Anyone have any more information on the tests, and the uproar about them? The article isn't to specific.
I'm simply wondering how the samples (of material for the genetic tests where collected). If they were done without employees knowledge - covertly as implied by the few statements in the article, then it poses a real threat, not for discrimination problems, but major privacy issues (like tracking someone by their genes)...
Problem is, other nations do not want the US to be in charge of the internet. They see it as a potential way for the US to impose the US's views on them.
However, on the same hand, the US has no real reason to give up control.
Hence the suggestion to use the UN - it seems like a middle ground somewhat. The people that suggested it are simply trying to create a compromise so the *net doesn't fragment.
I wonder that also - alot. Since the pirates which distribute the software / movies commerically are ripping off - not only the consumer, but the author/owner.
For example www.cdrbstore.net is obivously a website selling pirated software. They are still up and doing business.
I'd much rather see them taking down someone that makes a PROFIT off stealing than someone that gives it away free.
True - to most people this isn't a misuse of terrorist fighting powers, but then again most people don't know what a torrent even is.
Average Joe American, is not savvy / educated enough to understand the mechanics of torrents, Hollywood (for instance that - Star Wars was an insider leak) or that this is a misuse of the DoH's resources. To them, pirates, downloaders and terrorists are one and the same.
Why? Because somewhere along the last couple of decades, peoples' knowledge of their own laws, (especially laws involving quickly changing technology) took a significant downturn. Simply try asking people on the street about the USAPatriot Act or the DMCA. Most - know nothing. Some may have a different perception of the act due to propaganda and only a few will care about it.
Unless it is directly affecting the person, it's not important to them for the most part...
Democracies, in order to be effective, require active and INFORMED citizens - something that is slowly dissappearing (for a multitude of reasons).
As nice as this might be, to be able to simply search various torrents, I have a feeling that this will not do anything to enhance Bittorrent's image with the media. If anything, they will use it as a tool to show that people "pirate" tons of stuff over BT. (As mentioned in the article - when the "reporter" requests a search done for The Interpeter.)
It's a good idea, and probably going to be a nice piece of software... but right now is probably about the worst time you can release something like this.
...whenever you reveal personal information to a 3rd party, there's an implied contract that they won't post it publically...
Not anymore. Read privacy agreements on most credit cards, banks, and other 3rd parties. Usually somewhere down in the fine print is a statement that allows the use of your information by the 3rd party's company and "their affiliates" - meaning anyone that wants to buy the information from them.
A good example of this is Wells Fargo - whenever you open an account with them, their agreement gives them a right to share your data unless you mail some form off. By default - your information is for sale.
Taking information off the internet, like the bill (that was introduced into the Senate), won't do much good to stop the flow of information, restricting businesses' right to sell and use your information will (but that is not likely to happen). Besides, the majority of ID theft happens offline anyways, the net just makes it easier...
I was a student at a local JC some years ago when I was given a similar choice.
I had written an assigned research paper for Eng 111, on security flaws, physical and electronic, in the school's network. I turned the paper in and didn't think anything about it. About a month later, I was called in my a couple of lab supervisors and asked to "demonstrate" some of the flaws. (It was a surprise, as I didn't know my paper had been circulated at all.)
I asked for a paper stating that I had permission to do so (signed by Dean of Students), and was told that was too much of a hassle to get, and not to worry. Since I was unable to get one, I declined to demonstrate...
It proved to be the right choice. The lab admins, got another person I knew out of a System Security class (IS 370?) to demonstrate. He was successful, but when the results of his work were sent to higher ups, he got fried (since they hadn't approved of his work and didn't want to spend money to fix the problems). He was ultimately dismissed from the college and was unable to finish his degree there.
I look back, and consider myself lucky. If you're going to show up a "paid professional", get a document giving you permission to do so, not from them, but their boss / superiour - always.
It seems to me that he (Ed Webber) simply took the money and ran - screwing over anyone that did donate to the defense fund (I didn't thankfully).
LokiTorrent raised well over thirty thousand dollars and was getting about 680,000 - 700,000 hits a day. That has to be major advertising dollars also. If Ed did cut a deal with the MPAA, he could have made bank.
They are not worried about legality of files here. The software is simply a catch-all because in their view it is better to error on the side of caution.
