Ok my comment was a bit vague. What I did mean was "two irresponsible short-sighted" people can breed, that is bring a life into the world they are not willing to guide and develop.
I don't think I am the only person to think that there are many many bad parents floating around.
The issue is the expectation of privacy. If you expect your data to be known [to the ISP] you cannot expect it to be private. Hence no violation of your rights.
Thats my whole point. If my ISP divulged my browsing habits to non-involved 3rd parties [e.g. a data mining operation] then I would say my rights were violated. But if the ISP keeps the info to themselves they can archive as much as they damn well please.
I'd bring up quarms on a consumer level though. If my ISP is logging gigs of data from the users someone has to pay for it, and that someone is the users...
Nobody has problems with two hicks with a combine IQ of 41 who breed.
But a set of medical doctors with the aims of advancing science and medical research cannot create CELLS WHICH ARE NOT SENTIENT BEINGS?
I mean we live in a society overrun with disfunctional families, delinquent children and pretty much underfunded infrastructure to host it all. Yet in such conditions people breeding is ok, and scientific research on the goop [goop == any living thing that isn't sentient] is horrific and grotesque.
True, and just because they have it, doesn't imply that they have the right to sell it to anybody else, and may even have restrictions on what analyses can be legally performed on the stored data. Just because a business has customer data, the business does not have complete and unrestricted use of that data.
Um, "selling" the information was not what Comcast was claiming todo though. You/. types are the ones who brought that up.
Comcast can do whatever they damn well please with the information which includes printing logs up on playing cards for midnight poker.
I doubt that ISP logs would be public information any more that your water bill, your gas bill, your electric bill.
What the fuck does this mean? just because an ISP logs your activity doesn't directly imply they will sell it to the highest bidder.
There is a strong possibility that you (whoever you are) are going somewhere in the vicinity of Toronto or at least in that general direction. If the conversation takes place in Dawson Creek, you could just as well be heading for the maritimes.
And naturally you missed the whole fucking point. My analogy was that asking someone how to get to Toronto is like asking your ISP for the IP of a DNS entry as well the routing information.
Ok I ask this. How can the ISP *not* know who you are when you perform a request?
I mean if I do a request 24.112.8.1 gets hit [from my IP]. The ISP gateway *must* know who I am.
This law passed in 1984 for CABLE TV doesn't really seem to apply to CABLE INTERNET. Fuck people, use your fucking brains ya fucking idiots, holy fuck, I mean does it take a fucking genius to realize this?
*if* you monitor _and_ *what* you do with the information
This thread [and your post] lead me to think its ok for walmart to "spy" on you as long as they are good with the information, but an ISP cannot even monitor.
Another little aspect though is that an ISP that logs your activity is not violating your privacy because what you are doing is by definition from their point of view not private.
Its like me asking you for directions to Toronto and expecting you to not have a clue where I am going.
All it takes is all ISP to add "you give all right to privacy when you connect with us , and all your data can be sold to anybody wanting them." and then what ? You would be satisfied ? Sorry but you are excetly like the proponent of "opt out". privacy should always an "opt in" to be given up. I hate to think i have to watch every single of my step, watch every single word I type. A bit like a dictature.
Welcome to the real world Neo.
Sorry to burst your bubble but what you do with *their* network *is* their business.
I mean next you will say Walmart shouldn't be allowed to have cameras in their own stores.
Hey, seriously people if you are going to troll about computer security get a clue.
You should learn something about the real world of computer security. Then come back to me with this insane little attitude.
If you think anything over the internet is private you are living in a dream world. The only reason anything is private [hence expectation of privacy] over the phone is because access is heavily restricted and the government said so. There is no real reason to expect privacy over the phone other than the laws in place.
What I mean is that unlike say a VoIP using a cipher to encrypt the transmission, a regular phone sends your conversation in plaintext. So if it wasn't for the laws inplace you'd really have no expectation of any privacy whatsoever.
