What you detail is different that interactive TV with TVs in 25 to 30 million homes trying to access the same files all within a few miliseconds of each other.
On interactive TV forums I've written extensively talking about how web infrastructure isn't really for national TV and large events with not 100 or 1000 but multiple millions of people try to access the same data within a few seconds of each other.
This is on a smaller scale but certainly proves the point; I do feel there are solutions for pre-caching to tiered servers through the network fabric; but some day when SuperBowl XXX runs and 200,000 TV sets try to access the same JavaTV Applets at the same time... that real fun begins.
If the person has any type of electronic device on them, they could profile that device or devices and the typical use of those devices; including voice prints and keystroke profiles, and anything else particular devices does and then track that person.
They could then ident. that persons "network" of contacts through both proximity and cell calls, and with traffic analysis find the key node of that "network" and destroy them.
If we wanted to be sure about information we are "trusting" we would only trust double blind studies that have been peer reviewed and replicated. It would be wrong for a student to write a paper only quoting Wikipedia. However a good paper with multiple sources and a robust list of ref'd papers, etc (Bibliog.) would help to some degree.
Allowing quotes from information within wikipedia that has a proper citation would also be a good advance.
However, not to allow quoting from Wikipedia esp. from graduate students is an affront to academic freedom.
I agree you analogy works for the current comcast service.
I was talking possible future products that were priced based on service level rather than line speed; since line speed doesn't mean your packets will get through. Many people think they have 100 mbits of service anyway because that is what the WinTel box shows as the connection between their computer and their router/NAT.
I never knew that. It seems strange given that they do carry voice, etc. What are the regs or requirements for IS services in terms of censorship, etc?
The question really should be when much later they are faced with a situtation that would require Fight or Flight, has this changed how they would react? Would they be more likely to "talk things out" or more likely to run or more likely to fight?
I think most users have so little idea of what a connection should work like, that if a page doesn't load, they will simply hit reload a few times.
What seems interesting to me, is would this take away their common carrier status? If they blocked specific web sites or types of content, then I think it would, but if this is done randomly, then I would think it wouldn't.
What would be interesting is if they never blocked sites they owed, or sites from which they recieved fees from, etc.
I have no problem with tiered pricing. Today it's often based on speed, but I what would be better is service level based on some packet metric. When I eat at a cheap buffet I don't mind that the food isn't at 4 star quality levels. But when I drop $100 on a meal, I expect it arrive on time and be perfectly suited to my needs.
The only difference is it is easier and let's be clear my Mom would never figure out "Site:" but could easily figure out this new feature. It's good for users, that's good enough for me.
Class action is great but what we really need is a RICO victory that would allow the RIAA and their members to be broken up, their assets returned to artists via a trust, and the future marketing of music and songs using a P2P model that allows for fair use copies and for stores to print physical media for a royality payment.
The big fish is the copyright RIAA member organizations put on the CD, Tape or Photograph. It has no artistic merit. It is almost like printing up lables w/ your name on them, sticking one on your car and claiming a copyright on the car.
The real copyright is for the artists, song writer and musicians who create the music, not for the company that pays for the reproduction and marketing of it.
In the late 70's TC May, an scientist working at Intel proved that cosmic rays could flip bits... given that discovery was many years ago, it seems rather clear that as chips get smaller, etc. that cosmic ray dectection could be a good thing on chips. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=1479948
Microsoft can of course alter it's prices for any of these devices if it loses enough market share...
There is also the issue of people who have licenced windows in the past and thrown away those machines. I expect to see consumer issues if consumers can't transfer those lic. Esp., in Europe with the regulators having MSFT in their sights.
With only 1 Billion PCS in a world of nearly 6 Billion, I still feel the world needs a $25 computer.
Last year I boarded a FULL 747 to Korea. It was mostly full of Korean people, but some other including myself (an American). Naturally the 1st and business classes board first.
Then for the coach class, they just announced that it was boarding.. no rows or anything.
Everyone was just polite and most importantly when people found their seats, they made an effort to first allow those behind them to pass, rather than just block the isle. The entire plane loaded w/out any problems in about 20 minutes.
