Actually, the purpose of anything is determined by it's user. I could manufacture an automatic weapon strictly intended for target shooting. Too bad you cannot restrict the users of such technology.
The purpose of a commercial airliner is to transport civilians to and from various destinations. Unfortunately we witnessed a benign object turn into a missile. Again, the purpose of the technology changed in the hands of the users. Very, very sad.
An aggrieved teenager could certainly use crypto to plot some sinister deed with an equally aggrieved teenager.
So, be careful when you try to describe the purpose of anything. It's not that simple.
Most rational, intelligent human beings understand the intent of cryptography, however the world is full of nuts.
I think the key to your post is 'thats [sic] I've seen'.
More than likely we will not see anything for quite some time. If I remember correctly, one senator (nameless) said they had some intercepted encrypted emails. Then, the same senator got a tounge lashing from Mr. Powell et al. So don't expect too much information to be leaked/spread.
Thanks for the history lesson. I am not quite that old (35), but I do remember being able to get a gun pretty easily. Nothing like it is today.
I live in MA where owning a gun is sort of like devil worshiping in Puritan times. A very popular icon on/. (name not to be mentioned) who claims to be a freedom fighter insists guns should be regulated. I just don't get the hypocrisy.
Sadly, I think you are right about the future of crypto. The more they bury it, the more dangerous it will become.
Let's clear the air. I definitely don't want crypto regulated. The purpose of the post is to highlight hypocrisy in viewing 'freedoms'.
The problem is that crypto is freely available than any one can go nuts and plan a shooting spree at a school or what not. Get it?
It's the intent of the user that is the problem, whether its crypto or guns or cars or planes or what not. The fact of the matter is there are sick people on this planet. There always have been and always will be. The problem is there are just more of them now with better, more effective tools in their arsenal.
You think people should have a sanity check to buy a gun (good idea)? Should we then be required to have a license for crypto? Maybe.
Yes, guns can and are used to attack someone. But crypto can and is used to plan an attack like the one we just witnessed on 11 September. I would say that was not defensive in nature. Mr. bin Laden is KNOWN to use crypto to plan his attacks, making it an offensive weapon in todays information age. Sad, but true.
I don't want crypto banned/regulated. My point was pretty simple: we should be defending all freedoms, not just those that affect our personal interests. The gun issue just highlights the hypocrisy flying around this country.
I am just as paranoid about a police state as the next geek. But I also have the ability to look objectively at any given situation.
Guns are used in a variety of SPORTS (target shooting being a classic example). The purpose of a gun is determined by the shooter. Just like the purpose of crypto.
Before people start whining about their rights and freedom of , they should contimplate what freedom actually means and how it affects everyone. It's pretty amusing to read the posts here on/. People all cry when THEIR interests are threatened, but the same people could care less about freedoms being taken away from other groups. Taxation is a classic example. How many times have you seen/.'ers gripe when someone actually wants to cut spending on the NASA budget? Since when is space exploration a 'right'? If you don't pay your taxes, you go to jail. Not exactly 'freedom' is it?
Guns may be instruments of death to some people, but they are a hobby to others. It depends on the person holding the gun. Crypto should be viewed in the same way.
I have read a lot of valid complaints about the prospect of having some civil liberties taken away. Most I agree with. But, there is something that is really bothering me about the postings on/.
You talk of freedoms and liberties in a very bold, strong manner. So what are you are prepared to sacrifice for these freedoms? Be honest. I am sure many people on/. are young enough (not to mention talented enough) to volunteer for military service to fight off the threat of terrorism. After all, freedom does come at a price.
Think of what our forefathers risked by originally declaring independence. Loss of life, property, family, etc. Also, think of those who went off in WWI and WWII. Many made the ultimate sacrifice.
So, before whining about your freedoms think carefully of what you would be willing to give up for those freedoms. If you answer your life, then you can bitch. If not, you don't deserve the freedoms in the first place. Put up or shut up, so to speak.
