On the radio spectrum, unless the license you are using allows encryption, it is illegal. You see, the FCC has some pretty clear rules about this kind of thing, and it has NOTHING to do with the First amendment, according to the courts anyway..
I'm one of those hams who would hunt you down for sport. Actually it IS a sport for some hams and we have competitions to see who of us can find hidden transmitters the fastest. We call it "Fox Hunting" and believe me, there are some folks who take this kind of thing very seriously and can find you, on or off the ham bands in pretty short order.
So, go ahead.... Interfere with the ham bands or some other radio service who knows to ask us for help, let us have some real fun. We'd be happy to find you and report you to the FCC...
Yup. The FCC will confiscate equipment and will fine those that abuse, and will probably come down even harder on entities that intentionally do it for commercial purposes.
Where I don't disagree, I have to point out that in the case of one misbehaving ham who's case recently came to a formal end with the FCC, this can take a LONG time. For this guy it took nearly 10 years to get just a portion of the $75K fine entered as a judgment and get his ham radio license yanked. It wasn't because it was hard to catch him breaking the rules as he basically ran an illegal shortwave broadcast operation on the ham bands for most of the day and night... I'm just saying that the FCC isn't exactly in an all fired hurry to actually enforce the rules sometimes...
Gag orders and national security letters have no place in the Land of the Free.
This should be too obvious to even be worth saying.
This is NOT a gag order... My reading of this is that the device is not legal for sale in the USA by FCC rules. I could go into the reasons why the FCC won't allow this device to be manufactured and sold, but suffice it to say, the technical requirements of the device and the FCC's rules for such things are incompatible at this time. I doubt this situation will change in the future.
Building a device like this would be allowed, but you couldn't sell it, nor could you operate it apart from the Part 15 rules, which judging from the photos of the device in question, it CLEARLY does not and cannot be brought into compliance.
Or maybe 100% vaporware without a feasible implementation in sight? Was a working prototype ever presented? Was a sound technical concept ever presented?
Totally possible, just totally illegal to operate and would have a high possibility of being caught. They would certainly need to use licensed spectrum for what they are describing, and such spectrum is currently packed solid with users. The data rates possible are pretty slow, unless you take up a huge amount of spectrum space, which would raise the noise floor, up the necessary power and make yourself a problem for the licensed users. Licensed users would surely locate you, then turn you in to the FCC in droves, who would show up to verify the interference and start sending you nasty letters about the rules you are breaking and the cost of the fines. They might even knock on your door and inspect the equipment if you are dumb enough to let them in. They cannot do much but fine you, but the DOJ can force the collection of the fines though court action, fines which run upwards to $5K/day per violation..
Sure, but to keep it legal one would need to be very careful.
Such a device would need to be Part 15 compliant, which puts a real damper on the output power, but allows encryption (I believe). Also Part 15 is secondary to EVERYBODY else on the spectrum. Running more than the Part 15 allowed field strengths and encrypting would be illegal.... Part 15 is pretty much do what you want to do, just keep the field strengths low enough that nobody will likely hear you more than 100 yards or so away, and if you interfere with somebody, YOU get to shut down.
Being illegal and getting caught are totally different things though.... The FCC is pretty understaffed in the spectrum monitoring area so unless somebody complains the chances of having a legal problem is slim (but not none). However, if they catch you, the fines can be $5K/day for each offense, so I'd not recommend flaunting the law in this case..
I tuned in to say the same thing. Police departments all over the US use encrypted radios every day. I bought a used Motorola Sabre II on Ebay for use on the Ham bands & it still had the encryption chip installed. I removed it because even if you're not using it it's a heck of a drain on the battery.
Police departments use LICENSED services which are allowed to encrypt per the terms of their licenses. Hams are allowed encryption too, but under the terms of the band plan and licenses and NEVER to obscure the meaning of the transmission.
I'm told that for Ham Radio users of the WiFi spectrum (I believe in the USA you can use the lower channels of the WiFi in 802.1G mode with a tech class license), encryption is allowed as long as the encryption key is maintained in your logs, or is publicly available for other hams to use.
I think this judge IS changing the rules, but hey, I'm not a judge, a practicing lawyer in the jurisdiction in question (or any jurisdiction for that matter), I don't play a lawyer on TV and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
So if you get served one of these lawsuits, I suggest you get a lawyer and skip the commentary on Slashdot. Better yet, don't let anybody download stuff that infringes on other people's copyrights on your internet connection...
But I don't see how one can proceed with a case like this unless the judge allows the discovery of who the "John Doe" subscriber is who was/is using the IP in question to distribute copyrighted materials. Most of the reasons given by the Judge don't seem to make common sense given how the BitTorrent technology works and if many of his arguments are allowed to stand, there will be ZERO ability in civil court to protect intellectual property. Perhaps the presumption that the subscriber is to blame needs to be adjusted some, but I don't think you can absolve the subscriber of all liability.