It's a great idea, I mean one missle can't shoot it all down...
But even assuming very strong encryption, and some line of sight point to point networking and that it's hard to temper with something up that high.. the DOD can't secure the conmputer networks we have NOW.
This is like putting the Crown Jewels in outer space, someone will find a way to get them...
They are trying though court cases and laws (DMCA) to over turn "fair use."
Also to be convicted of selling or distributing copywritten material, you typically have to a) charge for it and b) prove that you actually distributed it. But the RIAA is trying to say just "making it available" is the same. This isn't supported in case law (yet...).
I just can't wait until someone hits them with something like RICO.
Clearly they want Yahoo's income stream so they can claim a higher % of revenue from "the net"
They also want the customers in part because of Web 2.0 social networking, they think they can earn more from having more users... my guess is hotmail + yahoo mail must equal a good % of all internet users, even assuming some users have more than one account...
Forgetting that Microsoft tried to kill the Internet w/ the Windows 95 product (before it was released; by the time of it's release it was a pro internet product), what Microsoft products in the 1st or Nth version are actually innovative?
They have had a cell phone platform for years (Windows Mobile) so why is the iPhone so much better? Generating so much excitement? IF they are truly the market leader in innovation and have had a long head start, why isn't their phone product better?
They don't build great products, they build products that can sell well, and with which they can lock-in users.
I don't think anyone is saying they are doing something wrong and they thus need to be arrested.
People are saying that what they are doing isn't ethical, based on the protocols of the security industry.
Each speciality has their own ethics. Drs's have the hippocratic oath. Most other professional have similar although less formal ethical guidelines.
This doesn't matter if this is only one company, but if it turns out that their "business model" changes everyone else's that will really change the nature of the IT security profession.
Thanks for taking the time to walk me through that. It means sense and someone really planning ahead could already have a private fibre on the cable they are tapping or use Stenog techniques to send the data through some route through which the data could be pulled out.
There are four very clear reasons why no nation would want to tap into four high speed data cables.. namely to get access to the data they would need 4 more cables to bring the data back to their "office."
They could someone reroute some of the data on the cable and even use stolen or leased lines on the existing cable for their purpose... but they couldn't steal all of the signal without a way of back hauling home (to their office).
England has always spied on all the data it could get its hands on and the US and every other country that can, probably does as well..
My guess if these cuts are connected it's more to force the data to route through specific nodes that anything else, and as I have said elsewhere since phone calls run on these same cables, they might not be even after internet data. Perhaps someone wants to catch someone calling home...
All phones need some type of binding to the network. For most users it's done by the dealer, or through a sim card or some other device. With Sprint you need to make a phone call.
Apple should be free to pursuit their model with AT&T. Apple gets money and support for all their features. AT&T gets the "halo" of a hot new product and has new customer's lining up, plus a nice lock in.
For everyone who doesn't like how Apple is doing this, really they should buy another product and vote with their $$ (and feet)... Or protest Ferrari (see below)...
It makes sense for Apple to route people through iTunes in the same way almost every museum I have visited routes me through the gift shop. Some people don't like it enough not to go museums and other people don't care and probably some people spend too much money on art books. Apple hopes you will buy some music or videos for your phone.
If the iPhone was the only choice there would be a legal issue, but they aren't and with the Google phone coming soon, everyone will be able to roll-their-own phone... probably on a phone they already own... pick their own network, etc.
For everyone protesting Apple it seems like it is really sour grapes... they want a new iPhone and it doesn't play on their network... or they don't like lock-in contracts (who does?) that's why I don't own one.
However, I wish people would stop bothering Apple and complain about something that really matters, the nasty way Ferrari prices their cars too high for me to buy one. That is truly evil.
If they were really isolating them, I would agree that its' a demo... but they still have phones, TV, sat com, etc... they are reduced but not isolated.
Since phone lines run on some of the same cables this might not have anything to do with internet taps/routes.
I would agree that 4 in such a short period of time is news worth and odd.
Slashdot Mirror
What you detail is different that interactive TV with TVs in 25 to 30 million homes trying to access the same files all within a few miliseconds of each other.