Just to remind all you arm chair freedom fighters, we were attacked last Tuesday. This did not happen in some far off land, but right here in our backyard. Thousands of human beings lost their lives because some whacko thinks their cause is more important than human lives. I would say those killed had their freedoms pretty much taken away from them by some very sick individuals.
Would I fight and die for these freedoms? Absolutely.
Just a rant.
-Fred
Re:Their communication was NOT encrypted anyway!
on
Blaming Encryption
·
· Score: 1
Does that mean the messase were not originally encrypted or were they decrepted? It's really not too clear from the article.
What infrastructure are you referring to? Afghanistan has literally nothing left to take out due to the years of warfare in their country.
The Mujahadeen are one of, if not the toughest fighting forces on this planet. While we sit here in the relative comfort of our homes debating what to do, these guys are in a constant state of preparedness. It won't be a simple matter of bomnbing them into oblivion. They are already there.
Yes, there could be a reasonable explanation. But unfortunately RMS doesn't seem to be believe in being reasonable or he would not have used the term 'unelected president'.
Let's make one thing very clear: GWB is not 'well into his first term'. It's his first of four years. Remember, he was just sworn in this past January (a grand total of 8 months ago). I would hardly quantify this as well into his first term.
As for suspending the terms-of-office, I doubt very much that we will have to deal with that when the time comes. If there is such a national emergency, then we can figure it out at that time.
One day at at time. Remember this: GWB has pretty much the exact team from the Gulf War around him (his dad, Powell, Cheney, et al). Regardless of what the critics say about not getting Saddam Hussein they did a great job in meeting the objectives of the mission. I am not republican nor am I a democrat but I can say without reservation we are in good hands with these leaders.
Unfortunately RMS is taking advantage of a crisis to promote his sometimes illogical ideologies. That is simply unacceptable when we just lost over 5000 people (regardless of citizenship).
What is even more sad is those who follow RMS with blind devotion. Sometimes I want to scream reading the/. comments/articles. He is a person people, not a diety. He is right sometimes and he is wrong sometimes. In this particular instance, he is most definitely wrong.
Excellent use of history. Finally, some logic on/.
For a site that claims to be for nerds (read: logical, technical people), there seems to be an overwhelming use of emotional drivel posted here.
RMS should be embarrassed to have Copyrighted such crap. I don't think that essay will go down in the annals of history as a famous document. Hopefully, it will be flushed into obscurity.
Are you nuts? Do you honestly think Mr. Gore would be reacting any differently.
Look across the board, both Dems and Reps are trying to pass these bills. It is definitely bi-partisan.
So, having said that, let's analyze Mr. & Mrs. Gore's history of personal freedoms. Actually, one glaring example is all we need. Mrs. Gore was the chair of some dumb ass commitee trying to censor music.
As much as I dislike 'W', he is handling this quite well. There has been no reactionary strike. Our streets remain safe. Our economy has not crumbled into oblivion. Dare I say Mr. Bush has been an terrific leader when we needed one? Yes, he has.
So, stop the damn politcal grandstanding and stick to the issues. No one wants civil liberties taken away, but now is definitely not the time to start the political BS and start dividing us all over again. Has anyone else noticed that we could actually go to war over these events?
Well, that's enough. I am getting a bit frustrated reading some of these posts. Maybe when this is all over we can have logical discussion.
Can you explain please how the Government would be using violence in restricting our freedoms? Honestly, I can't see the correlation between passing anti-encryption laws and terrorism.
I was actually agreeing with RMS until I saw that little political quip (our 'unelected president' comment) thrown in at the end of his freedom ranting.
The last thing we need now is political grandstanding by Mr. Stallman. There is absolutely no excuse for this obvious political grenade.
An argument could certainly be made about the Clinon administrations cut in intelligence gathering having a direct effect on what happened. But that too would be WAY OUT OF LINE!!!!!!!
I have said this before, and I hate to repeat myself but LEAVE POLITICS OUT.
Does RMS simply hate anything conservative? Is he so blinded by his own dogma that he cannot see the human side to what GW is going through right now?
