"Did not break US law because it did not happen in the US and the US has no jurisdiction over what a Russian citizen does in Russia. And considering that what he did in Russia is not even illegal there, there really truly is something wrong with this scenario"
Our government acting like this is creating HAZARD for US Citizens travelling or doing business abroad as well. If we do not respect the sovergnity of other nations to live under their own laws, then why should THEY respect ours?
Let's be consistent... The Chinese government, for example, has been guilty of breaking MANY MANY US laws FAR more serious than the DMCA... There is, for example, the small matter of the senseless murder of thousands of protestors in 1989... Why didn't we grab Zhang Jhemin (sp) the last time he visited the USA?
I mean, we used force of bribery to get Yugoslavia to hand over Milosevic, who hadn't broken any law in his country...
Given the US's POOR track record of protecting citizens abroad (particular Chinese-Americans on trial even NOW for dubious claims of "espionage", claims the ChiCom government refuses to provide ANY proof of), cavalier actions like this threaten the security of ALL Americans.
"Well, of course, what he did *was* a crime, at least by our fucked-up standards. Is it fair? No. Is it just? No. Is it constitutional? Only up until a federal judge says its not."
Why does the DMCA have any weight right now? Because a conflicted judge (Kaplan), who had previously worked for a lawfirm that represented Time-Warner (but nevertheless excoriated the defence lawyer, Martin Garbus for a similar, but FAR weaker conflict, his firm had worked for someone later BOUGHT by Time-Warner), who was one or all of:
1. Corrupt (see conflict of interest)
2. Incompetent (either hasn't read the Constitution, or think it means only what HE thinks it means)
3. An oathbreaker (how did his 2600 ruling and prejustice preserve, protect, defend the Constitution, anyone?)
Came up with a VERY bad decision (DeCSS case), which the news media and the public at large has let him get away with only because the defendants were "hackers".
Methinks if there is going to be protest against the DMCA, someone needs to find out where that bozo works and picket outside it.
Yes, I agree with the subject line, that a case NEEDS to go to court, if there is to be any hope at all of weakening or defeating the DMCA, but I can't morally ask another, especially a foreign national now being held against his will as a political prisoner, to make that sacraifice.
I think Adobe is right now weighing the implications of this case, and the fact that it COULD be devastating to the DMCA, along with the BAD PR they are receiving right now in our community. While it may be true that we as a whole aren't listened to by the media, we DO have considerable influence beyond our numbers in what the companies we work for purchase.
And at this point, I'd even buy MICROSOFT products over Adobe. MS, to my knowledge, isn't the cause of someone being unjustly imprisoned in a country foreign to them.
This case and the case of Professor Felten have the distiction of being the first to seriously display the moral, educational, and social impact of the DMCA, in a way that the 536 co-conspirators (the Senate, House, and President (Clinton who unanimously voted for and signed the DMCA) probably never envisioned.
Personally, I've resolved to NOT vote for ANY of the 535 Congressmen who were in office at the time of the DMCA's passage, as they all voted for it (or at least, failed to vote against it).
An unjust law is no law at all. And it wouldn't have the teeth it does today (considering the many major conflicts the DMCA has with the Constitution) is all thanks to one man:
"judge" Kaplan of DeCSS fame.
Just goes to show you what damage one rogue biased/corrupt/incompetent federal judge can wreak.
I had the same problem with Mandrake 8.0... Did some hunting and found the solution... If you, like me, use KDE 2.1, restart into GNOME. Run the shell script... The little window will be full size and let you install the program.
I restarted back into KDE, and Lime Wire 1.6 works great! Much faster and smoother than the earlier version.
If it can be played, it can be ripped. There is no such thing as copy protection that REQUIRES the thing be decoded to audio that will not be EASLILY bypassed.
The sooner the morons in the record industry realize this, the sooner they pocket the $millions they are wasting developing such crap.
"The music industry still has no effective response to the simple fact that millions of Americans don't like them and are willing to share their music despite judicial decrees that this violates the law. Until something occurs to moderate the mob, there will be tremendous innovation.
"
The response will be one of two things... Either the government will respond to the will of the people, or (more likely)....
Another "drug war".
I can see new twisted laws, abandonment of civil liberty, in the name of protecting an obsolete business model against information.... Why will it happen? First off, government only responds to MONEY, and the IP cartels have a lot of it. Secondly, the law enforcement establishment will see this as yet another avenue to incresed funding, more employment. Imagine the RICO act and "civil asset forefiture" being applied to the homes and property of those who trade MP3's...