Yes, so? That's how it's done... Once you have a defendant to name, that's what you do, amend your suit and serve the defendant. Why would you issue a subpoena to the subscriber, and for what? Once the suit is filed and served, it is time for discovery proper, so you start up that process. If the subscriber wants to present evidence or ask questions of the other side, then it's time to do so once the suit has been served...
Remember, Malibu Media can just change venues too and start this all over again... This judge didn't do anything worth while for you and me and opened himself up to an appeal where he obviously will be slapped.
About the only thing he accomplished is getting Malibu Media out of his courtroom and off his docket, for now. Nothing else will change.
I beg to differ.
Malibu Media can't choose the venue, or the judge.
If Judge Hellerstein's decision is followed by other judges, it will be the death knell of the present wave of Malibu Media litigation.
If other judges follow this precedent, it will be the death knell of civil litigation involving the internet in any way. I don't like how trolls do business, but I don't think changing the rules like this is a good idea overall.
Didn't congress give them but $230 Million for this kid of thing just recently?
Dang, this is half the year's budget. It's going to hurt the commercial crew budget. I guess this just validates the position of congress then that Space X just isn't ready enough to get their stuff human rated and they apparently need some more time to work out the kinks... Shame they blew up almost a half of the budget though...
Well, when the insurance company says "Sure we will write insurance for that $110 million, just cut us a check for $110 Million.." you just don't do it. Besides, it's usually less expensive to "self insure" (i.e. take the risk yourself), especially if you know you will succeed.
I'm not sure if they could buy insurance for the vehicle, given their previous track record. I wouldn't bet they will succeed on the next launch myself and if nobody wants to write insurance at a reasonable rate, you just take the risk yourself.
Yea, it apparently had a similar failure rate to the Saturn V. Operationally it lost one engine in flight, had fueling issues for two flights and a whole host of minor issues and glitches both on the launch pad and in flight. Where it was successful at meeting it's objectives for each mission, it did not have a perfect record.
Saturn I -- 10 launches from 1961 to 1965, 10 operational successes. And that was using clustered engines and liquid hydrogen engines in the EARLY 60s.
Successful, but not totally a clean record... SA-1 and 3 had issues related to improper fuel loads. AS-101 had an unexpected engine failure and AS-103 sand SA-104 had some minor failures. They all achieved their mission objectives, but the vehicle wasn't flawless.
Our survey found that only 45.4% of the class of 2014 is currently enrolled in a full-time job meaning 54.6% of grads from last year are unemployed or underemployed (this is excluding students enrolled in graduate education).
This seems to be more noteworthy.
Oh it is! However, it doesn't fit the desired story line so we just ignore that little issue and start arguments about minimum wage and the confederate battle flag... The number of people not working in this country is a serious issue, but none of these unemployed graduates actually get counted in the headline unemployment numbers, so the Department of Labor doesn't have to report on them and the press doesn't have to report on it.
You know, the alarmists have been playing the gloom and doom card for 20+ years, so far none of their dire prognostications have been proven true. If they've been so so wrong in the past, why would I believe them now? They confidently made claims in the past which turned out to be false.
Don't you see? They have just kept upping the anti with more and more dire predictions, because that's what it takes to get attention now. It's starting to wear thin if you ask me. I look at their past and it seems like they are just shysters, snake oil sellers who will literally say anything to manipulate folks like you. I suggest you apply a bit more critical thinking when you read stuff like this.
I'm saying that this whole article is actually hog wash born of the global warming alarmist religion. I don't think this is a problem, nor do I think that the issue is traceable to global warming. Finally, I don't think global warming is man made (but that's a totally different argument).
This does not seem to be a serious problem to me...Even if their conclusions are true.
I hope you aren't serious because if you like to eat you're going to want the honeybees to survive.
Honeybees WILL survive. Raising bees is a big business, making honey is but one way to make money at it. Hives are routinely loaded onto trucks and taking to areas where they are needed and the hive owners are paid for this. If you want to have a lot of some animal, have it produce something we need and domesticate it. You will eventually get a LOT of them..
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks to the first amendment.
On the radio spectrum, unless the license you are using allows encryption, it is illegal. You see, the FCC has some pretty clear rules about this kind of thing, and it has NOTHING to do with the First amendment, according to the courts anyway..
True this....
I'm one of those hams who would hunt you down for sport. Actually it IS a sport for some hams and we have competitions to see who of us can find hidden transmitters the fastest. We call it "Fox Hunting" and believe me, there are some folks who take this kind of thing very seriously and can find you, on or off the ham bands in pretty short order.