I don't know of an open format that allows for marking of files as copyrighted and non-copyrighted, were the file cannot be easily modified to show the opposite. (Does one exist?)
Windows also has an auto-updater - it is just as easy. Mac is only a short term answer - the parent is right when he says that Market Share will change all of the benefits of a Mac.
One wonders if this is going to become a pattern in places like Hong Kong, Bangkok and other area's of the world where piracy is strong - or simply a courtesy arrest to please the complaining MPAA.
I saw police shut down a kiosk in Moscow once for selling pirated movies (a legit store across the street had complained) but within a day the kiosk re-opened, it simply moved further down the road.
Since we lack details, and no charges have been filed yet, I guess we will have to wait and see. Even if he is convicted, I doubt he would get the maximum penalty of 4 yrs in jail (more then likely IMO that he will get the fine - 6,400 for every illegal copy (how would you track that on bittorrent?)
Your offer has been accepted. You are invited to become part of our Guantanomo Detainee Program (which currently does not produce intel or results).
Please report to your nearest police station for arrest and processing. No personal effects allowed (as your living space is significantly restricted).
The entertainment industry realizes that they are being hostile to the internet and offending many potential consumers with the lawsuits. The problem is that there is no viable alternative at the moment.
Honestly, look at the alternatives they have: Put heavy copy protection on DVD's or TV broadcasts. Overturn Betamax - make all recording illegal. Shut down the programs which allow filesharing. Lower prices to point of where it is not worth stealing. Sue downloaders / sharers.
The only one that seems to be non-hostile towards the internet is lowering prices, but that one also hurts the industry the most. Betamax and heavy copyright protection would annoy the whole populace as people would not be able to record or have to upgrade their dvd / tv / vcr players. Shutting down the programs has already been tried and that failed.
Therefore, it kind of makes sense that they sue the users. It is a fright tactic - one that they will use until a better alternative pops up. It only hurts the guilty (for the most part - there are exceptions...) and does not cost them extreme amounts of profit.
I'd be interested in seeing your sources (for your facts).
Yes, Tony Blair and USAID are biased sources. But, many other organizations have released similar statistics (example United Nations Comission on Human Rights - here, click on the Iraqi reports on the right side).
As for the Irainian war dead, those are mostly POW's that Sadamm slaughtered, so it is still mass murder. (Where on earth are you getting your 3000 a month?)
Lastly, I recently completed an overseas trip to Samara Russia. There they hate the US and dislike the war, but still readily admit that Sadamm was an mass-murderer.
Please read here. (Simply first one to come up on Google.)
I quote from the article "The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) reports that since Saddam was ousted 270 sites of mass graves have been reported. These contain an unknown number of Iraqis, Iranian prisoners of war, Iraqi Kurds and Kuwaiti prisoners among the long list of those Saddam tortured and killed. British Prime Minister Tony Blair puts the remains in mass graves at 400,000 so far."
Questioning whether the Iraqi War was right, legal and whatnot is valid (and a good thing to do). Saying that Saddam did not kill thousands of people is like saying the Holocaust never happened...
Not only what will we have 10 years from now - but what major item will be gone? [Cars? TVs?...]
Also as a science fiction author - when you write, do you try to paint a realistic picture of the future or simply one that will suit the needs of your story?
You're right. It does not specify that it will be paid in cash, but one would assume so for several reasons:
1. Other recent lawsuit actions. MS recently settled 2 other lawsuits for a total of 2.04 billion dollars [1.6 billion Sun, 440 million Intertrust] 2. Non-Cash Settlements have hurt MS. When MS settled with the DoJ and some states in November, provisions in the settlement prevented MS from engaging in exclusive contracts that would prohibit software developers or PC makers from using competing products [source - news.com]. 3. Settlements with some states have been for software and like, but some [for example California which settled for 1.1 billion], the money is available to claim if you want (a cash settlement).
I would bet the settlement with be for a decent amount of cash, but you have to claim it and the unclaimed Cash goes back to MS [like California and Florida's settlements.
Also a fellow Minnesotan (and proud to be one), I can see why they chose to settle the suit. It may not have helped the little guy, but given Microsoft more or less got off from the Federal Government, chances of this suit succeeding are very slim. Also - MS has been paying out CASH for quite a few of it's settlements - from the article "Microsoft previously paid $1.55 billion to settle similar suits in nine other states and the District of Columbia."