Why do I forsee doom and gloom? Because of the wisdom of the Founders, who wrote that the "natural" way of things was for government to become more powerful and the people less so (which is why they wrote a Constitution that placed SEVERE limitations on the power and scope of government).
But now law, not even a Constitution has any more power than those in power have the will or honor to enforce it. And in the past 80 years there has been less and less of both among our leadership.
Re:Might As Well Go EVA, There Ain't No Test Tubes
on
ISS Airlock Installed
·
· Score: 2
"his won't change until we get a crew escape vehicle (currently the Russian Soyuz, a 30-year-old design) that can carry more than three people back. Guess what - there isn't even a funded plan to build such a vehicle!"
This is what the XP38 shuttle was supposed to be. Since it's been scrapped, there is no way (besides what you proposed, having more than 1 Soyuz standing by) to have more than 3 crew, as they'd have no way to escape the station.
" I've worked several years in the book publishing industry (in the production side), and with the pay I was taking home, I was not able to afford to buy the (specialized) books that interested me.
The most disgusting part of that industry is that the one who gets the bigger profit (50% of the final retail sale price) is (of course) the one who does the least work: the bookseller."
In other words, the book publishers have imitated the recording industry (which earns in excess of $5 to every $1 an artist earns).
"Until tiny little e-books become mainstream, I don't see the pirating of books becoming a problem. Sure I could download the latest novels to read, but no one wants to sit at the computer and read for recreation."
This is likely far in the future. I've yet to see any new technology to make an "e-book" that is as comfortable to read and is as practical as a paper book. That's an invention that will be as Earth shattering as the microprocessor itself.
"Free Market Capitalism cannot co-exist with Democratic and Free people"
This is a fallacy. What we have in the USA is NOT free market capitalism! It's more of a pseudo-socialist corporate/government Oligarchy.
In a truly FREE MARKET, these things would be true that are NOT true in the United States of 2001 (though some of them used to be true):
1. Anyone with an invention would be able to bring it to market. Not easily possible today by anyone not a Fortune 500 corporation, thanks to byzantine IP laws, and government-sanctioned monopolies (all corporations are government sanctioned entities, as a corporation is a government created legal fiction).
2. Anyone would be permitted to improve any existing invention or product, both for their own financial gain and the general good. Not able to happen today for similar reasons to #1
3. Copyrights and patents would be limited in scope and duration (as intended by the Constitution), with VERY leniant "fair use" exceptions. The 1990's basically put an end to any fiction that ANY limits on copyrights and patents still exist.
4. The government's role in the economy would be restricted to:
a. Maintaining a sound fiscal policy (ie, not spending more than they take in, so as not to take on debt and inflate interest rates)
b. Busting monopolies whererever they exist.
The US government abandoned these policies forever when FDR became the first US Tyrant.
5. There would be no such thing as a government entity (be it legislative, or by judicial fiat) that has the power to protect "business models" from the advance of technology. Had we our current laws and politicians and courts in the time of Henry Ford, the automobile would have been outlawed as "stealing" from horse farms and coach and buggy makers. Had they presided over the time of Thomas Edison, electricity would have been outlawed as "stealing" from candle and oil lamp makers.
I could go on indefinately, but you get the idea. The USA is rapidly becoming a Plutocracy, rule by merchants (large megacorps), which, while not socialist in the same FORM as communist countries, has the same exact effect on:
1. civil rights
2. freedom of speech, most particulary
3. freedom to learn
4. freedom to buy (or not to buy) products of your choice (try buying a computer at ANY retail store without paying the MS tax) 5. freedom to dissent. In communist countries they roll the tanks over you. In the American Imperial Corporate State, they just sue you into bankruptcy. Eventually it will become tanks.
The American Plutocracy is a fusion of corporation into government, leading to corporate control of government. Communist countries are the same, except that it happened the opposite way, government took control of the corporations.
The day that public libraries are illegal is THE DAY that we've completely lost our freedom to the corporations.
When information is THAT controlled by the IP cartels, it will be a world where only the very wealthy can afford to read (as per Richard Stallman's scary short story, the "Right To Read"), and only the wealthy elite are educated.
In that world, the masses will only know what they are told, or what they can afford to buy. They will be trained to meekly work for the corporations and be "good" cowed consumers of what the corporations want them to buy.
The scary thing is, our own GOVERNMENT is leading us to this bleak future, the post-Information Age Dark Age, out of their own ignorance and greed.