Over the internet anyone can run a hub, a server, a proxy, an ISP, etc. When you access "slashdot" you are going through probably 10 to 15 different hops [I go through more then 30 hops myself]. Each one of those hops could belong to a different private company each of which have the right to log activity. I mean I don't pay Sprint but I do use their servers [they are in the path from me to/.]. So why shouldn't they be able to keep tabs on non-customers and customers alike?
I mean you think your local telco doesn't keep tabs on what calls you make [to whom and when]? The power from this logging only comes when it is abused. Telco's don't readily give out your call information to anyone just like ISPs shouldn't.
That doesn't mean ISPs shouldn't log stuff if they want to though, it just means they should be responsible with it.
An "allegation" is not a conviction. I could allege that you are a mass-murderer.
So while these $$$-sucking bastards allege it violates the 1984 law [which I haven't read] that doesn't mean its so.
Even still its naive to think blocking your cable side ISP from logging will protect your privacy. I mean they still need to know what you are doing. So if a person at your cable ISP wanted to see what you specifically were doing it wouldn't be hard even if it wasn't logged to disk.
Also I think that preventing logging is irresponsible. You can do far more damage with a bi-directional connection then you could with say Cable TV. I would rather have my ISP keep daily logs [and not divulge them to anyone unless required] if it meant that catching say kidding-porn distributors became easier.
Um, the owner of a private network has the right to monitor all traffic on it. You have no right to privacy over private property that you don't own. If its not in violation of your TOS your ISP could post your browsing habits on CNN if they wanted to.
Sorry to burst your bubble. It is different for telephones because it is governmentally regulated. Any joe-sixpack can become an ISP.
Admitedly I'd rather not see my ISP divulge my browsing habits but I could care less if they archive them. I assume the risk that when I go online they are actively logging what I do.
If you use *their* *private* network as your ISP they can log all they want. That is not a violation of any privacy and if you think it is your a fucking idiot.
I mean when you request your "teenyteens.com" documentaries don't you think your ISP has to keep track of that even temporarily todo a DNS lookup? Even if the ISP doesn't log your information permanately they will know what you are doing *while* you are doing it.
Need I remind you that if you use Comcast as your ISP you are using *their* networks. Its not like they don't have a right to maintain it anyways they want. Unless the TOS specifically says "We will not log your activity" this lawsuit should be thrown out.
Also I forgot to mention that real businesses do actually reboot weekly. For example, a few years back I learned the hard way why its not "keen" to goto work [at Nortel] early on sunday mornings...
So this "4 yrs, 3 mos, 7 days, 20 hrs" uptime crap that people like to claim [which is unrealistic] is certainly a feat but not something real businesses tend todo.
Guy, it is not that it isn't a good uptime it's a completely unaceptable uptime at all. Even on an 8to5 bussiness, that means (statistically) more or less ONE undesired reboot per week.
How many people do you know play Quake, JKII, watch tv and listen to Winamp on dedicated business servers?
If I just left my computer alone with Apache it would probably be up for weeks but as it stands I do all my play+work+development on this machine. 4 days up is perfectly fine with me simply because UNLIKE linux I can reboot in under 30 minutes:-o
This is because the Micro$hit crap you run. What an antivirus is? It is nothing but an add-in to a user-space app... and you *have* to reboot!!!???
This is a typically stupid line of thinking. Its not MSFT's fault that "Free-AV" requires a reboot when you install. I mean that's like dumping on Linux because XMMS dumps 4GB files all over your disk or something.
Like I said, if I didn't play quake, watch tv, listen to winamp etc my computer would probably be up more than 4 days.
I'm a music junkie, I admit... I spend waaaay too much money at a few local music stores and when I finally get to the counter I DO notice when their POS systems are taking forever! For example, a small local chain is using a Win2K-based system running over Terminal Services to run their POS cash register systems... it royally sucks. Now, I'm not expressly criticising Win2K, but one thing they often say when it's getting sluggish... "someone needs to reboot the server..."
