Voting to disable identification is not the means for stopping that.
Voting to stop that is the means for stopping that.
Your ISP can already throttle you down to 2 grainy.wmv files a day. And while you're fighting a voluntary secure ID system, they're off making throttling the law.
the public sector will be charged with creating a secure, robust, dependable system.
You think the NSA isn't public sector? CIA? NASA? the Military? DARPA? the FAA?
The only reason we have anything resembling a concept of "secure, robust, dependable system" is because the government invented it.
Left to its own devices, private industry doesn't give two shits about your privacy, security, safety, or the reliabiltiy of its products. If I trust anyone not to be hacking the system to give themselves an instant advantage and access to steal my money, it's the government itself. They already have the right of eminent domain, up to and including the right to conscript me and order me into a suicide mission, and every day they don't exercise it means they actually allow me to keep my stuff.
That last part is true of every nation on Earth, including yours. Many of them actively take their citizens' stuff just because the Sovereign wants more stuff, or doesn't like the gene pool you came from, and kill people for laughs or profit.
Either you own your government, or it owns you. And either one is a lot better than letting Standard Oil own you.
Only banking sites have anything like security processes, generally consisting of testing another bank account which you presumably opened in person, or recursively so. Any other type of site just checks that you have an email address you personally access, to ensure you're not a bot (that's too simple to receive email and click on a link in it).
Why would "every" site suddenly start requiring an advanced form of identity checking?
And why wouldn't some sites expressly advertise that they don't?
In the case where you have done something wrong you have no right to avoid being investigated.
And no, you don't have to have a job or health insurance or a bank account.
If you want to remain outside the realm of society by pretending you don't exist whenever it suits you, society doesn't have to employ you, care for you, or let you free-ride on the good name of its fiat money.
The government has more than one legal definition of "voluntary". If you literally never want to work a taxable job and never want any SSA benefits, you never need an SSN. But if you want to do those things, you have to "volunteer" your information to get the SSN. They don't solicit you for it.
Same deal with the entire tax system being "voluntary" not because you can choose not to pay, but because you are on your own recognizance to do the reporting of what you earned and spent, and for making up any shortfall at the time of your report. Albeit there are today many forms of evidence gathered by law from third parties with whom you conduct business that they rely on to audit your voluntary submission. They don't send you a bill and insist on payment. Not until you've somehow broken the law.
Why would the people who own your private information hand it out to just anyone without your permission? That would imply that you can go into the database and get just anyone's information without their permission. How does that work for you now? How would that be changed by centralizing it and putting it under the watch of people who can go to federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison for letting it be released in an unauthorized manner?
Since when have legitimate businesses allowed transactions with anonymous people? If you want my stuff, you have to pay for it, and I have to know to whom to send the stuff, and the banking system has to know whose account to debit before it can credit mine. Illegitimate businesses will continue not to require ID.
# Private: This new "identity ecosystem" protects your privacy. Credentials share only the amount of personal information necessary for the transaction. You control what personal information is released, and can ensure that your data is not centralized among service providers. # Voluntary: The identity ecosystem is voluntary. You will still be able to surf the Web, write a blog, participate in an online discussion, and post comments to a wiki anonymously or using a pseudonym. You would choose when to use your trusted ID. When you want stronger identity protection, you use your credential, enabling higher levels of trust and security.
Of course, we will never know how many of the people convicted are the actual criminals, rather than just a victim of a hacker who chose their identity at random.
If it's possible to hack an identity, and it's possible to show that it's possible to hack an identity, then the system is mooted and the conviction based on the system is invalid.
Yeah, I figured that out after reading through some links. Even posted a demurral but I don't see it here. Could just be/.'s new fucked-upedness taking over.
Been a while since I did anything with passwords and the linguistic shift from encrypted to hashed is just reaching Barsoom.
About as useful as slicing your computer into 0.1-mm thicknesses then labelling them by the smell of each 0.1-mm square thereof.
The brain is a network of fluid tubes, wiring, electrochemical interfaces, and active surfaces. The gross chemical distribution is as important to signalling as the precise position and reactive conditioning of wiring connections is. Probably the least important thing about its function is "gene expression".
Gene expression is useful only for disease mapping. Helpful to someone who wants to pick your insurance company's wallet. Worthless if you want to build one that works.
No, it's because the News is no longer independent at any level. Corporations own it all. Fox News is just their bulldog, making the rest of them seem less ridiculously solicitous of plutocratic ideals.
Scroll down to the powerpoint slide at the bottom and squint through the badly reduced text. (note though that they mixed up the pictures between the central collector and the parabolic dish)
It says that the trough has the best land use, but isn't as efficient, and uses an oil-based thermal fluid, which can't be cheaper than water, and would have to be disposed of somehow when it needs replacing, whereas the solar tower just recycles its water to wash the mirrors.
Slashdot Mirror
Voting to disable identification is not the means for stopping that.
Voting to stop that is the means for stopping that.
Your ISP can already throttle you down to 2 grainy .wmv files a day. And while you're fighting a voluntary secure ID system, they're off making throttling the law.
particularly that you must not be able to prove what you voted
That's only relevant in a society where you can be retaliated against for your vote.
Which, if democracy is already established, should never be a state the society can get into.
So you should be safe letting everyone know how you voted.
As if anyone ever does hide their allegiance any more.
the public sector will be charged with creating a secure, robust, dependable system.
You think the NSA isn't public sector? CIA? NASA? the Military? DARPA? the FAA?
The only reason we have anything resembling a concept of "secure, robust, dependable system" is because the government invented it.
