I really do appreciate your POV here.. but I think you are clearly mistaking several facts. In general you are implying that a end user knowingly bought a counterfeit item; this is far from the truth.
Let's start with 18 U.S. Code 2332b - (B) Acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries which states, "creates a substantial risk of serious bodily injury to any other person by destroying or damaging any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the United States or by attempting or conspiring to destroy or damage any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the United States;"
And the penalty --> "(E) for destroying or damaging any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property, by imprisonment for not more than 25 years;"
Now, with that out of the way, let's talk about your 'mythical user' who buys a counterfeit chip. The last time I bought a 'chip' for a computer was in 1987 for my IBM PC portable.. (not a board, not a device, but an actual 'chip').
#1) we are not talking about "a" user, but rather thousands if not millions or even 10's of millions of users #2) the end user we are addressing here did NOT buy a chip.. they bought a device (computer, laptop, etc.) #3) even if these millions of users had the knowledge to inspect the chips within the devices they are buying, a visual inspection would have indicated these are legitimate chips. #4) this is in no way analogous to counterfeit currency - there are built in counter measures, there are tools for detecting them, and if you have homeowners insurance you may be covered for some or all of the loss (in the US).
The reason I feel this is terroristic is if you consider the following thought experiment. A group creates code that disables millions or 10's of millions of computers, computers used in banking, healthcare, traffic management, emergency management, law enforcement -- as well as general users like businesses and individuals with the potential direct economic loss (of the machine(s) in the 100's of millions of dollars, and the potential for additional loss, including loss of life, limb or other property potential worth even more --- would you call that a terroristic ad? I would.
Now hospitals hopefully don't do Windows upgrades live while a patient is in the room (and hopefully) ditto for the other types of uses -- but if a regularly scheduled update reduces the # of machines available, forcing additional triage -- ultimately some people may have delayed treatment, require transfer to other facilities -- its possible this could have negative impact on a number of people's healthcare delivery. We are talking about machines used before, during and post surgery for example.
The same issues could impact all the others; perhaps trivial to some but students could fail courses or have reduced grades because they were not able to complete assignments "on time, etc."
I don't see how it isn't not only illegal, but also terroristic -- and if any device that fails results in loss of life, limb or just economic damages I would think they would be culpable as well.
I don't see how creating code that is intentionally malicious can be legal even if the chip itself is a fake. IANAL --- but would speculate that such code seem terroristic in nature.
Clearly it was someone from the NSA;) just trying to help:) --- If you believe comcast..
"Comcast refuted the claims made in Deepdotweb, stating that they had launched an internal review into the discussions reported above:
Customers are free to use their Xfinity Internet service to visit any website or use it however they wish otherwise. Like virtually all ISPs, Comcast has an acceptable use policy or AUP that outlines appropriate and inappropriate uses of the service. Comcast doesn’t monitor users’ browser software or web surfing and has no program addressing the Tor browser. he anecdotal chat room evidence provided is not consistent with our agents’ messages and is not accurate. Per our own internal review, we have found no evidence that these conversations took place, nor do we employ a Security Assurance team member named Kelly. Tor’s own FAQs clearly state: 'File sharing (peer-to-peer/P2P) is widely unwanted on Tor' and 'BitTorrent is NOT anonymous' on Tor.
The issue is that eye surgery is complex. The tech manages the complexity but on some level it weakens the lens, Etc.
A eye surgeon friend/relation suggested that the "next" version of the technology is always better.. and in the past once you had had the surgery you were precluded from the newest revision. That may have changed. His advice was not to get the surgery unless you need it medically or understand that you maybe limiting your ability to get the surgery later in your life when you might need it.
There is a problem that Xanadu really solves which is when you want to cite someone else's text verbatim... its a direct and visual link back to the source.. so it's clear whose words are being used, where they come from and there is an easy Color coded and visual LINK to see them in full context.. HMTL named hyperlinks can accomplish much of the same however... the interface for Xanadu is much more fluid...
I would say FEC to is correct the current bit state, while this method RLNC is to correct a past or future packet.. I am totally suggesting is with fast enough processing power the protocol would assume every packet is missing and have recovered packets "ready to go" if one is missing...
I use Blackboard (9.1) and do like it. I also use Google Docs with my students (I use it for virtual office hours), so we can review papers together (while talking on the phone, make mutual edits, Etc.). One issue I have with Blackboard is there isn't a great way to hand in assignments; I do it in a discussion forum. I'm really eager to see what Google comes up with.
That said, given Google's track record, I'm really concerned that this system might not last long. I can't imagine what would happen if/when it goes away in the middle of a term; I wonder if Google is willing to guarantee Classroom for X # of years.
FYI I am an Adj. Instructor at a College in NYC. I also provide commentary about Technology in Higher Education for the FIR Higher Ed Podcast (http://forimmediaterelease.biz/index.php?/weblog/C20).