The DMCA, evil as it is, is only the thin end of the wedge. It is what makes such absurdities as even ALLOWING the discussion of restricting public libraries to be discussed by anyone other than a raving, Oliver Stone believing consipracy theroy raver.
Unfortunately, this is only the beginning. As our current rate of loss of civil rights to big corporation and big government continues to accelerate, the coming Dark Age becomes more real... I predict that unless things change NOW, the world of 50 years in the future will be a cross between the bleak future in Richard Stallman's "The Right to Read" (corporate control of all information) and "Demolition Man" (the ultimate "everything that is not good for you is bad, and therefore illegal" nanny state government).
"Sweet! IBM is sounding cooler and cooler all the time. I distinctly recall the Apple TV advertisement that ran once during the '84 Olympics, announcing Macintosh, and portraying IBM as the Big Brother (1984, get it?). I guess IBM has been undergoing some revamping of their corporate culture."
At my level, it's a VERY cool place to work. And, IBM is far less "stodgy" than I expected. Everyone wears blue jeans and t-shirts, including the managers. It's almost like IBM caught on to the 80's in the early 00's.
And I faced more "big brother" at the small computer VAR in West Virginia I used to work at.
"sigh* Of course not. Clearly every employer who doesn't have their heads shoved up their own arse -- and even some that do -- recognize that some company time/resources will be lost for purposes of morale. Reading slashdot is like setting aside part of an unused cubicle for a small fridge and a coffee machine, or getting a phone call from the SO to remind you to pick up milk on the way home. No, they aren't strictly work activites, and no, they don't bring in immediate revenue (or whatever)."
Where I work (IBM), reading sites like./ is encouraged in my department (though not to the expense of not getting work done). I'm a QA tester, so I have LOTS of dead time while waiting for this or that to time out, etc, and surfing./, The Register, Toms Hardware, etc, are "in the line of duty", IMO, as they increase my knowledge, and thus my value.
"Just explain them what the correct definition of hacking. Writing or altering sourcecode or system-settings e.g. programming. Cracking on the otherhand is illegal. I'm a hacker, but I've never broken the law. I agree that he misused the means given to him but 500000$ and 15 years among hard criminals. Anyone should be able to see what's wrong. (Well obviously not lawyers, but then again...)"
Of course, eductating the courts is the answer, but unfortunately, the courts are under NO obligation at all to listen to us. Keep in mind, most judges are older people, who didn't grow up with computers.
When Gen X gets old enough to become politicos and judges (almost there), things may start to improve.
"Actually, if the police have a search warrent of your place, you still don't have to let them in.
Of course, if you don't, they'll bust down the door and go in anyway, so it's easier just to open it."
True, though not letting them in when they have a valid warrant would likely open yourself up to being charged with "obstruction of justice", which would only make things worse.
"So where do I go to sue the fuckers that spam me and cost *me* money. I am not a state, I'm a frickin' person. There's probably millions of dollars used in downloading spam (at least in Ireland with pay per minute Internet which is your only option really). A win in this case could be dangerous precedent for Universities that have large bandwidth with SETI clients and so on. Sort of like Napster as well (can't remember the links though when those Unviersities banned it)."
Very interesing suggestion, as what this guy is accused of is more or less what spammers do, especially the ones who exploit open relays.
Maybe if we started calling spammers "hackers" the courts would start assfucking them like they do to anyone who gets branded with that name.
I believe this guy deserves to be punished, but what he did was at WORST a misdemenor. He deserves at worst a fine and/or community service.
The fine and punishment the prosecutors are going for are TOTALLY out of porportion to the crime. There are drug dealers and people guilty of VIOLENT crimes like assault who get FAR less.
"He will never get 15 years / $500000 in fines. He will however, go through hell defending himself and getting off with an approprate punishment. He completely deserves it too. Using other peoples computers and bandwidth (reguardless of how little they will be affected by it) for your own personal gain is just plain evil."
Don't be too sure. Most judges know more about nuclear physics than they do about how computers and networks REALLY work.
And pretty much ALL you have to do to fuck someone in the courts is to call them a "hacker". As 2600 found out in the DeCSS case. Doesn't matter what the merits of your defense are once that label is thrown out like red meat to the judge. Of course, having a corrupt and/or incompetent fool like Kaplan for a judge didn't help.
"Do you see having to prove your innocence as being substantially different from 1984? How?"
Exactly... Which is why any government that presumes guilt (instead of innocent until proven guilty) in criminal cases is not free.