Yes but if you are this objective in everyting you'll never be a good scientist in any field.
I mean there is no reason why you can't have a fast POS system even on a Mac with OSX!
Maybe the losers who wrote the code for the thing are just incompetent. As to "need to restart the computer". I find that Win2k can stay up for about 4 days [with a fair bit of MM usage] before it gets a bit unstable. I dunno why it crashes but its more likely to crash after a week up then not.
Admitedly a week uptime is not alot but often there are new virus updates within the week so I have to reboot anyways. This of course doesn't affect most POS'es because they normally restart each night [PharmaPlus *nix servers would reboot after the mgmt logged out at night]. The NT4 machines [postal outlet terminals] would reboot themselves too at midnight to get in sync with Canada Post terminals:-)
I currently work for AMC theaters [stop laughing!] and they changed their POS over to some newer system [touch screens running Win98]. I find that they have to "restart the server" every 20 minutes solely because the code that the contractors wrote is shitty! I wish that the dudes writting the software for these terminals actually spent 5 minutes being a cashier. Getting to know your user is one of the more difficult aspects of good project design.
Your entire post is so full of shit I can't believe it myself.
I have personally worked for a few jo-jobs and I can tell you straight-up that nobody include the mgmt care what OS they use as long as it works. For instance, I worked for PharmaPlus [in Canada] and their servers run Unix [or linux, it was some *nix to be sure], the front cashes were Compaq's running win98 and the postal cashes were some other brand running NT4.
And I never had any customers come to me and say "I see you are running 98, well thats completely unreliable".
Believe it or not but 99% of the customers don't have a first clue about computers or the diff between say Win98 and Win2k other than the name.
The fact that they use Linux is neat but as another poster pointed out not entirely a big win since the goal is to crush MSFT isn't it?
Writing your password on paper is not a bad idea. Leaving it at your desk is.
just like if you had a MagCard instead. The MagCard could easily hold a 256-bit password [e.g. random bits stored on card]. Guessing the password would be next to impossible. Stealing the card [or breaking the cryptosystem] would be the only real option for getting access [etc].
If you just left your card on the desk or in a well public spot you certainly are asking for trouble.
First off 28kbps is far too low for a "cutoff". Also monthly setups mean you can go quite a while at low bandwidth. While I have posted this idea before [the idea of a cutoff] I normally mentioned a daily cutoff not monthly.
What they should have done is say limited the connection to a couple 100 MB a day, then after that quarter the bandwidth. If you normally get around 2Mbps down 28kbps is 1/71'th of the bandwidth!!!
Seriously while it would be nice to be able to listen to shoutcast 24/7 and download fresh ISO's of *nix every two weeks you have to face the fact that this "unlimited inet pipe" was really just a fluke. It wasn't supposed to happend yet!
While I disagree with sabotaging a system because people abuse in this case I couldn't really defend it. Kazaa [et al.] are piracy tools that waste shitloads of bandwidth. Anything that scares people off them is good.
You say hypocrite I say fuckin-monkeys using P2P get what they deserve. Now if this was a virus for FTP or HTTP [or NNTP or SMTP] I would have a different position. FTP/HTTP for instance have far more legitimate uses than P2P protocols.
I mean when is the last time you submited a school assignment through Kazaa? Or downloaded a redhat ISO from E-Donkey2k etc...
Slashdot Mirror
Ok my comment was a bit vague. What I did mean was "two irresponsible short-sighted" people can breed, that is bring a life into the world they are not willing to guide and develop.
I don't think I am the only person to think that there are many many bad parents floating around.
Tom
The issue is the expectation of privacy. If you expect your data to be known [to the ISP] you cannot expect it to be private. Hence no violation of your rights.
Thats my whole point. If my ISP divulged my browsing habits to non-involved 3rd parties [e.g. a data mining operation] then I would say my rights were violated. But if the ISP keeps the info to themselves they can archive as much as they damn well please.