A good example. Is it still melting down? They should of figurd that out, but that is still nothing compared to major network events..
On interactive TV forums I've written extensively talking about how web infrastructure isn't really for national TV and large events with not 100 or 1000 but multiple millions of people try to access the same data within a few seconds of each other.
This is on a smaller scale but certainly proves the point; I do feel there are solutions for pre-caching to tiered servers through the network fabric; but some day when SuperBowl XXX runs and 200,000 TV sets try to access the same JavaTV Applets at the same time... that real fun begins.
If the person has any type of electronic device on them, they could profile that device or devices and the typical use of those devices; including voice prints and keystroke profiles, and anything else particular devices does and then track that person.
They could then ident. that persons "network" of contacts through both proximity and cell calls, and with traffic analysis find the key node of that "network" and destroy them.
If we wanted to be sure about information we are "trusting" we would only trust double blind studies that have been peer reviewed and replicated. It would be wrong for a student to write a paper only quoting Wikipedia. However a good paper with multiple sources and a robust list of ref'd papers, etc (Bibliog.) would help to some degree.
Allowing quotes from information within wikipedia that has a proper citation would also be a good advance.
However, not to allow quoting from Wikipedia esp. from graduate students is an affront to academic freedom.
I agree you analogy works for the current comcast service.
I was talking possible future products that were priced based on service level rather than line speed; since line speed doesn't mean your packets will get through. Many people think they have 100 mbits of service anyway because that is what the WinTel box shows as the connection between their computer and their router/NAT.
I never knew that. It seems strange given that they do carry voice, etc. What are the regs or requirements for IS services in terms of censorship, etc?
The question really should be when much later they are faced with a situtation that would require Fight or Flight, has this changed how they would react? Would they be more likely to "talk things out" or more likely to run or more likely to fight?
I think most users have so little idea of what a connection should work like, that if a page doesn't load, they will simply hit reload a few times.
What seems interesting to me, is would this take away their common carrier status? If they blocked specific web sites or types of content, then I think it would, but if this is done randomly, then I would think it wouldn't.
What would be interesting is if they never blocked sites they owed, or sites from which they recieved fees from, etc.
I have no problem with tiered pricing. Today it's often based on speed, but I what would be better is service level based on some packet metric. When I eat at a cheap buffet I don't mind that the food isn't at 4 star quality levels. But when I drop $100 on a meal, I expect it arrive on time and be perfectly suited to my needs.
Of course it is reasonable that the US Government could have been one of early funders of google, but then generally government are not that smart.
The only difference is it is easier and let's be clear my Mom would never figure out "Site:" but could easily figure out this new feature. It's good for users, that's good enough for me.
Class action is great but what we really need is a RICO victory that would allow the RIAA and their members to be broken up, their assets returned to artists via a trust, and the future marketing of music and songs using a P2P model that allows for fair use copies and for stores to print physical media for a royality payment.
The big fish is the copyright RIAA member organizations put on the CD, Tape or Photograph. It has no artistic merit. It is almost like printing up lables w/ your name on them, sticking one on your car and claiming a copyright on the car.
The real copyright is for the artists, song writer and musicians who create the music, not for the company that pays for the reproduction and marketing of it.
In the late 70's TC May, an scientist working at Intel proved that cosmic rays could flip bits... given that discovery was many years ago, it seems rather clear that as chips get smaller, etc. that cosmic ray dectection could be a good thing on chips. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=1479948
Microsoft can of course alter it's prices for any of these devices if it loses enough market share...
There is also the issue of people who have licenced windows in the past and thrown away those machines. I expect to see consumer issues if consumers can't transfer those lic. Esp., in Europe with the regulators having MSFT in their sights.
With only 1 Billion PCS in a world of nearly 6 Billion, I still feel the world needs a $25 computer.
Last year I boarded a FULL 747 to Korea. It was mostly full of Korean people, but some other including myself (an American). Naturally the 1st and business classes board first.
Then for the coach class, they just announced that it was boarding.. no rows or anything.
Everyone was just polite and most importantly when people found their seats, they made an effort to first allow those behind them to pass, rather than just block the isle. The entire plane loaded w/out any problems in about 20 minutes.