The burden of proving a negative is onerous. It's FAR harder a burden to prove that you didn't do something, especially when the police (in the case of this bill) are given the power to more or less force your co-operation at gunpoint.
ALL government power, no matter how seemingly benign, flows from the barrel of a gun. Remember that. Violation of ANY law, no matter how slight, will ultimately result in the State enforcing it with guns.
"with hacker tools such as the hex editor and the scientific calculator banned, how would you teach comp sci at uni?"
How do you know that ignorance isn't the ultimate aim of those who want to grab such power for the State? After all, an uneducated and ignorant populace is easier to cow.
I find it no coincidence that Government schools tend to produce brainwashed individuals who are uneducated and ready to accept whatever the Statists wish them to. Did you see the Stossel special on ABC, about the brainwashing that elementary school children are getting in "Global Warming"?
Keeping the people ignorant is one way that those in power seek to stay in power. And State control over information systems (which is exactly what such powers as this proposed Australian law gives it) is an obvious goal for those who favor powerful federal government.
"seriously tho, the bill would probably not be passed in its present form, given the many obvious problems with it."
Really? These are the same obvious problems that were in the various "net censorship" bills the Australian government has bassed. And the same ones that the Brits overlooked when passing RIP.
Don't be too sure of that. If you live in Australia, the only way to NOT get such a law passed is to start spreading the word, and get your fellow citizens out in front of the Parlaiment building with pitchforks, so to speak.
"I was talking about being arrested for a crime and then not cooperating with the police. That's probably illegal in any country"
110% WRONG! In the United States, you have a 5th Amendment protection against self-incrimination. That includes the right to NOT co-operate with the police, as codified in the "Miranda" rights that all arresting officers have to read to the person being arrested.
It's up to the police/prosecutors to prove your guilt, and they have NO right to your assistance in that task.
Now, I'm not saying that there haven't been recent law, etc, where the police lobby hasn't been attacking those rights, but until the Bill of Rights is repealed, they are still there.
" - there's nothing special about this act in Australia. If they demand that you give the key to the safety deposit box where you hid your child porn and you refuse, you're basically doing the same thing as if they demand the keys and pass phrases to your data. There's nothing special about digital data and there shouldn't be anything special about it"
The police in the USA can very well get a search warrant for such a safety deposit box, or your home, and may search them. However, again, you DO NOT have any obligation to do anything other than let them in, you do not have to lead them on a "guided tour". Again, the 4th and 5th Amendments cover this.
This Australian law sounds very much like the odious "RIP" law in the UK, which basically gives more or less ANY cop the power to forcibly hand over your security to them, without any oversight (and in the case of RIP, you can even be jailed for letting anyone KNOW they did this to you).
There is no place for such laws in a free society. A people who will tolerate such enormous State power over their persons and property are in effect, tolerating State ownership of all their information and property.
And we all know governments are ALWAYS 100% trustworthy, and would never murder innocents (Waco, Ruby Ridge), and individuals within it would never abuse their power to politically persecute ideological or religious "enemies" (Keith Henson)...
The United States was founded by wise men who feared the power and abuse wrought by too-powerful federal governments. Unfortunately, there aren't many such men in power today.
"What's really sad about this is that in 95% of cases, they'll be going after people who haven't the resources to fight this. Satire is protected speech, but only when people want to protect it. Most ISP's will roll over and take it when they get a nastygram, rather than keep the site up while their customer fights it. "
That's the problem these days. Society is so litigious, to the point where you really DO have no rights unless you get a lawyer and go to court. None at all...
Why? Because of two things.
1. The lack of common decency. For some, unknown reason, it seems all people and especially corps feel that no one has the right to make fun of them or criticise them, Corps especially. And lawyers lack any sense of morals.
2. The legal system does NOTHING at all to discourage this. From judges on down to the bar.
We need some kind of Federal SLAPP law, one that imposes HARSH penalties on lawyers, and even JUDGES who become parties to such harassment. Unforunately, this is about as likely as Jack Valenti asking for the repeal of the DMCA.
Slashdot Mirror
"Did not break US law because it did not happen in the US and the US has no jurisdiction over what a Russian citizen does in Russia. And considering that what he did in Russia is not even illegal there, there really truly is something wrong with this scenario"
Our government acting like this is creating HAZARD for US Citizens travelling or doing business abroad as well. If we do not respect the sovergnity of other nations to live under their own laws, then why should THEY respect ours?