Anyone can be an 'arm-chair leader' or 'arm-chair hero'. Let's see RMS do a better job handling this disaster than our 'unelected president'. That prick couldn't even lead a high school prep rally, never mind a country in crisis.
That bastard is no better than the people calling for anti-encryption laws. He is intentionally aggrevatelty
BTW, if he thinks we don't need copyrights, why does he copyright everything he composes?
Sorry for the rant, but slagging off GW during this time is simply unacceptable. We are all in this thing together REGARDLESS of political affiliation. Can't RMS deal with the civil liberty issues without in a more non-confrontational manner?
To be sure, Gates and the rest of the wealthy will be donating money. I know of several prominent families who have already pledged multi-million dollar contributions. Most do it anonymously. No one likes a glory hound.
I just called the Red Cross here in MA. They requested that we give blood in about thirty days. Their fear is that once the crisis here has calmed, people will not replenish the much needed supply. Apparently our red stuff has a shelf life of forty-two days.
Do your best to donate anything you can afford. The salvation army is looking for new clothing and medical supplies for the rescue workers.
Please don't get me wrong. I agree we should bomb the shit out of those responsible. If it's Bin Laden, draw and quarter the prick.
The problem is that there is resistance to the Taliban in Afghanistan. If we go and bomb everything, we will be most likely bombing innocent people in the process. Yes, I am aware everyone who died yesterday was innocent. And yes, my heart is in my throat as I write this. But we have to be selective and not start killing for the sake of killing.
If it is Bin Laden, then we should give Afghanastan an ultimatum: give him up or else. If they don't, then go in blazing. Not the other way around. But this time, follow through!
After this is over, we definitely need to review our foriegn policy vis a vis Israel. This is one of the biggest reasons innocent Americans are being targeted.
There are innocent Afghans who probably would like to see the Taliban gone as much as we would. My fear is that we end up killing those people as well.
Well said. Of course you will get much flack if you disagree with federally funding tech projects on/. but that is to be expected. I dare anyone to post something negative about NASA's budget (I believe if you want to go to Mars, pay for it yourself).
It's too bad the concept, or myth, of 'the greater good' has taken such a hold over peoples minds.
As far as stem cell research is concerned, have we totally abandoned natural selection? Sure, it's sad we get sick (myself included) but isn't that the way it is suppose to be? Why do we try to prolong life rather than enhance the one we have?
I really am nervous/scared about what lies ahead for us.
That's enough. If you have not noticed, the Democrats are just as guilty of censorship.
Examples:
1) Tipper Gore and the whole music labeling thing,
2) The recent Brown University fiasco,
3) the Anti-Defamation league (granted they have points, but they still get things censored).
The list could go on forever.
I am not a republican (in fact I hate ALL political parties). It just bothers me to see a blanket statement against any group.
So, stick to technology/science/geekdom and leave politics out!!!!!!!!!!!!
VERY BAD IDEA. If he/she forms his/her own company WHILE still employed with his/her employer, he/she will certainly be sued for competing against his employer. They have very clear laws for this, regardless what contracts he/she has signed.
Okay, I am not a lawyer but I have recently brushed up on employment law (forced to, not something I really wanted to do!).
If you worked on any part of your project on company time, your firm has a legal claim to ownership. You owe a certain 'responsibility' to your employer not to do anything competitive while on the job. I know it sucks, but it's the law.
Best bet is to contact a lawyer immediately and describe the situation. Maybe your firm will understand and let you sell the technology to them. I definitely would NOT proceed without legal counsel!!.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the purpose of anything is determined by it's user. I could manufacture an automatic weapon strictly intended for target shooting. Too bad you cannot restrict the users of such technology.
The purpose of a commercial airliner is to transport civilians to and from various destinations. Unfortunately we witnessed a benign object turn into a missile. Again, the purpose of the technology changed in the hands of the users. Very, very sad.
An aggrieved teenager could certainly use crypto to plot some sinister deed with an equally aggrieved teenager.
So, be careful when you try to describe the purpose of anything. It's not that simple.