So, go ahead.... Interfere with the ham bands or some other radio service who knows to ask us for help, let us have some real fun. We'd be happy to find you and report you to the FCC...
Yup. The FCC will confiscate equipment and will fine those that abuse, and will probably come down even harder on entities that intentionally do it for commercial purposes.
Where I don't disagree, I have to point out that in the case of one misbehaving ham who's case recently came to a formal end with the FCC, this can take a LONG time. For this guy it took nearly 10 years to get just a portion of the $75K fine entered as a judgment and get his ham radio license yanked. It wasn't because it was hard to catch him breaking the rules as he basically ran an illegal shortwave broadcast operation on the ham bands for most of the day and night... I'm just saying that the FCC isn't exactly in an all fired hurry to actually enforce the rules sometimes...
Gag orders and national security letters have no place in the Land of the Free.
This should be too obvious to even be worth saying.
This is NOT a gag order... My reading of this is that the device is not legal for sale in the USA by FCC rules. I could go into the reasons why the FCC won't allow this device to be manufactured and sold, but suffice it to say, the technical requirements of the device and the FCC's rules for such things are incompatible at this time. I doubt this situation will change in the future.
Building a device like this would be allowed, but you couldn't sell it, nor could you operate it apart from the Part 15 rules, which judging from the photos of the device in question, it CLEARLY does not and cannot be brought into compliance.
So this is not a government gag order.... IMHO
Or maybe 100% vaporware without a feasible implementation in sight? Was a working prototype ever presented? Was a sound technical concept ever presented?
Totally possible, just totally illegal to operate and would have a high possibility of being caught. They would certainly need to use licensed spectrum for what they are describing, and such spectrum is currently packed solid with users. The data rates possible are pretty slow, unless you take up a huge amount of spectrum space, which would raise the noise floor, up the necessary power and make yourself a problem for the licensed users. Licensed users would surely locate you, then turn you in to the FCC in droves, who would show up to verify the interference and start sending you nasty letters about the rules you are breaking and the cost of the fines. They might even knock on your door and inspect the equipment if you are dumb enough to let them in. They cannot do much but fine you, but the DOJ can force the collection of the fines though court action, fines which run upwards to $5K/day per violation..
Sure, but to keep it legal one would need to be very careful.
Such a device would need to be Part 15 compliant, which puts a real damper on the output power, but allows encryption (I believe). Also Part 15 is secondary to EVERYBODY else on the spectrum. Running more than the Part 15 allowed field strengths and encrypting would be illegal.... Part 15 is pretty much do what you want to do, just keep the field strengths low enough that nobody will likely hear you more than 100 yards or so away, and if you interfere with somebody, YOU get to shut down.
Being illegal and getting caught are totally different things though.... The FCC is pretty understaffed in the spectrum monitoring area so unless somebody complains the chances of having a legal problem is slim (but not none). However, if they catch you, the fines can be $5K/day for each offense, so I'd not recommend flaunting the law in this case..
I tuned in to say the same thing. Police departments all over the US use encrypted radios every day. I bought a used Motorola Sabre II on Ebay for use on the Ham bands & it still had the encryption chip installed. I removed it because even if you're not using it it's a heck of a drain on the battery.
Police departments use LICENSED services which are allowed to encrypt per the terms of their licenses. Hams are allowed encryption too, but under the terms of the band plan and licenses and NEVER to obscure the meaning of the transmission.
I'm told that for Ham Radio users of the WiFi spectrum (I believe in the USA you can use the lower channels of the WiFi in 802.1G mode with a tech class license), encryption is allowed as long as the encryption key is maintained in your logs, or is publicly available for other hams to use.
Insert bad lawyer joke here.... Total ignorance of the law eh? That from a New York lawyer? What's wrong, couldn't get areal job?
I think you missed the sarcasm in my voice....
Well, unless you are riding in one of these, I suppose a 20% failure rate is great at half the cost..
I think this judge IS changing the rules, but hey, I'm not a judge, a practicing lawyer in the jurisdiction in question (or any jurisdiction for that matter), I don't play a lawyer on TV and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
So if you get served one of these lawsuits, I suggest you get a lawyer and skip the commentary on Slashdot. Better yet, don't let anybody download stuff that infringes on other people's copyrights on your internet connection...
But I don't see how one can proceed with a case like this unless the judge allows the discovery of who the "John Doe" subscriber is who was/is using the IP in question to distribute copyrighted materials. Most of the reasons given by the Judge don't seem to make common sense given how the BitTorrent technology works and if many of his arguments are allowed to stand, there will be ZERO ability in civil court to protect intellectual property. Perhaps the presumption that the subscriber is to blame needs to be adjusted some, but I don't think you can absolve the subscriber of all liability.