Let's be consistent... The Chinese government, for example, has been guilty of breaking MANY MANY US laws FAR more serious than the DMCA... There is, for example, the small matter of the senseless murder of thousands of protestors in 1989... Why didn't we grab Zhang Jhemin (sp) the last time he visited the USA?
I mean, we used force of bribery to get Yugoslavia to hand over Milosevic, who hadn't broken any law in his country...
Given the US's POOR track record of protecting citizens abroad (particular Chinese-Americans on trial even NOW for dubious claims of "espionage", claims the ChiCom government refuses to provide ANY proof of), cavalier actions like this threaten the security of ALL Americans.
"Well, of course, what he did *was* a crime, at least by our fucked-up standards. Is it fair? No. Is it just? No. Is it constitutional? Only up until a federal judge says its not."
Why does the DMCA have any weight right now? Because a conflicted judge (Kaplan), who had previously worked for a lawfirm that represented Time-Warner (but nevertheless excoriated the defence lawyer, Martin Garbus for a similar, but FAR weaker conflict, his firm had worked for someone later BOUGHT by Time-Warner), who was one or all of:
1. Corrupt (see conflict of interest)
2. Incompetent (either hasn't read the Constitution, or think it means only what HE thinks it means)
3. An oathbreaker (how did his 2600 ruling and prejustice preserve, protect, defend the Constitution, anyone?)
Came up with a VERY bad decision (DeCSS case), which the news media and the public at large has let him get away with only because the defendants were "hackers".
Methinks if there is going to be protest against the DMCA, someone needs to find out where that bozo works and picket outside it.
Yes, I agree with the subject line, that a case NEEDS to go to court, if there is to be any hope at all of weakening or defeating the DMCA, but I can't morally ask another, especially a foreign national now being held against his will as a political prisoner, to make that sacraifice.
I think Adobe is right now weighing the implications of this case, and the fact that it COULD be devastating to the DMCA, along with the BAD PR they are receiving right now in our community. While it may be true that we as a whole aren't listened to by the media, we DO have considerable influence beyond our numbers in what the companies we work for purchase.
And at this point, I'd even buy MICROSOFT products over Adobe. MS, to my knowledge, isn't the cause of someone being unjustly imprisoned in a country foreign to them.
This case and the case of Professor Felten have the distiction of being the first to seriously display the moral, educational, and social impact of the DMCA, in a way that the 536 co-conspirators (the Senate, House, and President (Clinton who unanimously voted for and signed the DMCA) probably never envisioned.
Personally, I've resolved to NOT vote for ANY of the 535 Congressmen who were in office at the time of the DMCA's passage, as they all voted for it (or at least, failed to vote against it).
"The DCMA was passed.
He broke the law."
An unjust law is no law at all. And it wouldn't have the teeth it does today (considering the many major conflicts the DMCA has with the Constitution) is all thanks to one man:
"judge" Kaplan of DeCSS fame.
Just goes to show you what damage one rogue biased/corrupt/incompetent federal judge can wreak.
I had the same problem with Mandrake 8.0... Did some hunting and found the solution... If you, like me, use KDE 2.1, restart into GNOME. Run the shell script... The little window will be full size and let you install the program.
I restarted back into KDE, and Lime Wire 1.6 works great! Much faster and smoother than the earlier version.
If it can be played, it can be ripped. There is no such thing as copy protection that REQUIRES the thing be decoded to audio that will not be EASLILY bypassed.
The sooner the morons in the record industry realize this, the sooner they pocket the $millions they are wasting developing such crap.
"The music industry still has no effective response to the simple fact that millions of Americans don't like them and are willing to share their music despite judicial decrees that this violates the law. Until something occurs to moderate the mob, there will be tremendous innovation.
"
The response will be one of two things... Either the government will respond to the will of the people, or (more likely)....
Another "drug war".
I can see new twisted laws, abandonment of civil liberty, in the name of protecting an obsolete business model against information.... Why will it happen? First off, government only responds to MONEY, and the IP cartels have a lot of it. Secondly, the law enforcement establishment will see this as yet another avenue to incresed funding, more employment. Imagine the RICO act and "civil asset forefiture" being applied to the homes and property of those who trade MP3's...
Why do I forsee doom and gloom? Because of the wisdom of the Founders, who wrote that the "natural" way of things was for government to become more powerful and the people less so (which is why they wrote a Constitution that placed SEVERE limitations on the power and scope of government).
But now law, not even a Constitution has any more power than those in power have the will or honor to enforce it. And in the past 80 years there has been less and less of both among our leadership.