I'd bring up quarms on a consumer level though. If my ISP is logging gigs of data from the users someone has to pay for it, and that someone is the users...
Tom
Why is it....
Nobody has problems with two hicks with a combine IQ of 41 who breed.
But a set of medical doctors with the aims of advancing science and medical research cannot create CELLS WHICH ARE NOT SENTIENT BEINGS?
I mean we live in a society overrun with disfunctional families, delinquent children and pretty much underfunded infrastructure to host it all. Yet in such conditions people breeding is ok, and scientific research on the goop [goop == any living thing that isn't sentient] is horrific and grotesque.
Tom
True, and just because they have it, doesn't imply that they have the right to sell it to anybody else, and may even have restrictions on what analyses can be legally performed on the stored data. Just because a business has customer data, the business does not have complete and unrestricted use of that data.
/. types are the ones who brought that up.
Um, "selling" the information was not what Comcast was claiming todo though. You
Comcast can do whatever they damn well please with the information which includes printing logs up on playing cards for midnight poker.
Tom
I doubt that ISP logs would be public information any more that your water bill, your gas bill, your electric bill.
What the fuck does this mean? just because an ISP logs your activity doesn't directly imply they will sell it to the highest bidder.
There is a strong possibility that you (whoever you are) are going somewhere in the vicinity of Toronto or at least in that general direction. If the conversation takes place in Dawson Creek, you could just as well be heading for the maritimes.
And naturally you missed the whole fucking point. My analogy was that asking someone how to get to Toronto is like asking your ISP for the IP of a DNS entry as well the routing information.
Tom
Who says an ISP that logs your activities sells it to 3rd parties? There are two separate issues here
1. Can they log information *at all*?
2. What should they be allowed todo with it?
Tom
Ok I ask this. How can the ISP *not* know who you are when you perform a request?
I mean if I do a request 24.112.8.1 gets hit [from my IP]. The ISP gateway *must* know who I am.
This law passed in 1984 for CABLE TV doesn't really seem to apply to CABLE INTERNET. Fuck people, use your fucking brains ya fucking idiots, holy fuck, I mean does it take a fucking genius to realize this?
Tom
Um those are different arguments
*if* you monitor
_and_
*what* you do with the information
This thread [and your post] lead me to think its ok for walmart to "spy" on you as long as they are good with the information, but an ISP cannot even monitor.
Another little aspect though is that an ISP that logs your activity is not violating your privacy because what you are doing is by definition from their point of view not private.
Its like me asking you for directions to Toronto and expecting you to not have a clue where I am going.
Tom
All it takes is all ISP to add "you give all right to privacy when you connect with us , and all your data can be sold to anybody wanting them." and then what ? You would be satisfied ? Sorry but you are excetly like the proponent of "opt out". privacy should always an "opt in" to be given up. I hate to think i have to watch every single of my step, watch every single word I type. A bit like a dictature.
Welcome to the real world Neo.
Sorry to burst your bubble but what you do with *their* network *is* their business.
I mean next you will say Walmart shouldn't be allowed to have cameras in their own stores.
Hey, seriously people if you are going to troll about computer security get a clue.
Tom
Wow, angry much?
/.]. So why shouldn't they be able to keep tabs on non-customers and customers alike?
You should learn something about the real world of computer security. Then come back to me with this insane little attitude.
If you think anything over the internet is private you are living in a dream world. The only reason anything is private [hence expectation of privacy] over the phone is because access is heavily restricted and the government said so. There is no real reason to expect privacy over the phone other than the laws in place.
What I mean is that unlike say a VoIP using a cipher to encrypt the transmission, a regular phone sends your conversation in plaintext. So if it wasn't for the laws inplace you'd really have no expectation of any privacy whatsoever.