Yes, so? That's how it's done... Once you have a defendant to name, that's what you do, amend your suit and serve the defendant. Why would you issue a subpoena to the subscriber, and for what? Once the suit is filed and served, it is time for discovery proper, so you start up that process. If the subscriber wants to present evidence or ask questions of the other side, then it's time to do so once the suit has been served...
Remember, Malibu Media can just change venues too and start this all over again... This judge didn't do anything worth while for you and me and opened himself up to an appeal where he obviously will be slapped. About the only thing he accomplished is getting Malibu Media out of his courtroom and off his docket, for now. Nothing else will change.
I beg to differ. Malibu Media can't choose the venue, or the judge. If Judge Hellerstein's decision is followed by other judges, it will be the death knell of the present wave of Malibu Media litigation.
If other judges follow this precedent, it will be the death knell of civil litigation involving the internet in any way. I don't like how trolls do business, but I don't think changing the rules like this is a good idea overall.
Bravo.. I see what you did there... Way to spin...
Didn't congress give them but $230 Million for this kid of thing just recently?
Dang, this is half the year's budget. It's going to hurt the commercial crew budget. I guess this just validates the position of congress then that Space X just isn't ready enough to get their stuff human rated and they apparently need some more time to work out the kinks... Shame they blew up almost a half of the budget though...
Are these things not insured anyways?
Well, when the insurance company says "Sure we will write insurance for that $110 million, just cut us a check for $110 Million.." you just don't do it. Besides, it's usually less expensive to "self insure" (i.e. take the risk yourself), especially if you know you will succeed.
I'm not sure if they could buy insurance for the vehicle, given their previous track record. I wouldn't bet they will succeed on the next launch myself and if nobody wants to write insurance at a reasonable rate, you just take the risk yourself.
Check on the June 15, 2007 launch. Where the flight wasn't a total failure, the vehicle failed to reach the intended orbit due to a valve failure.
So not perfect reliability for even the Atlas V, which has one of the absolute best and longest records flying in rocket science.
Yea, it apparently had a similar failure rate to the Saturn V. Operationally it lost one engine in flight, had fueling issues for two flights and a whole host of minor issues and glitches both on the launch pad and in flight. Where it was successful at meeting it's objectives for each mission, it did not have a perfect record.
Saturn I -- 10 launches from 1961 to 1965, 10 operational successes. And that was using clustered engines and liquid hydrogen engines in the EARLY 60s.
Successful, but not totally a clean record... SA-1 and 3 had issues related to improper fuel loads. AS-101 had an unexpected engine failure and AS-103 sand SA-104 had some minor failures. They all achieved their mission objectives, but the vehicle wasn't flawless.
Painful, but we'll live. There hasn't been a rocket yet that has a perfect operational record.
Oh sure there is... We've just not tried to launch it yet.... ;)
Our survey found that only 45.4% of the class of 2014 is currently enrolled in a full-time job meaning 54.6% of grads from last year are unemployed or underemployed (this is excluding students enrolled in graduate education).
This seems to be more noteworthy.
Oh it is! However, it doesn't fit the desired story line so we just ignore that little issue and start arguments about minimum wage and the confederate battle flag... The number of people not working in this country is a serious issue, but none of these unemployed graduates actually get counted in the headline unemployment numbers, so the Department of Labor doesn't have to report on them and the press doesn't have to report on it.
You know, the alarmists have been playing the gloom and doom card for 20+ years, so far none of their dire prognostications have been proven true. If they've been so so wrong in the past, why would I believe them now? They confidently made claims in the past which turned out to be false.
Don't you see? They have just kept upping the anti with more and more dire predictions, because that's what it takes to get attention now. It's starting to wear thin if you ask me. I look at their past and it seems like they are just shysters, snake oil sellers who will literally say anything to manipulate folks like you. I suggest you apply a bit more critical thinking when you read stuff like this.
If you think so...
I'm saying that this whole article is actually hog wash born of the global warming alarmist religion. I don't think this is a problem, nor do I think that the issue is traceable to global warming. Finally, I don't think global warming is man made (but that's a totally different argument).
This does not seem to be a serious problem to me...Even if their conclusions are true.
OK, just remove the word and re-read...
I hope you aren't serious because if you like to eat you're going to want the honeybees to survive.
Honeybees WILL survive. Raising bees is a big business, making honey is but one way to make money at it. Hives are routinely loaded onto trucks and taking to areas where they are needed and the hive owners are paid for this. If you want to have a lot of some animal, have it produce something we need and domesticate it. You will eventually get a LOT of them..