If they want to go all Steam Punk they should recreate the Dobles E20 which has a 4 piston steam engine and is nearly silent..http://www.virtualsteamcarmuseum.org/makers/stewart_h_h_steam_stewart_doble_material.html
One person's gibberish is another's encrypted data. Perhaps Russia was testing a encrypted "secure" mode that would switch to in time on conflict, such as an invasion or something like that.
A highlight of my early days online was when I asked (and your replied) to a question I had about how the Narn defeated the Shadows the previous war. I'm sure that many people had a similar reaction when you interacted with them. I was elated for days.
Has there or will there be an effort to edit/catalog and compile all of the fan interaction as part of the history of Bab 5? [This seems like a great task to hand over the your fans].
I consider your use of online technology for Bab5 to have been both Evolutionary and Revolutionary.
My question: Which if any other shows, writers, producers and show runners did you emulate or follow or get inspired by when you took to the Internet to promote Bab 5.
When you look back at how you used tools like NNTP to engage with your audience regarding Bab 5, is there anything you would have done differently today?
For me, you are the father or grandfather of social TV, meaning the way you promoted Bab 5 (before, during and after) the series is more or less the methodology that many TV shows and movies have adapted. You maybe have been using NNTP (Network News) instead of Facebook or Twitter, but for me you are the first.
My question: in that context: What are show producers/runners not doing today with Social Media that they could or should be doing to engage and interact with fans?
Ads are not sold by the second, but rather by a price per thousand viewers, known as CPM or Cost Per Thousand. On a CPM basis the Super Bowl ads are equal or below the cost of regular ads... If you want to reach a lot of people they can be an effective part of a marketing mix.
The US Government and the NSA, the UK government, Etc. are behaving badly and of course they are used to getting things their way. What I mean is that in public relations you have clients that understand that when the truth comes out, not matter how awful the best thing to do is to get out in front of the story with the actual real truth. Then you have clients who run from the truth, that is a bad client.
Telling more lies, half lies, lies of omission, threatening witnesses and reporters who are covering the story, Etc only make it worse.. Indeed that is what is happening here.. The government clearly isn't accepting that but until they do, there story will grow and grow and those telling the story will get stronger, gain more respect from the publics, Etc.
I didn't promise nor did I describe an Utopian system. WIth the current system they could be blackmailing anyone, using it for insider trading, Etc. Etc., The NSA has said they can't SEARCH their own email system. They can search YOURS.. but not THEIR OWN.. http://www.propublica.org/article/nsa-says-it-cant-search-own-emails
Thus, even with a legitimate suing of them there just isn't any discovery! No opportunity to learn what they did, and when they did it.
My point again, if you can't stop them, and I just don't see how that is possible, the best case left is to pour in the sunlight..
For me the only viable solution is making the NSA's work/effort and all of their data capture completely transparent with audit trails, Etc. not to stop them, but so when the abuses do come we can figure out who did want and seek redress.
It's hard to explain for layer Antifragility are best built on layers of fragility.. meaning cells in a body are fragile but the body itself get's stronger when stressed (lifting weights, Etc.). The Netflix example is good, it's a bit like randoming pulling parts of a plane in flight and then after the crash making the next planes stronger.. it also leads to antifragility, but it's a strong stressor. .
The government has long wanted better, meaning highly reliable means of conducting traffic analysis... who knows who, who talks to whom, etc. You can use this data for good or bad.. you can use it to break past the limits in typical "cells"... you can find the path/person who links from one cell to another..
My own take is there is a enough personal data and information in meta data that use of it deprives us of our rights to be secure in our home and in our papers.. our communications with others, Etc.
Back in the days of the Clipper chip, the chip had done into wide spread use it's use would have given the NSA, Etc nearly perfect traffic analysis since each chip would have it's own unique and cryptographically signed ID. Fast forward, everyone walking around with a cell phone has an unique ID, several in fact including their phone #, and that's the value of all the meta data.. it's often more important than what is being said, it is who is talking to whom...
Knowing everyone who talked to OBL in say 1995 or 1990 or 1985 would be helpful to find his network in 2001 or 2002, Etc. It can be helpful when tracking bad guys, but it can be used to track anyone for any reason and find their entire network of friends and family.
My Gen III Prius is rated for 50 MPG highway. I regularly take extended trips where I get 52-54 MPG. Even my daily highway driving is in that same range, depending on traffic (heavy traffic = less MPG.). Typically the worse I do is 47-48 for combined City/Highway. Of course I can drive like a maniac and get mileage in the low 40's.
Slashdot Mirror
Dear Dahamma,
I really do appreciate your POV here.. but I think you are clearly mistaking several facts. In general you are implying that a end user knowingly bought a counterfeit item; this is far from the truth.