Left to its own devices, private industry doesn't give two shits about your privacy, security, safety, or the reliabiltiy of its products. If I trust anyone not to be hacking the system to give themselves an instant advantage and access to steal my money, it's the government itself. They already have the right of eminent domain, up to and including the right to conscript me and order me into a suicide mission, and every day they don't exercise it means they actually allow me to keep my stuff.
That last part is true of every nation on Earth, including yours. Many of them actively take their citizens' stuff just because the Sovereign wants more stuff, or doesn't like the gene pool you came from, and kill people for laughs or profit.
Either you own your government, or it owns you. And either one is a lot better than letting Standard Oil own you.
How many of them require positive ID now?
Only banking sites have anything like security processes, generally consisting of testing another bank account which you presumably opened in person, or recursively so. Any other type of site just checks that you have an email address you personally access, to ensure you're not a bot (that's too simple to receive email and click on a link in it).
Why would "every" site suddenly start requiring an advanced form of identity checking?
And why wouldn't some sites expressly advertise that they don't?
In the case where you have done something wrong you have no right to avoid being investigated.
And no, you don't have to have a job or health insurance or a bank account.
If you want to remain outside the realm of society by pretending you don't exist whenever it suits you, society doesn't have to employ you, care for you, or let you free-ride on the good name of its fiat money.
You're still free to bitch about it.
The government has more than one legal definition of "voluntary". If you literally never want to work a taxable job and never want any SSA benefits, you never need an SSN. But if you want to do those things, you have to "volunteer" your information to get the SSN. They don't solicit you for it.
Same deal with the entire tax system being "voluntary" not because you can choose not to pay, but because you are on your own recognizance to do the reporting of what you earned and spent, and for making up any shortfall at the time of your report. Albeit there are today many forms of evidence gathered by law from third parties with whom you conduct business that they rely on to audit your voluntary submission. They don't send you a bill and insist on payment. Not until you've somehow broken the law.
Why would the people who own your private information hand it out to just anyone without your permission? That would imply that you can go into the database and get just anyone's information without their permission. How does that work for you now? How would that be changed by centralizing it and putting it under the watch of people who can go to federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison for letting it be released in an unauthorized manner?
Paranoia is no substitute for reason.
Since when have legitimate businesses allowed transactions with anonymous people? If you want my stuff, you have to pay for it, and I have to know to whom to send the stuff, and the banking system has to know whose account to debit before it can credit mine. Illegitimate businesses will continue not to require ID.
Your objection is nonsensical.
BTW, you're in agreement with a TOS you've probably never read by posting on /.
From the NIST NSTIC link in TFA:
# Private: This new "identity ecosystem" protects your privacy. Credentials share only the amount of personal information necessary for the transaction. You control what personal information is released, and can ensure that your data is not centralized among service providers.
# Voluntary: The identity ecosystem is voluntary. You will still be able to surf the Web, write a blog, participate in an online discussion, and post comments to a wiki anonymously or using a pseudonym. You would choose when to use your trusted ID. When you want stronger identity protection, you use your credential, enabling higher levels of trust and security.
If i want to speak on the internet, it will now require a license?
I was asked to forward this:
Hi. This is the /. TOS speaking. Have you read me lately? I'm your license to speak on the Internet. At least through /.
If you want to speak on the internet unencumbered by a TOS, start your own forum.
Hope this helps.
Of course, we will never know how many of the people convicted are the actual criminals, rather than just a victim of a hacker who chose their identity at random.
If it's possible to hack an identity, and it's possible to show that it's possible to hack an identity, then the system is mooted and the conviction based on the system is invalid.
I for one welcome our new, positively identified overlords.
whatever happened to the user being the one in control of his or her own computer?
It died when Apple bundled an operating system with every one.
Will a paternity test be needed to get a divorce now, to make sure you're actually the father of the wedding ring?
balls.
Going faster had a purpose. It wasn't the end goal of a productive process, it was a metric.
We've pretty much run out of ways to go faster, and reasons to do it.
It will come back, when we try to get to Mars.
No, my strong suit is a singlet and T-shirt, and stiff-soled shoes.
Not if you spent your money buiding a higher-resolution CCD instead of a curved one...
Yeah, I figured that out after reading through some links. Even posted a demurral but I don't see it here. Could just be /.'s new fucked-upedness taking over.
Been a while since I did anything with passwords and the linguistic shift from encrypted to hashed is just reaching Barsoom.
About as useful as slicing your computer into 0.1-mm thicknesses then labelling them by the smell of each 0.1-mm square thereof.
The brain is a network of fluid tubes, wiring, electrochemical interfaces, and active surfaces. The gross chemical distribution is as important to signalling as the precise position and reactive conditioning of wiring connections is. Probably the least important thing about its function is "gene expression".
Gene expression is useful only for disease mapping. Helpful to someone who wants to pick your insurance company's wallet. Worthless if you want to build one that works.
Android is the best bet. It's open-source, and not beholden to the fortunes of a single corporation, the way Blackberry and the iPhone are.
No, it's because the News is no longer independent at any level. Corporations own it all. Fox News is just their bulldog, making the rest of them seem less ridiculously solicitous of plutocratic ideals.
Scroll down to the powerpoint slide at the bottom and squint through the badly reduced text. (note though that they mixed up the pictures between the central collector and the parabolic dish)
It says that the trough has the best land use, but isn't as efficient, and uses an oil-based thermal fluid, which can't be cheaper than water, and would have to be disposed of somehow when it needs replacing, whereas the solar tower just recycles its water to wash the mirrors.
And about half of it is still federally owned.
never mind. hashing = encryption, here. they've changed the terminology since the last time i cared.