It's a great idea, I mean one missle can't shoot it all down...
But even assuming very strong encryption, and some line of sight point to point networking and that it's hard to temper with something up that high.. the DOD can't secure the conmputer networks we have NOW.
This is like putting the Crown Jewels in outer space, someone will find a way to get them...
They are trying though court cases and laws (DMCA) to over turn "fair use."
Also to be convicted of selling or distributing copywritten material, you typically have to a) charge for it and b) prove that you actually distributed it. But the RIAA is trying to say just "making it available" is the same. This isn't supported in case law (yet...).
I just can't wait until someone hits them with something like RICO.
I think that is such a false statement.
Clearly they want Yahoo's income stream so they can claim a higher % of revenue from "the net"
They also want the customers in part because of Web 2.0 social networking, they think they can earn more from having more users... my guess is hotmail + yahoo mail must equal a good % of all internet users, even assuming some users have more than one account...
Forgetting that Microsoft tried to kill the Internet w/ the Windows 95 product (before it was released; by the time of it's release it was a pro internet product), what Microsoft products in the 1st or Nth version are actually innovative?
They have had a cell phone platform for years (Windows Mobile) so why is the iPhone so much better? Generating so much excitement? IF they are truly the market leader in innovation and have had a long head start, why isn't their phone product better?
They don't build great products, they build products that can sell well, and with which they can lock-in users.
I don't think anyone is saying they are doing something wrong and they thus need to be arrested.
People are saying that what they are doing isn't ethical, based on the protocols of the security industry.
Each speciality has their own ethics. Drs's have the hippocratic oath. Most other professional have similar although less formal ethical guidelines.
This doesn't matter if this is only one company, but if it turns out that their "business model" changes everyone else's that will really change the nature of the IT security profession.
Thanks for taking the time to walk me through that. It means sense and someone really planning ahead could already have a private fibre on the cable they are tapping or use Stenog techniques to send the data through some route through which the data could be pulled out.
If I'm understanding you, they can do DIP and pass back the meta data or specific packets but not back haul the whole data stream?
Can you get the full cable? or just meta data?
There are four very clear reasons why no nation would want to tap into four high speed data cables.. namely to get access to the data they would need 4 more cables to bring the data back to their "office."
They could someone reroute some of the data on the cable and even use stolen or leased lines on the existing cable for their purpose... but they couldn't steal all of the signal without a way of back hauling home (to their office).
England has always spied on all the data it could get its hands on and the US and every other country that can, probably does as well..
My guess if these cuts are connected it's more to force the data to route through specific nodes that anything else, and as I have said elsewhere since phone calls run on these same cables, they might not be even after internet data. Perhaps someone wants to catch someone calling home...
All phones need some type of binding to the network. For most users it's done by the dealer, or through a sim card or some other device. With Sprint you need to make a phone call.
Apple should be free to pursuit their model with AT&T. Apple gets money and support for all their features. AT&T gets the "halo" of a hot new product and has new customer's lining up, plus a nice lock in.
For everyone who doesn't like how Apple is doing this, really they should buy another product and vote with their $$ (and feet)... Or protest Ferrari (see below)...
It makes sense for Apple to route people through iTunes in the same way almost every museum I have visited routes me through the gift shop. Some people don't like it enough not to go museums and other people don't care and probably some people spend too much money on art books. Apple hopes you will buy some music or videos for your phone.
If the iPhone was the only choice there would be a legal issue, but they aren't and with the Google phone coming soon, everyone will be able to roll-their-own phone... probably on a phone they already own... pick their own network, etc.
For everyone protesting Apple it seems like it is really sour grapes... they want a new iPhone and it doesn't play on their network... or they don't like lock-in contracts (who does?) that's why I don't own one.
However, I wish people would stop bothering Apple and complain about something that really matters, the nasty way Ferrari prices their cars too high for me to buy one. That is truly evil.
If they were really isolating them, I would agree that its' a demo... but they still have phones, TV, sat com, etc... they are reduced but not isolated.
Since phone lines run on some of the same cables this might not have anything to do with internet taps/routes.
I would agree that 4 in such a short period of time is news worth and odd.