They did it as the agent of the **AA. Unless and until the **AA disowns them, the downloads are authorized.
The ??AA can't disown them retrospectivly. Any torrent they have uploaded before then continues to be "authorized" so long as it exists. what they had no authority to do was to use R3's servers to distribute their torrents. Thus R3 are entitled to take all sorts of action, be it instigating criminal/civil procedings or just sending MD a bill.
If we really had to deal with widely disparate batches, ntohing large could ever be built, as the overall strength of the finished product could not be counted on.
Especially when the structure is created by "continuious pour". Though the formulation may differ in different parts of the structure.
Now, if we were still mixing concrete by hand using slave labor like the Romans, then wide variations in concrete batches would be an issue.
No doubt the Romans tried to reduce unintended variations.
At the moment I'm working in the bio/ag-tech industry and can see the same thing coming down the road in the wheat/corn/soybeans/milo industry, where big industry players have foolishly limited the gene pool in the name of profit.
Supermarkets like the idea of uniform products, especially with fruits (including the likes of tomatoes, cucumbers, etc which many people don't think of as "fruits"). Quite likely the corporations transporting them (sometimes half way across the planet) want them uniform since it makes packaging easier.
This is like if I had a broken lock on my back door, didn't realize it, and some guy kept breaking into my house day after day. Then, when I finally realized what was going on, and replaced the lock, he nailed all my doors shut and boarded up my windows.
Possibly a better analogy for Media Defender's actions would be "deployed a squadron of AC130s against your house".
Except that MediaDefender, with the knowledge and consent of the **AA, loaded trackers onto the R3 servers that allowed people to do the downloading. Since the trackers were, in effect, sanctioned by the copyright holders, who were making the material available for download via MediaDefender poisoning R3s servers, the downloads are legal.
Even though MediaDefender's uploading of the trackers undoubtedly wasn't.
the "one two punch" MediaDefender did was not only reckless but dumb. They stealing bandwidth and poisoning the Revision3 tracker.
They probably didn't just attempt this with Revision3. So presumably in addition to automated DOS they have automated systems which try to hack trackers.
But that they have a big fat pipe dedicated to conducting DOS attacks? Jesus F. Christ, that's like saying that I have a car dedicated to running down pedestrians I don't like. If that's not a confession of premeditation, I don't know what is.
Not a car a whole fleet of them.
So these guys have basically been paying all along for a pipe _dedicated_ to breaking the law? They actually had a plan to break the law, and month after month paid the bill on the resources set aside for only that purpose? Geesh.
Dosn't this at least break their ISP's terms and conditions?
I hope that a few executives land in state jail there.
Jailing "a few executives" probably isn't enough. Even getting rid of "Media Defender" won't do it. What's needed is for those who paid for it to be up on either racketering or terrorist charges.
I think they'd have an excellent chance of being found guilty in a criminal prosecution. The roadblock will be getting a prosecutor or press charges.
The basic problem is "how do you get criminal law applied to a corporation in any meaningful way?" Which includes preventing them from being "business as usual" until the end of the trial.
So why doesn't someone send a butt-load of take-down requests to youtube?
They probably get several "butt-loads" a day.
If you submit a DMCA take-down for a work that you do not have copyright for, and the actual holder decides it's worth them to sue, they can get damages plus legal fees.
The poster need not be the copyright holder. Also individual/small business might have a difficult time suing rich guy/big business.
I don't understand your point. Do you not mind getting prosecuted for copyright infringement? Youtube does, which is why they abide by the DMCA, which states that the hosting party must take down the material.
Except that Youtube is a corporation, so cannot be prosecuted.
It will cost a shit-ton of money and probably not work, requiring huge wads of cash for staff, R&D, Install, replacement and repair.
The fitting cost is going to be especially high on a plane not scheduled for a full refit of the cabin. After fitting it's going to increase fuel consumption both due to the power needed to run it and increasing the weight of the plane.