"his won't change until we get a crew escape vehicle (currently the Russian Soyuz, a 30-year-old design) that can carry more than three people back. Guess what - there isn't even a funded plan to build such a vehicle!"
This is what the XP38 shuttle was supposed to be. Since it's been scrapped, there is no way (besides what you proposed, having more than 1 Soyuz standing by) to have more than 3 crew, as they'd have no way to escape the station.
" I've worked several years in the book publishing industry (in the production side), and with the pay I was taking home, I was not able to afford to buy the (specialized) books that interested me.
The most disgusting part of that industry is that the one who gets the bigger profit (50% of the final retail sale price) is (of course) the one who does the least work: the bookseller."
In other words, the book publishers have imitated the recording industry (which earns in excess of $5 to every $1 an artist earns).
"Until tiny little e-books become mainstream, I don't see the pirating of books becoming a problem. Sure I could download the latest novels to read, but no one wants to sit at the computer and read for recreation."
This is likely far in the future. I've yet to see any new technology to make an "e-book" that is as comfortable to read and is as practical as a paper book. That's an invention that will be as Earth shattering as the microprocessor itself.
"Free Market Capitalism cannot co-exist with Democratic and Free people"
This is a fallacy. What we have in the USA is NOT free market capitalism! It's more of a pseudo-socialist corporate/government Oligarchy.
In a truly FREE MARKET, these things would be true that are NOT true in the United States of 2001 (though some of them used to be true):
1. Anyone with an invention would be able to bring it to market. Not easily possible today by anyone not a Fortune 500 corporation, thanks to byzantine IP laws, and government-sanctioned monopolies (all corporations are government sanctioned entities, as a corporation is a government created legal fiction).
2. Anyone would be permitted to improve any existing invention or product, both for their own financial gain and the general good. Not able to happen today for similar reasons to #1
3. Copyrights and patents would be limited in scope and duration (as intended by the Constitution), with VERY leniant "fair use" exceptions. The 1990's basically put an end to any fiction that ANY limits on copyrights and patents still exist.
4. The government's role in the economy would be restricted to:
a. Maintaining a sound fiscal policy (ie, not spending more than they take in, so as not to take on debt and inflate interest rates)
b. Busting monopolies whererever they exist.
The US government abandoned these policies forever when FDR became the first US Tyrant.
5. There would be no such thing as a government entity (be it legislative, or by judicial fiat) that has the power to protect "business models" from the advance of technology. Had we our current laws and politicians and courts in the time of Henry Ford, the automobile would have been outlawed as "stealing" from horse farms and coach and buggy makers. Had they presided over the time of Thomas Edison, electricity would have been outlawed as "stealing" from candle and oil lamp makers.
I could go on indefinately, but you get the idea. The USA is rapidly becoming a Plutocracy, rule by merchants (large megacorps), which, while not socialist in the same FORM as communist countries, has the same exact effect on:
1. civil rights
2. freedom of speech, most particulary
3. freedom to learn
4. freedom to buy (or not to buy) products of your choice (try buying a computer at ANY retail store without paying the MS tax) 5. freedom to dissent. In communist countries they roll the tanks over you. In the American Imperial Corporate State, they just sue you into bankruptcy. Eventually it will become tanks.
The American Plutocracy is a fusion of corporation into government, leading to corporate control of government. Communist countries are the same, except that it happened the opposite way, government took control of the corporations.
The day that public libraries are illegal is THE DAY that we've completely lost our freedom to the corporations.
When information is THAT controlled by the IP cartels, it will be a world where only the very wealthy can afford to read (as per Richard Stallman's scary short story, the "Right To Read"), and only the wealthy elite are educated.
In that world, the masses will only know what they are told, or what they can afford to buy. They will be trained to meekly work for the corporations and be "good" cowed consumers of what the corporations want them to buy.
The scary thing is, our own GOVERNMENT is leading us to this bleak future, the post-Information Age Dark Age, out of their own ignorance and greed.
The DMCA, evil as it is, is only the thin end of the wedge. It is what makes such absurdities as even ALLOWING the discussion of restricting public libraries to be discussed by anyone other than a raving, Oliver Stone believing consipracy theroy raver.
Unfortunately, this is only the beginning. As our current rate of loss of civil rights to big corporation and big government continues to accelerate, the coming Dark Age becomes more real... I predict that unless things change NOW, the world of 50 years in the future will be a cross between the bleak future in Richard Stallman's "The Right to Read" (corporate control of all information) and "Demolition Man" (the ultimate "everything that is not good for you is bad, and therefore illegal" nanny state government).