Hopefully this will result in that type of settlement and not the "free educational software" [which is ironic as the suit is because Microsoft was a monopoly - letting them put their software in schools only increases the monopoly].
They would make it so that both messangers work with one another at first - and leave the brands alone. Then later, little by little they would get rid of one of the messangers with newer patches and versions.
AOL would probably come out on top because of the brand name... but hopefully some of the good things about MSN messanger would get integrated as well.
Its not all that unlikely. Simply think about it like this. Things with odds that are millions to one happen on a day to day basis. We simply don't notice them because they don't seem out of the ordinary. (to quote Dead Poet's Society).
So yes - while the chances of Spirit taking that photo are millions to one, the chances of something odd happening like this are probably pretty darn good.
It definently has to do with water - not microbes, and almost certianly saltly water at that. This article on MSNBC talks a fair amount about it.
More or less, the appearence of the martian bedrock appears to be sedimentary in origin, with a clumpy, sticky soil that hints at a bit of brine. While it's not life, water is one of the building blocks of life.
It may save tax dollars - but it is a step toward private business enforcing it's own laws. Has anyone read Snowcrash (by Neal Steavenson) where the different parts of the city all have their own rent-a-cops that enforce different laws? I realize that the RIAA is attempting to combat piracy - but they should not be making claims like "They said they were police from the recording industry or something, and next time they'd take me away in handcuffs..." (from article).
Taking law into your own hands is not something I want to see happen in America - for example some guy starts pulling over speeders that drive by his house, or a store owner shoots two kids that are shoplifting... Simply put I don't trust the RIAA and most private law enforcement agencies. That is why I pay taxes - so I can have a FAIR and UNBIASED bunch of law enforcement.
That said - I think the guy was an idiot for selling pirated stuff and don't support him one bit - it is the tactics that are being used that scare me.
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone have any more information on the tests, and the uproar about them? The article isn't to specific.
I'm simply wondering how the samples (of material for the genetic tests where collected). If they were done without employees knowledge - covertly as implied by the few statements in the article, then it poses a real threat, not for discrimination problems, but major privacy issues (like tracking someone by their genes)...
Anyhow - Gattaca anyone?
Problem is, other nations do not want the US to be in charge of the internet. They see it as a potential way for the US to impose the US's views on them.
However, on the same hand, the US has no real reason to give up control.
Hence the suggestion to use the UN - it seems like a middle ground somewhat. The people that suggested it are simply trying to create a compromise so the *net doesn't fragment.
I wonder that also - alot. Since the pirates which distribute the software / movies commerically are ripping off - not only the consumer, but the author/owner.
For example www.cdrbstore.net is obivously a website selling pirated software. They are still up and doing business.
I'd much rather see them taking down someone that makes a PROFIT off stealing than someone that gives it away free.
True - to most people this isn't a misuse of terrorist fighting powers, but then again most people don't know what a torrent even is.
Average Joe American, is not savvy / educated enough to understand the mechanics of torrents, Hollywood (for instance that - Star Wars was an insider leak) or that this is a misuse of the DoH's resources. To them, pirates, downloaders and terrorists are one and the same.
Why? Because somewhere along the last couple of decades, peoples' knowledge of their own laws, (especially laws involving quickly changing technology) took a significant downturn. Simply try asking people on the street about the USAPatriot Act or the DMCA. Most - know nothing. Some may have a different perception of the act due to propaganda and only a few will care about it.
Unless it is directly affecting the person, it's not important to them for the most part...
Democracies, in order to be effective, require active and INFORMED citizens - something that is slowly dissappearing (for a multitude of reasons).
As nice as this might be, to be able to simply search various torrents, I have a feeling that this will not do anything to enhance Bittorrent's image with the media. If anything, they will use it as a tool to show that people "pirate" tons of stuff over BT. (As mentioned in the article - when the "reporter" requests a search done for The Interpeter.)
It's a good idea, and probably going to be a nice piece of software... but right now is probably about the worst time you can release something like this.
Not anymore. Read privacy agreements on most credit cards, banks, and other 3rd parties. Usually somewhere down in the fine print is a statement that allows the use of your information by the 3rd party's company and "their affiliates" - meaning anyone that wants to buy the information from them.
A good example of this is Wells Fargo - whenever you open an account with them, their agreement gives them a right to share your data unless you mail some form off. By default - your information is for sale.