Indeed. I love this theory that someone who is mentally prepared to kill themselves is going to break out in a cold sweat beforehand and give themselves away.
Consider also that all the tests are likely to have been performed using actors. Even the daftest of terrorists is likely to realise that this test setup is not a real plane.
How many people are going to be labeled as terrorists because their facial expressions show annoyance due to the screaming baby with the ear infection sitting directly behind them?
Giving how rare actual terrorists are it's likely that any hit will be a "false positive". That's even before factoring in that most terrorists would only consider a plane to be a means of transport in the first place...
There is an "official investigation" being launched, but frankly I think they should just drag all MediaDefender staff into the street and hold a public execution.
How about a "public execution" of MediaDefender? Something like all their assets are sized, with any physical assets being sold by public auction.
The reasons they gave on the BBC site was that Pedos are using special software to turn photos into drawings. I would like to see this software, it sounds very cool.
What effect does it have on photographs of government ministers?
Good point on the age. Plus, what if it is a sci-fi story?
Or a historical story
What if it is a world of the future where people live to be a 1000 years old but don't reach physical maturity until they are 100 years old but their mental maturity is unhampered.
So that at 25 years of age, they look like they are just a few years old physically?
Or where current trends towards physical maturity of humans being younger continue. What if someone other than Paramount had come up with a species such as the Ocampa? Even without intruducing aliens it's perfectly plausable for some future human society to have very different attitudes towards sexuality...
According the news article, the motivation for the law is close a loophole in the law whereby a paedophile manipulates a illegal photography in order to make it legal:
Is it possible to do this in such a way that it would not be possible to tell that it was a manipulated photograph? Possibly the real issue here is that it would the difficulty of working out if the original photograph was of "legel" or "illegal" porn.
But even if you did, then you would have to point out the several ongoing cases in the US involving clothed kids dancing or posing, which are being tried under child porn laws, despite the kid's parents having signed a waiver and agreed to the photos.
So you could outlaw that, but then, how do you determine what is child porn?
At which point does a studio portrait become porn? And considering that PRODUCING child porn carries sentences on the order of 20 years plus lifetime registration, you better make that line damn clear.
What about CCTV footage, mainstream TV/movies (including those where an adult actor is playing a "child" character), pop videos, etc? Add to that the complications resulting from laws on child pornography, age of consent and legal emancipation typically not matching up.
That's irrelevant. Serial killers, for example, are "born that way" too, yet they are locked up when caught and sometimes executed. Not everybody has the same mental faculties as the majority of the population, and that can lead to behaviour classified as psychopatic and abnormal.
Thing is that the mental patterns of serial killers may not be unique to serial killers. IIRC they have quite a lot in common with stock traders. The phrase "make a killing" is even used in the context of finance. Also many governments specifically try and train people to be "serial killers", just that they tend to be called "soldiers" in that situation.
I have no problem with academics being prosecuted under terror legislation if they are indeed engaging in the support of terrorism.
Those who actually are may well support politically correct terrorist though.
But for downloading material which the US Government has cleared for release on its websites? I have trouble believing that anything about al-Qaeda on a US government website could be grounds for suspicion
At least not on the part of the person doing the downloading. There might be a lot of cause for suspicion directed at the US Government though. Was this an actual "terrorist manual" or some kind of propaganda? Possibly even both, given that the US Government has produced "terrorist manuals" in the past...
Slashdot Mirror
They did it as the agent of the **AA. Unless and until the **AA disowns them, the downloads are authorized.
The ??AA can't disown them retrospectivly. Any torrent they have uploaded before then continues to be "authorized" so long as it exists.
what they had no authority to do was to use R3's servers to distribute their torrents. Thus R3 are entitled to take all sorts of action, be it instigating criminal/civil procedings or just sending MD a bill.
The idea behind steganography is not just to encrypt the data, but to hide the fact that you're sending it in the first place.
Even though specific applications may use steganography in conjunction with encryption it does not imply that encryption is involved.