Over the internet anyone can run a hub, a server, a proxy, an ISP, etc. When you access "slashdot" you are going through probably 10 to 15 different hops [I go through more then 30 hops myself]. Each one of those hops could belong to a different private company each of which have the right to log activity. I mean I don't pay Sprint but I do use their servers [they are in the path from me to
I mean you think your local telco doesn't keep tabs on what calls you make [to whom and when]? The power from this logging only comes when it is abused. Telco's don't readily give out your call information to anyone just like ISPs shouldn't.
That doesn't mean ISPs shouldn't log stuff if they want to though, it just means they should be responsible with it.
To supplement my reply:
An "allegation" is not a conviction. I could allege that you are a mass-murderer.
So while these $$$-sucking bastards allege it violates the 1984 law [which I haven't read] that doesn't mean its so.
Even still its naive to think blocking your cable side ISP from logging will protect your privacy. I mean they still need to know what you are doing. So if a person at your cable ISP wanted to see what you specifically were doing it wouldn't be hard even if it wasn't logged to disk.
Also I think that preventing logging is irresponsible. You can do far more damage with a bi-directional connection then you could with say Cable TV. I would rather have my ISP keep daily logs [and not divulge them to anyone unless required] if it meant that catching say kidding-porn distributors became easier.
Um, the owner of a private network has the right to monitor all traffic on it. You have no right to privacy over private property that you don't own. If its not in violation of your TOS your ISP could post your browsing habits on CNN if they wanted to.
Sorry to burst your bubble. It is different for telephones because it is governmentally regulated. Any joe-sixpack can become an ISP.
Admitedly I'd rather not see my ISP divulge my browsing habits but I could care less if they archive them. I assume the risk that when I go online they are actively logging what I do.
Tom
If you use *their* *private* network as your ISP they can log all they want. That is not a violation of any privacy and if you think it is your a fucking idiot.
I mean when you request your "teenyteens.com" documentaries don't you think your ISP has to keep track of that even temporarily todo a DNS lookup? Even if the ISP doesn't log your information permanately they will know what you are doing *while* you are doing it.
Tom
Need I remind you that if you use Comcast as your ISP you are using *their* networks. Its not like they don't have a right to maintain it anyways they want. Unless the TOS specifically says "We will not log your activity" this lawsuit should be thrown out.
Tom
Also I forgot to mention that real businesses do actually reboot weekly. For example, a few years back I learned the hard way why its not "keen" to goto work [at Nortel] early on sunday mornings...
So this "4 yrs, 3 mos, 7 days, 20 hrs" uptime crap that people like to claim [which is unrealistic] is certainly a feat but not something real businesses tend todo.
Tom
Guy, it is not that it isn't a good uptime it's a completely unaceptable uptime at all. Even on an 8to5 bussiness, that means (statistically) more or less ONE undesired reboot per week.
:-o
How many people do you know play Quake, JKII, watch tv and listen to Winamp on dedicated business servers?
If I just left my computer alone with Apache it would probably be up for weeks but as it stands I do all my play+work+development on this machine. 4 days up is perfectly fine with me simply because UNLIKE linux I can reboot in under 30 minutes
This is because the Micro$hit crap you run. What an antivirus is? It is nothing but an add-in to a user-space app... and you *have* to reboot!!!???
This is a typically stupid line of thinking. Its not MSFT's fault that "Free-AV" requires a reboot when you install. I mean that's like dumping on Linux because XMMS dumps 4GB files all over your disk or something.
Like I said, if I didn't play quake, watch tv, listen to winamp etc my computer would probably be up more than 4 days.
Tom
I'm a music junkie, I admit... I spend waaaay too much money at a few local music stores and when I finally get to the counter I DO notice when their POS systems are taking forever! For example, a small local chain is using a Win2K-based system running over Terminal Services to run their POS cash register systems... it royally sucks. Now, I'm not expressly criticising Win2K, but one thing they often say when it's getting sluggish... "someone needs to reboot the server..."
:-)
Yes but if you are this objective in everyting you'll never be a good scientist in any field.
I mean there is no reason why you can't have a fast POS system even on a Mac with OSX!
