But actually, that is not what everyone is doing. Many people are setting it up and neighbors are using it. That is a different story- they are not guests.
But if your ISP asks, you set it up for your guests. You're not responsible for your neighbors' behavior.
This is a very well-intentioned idea, and a good one at that, but the fact that data collection is being made involuntarily and covertly is a big screw-up.
If it were well-intentioned, they'd give the data to the highway engineers so they could set the speed limits to the 85% percentile of actual speeds.
This is just a revenue sharing model for improperly provisioned roads.
But home rates are low because it is understood and agreed that it is for the use by the occupants of the resident (and their immediate guests while on the property), only.
That's why you'd set up a public wireless at home - for your guests. It's entirely reasonable, you let them wash their hands in your sink as well. If somebody comes up to your house and washes their hands with your hose while you're at work - not much you can do about that.
It's also a monster pain to try to help your guest get a WPA2 key configured and working, double on Windows, triple if they have vendor-written wireless software loaded. Open is the only thing that'll work reliably.
If you actually have anything that they can't peer into, or that they can't crack, then they just wait til you are at work, then with or without another warrant, they enter your home to install a keylogger on your keyboard(s).
If the government wants you badly enough, they've got you.
And they probably have a list of unpatched holes in the open source servers as well. But at least those things require an actual 4th Amendment warrant (local interpretations of USAPATRIOT not withstanding). The notion of ubiquitous secret interception of all communications is a different attack surface than directed warranted confiscation of evidence.
think: blackberry. is that really secure? are you positive?
You can't ever really know if it's closed source, but since there was such a stink made when Blackberry handed over their keys to the repressive Middle East regimes, one supposes they needed those keys in the first place.
Of course, it could have all been a show mean to make us think the keys were only needed at that point in time.
So MPEG-LA is the root of evil because year after year they remain silent?
Hardly silent. Most people don't like them because their business plan is to "get 'em hooked first, then start charging them" like a drug dealer does.
It's just that WebM prevents a credible enough threat to that business plan that it keeps getting revised to be less offensive. If WebM weren't around, they'd be charging individuals per minute of their home movies of the kids. Which would create a market incentive for something like a WebM.
The market works, except for government interference. In this case, patents could tilt this balance, which is what this article is about.
VHS had worse picture quality than Betamax, but you could do much more with it.
MPEG-LA is now in the position of having to compete against a free alternative, that's probably good enough for most applications.
Two or three times now they've announced a ramp-up in royalty rates, to be beaten back by industry pressure. Their business model has always been to start out with low prices, then ramp them up later. What's their business model now?
If h.264 stays cheap forever, then Google has won. If People switch to WebM, then Google has won. Either way, their investment pays back; and people wonder how anybody can ever make money with free software.
That's why if you're really smart, they make you take further IQ tests that are aimed progressively higher up.
Careful now, those might be trick tests.
I took a standardized test IQ in high school when I was having some trouble with Algebra II. I scored into the region where there's no more score adjustment for correct answers, so they asked me if I'd like to take a test more focused at the higher end. I said, "and what would that accomplish?" and they pretty much agreed that my math trouble wasn't due to being a moron and didn't make me take any more IQ tests (the problem turned out to be having gone to the local Catholic grammar school).
which is swept under the rug by curving the tests downward
Adjusting the test to the population is precisely what IQ tests are supposed to do. If the median score isn't 100 then the test is broken. The distribution should be fairly normal about 100 too.
Most tests also fall apart at the ends. I took one of the 'sensitive' tests once and helped with the grading - there's a point at which correct answers don't increase the score. Groups like Mega have their own tests, but their sample size is really small, so who knows what its biases are.
We get most of our kids' clothes at second-hand stores. Around here they don't take stained or damaged stuff, so it's impossible to tell a difference from new clothing aside from price.
I always buy them new shoes, though - shoes don't wear well across multiple kids, unless they're totally flat, like snow boots, because they get broken in to fit the foot.
Given that, I have a hard time accepting that I should pay extra tax money so that foster kids can have fancier clothes than my kids have. But, really it seems silly - give the foster parents the right amount of money and let them figure out where to buy the required clothes that can be bought for that much money. If they can't handle that then they probably can't really handle being foster parents either.
So people who want political independence on a smaller scale (state, local or individual) oppose nuclear power. They want technology they can control. They want it to be within their own reach.
Go ahead and oppose light water reactors, we'll all join you. But lightwater reactors are a subset of nuclear reactors, some of which satisfy your criteria.
Slashdot Mirror
But actually, that is not what everyone is doing. Many people are setting it up and neighbors are using it. That is a different story- they are not guests.
But if your ISP asks, you set it up for your guests. You're not responsible for your neighbors' behavior.
This is a very well-intentioned idea, and a good one at that, but the fact that data collection is being made involuntarily and covertly is a big screw-up.
If it were well-intentioned, they'd give the data to the highway engineers so they could set the speed limits to the 85% percentile of actual speeds.
This is just a revenue sharing model for improperly provisioned roads.
But home rates are low because it is understood and agreed that it is for the use by the occupants of the resident (and their immediate guests while on the property), only.
That's why you'd set up a public wireless at home - for your guests. It's entirely reasonable, you let them wash their hands in your sink as well. If somebody comes up to your house and washes their hands with your hose while you're at work - not much you can do about that.