If we really had to deal with widely disparate batches, ntohing large could ever be built, as the overall strength of the finished product could not be counted on.
Especially when the structure is created by "continuious pour". Though the formulation may differ in different parts of the structure.
Now, if we were still mixing concrete by hand using slave labor like the Romans, then wide variations in concrete batches would be an issue.
No doubt the Romans tried to reduce unintended variations.
At the moment I'm working in the bio/ag-tech industry and can see the same thing coming down the road in the wheat/corn/soybeans/milo industry, where big industry players have foolishly limited the gene pool in the name of profit.
Supermarkets like the idea of uniform products, especially with fruits (including the likes of tomatoes, cucumbers, etc which many people don't think of as "fruits"). Quite likely the corporations transporting them (sometimes half way across the planet) want them uniform since it makes packaging easier.
This is like if I had a broken lock on my back door, didn't realize it, and some guy kept breaking into my house day after day. Then, when I finally realized what was going on, and replaced the lock, he nailed all my doors shut and boarded up my windows.
Possibly a better analogy for Media Defender's actions would be "deployed a squadron of AC130s against your house".
Except that MediaDefender, with the knowledge and consent of the **AA, loaded trackers onto the R3 servers that allowed people to do the downloading. Since the trackers were, in effect, sanctioned by the copyright holders, who were making the material available for download via MediaDefender poisoning R3s servers, the downloads are legal.
Even though MediaDefender's uploading of the trackers undoubtedly wasn't.
the "one two punch" MediaDefender did was not only reckless but dumb. They stealing bandwidth and poisoning the Revision3 tracker.
They probably didn't just attempt this with Revision3. So presumably in addition to automated DOS they have automated systems which try to hack trackers.
But that they have a big fat pipe dedicated to conducting DOS attacks? Jesus F. Christ, that's like saying that I have a car dedicated to running down pedestrians I don't like. If that's not a confession of premeditation, I don't know what is.
Not a car a whole fleet of them.
So these guys have basically been paying all along for a pipe _dedicated_ to breaking the law? They actually had a plan to break the law, and month after month paid the bill on the resources set aside for only that purpose? Geesh.
Dosn't this at least break their ISP's terms and conditions?
I hope that a few executives land in state jail there.
Jailing "a few executives" probably isn't enough. Even getting rid of "Media Defender" won't do it. What's needed is for those who paid for it to be up on either racketering or terrorist charges.
I think they'd have an excellent chance of being found guilty in a criminal prosecution. The roadblock will be getting a prosecutor or press charges.
The basic problem is "how do you get criminal law applied to a corporation in any meaningful way?" Which includes preventing them from being "business as usual" until the end of the trial.
If I were to do this against any arbitrary server and got caught, I'd be sued to oblivion.
Or you'd have the police come and take you away.
So why doesn't someone send a butt-load of take-down requests to youtube?
They probably get several "butt-loads" a day.
If you submit a DMCA take-down for a work that you do not have copyright for, and the actual holder decides it's worth them to sue, they can get damages plus legal fees.
The poster need not be the copyright holder. Also individual/small business might have a difficult time suing rich guy/big business.
I don't understand your point. Do you not mind getting prosecuted for copyright infringement? Youtube does, which is why they abide by the DMCA, which states that the hosting party must take down the material.
Except that Youtube is a corporation, so cannot be prosecuted.
Now you can bring a full set of travel size liquids on board and everyone is back to cramming their full size suitcases in the overhead.
The obvious solution to this is for airlines to charge passengers for luggage over a certain size taken into the cabin.
It will cost a shit-ton of money and probably not work, requiring huge wads of cash for staff, R&D, Install, replacement and repair.
The fitting cost is going to be especially high on a plane not scheduled for a full refit of the cabin. After fitting it's going to increase fuel consumption both due to the power needed to run it and increasing the weight of the plane.
This is not about catching the followers of Emmanuel Goldstein.
There's always his brother "Osama Goldstein" or cousin "Emmanuel Bin Laden"...