Most of the "big media" sites that would go for such a thing are welcome to blackhole themselves from most of the `net if they wish.
This will give the internet back to the small-time hobbyist websites.
I'm actually hoping that this becomes popular, AND that my ISP doesn't pay, of course.
ALL good IT people need to have the "swagger"... That means that you KNOW what you are doing, and project the confidence that you do.
Swagger means you don't BRAG about it, or praise yourself, it just means you "have it". Praising yourself and making unreasonable demands is boorish..
Swagger is cool.
"Sweet! IBM is sounding cooler and cooler all the time. I distinctly recall the Apple TV advertisement that ran once during the '84 Olympics, announcing Macintosh, and portraying IBM as the Big Brother (1984, get it?). I guess IBM has been undergoing some revamping of their corporate culture."
At my level, it's a VERY cool place to work. And, IBM is far less "stodgy" than I expected. Everyone wears blue jeans and t-shirts, including the managers. It's almost like IBM caught on to the 80's in the early 00's.
And I faced more "big brother" at the small computer VAR in West Virginia I used to work at.
"sigh* Of course not. Clearly every employer who doesn't have their heads shoved up their own arse -- and even some that do -- recognize that some company time/resources will be lost for purposes of morale. Reading slashdot is like setting aside part of an unused cubicle for a small fridge and a coffee machine, or getting a phone call from the SO to remind you to pick up milk on the way home. No, they aren't strictly work activites, and no, they don't bring in immediate revenue (or whatever)."
./ is encouraged in my department (though not to the expense of not getting work done). I'm a QA tester, so I have LOTS of dead time while waiting for this or that to time out, etc, and surfing ./, The Register, Toms Hardware, etc, are "in the line of duty", IMO, as they increase my knowledge, and thus my value.
Where I work (IBM), reading sites like
"Just explain them what the correct definition of hacking. Writing or altering sourcecode or system-settings e.g. programming. Cracking on the otherhand is illegal. I'm a hacker, but I've never broken the law. I agree that he misused the means given to him but 500000$ and 15 years among hard criminals. Anyone should be able to see what's wrong. (Well obviously not lawyers, but then again ...)"
Of course, eductating the courts is the answer, but unfortunately, the courts are under NO obligation at all to listen to us. Keep in mind, most judges are older people, who didn't grow up with computers.
When Gen X gets old enough to become politicos and judges (almost there), things may start to improve.
"Actually, if the police have a search warrent of your place, you still don't have to let them in.
Of course, if you don't, they'll bust down the door and go in anyway, so it's easier just to open it."
True, though not letting them in when they have a valid warrant would likely open yourself up to being charged with "obstruction of justice", which would only make things worse.
"So where do I go to sue the fuckers that spam me and cost *me* money. I am not a state, I'm a frickin' person. There's probably millions of dollars used in downloading spam (at least in Ireland with pay per minute Internet which is your only option really). A win in this case could be dangerous precedent for Universities that have large bandwidth with SETI clients and so on. Sort of like Napster as well (can't remember the links though when those Unviersities banned it)."
Very interesing suggestion, as what this guy is accused of is more or less what spammers do, especially the ones who exploit open relays.
Maybe if we started calling spammers "hackers" the courts would start assfucking them like they do to anyone who gets branded with that name.
I believe this guy deserves to be punished, but what he did was at WORST a misdemenor. He deserves at worst a fine and/or community service.
The fine and punishment the prosecutors are going for are TOTALLY out of porportion to the crime. There are drug dealers and people guilty of VIOLENT crimes like assault who get FAR less.
"He will never get 15 years / $500000 in fines. He will however, go through hell defending himself and getting off with an approprate punishment. He completely deserves it too. Using other peoples computers and bandwidth (reguardless of how little they will be affected by it) for your own personal gain is just plain evil."
Don't be too sure. Most judges know more about nuclear physics than they do about how computers and networks REALLY work.
And pretty much ALL you have to do to fuck someone in the courts is to call them a "hacker". As 2600 found out in the DeCSS case. Doesn't matter what the merits of your defense are once that label is thrown out like red meat to the judge. Of course, having a corrupt and/or incompetent fool like Kaplan for a judge didn't help.
You know what, I'm PROUD to be accused of being bigoted towards lawyers...
Damn proud.
That's like being called a "religious bigot" by the Scientologists.
That means I'm living up to my Roman Catholic upbringing.
"Do you see having to prove your innocence as being substantially different from 1984? How?"