It's also a monster pain to try to help your guest get a WPA2 key configured and working, double on Windows, triple if they have vendor-written wireless software loaded. Open is the only thing that'll work reliably.
C'mon, this is Slashdot. You left your garage unlocked, somebody stole your car and ran down some pedestrians.
How does it fit in their plans for hitting it big (if there is any)?
Steve and Chad have already hit it dolphin bone and sapphire big.
see subject.
If you actually have anything that they can't peer into, or that they can't crack, then they just wait til you are at work, then with or without another warrant, they enter your home to install a keylogger on your keyboard(s).
If the government wants you badly enough, they've got you.
And they probably have a list of unpatched holes in the open source servers as well. But at least those things require an actual 4th Amendment warrant (local interpretations of USAPATRIOT not withstanding). The notion of ubiquitous secret interception of all communications is a different attack surface than directed warranted confiscation of evidence.
deep packet inspection.
How does deep packet inspection thwart encryption?
think: blackberry. is that really secure? are you positive?
You can't ever really know if it's closed source, but since there was such a stink made when Blackberry handed over their keys to the repressive Middle East regimes, one supposes they needed those keys in the first place.
Of course, it could have all been a show mean to make us think the keys were only needed at that point in time.
That's not spying.
By getting the content directly from your (ISP's) servers via closed/secret warantless court procedures.
That's why I run my own mail servers. It's not hard.
1999 called
OMG, did you warn them about 9/11?!?!
Maybe it's that the physicists know how to collaborate better.
Division of labor is a good thing. Reading his complaint makes me think that the real problem is the university system, not the over-specialization.
So MPEG-LA is the root of evil because year after year they remain silent?
Hardly silent. Most people don't like them because their business plan is to "get 'em hooked first, then start charging them" like a drug dealer does.
It's just that WebM prevents a credible enough threat to that business plan that it keeps getting revised to be less offensive. If WebM weren't around, they'd be charging individuals per minute of their home movies of the kids. Which would create a market incentive for something like a WebM.
The market works, except for government interference. In this case, patents could tilt this balance, which is what this article is about.
VHS had worse picture quality than Betamax, but you could do much more with it.
MPEG-LA is now in the position of having to compete against a free alternative, that's probably good enough for most applications.
Two or three times now they've announced a ramp-up in royalty rates, to be beaten back by industry pressure. Their business model has always been to start out with low prices, then ramp them up later. What's their business model now?
If h.264 stays cheap forever, then Google has won. If People switch to WebM, then Google has won. Either way, their investment pays back; and people wonder how anybody can ever make money with free software.
all world governments have the ability to spy on all kinds of communications already.
Yeah? How do they spy on TLS-wrapped e-mail, web, VoIP, or XMPP traffic, OTR-wrapped AIM, or WPA2 wireless, to name a few?
That's why if you're really smart, they make you take further IQ tests that are aimed progressively higher up.
Careful now, those might be trick tests.
I took a standardized test IQ in high school when I was having some trouble with Algebra II. I scored into the region where there's no more score adjustment for correct answers, so they asked me if I'd like to take a test more focused at the higher end. I said, "and what would that accomplish?" and they pretty much agreed that my math trouble wasn't due to being a moron and didn't make me take any more IQ tests (the problem turned out to be having gone to the local Catholic grammar school).
which is swept under the rug by curving the tests downward
Adjusting the test to the population is precisely what IQ tests are supposed to do. If the median score isn't 100 then the test is broken. The distribution should be fairly normal about 100 too.
Most tests also fall apart at the ends. I took one of the 'sensitive' tests once and helped with the grading - there's a point at which correct answers don't increase the score. Groups like Mega have their own tests, but their sample size is really small, so who knows what its biases are.
If you want to communicate with the other intelligent races in the Universe, go help the LHC.
Steps:
1) figure out physics
2) build the most promising communicator or detector
3) try, wait, try, wait, try, wait.
4) goto 2
We're making progress on step 1) but step 2) is far too premature at this point.
Do they teach this kind of thing in astronomy?
Perhaps, but it's in every SETI FAQ, so you don't need to go to College to figure it out.
Short version: radio SETI is looking for intentional radiators.
Prosecutors love when you don't have any.
We get most of our kids' clothes at second-hand stores. Around here they don't take stained or damaged stuff, so it's impossible to tell a difference from new clothing aside from price.
I always buy them new shoes, though - shoes don't wear well across multiple kids, unless they're totally flat, like snow boots, because they get broken in to fit the foot.
Given that, I have a hard time accepting that I should pay extra tax money so that foster kids can have fancier clothes than my kids have. But, really it seems silly - give the foster parents the right amount of money and let them figure out where to buy the required clothes that can be bought for that much money. If they can't handle that then they probably can't really handle being foster parents either.
There's substantial research to support the parent comment's point.
So people who want political independence on a smaller scale (state, local or individual) oppose nuclear power. They want technology they can control. They want it to be within their own reach.
Go ahead and oppose light water reactors, we'll all join you. But lightwater reactors are a subset of nuclear reactors, some of which satisfy your criteria.
some asshole will come out of the woodwork and snort "How could those guys not plan for __________?"
Captain Hindsight!