Indeed. I love this theory that someone who is mentally prepared to kill themselves is going to break out in a cold sweat beforehand and give themselves away.
Consider also that all the tests are likely to have been performed using actors. Even the daftest of terrorists is likely to realise that this test setup is not a real plane.
How many people are going to be labeled as terrorists because their facial expressions show annoyance due to the screaming baby with the ear infection sitting directly behind them?
Giving how rare actual terrorists are it's likely that any hit will be a "false positive". That's even before factoring in that most terrorists would only consider a plane to be a means of transport in the first place...
There is an "official investigation" being launched, but frankly I think they should just drag all MediaDefender staff into the street and hold a public execution.
How about a "public execution" of MediaDefender? Something like all their assets are sized, with any physical assets being sold by public auction.
Corporations aren't normal members of the public. Except they're treated as such in court.
In the case of civil courts. Does a case involving a corporation facing a criminal court even exist?
The reasons they gave on the BBC site was that Pedos are using special software to turn photos into drawings. I would like to see this software, it sounds very cool.
What effect does it have on photographs of government ministers?
Good point on the age. Plus, what if it is a sci-fi story?
Or a historical story
What if it is a world of the future where people live to be a 1000 years old but don't reach physical maturity until they are 100 years old but their mental maturity is unhampered. So that at 25 years of age, they look like they are just a few years old physically?
Or where current trends towards physical maturity of humans being younger continue. What if someone other than Paramount had come up with a species such as the Ocampa?
Even without intruducing aliens it's perfectly plausable for some future human society to have very different attitudes towards sexuality...
According the news article, the motivation for the law is close a loophole in the law whereby a paedophile manipulates a illegal photography in order to make it legal:
Is it possible to do this in such a way that it would not be possible to tell that it was a manipulated photograph? Possibly the real issue here is that it would the difficulty of working out if the original photograph was of "legel" or "illegal" porn.
But even if you did, then you would have to point out the several ongoing cases in the US involving clothed kids dancing or posing, which are being tried under child porn laws, despite the kid's parents having signed a waiver and agreed to the photos.
So you could outlaw that, but then, how do you determine what is child porn?
At which point does a studio portrait become porn? And considering that PRODUCING child porn carries sentences on the order of 20 years plus lifetime registration, you better make that line damn clear.
What about CCTV footage, mainstream TV/movies (including those where an adult actor is playing a "child" character), pop videos, etc? Add to that the complications resulting from laws on child pornography, age of consent and legal emancipation typically not matching up.
That's irrelevant. Serial killers, for example, are "born that way" too, yet they are locked up when caught and sometimes executed. Not everybody has the same mental faculties as the majority of the population, and that can lead to behaviour classified as psychopatic and abnormal.
Thing is that the mental patterns of serial killers may not be unique to serial killers. IIRC they have quite a lot in common with stock traders. The phrase "make a killing" is even used in the context of finance.
Also many governments specifically try and train people to be "serial killers", just that they tend to be called "soldiers" in that situation.
The only real thing you can do to stop the terrorists is to stop being afraid.
There are quite a few things governments could do to stop terrorists, assuming they actually wanted to...
The odds of you dying in a terrorist attack are infinitesimally small... You'd have a better shot at winning the lottery.
It's actually more likely that you will be killed or injuried in a "freak accident".
The only thing you can do is be smart and sensible about security.
Most people don't actually know how to do this, even in the general population.
I have no problem with academics being prosecuted under terror legislation if they are indeed engaging in the support of terrorism.
Those who actually are may well support politically correct terrorist though.
But for downloading material which the US Government has cleared for release on its websites? I have trouble believing that anything about al-Qaeda on a US government website could be grounds for suspicion
At least not on the part of the person doing the downloading. There might be a lot of cause for suspicion directed at the US Government though. Was this an actual "terrorist manual" or some kind of propaganda? Possibly even both, given that the US Government has produced "terrorist manuals" in the past...