Taking information off the internet, like the bill (that was introduced into the Senate), won't do much good to stop the flow of information, restricting businesses' right to sell and use your information will (but that is not likely to happen). Besides, the majority of ID theft happens offline anyways, the net just makes it easier...
I was a student at a local JC some years ago when I was given a similar choice.
I had written an assigned research paper for Eng 111, on security flaws, physical and electronic, in the school's network. I turned the paper in and didn't think anything about it. About a month later, I was called in my a couple of lab supervisors and asked to "demonstrate" some of the flaws. (It was a surprise, as I didn't know my paper had been circulated at all.)
I asked for a paper stating that I had permission to do so (signed by Dean of Students), and was told that was too much of a hassle to get, and not to worry. Since I was unable to get one, I declined to demonstrate...
It proved to be the right choice. The lab admins, got another person I knew out of a System Security class (IS 370?) to demonstrate. He was successful, but when the results of his work were sent to higher ups, he got fried (since they hadn't approved of his work and didn't want to spend money to fix the problems). He was ultimately dismissed from the college and was unable to finish his degree there.
I look back, and consider myself lucky. If you're going to show up a "paid professional", get a document giving you permission to do so, not from them, but their boss / superiour - always.
Point is - can you trust them not to do so in the future?
They've pulled comments once and could easily continue to do so - I doubt most people would care enough to make a stink about it.
Hm.... they changed what it said since I posted it.
Oh well - more or less, they accused Ed of trying to sell Loki and its logs to the MPAA.
It seems to me that he (Ed Webber) simply took the money and ran - screwing over anyone that did donate to the defense fund (I didn't thankfully).
LokiTorrent raised well over thirty thousand dollars and was getting about 680,000 - 700,000 hits a day. That has to be major advertising dollars also. If Ed did cut a deal with the MPAA, he could have made bank.
I'm not the only that thinks this it seems
Meh...
They are not worried about legality of files here. The software is simply a catch-all because in their view it is better to error on the side of caution.
I don't know of an open format that allows for marking of files as copyrighted and non-copyrighted, were the file cannot be easily modified to show the opposite. (Does one exist?)
You can check out the software here
Windows also has an auto-updater - it is just as easy. Mac is only a short term answer - the parent is right when he says that Market Share will change all of the benefits of a Mac.
Buying a Mac is only a short term solution. If Apple gains enough market share, then people will start to code spyware and viruses for the Mac.
Myth:
Mac's are invunerable to exploits.
Truth:
Mac's are not yet used by enough of the population to catch attention of those that write malicious code.
A better answer would be to educate people - that will permanently fix the problem.
One wonders if this is going to become a pattern in places like Hong Kong, Bangkok and other area's of the world where piracy is strong - or simply a courtesy arrest to please the complaining MPAA.
I saw police shut down a kiosk in Moscow once for selling pirated movies (a legit store across the street had complained) but within a day the kiosk re-opened, it simply moved further down the road.
Since we lack details, and no charges have been filed yet, I guess we will have to wait and see. Even if he is convicted, I doubt he would get the maximum penalty of 4 yrs in jail (more then likely IMO that he will get the fine - 6,400 for every illegal copy (how would you track that on bittorrent?)
Sir,
Your offer has been accepted. You are invited to become part of our Guantanomo Detainee Program (which currently does not produce intel or results).
Please report to your nearest police station for arrest and processing. No personal effects allowed (as your living space is significantly restricted).
Thank You
FBI
The entertainment industry realizes that they are being hostile to the internet and offending many potential consumers with the lawsuits. The problem is that there is no viable alternative at the moment.
Honestly, look at the alternatives they have:
Put heavy copy protection on DVD's or TV broadcasts.
Overturn Betamax - make all recording illegal.
Shut down the programs which allow filesharing.
Lower prices to point of where it is not worth stealing.
Sue downloaders / sharers.
The only one that seems to be non-hostile towards the internet is lowering prices, but that one also hurts the industry the most. Betamax and heavy copyright protection would annoy the whole populace as people would not be able to record or have to upgrade their dvd / tv / vcr players. Shutting down the programs has already been tried and that failed.
Therefore, it kind of makes sense that they sue the users. It is a fright tactic - one that they will use until a better alternative pops up. It only hurts the guilty (for the most part - there are exceptions...) and does not cost them extreme amounts of profit.