Most rational, intelligent human beings understand the intent of cryptography, however the world is full of nuts.
I think the key to your post is 'thats [sic] I've seen'.
More than likely we will not see anything for quite some time. If I remember correctly, one senator (nameless) said they had some intercepted encrypted emails. Then, the same senator got a tounge lashing from Mr. Powell et al. So don't expect too much information to be leaked/spread.
Thanks for the history lesson. I am not quite that old (35), but I do remember being able to get a gun pretty easily. Nothing like it is today.
/. (name not to be mentioned) who claims to be a freedom fighter insists guns should be regulated. I just don't get the hypocrisy.
I live in MA where owning a gun is sort of like devil worshiping in Puritan times. A very popular icon on
Sadly, I think you are right about the future of crypto. The more they bury it, the more dangerous it will become.
Not using an authorized version of cryptographic software probably would raise suspicion of prying eyes.
Let's clear the air. I definitely don't want crypto regulated. The purpose of the post is to highlight hypocrisy in viewing 'freedoms'.
The problem is that crypto is freely available than any one can go nuts and plan a shooting spree at a school or what not. Get it?
It's the intent of the user that is the problem, whether its crypto or guns or cars or planes or what not. The fact of the matter is there are sick people on this planet. There always have been and always will be. The problem is there are just more of them now with better, more effective tools in their arsenal.
You think people should have a sanity check to buy a gun (good idea)? Should we then be required to have a license for crypto? Maybe.
Yes, guns can and are used to attack someone. But crypto can and is used to plan an attack like the one we just witnessed on 11 September. I would say that was not defensive in nature. Mr. bin Laden is KNOWN to use crypto to plan his attacks, making it an offensive weapon in todays information age. Sad, but true.
I don't want crypto banned/regulated. My point was pretty simple: we should be defending all freedoms, not just those that affect our personal interests. The gun issue just highlights the hypocrisy flying around this country.
I am just as paranoid about a police state as the next geek. But I also have the ability to look objectively at any given situation.
Excellent analysis, IMHO.
These documents were religious instructions for the last days of the bombers life, not the actual logistical plans for the attack.
bin Laden is known for using crypto to circulate logistics. That is what the Feds are targeting.
Just an FYI.
Ahh...wrong again.
/. People all cry when THEIR interests are threatened, but the same people could care less about freedoms being taken away from other groups. Taxation is a classic example. How many times have you seen /.'ers gripe when someone actually wants to cut spending on the NASA budget? Since when is space exploration a 'right'? If you don't pay your taxes, you go to jail. Not exactly 'freedom' is it?
Guns are used in a variety of SPORTS (target shooting being a classic example). The purpose of a gun is determined by the shooter. Just like the purpose of crypto.
Before people start whining about their rights and freedom of , they should contimplate what freedom actually means and how it affects everyone. It's pretty amusing to read the posts here on
Guns may be instruments of death to some people, but they are a hobby to others. It depends on the person holding the gun. Crypto should be viewed in the same way.
Ya know, it's pretty easy to get your message across to the record companies. Don't buy CD's. Find a better hobby than listening to music.
These guys only care about money. Hit them where is hurts, the wallet.
You do have the choice whether or not you support the music industry.
Just a thought.
-Fred
Here comes my pissed off rant.
/.
/. are young enough (not to mention talented enough) to volunteer for military service to fight off the threat of terrorism. After all, freedom does come at a price.
I have read a lot of valid complaints about the prospect of having some civil liberties taken away. Most I agree with. But, there is something that is really bothering me about the postings on
You talk of freedoms and liberties in a very bold, strong manner. So what are you are prepared to sacrifice for these freedoms? Be honest. I am sure many people on
Think of what our forefathers risked by originally declaring independence. Loss of life, property, family, etc. Also, think of those who went off in WWI and WWII. Many made the ultimate sacrifice.
So, before whining about your freedoms think carefully of what you would be willing to give up for those freedoms. If you answer your life, then you can bitch. If not, you don't deserve the freedoms in the first place. Put up or shut up, so to speak.
