or maybe even gazillions of files copied from multiple cd's into those newly created filesystems; then the initrd program ends, and the kernel "finishes" booting into the hard disk system that did not even exist when you started the kerenel booting up.You could conceivably have a server running for several years whose kernel was first loaded from the CD during installation onto an empty hard disk. Compare to number of reboots during Windows install.
For those of us who speak english instead of freedom, how do you pronounce it?
Objoke:
Q. What do you call someone who speaks three languages?
A. Trilingual.
Q. What do you call someone who speaks two languages?
A. Bilingual
Q. What do you call someone who speaks only one language?
A. American.
You setup a smallish
I can think of a number of enhancements for modern bloat loaders....
Listen to the ogg's of their telephone conferences. Listen to when Darl is introduced, how she pronounces it.
It is DARL.
Rymes with Carl. Whether this sounds stupid or not, I suppose, is a matter of opinion.
they are dangerous / dirty communists / hoping to undermine Capitalism|America|Freedom
You are behind the times. You forgot "terrorist".
Wal-Mart needs to understand that people don't want to download music online. They want to visit a physical store and pay artificially high prices for a limited selection of music that are willing to be raped by the RIAA.
After all, which kinds of businesses usually succeed? Businesses that offer consumers what they want at a reasonable price? Or businesses that screw the consumer, call them thieves, sue them, pass draconian legislation, and restrict choices? After all, the only good music is RIAA music.
Maybe now that I've posted this, Wal-Mart will reconsider. And others will stop jumping onto this music downloading fad which is not what people really want.
Language changes and evolves. (Often driven by stupid people.)
An operating system is now commonly understood to be what Microsoft calls an operating system.
A hacker is now commonly understood to be someone who breaks into computers. A cracker is commonly understood to be something you eat.
Piracy is now commonly understood to mean copyright infringement, even though the behavior of the RIAA, MPAA and Disney actually fit the classic definition of piracy.
For a long spell in the 80's when microcomputers weren't very powerful, every new database product under the sun called itself a "relational database" even though it wasn't.
Perhaps what I describe is more a contamination of language than evolution. But it is a fact of life. Get used to it, or sound like a fool. This despite the fact that your use of the word is technically correct.
The one I really liked was how Blake said that the GPL violates antitrust laws and US export control laws. That's even more novel than it violating the constitution or US copyright laws.
I'd love to hear the theory of how GPL violates export control laws, or even antitrust laws. Does MS EULA violate antitrust laws?
There is no word copywritten. Or copywrite either.
The opposite of Copyright is CopyWrong, not CopyLeft. The "right" in Copyright is not "write" as something you do with a pencil, nor "right" as in the opposite of "left", but "right" as in the "right to copy".
Copywrong would be a word with the same flavor as the RIAA and MPAA. Copyleft, which the FSF uses is the wrong opposite of "right". It is the opposite of the wrong "right".
Do you have personal knowledge that PJ is a guy who cross dresses?
I believe one of IBM's counterclaims is for copyright infringement based on violation of the GPL. This was previously covered on slashdot. IBM has written code, contributed it to Linux under the GPL, and SCO has violated IBM's copyright interest in that code.
You link to a friends page because you like him. Unbenonst to you, he links to infringing material. An over-zealous RIAA decides that the "only possible reason" for you to have linked to such a malcontent was that you must share his every view.
Didn't we have this evil linking business before? If you merely know someone on the communist blacklist, then you are on the blacklist. Then recurse for those who know you.
Are you now or have you ever been a pirate sympathizer? Do you share in their anti-corporate views? God bless America.
At that point, they've won the war, although battles will continue to be fought for some time.
Maybe only if they produce something that people want to listen to so badly that they must buy from the RIAA and put up with their restrictions instead of from less draconian artists.
IMHO, at some point the restrictions / price tipping point of the RIAA vs. other sources of music will be reached.
The only way I can see the outcome you suggest is to fundamentally change the way the Internet works. They would need to have control of my connection at the packet level. They would have to filter based on protocol. No protocols not approved by the government, etc.
As long as I can send IP packets between my computer and yours, we still will be able to communicate much as is done today. The value of this is great enough that large numbers of people will do it. Even if it takes new implementations of mail, irc, the web, etc.