It seems more likely that DARPA would create a protocol free from built-in snooping for fear that such a feature could be used by the enemy.
While governments in general are guided by the will-to-power, militaries (at least the US military) are fairly well driven by readiness and victory. It doesn't seem likely that they would create such a vulnerable technology.
1) In America, the first ammendment protects speech, even commercial speech. As tasteless as spam is, regulating sets a dangerous precedent. Unpopular political speech could be artfully labelled as spam to silent those with differing views.
2) The Internet so far has been regarded as a jurisdiction-free zone. What makes anyone think that US laws at any level could be used to prosecute spammers in other jurisdictions? Would we want that? If the tables were turned, if we were to be subject to France's hard-line anti-speech laws, we would not be happy.
Be careful. This is country is about freedom, not about safety or convenience. Freedom should never be abridged for the sake of safety or convenience. If you want that, move to Canada.
First, a number of people have reference RFC 2100. Interested souls should read it.
Second, several people that it is important to make distinctions between LOGICAL names and PHYSICAL names. If you choose a naming convention based on function, form, manufacturer, os, location, owner, etc., you will eventually end up in trouble. No matter how you slice it a host is just a place to do things - it's generic and it should have a generic name.
Third, the suggestion to create a physical name as the real name is by far the best way to do things. You can map service names to the real names by using CNAMES as above, but watch out! Some services cannot use CNAMES (MX records and NS records must not point to CNAMES).
Fourth the suggestion to use sub-domains is the only orthogonal way to apply any kind of organization in your namespace. It's the "right way"
Lastly, for large numbers of hosts, inventing names is certainly a waste of time. However, don't let yourself get into the trap of naming them things like cslab05 - as sure as death and taxes, that box will end up in the eelab or in a professor's (or exec's) office.
It's 5pm, time to be cynical. Why not spend those millions on tutors for two days? Show the world that reasonably funded and unobstructed education can accomplish more in two days than many school systems can accomplish in a year.
With a good education, these children will be able to change the world on their own.
Fireproof safes are for paper, not for plastic or any sort of sensitive equipment. If a hard drive is heated above (say) 140F for more than a few minutes, the data is gone. Allowing for the fact that home fires typically reach temperatures in excess of 1200F, many of the drive components will melt.
Fireproof safes protect combustible material from combustion. They do not protect meltable (?!) material from melting. Put your stock certificates and your marriage license in the safe. Put the backup harddrive somewhere else.
While it's still pricey, it is within the realm of some home users. It's a fantastic drive, rivaling DLT, and it makes a good showing against AIT-2. The tapes will set you back, but backups these days still means tape. DVD in the best case is 9GB. An Ecrix tape can hold 50GB+ and has a higher write speed than DVD. I've dealt with the company before - they are genuinely pro-linux and are all about making a good product at a good price.
Ecrix
There is no honor in death. Prior to this issue with documentation licenses, there was the notice regarding numerous packages that are have not been updated. There was a threat (for lack of a better term) that such packages would be dropped - Apache, for example. In many situations, such idealism is fine or even desirable, but in many business settings, it will make debian a tough choice for users and decision makers. Without users, the debian ideals become irrelevant since they no longer have an audience.
Why not just move the offending docs to contrib or non-free? Some days, I dream about creating a debian distribution that doesn't have such silly things as "installers" just to get around nits with licenses (think qmail).
Slashdot Mirror
It seems more likely that DARPA would create a protocol free from built-in snooping for fear that such a feature could be used by the enemy.
While governments in general are guided by the will-to-power, militaries (at least the US military) are fairly well driven by readiness and victory. It doesn't seem likely that they would create such a vulnerable technology.
1) In America, the first ammendment protects speech, even commercial speech. As tasteless as spam is, regulating sets a dangerous precedent. Unpopular political speech could be artfully labelled as spam to silent those with differing views. 2) The Internet so far has been regarded as a jurisdiction-free zone. What makes anyone think that US laws at any level could be used to prosecute spammers in other jurisdictions? Would we want that? If the tables were turned, if we were to be subject to France's hard-line anti-speech laws, we would not be happy. Be careful. This is country is about freedom, not about safety or convenience. Freedom should never be abridged for the sake of safety or convenience. If you want that, move to Canada.
First, a number of people have reference RFC 2100. Interested souls should read it.
Second, several people that it is important to make distinctions between LOGICAL names and PHYSICAL names. If you choose a naming convention based on function, form, manufacturer, os, location, owner, etc., you will eventually end up in trouble. No matter how you slice it a host is just a place to do things - it's generic and it should have a generic name.
Third, the suggestion to create a physical name as the real name is by far the best way to do things. You can map service names to the real names by using CNAMES as above, but watch out! Some services cannot use CNAMES (MX records and NS records must not point to CNAMES).
Fourth the suggestion to use sub-domains is the only orthogonal way to apply any kind of organization in your namespace. It's the "right way"
Lastly, for large numbers of hosts, inventing names is certainly a waste of time. However, don't let yourself get into the trap of naming them things like cslab05 - as sure as death and taxes, that box will end up in the eelab or in a professor's (or exec's) office.
It's 5pm, time to be cynical. Why not spend those millions on tutors for two days? Show the world that reasonably funded and unobstructed education can accomplish more in two days than many school systems can accomplish in a year.
With a good education, these children will be able to change the world on their own.
Fireproof safes are for paper, not for plastic or any sort of sensitive equipment. If a hard drive is heated above (say) 140F for more than a few minutes, the data is gone. Allowing for the fact that home fires typically reach temperatures in excess of 1200F, many of the drive components will melt.
Fireproof safes protect combustible material from combustion. They do not protect meltable (?!) material from melting. Put your stock certificates and your marriage license in the safe. Put the backup harddrive somewhere else.
While it's still pricey, it is within the realm of some home users. It's a fantastic drive, rivaling DLT, and it makes a good showing against AIT-2. The tapes will set you back, but backups these days still means tape. DVD in the best case is 9GB. An Ecrix tape can hold 50GB+ and has a higher write speed than DVD. I've dealt with the company before - they are genuinely pro-linux and are all about making a good product at a good price. Ecrix
There is no honor in death. Prior to this issue with documentation licenses, there was the notice regarding numerous packages that are have not been updated. There was a threat (for lack of a better term) that such packages would be dropped - Apache, for example. In many situations, such idealism is fine or even desirable, but in many business settings, it will make debian a tough choice for users and decision makers. Without users, the debian ideals become irrelevant since they no longer have an audience.
Why not just move the offending docs to contrib or non-free? Some days, I dream about creating a debian distribution that doesn't have such silly things as "installers" just to get around nits with licenses (think qmail).