Just to remind all you arm chair freedom fighters, we were attacked last Tuesday. This did not happen in some far off land, but right here in our backyard. Thousands of human beings lost their lives because some whacko thinks their cause is more important than human lives. I would say those killed had their freedoms pretty much taken away from them by some very sick individuals.
Would I fight and die for these freedoms? Absolutely.
Just a rant.
-Fred
Does that mean the messase were not originally encrypted or were they decrepted? It's really not too clear from the article.
What infrastructure are you referring to? Afghanistan has literally nothing left to take out due to the years of warfare in their country.
The Mujahadeen are one of, if not the toughest fighting forces on this planet. While we sit here in the relative comfort of our homes debating what to do, these guys are in a constant state of preparedness. It won't be a simple matter of bomnbing them into oblivion. They are already there.
-Donald (or Fred, take your pick)
Hi:
/. comments/articles. He is a person people, not a diety. He is right sometimes and he is wrong sometimes. In this particular instance, he is most definitely wrong.
Yes, there could be a reasonable explanation. But unfortunately RMS doesn't seem to be believe in being reasonable or he would not have used the term 'unelected president'.
Let's make one thing very clear: GWB is not 'well into his first term'. It's his first of four years. Remember, he was just sworn in this past January (a grand total of 8 months ago). I would hardly quantify this as well into his first term.
As for suspending the terms-of-office, I doubt very much that we will have to deal with that when the time comes. If there is such a national emergency, then we can figure it out at that time.
One day at at time. Remember this: GWB has pretty much the exact team from the Gulf War around him (his dad, Powell, Cheney, et al). Regardless of what the critics say about not getting Saddam Hussein they did a great job in meeting the objectives of the mission. I am not republican nor am I a democrat but I can say without reservation we are in good hands with these leaders.
Unfortunately RMS is taking advantage of a crisis to promote his sometimes illogical ideologies. That is simply unacceptable when we just lost over 5000 people (regardless of citizenship).
What is even more sad is those who follow RMS with blind devotion. Sometimes I want to scream reading the
-Fred
You are without a doubt the dumbest, most ignorant person alive today. What does racism have to due with civil liberties?
Please, do all of us a favor and kill yourself. You are wasting other peoples oxygen.
And by the way, I am not at all afraid to reveal who I am and where I live. If you think you are man enough.
Fucker.
Excellent use of history. Finally, some logic on /.
For a site that claims to be for nerds (read: logical, technical people), there seems to be an overwhelming use of emotional drivel posted here.
RMS should be embarrassed to have Copyrighted such crap. I don't think that essay will go down in the annals of history as a famous document. Hopefully, it will be flushed into obscurity.
-Fred
Ummmm....hmmmm....ahhh....
Are you nuts? Do you honestly think Mr. Gore would be reacting any differently.
Look across the board, both Dems and Reps are trying to pass these bills. It is definitely bi-partisan.
So, having said that, let's analyze Mr. & Mrs. Gore's history of personal freedoms. Actually, one glaring example is all we need. Mrs. Gore was the chair of some dumb ass commitee trying to censor music.
As much as I dislike 'W', he is handling this quite well. There has been no reactionary strike. Our streets remain safe. Our economy has not crumbled into oblivion. Dare I say Mr. Bush has been an terrific leader when we needed one? Yes, he has.
So, stop the damn politcal grandstanding and stick to the issues. No one wants civil liberties taken away, but now is definitely not the time to start the political BS and start dividing us all over again. Has anyone else noticed that we could actually go to war over these events?
Well, that's enough. I am getting a bit frustrated reading some of these posts. Maybe when this is all over we can have logical discussion.
-Fred
Can you explain please how the Government would be using violence in restricting our freedoms? Honestly, I can't see the correlation between passing anti-encryption laws and terrorism.
I was actually agreeing with RMS until I saw that little political quip (our 'unelected president' comment) thrown in at the end of his freedom ranting.
The last thing we need now is political grandstanding by Mr. Stallman. There is absolutely no excuse for this obvious political grenade.