Maybe the losers who wrote the code for the thing are just incompetent. As to "need to restart the computer". I find that Win2k can stay up for about 4 days [with a fair bit of MM usage] before it gets a bit unstable. I dunno why it crashes but its more likely to crash after a week up then not.
Admitedly a week uptime is not alot but often there are new virus updates within the week so I have to reboot anyways. This of course doesn't affect most POS'es because they normally restart each night [PharmaPlus *nix servers would reboot after the mgmt logged out at night]. The NT4 machines [postal outlet terminals] would reboot themselves too at midnight to get in sync with Canada Post terminals
I currently work for AMC theaters [stop laughing!] and they changed their POS over to some newer system [touch screens running Win98]. I find that they have to "restart the server" every 20 minutes solely because the code that the contractors wrote is shitty! I wish that the dudes writting the software for these terminals actually spent 5 minutes being a cashier. Getting to know your user is one of the more difficult aspects of good project design.
Tom
Your entire post is so full of shit I can't believe it myself.
I have personally worked for a few jo-jobs and I can tell you straight-up that nobody include the mgmt care what OS they use as long as it works. For instance, I worked for PharmaPlus [in Canada] and their servers run Unix [or linux, it was some *nix to be sure], the front cashes were Compaq's running win98 and the postal cashes were some other brand running NT4.
And I never had any customers come to me and say "I see you are running 98, well thats completely unreliable".
Believe it or not but 99% of the customers don't have a first clue about computers or the diff between say Win98 and Win2k other than the name.
The fact that they use Linux is neat but as another poster pointed out not entirely a big win since the goal is to crush MSFT isn't it?
Tom
All I know is I get a 70ms ping with my buddy in the same city with a cable modem. Close enough for some jedi knights saber action.... muhahahahahaha
tom
Actually no he had legit cause there. Ping time plays a big role in say online gaming or say remote surgery.
Sure really fast connections are neato but if you have a 250ms ping minimum that just sucks!
Ideally you would want the minimum ping time with maximum bandwidth [duh] which is what this internet2 achieves [well closer than the public internet]
Tom
First, you don't crack a password, you "break" a cryptosystem. I mean thats like asking how random the number 4 is?
Second, what is a SSN number password?
Tom
Writing your password on paper is not a bad idea. Leaving it at your desk is.
just like if you had a MagCard instead. The MagCard could easily hold a 256-bit password [e.g. random bits stored on card]. Guessing the password would be next to impossible. Stealing the card [or breaking the cryptosystem] would be the only real option for getting access [etc].
If you just left your card on the desk or in a well public spot you certainly are asking for trouble.
Tom
excuse the bad grammar... I did my usual "post to slashdot while half-awake before school..."
Tom
First off 28kbps is far too low for a "cutoff". Also monthly setups mean you can go quite a while at low bandwidth. While I have posted this idea before [the idea of a cutoff] I normally mentioned a daily cutoff not monthly.
What they should have done is say limited the connection to a couple 100 MB a day, then after that quarter the bandwidth. If you normally get around 2Mbps down 28kbps is 1/71'th of the bandwidth!!!
Seriously while it would be nice to be able to listen to shoutcast 24/7 and download fresh ISO's of *nix every two weeks you have to face the fact that this "unlimited inet pipe" was really just a fluke. It wasn't supposed to happend yet!
Tom
While I disagree with sabotaging a system because people abuse in this case I couldn't really defend it. Kazaa [et al.] are piracy tools that waste shitloads of bandwidth. Anything that scares people off them is good.
You say hypocrite I say fuckin-monkeys using P2P get what they deserve. Now if this was a virus for FTP or HTTP [or NNTP or SMTP] I would have a different position. FTP/HTTP for instance have far more legitimate uses than P2P protocols.
I mean when is the last time you submited a school assignment through Kazaa? Or downloaded a redhat ISO from E-Donkey2k etc...
Tom