Exactly... Which is why any government that presumes guilt (instead of innocent until proven guilty) in criminal cases is not free.
The burden of proving a negative is onerous. It's FAR harder a burden to prove that you didn't do something, especially when the police (in the case of this bill) are given the power to more or less force your co-operation at gunpoint.
ALL government power, no matter how seemingly benign, flows from the barrel of a gun. Remember that. Violation of ANY law, no matter how slight, will ultimately result in the State enforcing it with guns.
"with hacker tools such as the hex editor and the scientific calculator banned, how would you teach comp sci at uni?"
How do you know that ignorance isn't the ultimate aim of those who want to grab such power for the State? After all, an uneducated and ignorant populace is easier to cow.
I find it no coincidence that Government schools tend to produce brainwashed individuals who are uneducated and ready to accept whatever the Statists wish them to. Did you see the Stossel special on ABC, about the brainwashing that elementary school children are getting in "Global Warming"?
Keeping the people ignorant is one way that those in power seek to stay in power. And State control over information systems (which is exactly what such powers as this proposed Australian law gives it) is an obvious goal for those who favor powerful federal government.
"seriously tho, the bill would probably not be passed in its present form, given the many obvious problems with it."
Really? These are the same obvious problems that were in the various "net censorship" bills the Australian government has bassed. And the same ones that the Brits overlooked when passing RIP.
Don't be too sure of that. If you live in Australia, the only way to NOT get such a law passed is to start spreading the word, and get your fellow citizens out in front of the Parlaiment building with pitchforks, so to speak.
"I was talking about being arrested for a crime and then not cooperating with the police. That's probably illegal in any country"
110% WRONG! In the United States, you have a 5th Amendment protection against self-incrimination. That includes the right to NOT co-operate with the police, as codified in the "Miranda" rights that all arresting officers have to read to the person being arrested.
It's up to the police/prosecutors to prove your guilt, and they have NO right to your assistance in that task.
Now, I'm not saying that there haven't been recent law, etc, where the police lobby hasn't been attacking those rights, but until the Bill of Rights is repealed, they are still there.
" - there's nothing special about this act in Australia. If they demand that you give the key to the safety deposit box where you hid your child porn and you refuse, you're basically doing the same thing as if they demand the keys and pass phrases to your data. There's nothing special about digital data and there shouldn't be anything special about it"
The police in the USA can very well get a search warrant for such a safety deposit box, or your home, and may search them. However, again, you DO NOT have any obligation to do anything other than let them in, you do not have to lead them on a "guided tour". Again, the 4th and 5th Amendments cover this.
This Australian law sounds very much like the odious "RIP" law in the UK, which basically gives more or less ANY cop the power to forcibly hand over your security to them, without any oversight (and in the case of RIP, you can even be jailed for letting anyone KNOW they did this to you).
There is no place for such laws in a free society. A people who will tolerate such enormous State power over their persons and property are in effect, tolerating State ownership of all their information and property.
And we all know governments are ALWAYS 100% trustworthy, and would never murder innocents (Waco, Ruby Ridge), and individuals within it would never abuse their power to politically persecute ideological or religious "enemies" (Keith Henson)...
The United States was founded by wise men who feared the power and abuse wrought by too-powerful federal governments. Unfortunately, there aren't many such men in power today.
"What's really sad about this is that in 95% of cases, they'll be going after people who haven't the resources to fight this. Satire is protected speech, but only when people want to protect it. Most ISP's will roll over and take it when they get a nastygram, rather than keep the site up while their customer fights it. "
That's the problem these days. Society is so litigious, to the point where you really DO have no rights unless you get a lawyer and go to court. None at all...
Why? Because of two things.
1. The lack of common decency. For some, unknown reason, it seems all people and especially corps feel that no one has the right to make fun of them or criticise them, Corps especially. And lawyers lack any sense of morals.
2. The legal system does NOTHING at all to discourage this. From judges on down to the bar.
We need some kind of Federal SLAPP law, one that imposes HARSH penalties on lawyers, and even JUDGES who become parties to such harassment. Unforunately, this is about as likely as Jack Valenti asking for the repeal of the DMCA.
Why? Who benefits from such threats and suits?
Lawyers.
Who makes up 90% of our government?
Layers.
Case closed.
"A site with 100 ways to kill a purple dinosaur's lawyers?"
;)
That's a HELLUVA idea! I think I'll start such a list up on my personal home page tonight.
One thing's for sure, there IS no bad way to off a lawyer