An argument could certainly be made about the Clinon administrations cut in intelligence gathering having a direct effect on what happened. But that too would be WAY OUT OF LINE!!!!!!!
I have said this before, and I hate to repeat myself but LEAVE POLITICS OUT.
Does RMS simply hate anything conservative? Is he so blinded by his own dogma that he cannot see the human side to what GW is going through right now?
Anyone can be an 'arm-chair leader' or 'arm-chair hero'. Let's see RMS do a better job handling this disaster than our 'unelected president'. That prick couldn't even lead a high school prep rally, never mind a country in crisis.
That bastard is no better than the people calling for anti-encryption laws. He is intentionally aggrevatelty
BTW, if he thinks we don't need copyrights, why does he copyright everything he composes?
Sorry for the rant, but slagging off GW during this time is simply unacceptable. We are all in this thing together REGARDLESS of political affiliation. Can't RMS deal with the civil liberty issues without in a more non-confrontational manner?
To be sure, Gates and the rest of the wealthy will be donating money. I know of several prominent families who have already pledged multi-million dollar contributions. Most do it anonymously. No one likes a glory hound.
I just called the Red Cross here in MA. They requested that we give blood in about thirty days. Their fear is that once the crisis here has calmed, people will not replenish the much needed supply. Apparently our red stuff has a shelf life of forty-two days.
Do your best to donate anything you can afford. The salvation army is looking for new clothing and medical supplies for the rescue workers.
-Donald
Actually, there is a problem with this.
Please don't get me wrong. I agree we should bomb the shit out of those responsible. If it's Bin Laden, draw and quarter the prick.
The problem is that there is resistance to the Taliban in Afghanistan. If we go and bomb everything, we will be most likely bombing innocent people in the process. Yes, I am aware everyone who died yesterday was innocent. And yes, my heart is in my throat as I write this. But we have to be selective and not start killing for the sake of killing.
If it is Bin Laden, then we should give Afghanastan an ultimatum: give him up or else. If they don't, then go in blazing. Not the other way around. But this time, follow through!
After this is over, we definitely need to review our foriegn policy vis a vis Israel. This is one of the biggest reasons innocent Americans are being targeted.
There are innocent Afghans who probably would like to see the Taliban gone as much as we would. My fear is that we end up killing those people as well.
-Fred
Well said. Of course you will get much flack if you disagree with federally funding tech projects on /. but that is to be expected. I dare anyone to post something negative about NASA's budget (I believe if you want to go to Mars, pay for it yourself).
It's too bad the concept, or myth, of 'the greater good' has taken such a hold over peoples minds.
As far as stem cell research is concerned, have we totally abandoned natural selection? Sure, it's sad we get sick (myself included) but isn't that the way it is suppose to be? Why do we try to prolong life rather than enhance the one we have?
I really am nervous/scared about what lies ahead for us.
-Donald
That's enough. If you have not noticed, the Democrats are just as guilty of censorship.
Examples:
1) Tipper Gore and the whole music labeling thing,
2) The recent Brown University fiasco,
3) the Anti-Defamation league (granted they have points, but they still get things censored).
The list could go on forever.
I am not a republican (in fact I hate ALL political parties). It just bothers me to see a blanket statement against any group.
So, stick to technology/science/geekdom and leave politics out!!!!!!!!!!!!
VERY BAD IDEA. If he/she forms his/her own company WHILE still employed with his/her employer, he/she will certainly be sued for competing against his employer. They have very clear laws for this, regardless what contracts he/she has signed.
-fred
Okay, I am not a lawyer but I have recently brushed up on employment law (forced to, not something I really wanted to do!).
If you worked on any part of your project on company time, your firm has a legal claim to ownership. You owe a certain 'responsibility' to your employer not to do anything competitive while on the job. I know it sucks, but it's the law.
Best bet is to contact a lawyer immediately and describe the situation. Maybe your firm will understand and let you sell the technology to them. I definitely would NOT proceed without legal counsel!!.
Good luck!
-fred