Let's start with 18 U.S. Code 2332b - (B) Acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries
which states, "creates a substantial risk of serious bodily injury to any other person by destroying or damaging any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the United States or by attempting or conspiring to destroy or damage any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the United States;"
And the penalty --> "(E) for destroying or damaging any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property, by imprisonment for not more than 25 years;"
Now, with that out of the way, let's talk about your 'mythical user' who buys a counterfeit chip. The last time I bought a 'chip' for a computer was in 1987 for my IBM PC portable.. (not a board, not a device, but an actual 'chip').
#1) we are not talking about "a" user, but rather thousands if not millions or even 10's of millions of users
#2) the end user we are addressing here did NOT buy a chip.. they bought a device (computer, laptop, etc.)
#3) even if these millions of users had the knowledge to inspect the chips within the devices they are buying, a visual inspection would have indicated these are legitimate chips.
#4) this is in no way analogous to counterfeit currency - there are built in counter measures, there are tools for detecting them, and if you have homeowners insurance you may be covered for some or all of the loss (in the US).
The reason I feel this is terroristic is if you consider the following thought experiment. A group creates code that disables millions or 10's of millions of computers, computers used in banking, healthcare, traffic management, emergency management, law enforcement -- as well as general users like businesses and individuals with the potential direct economic loss (of the machine(s) in the 100's of millions of dollars, and the potential for additional loss, including loss of life, limb or other property potential worth even more --- would you call that a terroristic ad? I would.
Now hospitals hopefully don't do Windows upgrades live while a patient is in the room (and hopefully) ditto for the other types of uses -- but if a regularly scheduled update reduces the # of machines available, forcing additional triage -- ultimately some people may have delayed treatment, require transfer to other facilities -- its possible this could have negative impact on a number of people's healthcare delivery. We are talking about machines used before, during and post surgery for example.
The same issues could impact all the others; perhaps trivial to some but students could fail courses or have reduced grades because they were not able to complete assignments "on time, etc."
I don't see how it isn't not only illegal, but also terroristic -- and if any device that fails results in loss of life, limb or just economic damages I would think they would be culpable as well.
I don't see how creating code that is intentionally malicious can be legal even if the chip itself is a fake. IANAL --- but would speculate that such code seem terroristic in nature.
Clearly it was someone from the NSA ;) just trying to help :) --- If you believe comcast..
"Comcast refuted the claims made in Deepdotweb, stating that they had launched an internal review into the discussions reported above:
Customers are free to use their Xfinity Internet service to visit any website or use it however they wish otherwise. Like virtually all ISPs, Comcast has an acceptable use policy or AUP that outlines appropriate and inappropriate uses of the service. Comcast doesn’t monitor users’ browser software or web surfing and has no program addressing the Tor browser. he anecdotal chat room evidence provided is not consistent with our agents’ messages and is not accurate. Per our own internal review, we have found no evidence that these conversations took place, nor do we employ a Security Assurance team member named Kelly. Tor’s own FAQs clearly state: 'File sharing (peer-to-peer/P2P) is widely unwanted on Tor' and 'BitTorrent is NOT anonymous' on Tor.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com..."
The issue is that eye surgery is complex. The tech manages the complexity but on some level it weakens the lens, Etc.
A eye surgeon friend/relation suggested that the "next" version of the technology is always better.. and in the past once you had had the surgery you were precluded from the newest revision. That may have changed. His advice was not to get the surgery unless you need it medically or understand that you maybe limiting your ability to get the surgery later in your life when you might need it.
There is a problem that Xanadu really solves which is when you want to cite someone else's text verbatim... its a direct and visual link back to the source.. so it's clear whose words are being used, where they come from and there is an easy Color coded and visual LINK to see them in full context.. HMTL named hyperlinks can accomplish much of the same however... the interface for Xanadu is much more fluid...
i would enjoy writing with Xanadu...
I would say FEC to is correct the current bit state, while this method RLNC is to correct a past or future packet.. I am totally suggesting is with fast enough processing power the protocol would assume every packet is missing and have recovered packets "ready to go" if one is missing...
I've used Blackboard since ~ 2001 it's changed a lot over the years...
I use Blackboard (9.1) and do like it. I also use Google Docs with my students (I use it for virtual office hours), so we can review papers together (while talking on the phone, make mutual edits, Etc.). One issue I have with Blackboard is there isn't a great way to hand in assignments; I do it in a discussion forum. I'm really eager to see what Google comes up with.
That said, given Google's track record, I'm really concerned that this system might not last long. I can't imagine what would happen if/when it goes away in the middle of a term; I wonder if Google is willing to guarantee Classroom for X # of years.
FYI I am an Adj. Instructor at a College in NYC. I also provide commentary about Technology in Higher Education for the FIR Higher Ed Podcast (http://forimmediaterelease.biz/index.php?/weblog/C20).