I'd be interested in seeing your sources (for your facts).
Yes, Tony Blair and USAID are biased sources. But, many other organizations have released similar statistics (example United Nations Comission on Human Rights - here, click on the Iraqi reports on the right side).
As for the Irainian war dead, those are mostly POW's that Sadamm slaughtered, so it is still mass murder. (Where on earth are you getting your 3000 a month?)
Lastly, I recently completed an overseas trip to Samara Russia. There they hate the US and dislike the war, but still readily admit that Sadamm was an mass-murderer.
Please read here. (Simply first one to come up on Google.)
I quote from the article "The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) reports that since Saddam was ousted 270 sites of mass graves have been reported. These contain an unknown number of Iraqis, Iranian prisoners of war, Iraqi Kurds and Kuwaiti prisoners among the long list of those Saddam tortured and killed. British Prime Minister Tony Blair puts the remains in mass graves at 400,000 so far."
Questioning whether the Iraqi War was right, legal and whatnot is valid (and a good thing to do). Saying that Saddam did not kill thousands of people is like saying the Holocaust never happened...
Not only what will we have 10 years from now - but what major item will be gone? [Cars? TVs?...]
Also as a science fiction author - when you write, do you try to paint a realistic picture of the future or simply one that will suit the needs of your story?
You're right. It does not specify that it will be paid in cash, but one would assume so for several reasons:
1. Other recent lawsuit actions. MS recently settled 2 other lawsuits for a total of 2.04 billion dollars [1.6 billion Sun, 440 million Intertrust]
2. Non-Cash Settlements have hurt MS. When MS settled with the DoJ and some states in November, provisions in the settlement prevented MS from engaging in exclusive contracts that would prohibit software developers or PC makers from using competing products [source - news.com].
3. Settlements with some states have been for software and like, but some [for example California which settled for 1.1 billion], the money is available to claim if you want (a cash settlement).
I would bet the settlement with be for a decent amount of cash, but you have to claim it and the unclaimed Cash goes back to MS [like California and Florida's settlements.
Also a fellow Minnesotan (and proud to be one), I can see why they chose to settle the suit. It may not have helped the little guy, but given Microsoft more or less got off from the Federal Government, chances of this suit succeeding are very slim. Also - MS has been paying out CASH for quite a few of it's settlements - from the article "Microsoft previously paid $1.55 billion to settle similar suits in nine other states and the District of Columbia."
Hopefully this will result in that type of settlement and not the "free educational software" [which is ironic as the suit is because Microsoft was a monopoly - letting them put their software in schools only increases the monopoly].
They would make it so that both messangers work with one another at first - and leave the brands alone. Then later, little by little they would get rid of one of the messangers with newer patches and versions.
AOL would probably come out on top because of the brand name... but hopefully some of the good things about MSN messanger would get integrated as well.
Its not all that unlikely. Simply think about it like this. Things with odds that are millions to one happen on a day to day basis. We simply don't notice them because they don't seem out of the ordinary. (to quote Dead Poet's Society).
So yes - while the chances of Spirit taking that photo are millions to one, the chances of something odd happening like this are probably pretty darn good.
It definently has to do with water - not microbes, and almost certianly saltly water at that. This article on MSNBC talks a fair amount about it.
More or less, the appearence of the martian bedrock appears to be sedimentary in origin, with a clumpy, sticky soil that hints at a bit of brine. While it's not life, water is one of the building blocks of life.
It may save tax dollars - but it is a step toward private business enforcing it's own laws. Has anyone read Snowcrash (by Neal Steavenson) where the different parts of the city all have their own rent-a-cops that enforce different laws? I realize that the RIAA is attempting to combat piracy - but they should not be making claims like "They said they were police from the recording industry or something, and next time they'd take me away in handcuffs..." (from article).
Taking law into your own hands is not something I want to see happen in America - for example some guy starts pulling over speeders that drive by his house, or a store owner shoots two kids that are shoplifting... Simply put I don't trust the RIAA and most private law enforcement agencies. That is why I pay taxes - so I can have a FAIR and UNBIASED bunch of law enforcement.
That said - I think the guy was an idiot for selling pirated stuff and don't support him one bit - it is the tactics that are being used that scare me.