If they want to go all Steam Punk they should recreate the Dobles E20 which has a 4 piston steam engine and is nearly silent..http://www.virtualsteamcarmuseum.org/makers/stewart_h_h_steam_stewart_doble_material.html
One person's gibberish is another's encrypted data. Perhaps Russia was testing a encrypted "secure" mode that would switch to in time on conflict, such as an invasion or something like that.
I'm you are right..
JMS's reply was, "that would be telling..."
Not sure if there is such a thing as spoilers for such an old show but msg me and I'll be happy to spoil it for you... /hawk
A highlight of my early days online was when I asked (and your replied) to a question I had about how the Narn defeated the Shadows the previous war. I'm sure that many people had a similar reaction when you interacted with them. I was elated for days.
Has there or will there be an effort to edit/catalog and compile all of the fan interaction as part of the history of Bab 5? [This seems like a great task to hand over the your fans].
I consider your use of online technology for Bab5 to have been both Evolutionary and Revolutionary.
My question: Which if any other shows, writers, producers and show runners did you emulate or follow or get inspired by when you took to the Internet to promote Bab 5.
When you look back at how you used tools like NNTP to engage with your audience regarding Bab 5, is there anything you would have done differently today?
For me, you are the father or grandfather of social TV, meaning the way you promoted Bab 5 (before, during and after) the series is more or less the methodology that many TV shows and movies have adapted. You maybe have been using NNTP (Network News) instead of Facebook or Twitter, but for me you are the first.
My question: in that context: What are show producers/runners not doing today with Social Media that they could or should be doing to engage and interact with fans?
Ads are not sold by the second, but rather by a price per thousand viewers, known as CPM or Cost Per Thousand. On a CPM basis the Super Bowl ads are equal or below the cost of regular ads... If you want to reach a lot of people they can be an effective part of a marketing mix.
The US Government and the NSA, the UK government, Etc. are behaving badly and of course they are used to getting things their way. What I mean is that in public relations you have clients that understand that when the truth comes out, not matter how awful the best thing to do is to get out in front of the story with the actual real truth. Then you have clients who run from the truth, that is a bad client.
Telling more lies, half lies, lies of omission, threatening witnesses and reporters who are covering the story, Etc only make it worse.. Indeed that is what is happening here.. The government clearly isn't accepting that but until they do, there story will grow and grow and those telling the story will get stronger, gain more respect from the publics, Etc.
I didn't promise nor did I describe an Utopian system. WIth the current system they could be blackmailing anyone, using it for insider trading, Etc. Etc., The NSA has said they can't SEARCH their own email system. They can search YOURS.. but not THEIR OWN.. http://www.propublica.org/article/nsa-says-it-cant-search-own-emails
Thus, even with a legitimate suing of them there just isn't any discovery! No opportunity to learn what they did, and when they did it.
My point again, if you can't stop them, and I just don't see how that is possible, the best case left is to pour in the sunlight..
For me the only viable solution is making the NSA's work/effort and all of their data capture completely transparent with audit trails, Etc. not to stop them, but so when the abuses do come we can figure out who did want and seek redress.
It's hard to explain for layer Antifragility are best built on layers of fragility.. meaning cells in a body are fragile but the body itself get's stronger when stressed (lifting weights, Etc.). The Netflix example is good, it's a bit like randoming pulling parts of a plane in flight and then after the crash making the next planes stronger.. it also leads to antifragility, but it's a strong stressor. .
The UK has always tapped their cables since the dawn of the telegraph.. This isn't new, and certainly isn't news to anyone who studied history.
The government has long wanted better, meaning highly reliable means of conducting traffic analysis... who knows who, who talks to whom, etc. You can use this data for good or bad.. you can use it to break past the limits in typical "cells"... you can find the path/person who links from one cell to another..
My own take is there is a enough personal data and information in meta data that use of it deprives us of our rights to be secure in our home and in our papers.. our communications with others, Etc.
Back in the days of the Clipper chip, the chip had done into wide spread use it's use would have given the NSA, Etc nearly perfect traffic analysis since each chip would have it's own unique and cryptographically signed ID. Fast forward, everyone walking around with a cell phone has an unique ID, several in fact including their phone #, and that's the value of all the meta data.. it's often more important than what is being said, it is who is talking to whom...
Knowing everyone who talked to OBL in say 1995 or 1990 or 1985 would be helpful to find his network in 2001 or 2002, Etc. It can be helpful when tracking bad guys, but it can be used to track anyone for any reason and find their entire network of friends and family.
My Gen III Prius is rated for 50 MPG highway. I regularly take extended trips where I get 52-54 MPG. Even my daily highway driving is in that same range, depending on traffic (heavy traffic = less MPG.). Typically the worse I do is 47-48 for combined City/Highway. Of course I can drive like a maniac and get mileage in the low 40's.