Article I, Section 9, par 8. (U.S. Constitution)
on
Bill Gates to be Knighted
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
"No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."
There are just so many ways to look at this (specifically where Bill Gates is concerned), that this could keep constitutional lawyers happy for years.
He's in a position of profit and trust, but is it Under the States? Is geographic location, making that much money, and having your software so deeply enshrined in so many State governments enough to make that connection? Note: Office does not specifically say POLITICAL office...
This may be obvious, but this is yet one more reason that re-affirms my pre-9/11 decision to not fly anymore unless I'm absolutely forced into it, and I'm very inventive about finding justification for other means (such as driving).
I've had it with the airline industry and their rather poor attempt at feel-good security (which isn't security at all). I have no intention of becoming part of the grand experiment of how an agency or company can screw up and compromise my financial records and my privacy even more. I simply will not be their guinea pig.
The more complex they make these systems, the more points of failure they add.
I'm lucky in that I'm at a job that doesn't require me to fly, and anywhere I need to reach in North America, I can do so with my car. Properly planned without a panic-timeframe schedule, such trips can actually be enjoyable, in and of themselves.
I sincerely hope they're going to have these things configured in one of the following manners:
1. Disable the Wi-Fi by default 2. If not disabled, seed the encryption key with a pseudorandom number before the user specifically configures it.
You don't want new computers forming unintended bridges or access points between the untrusted network/airspace and your trusted internal network between when they're first powered up and when the overworked sysadmin has a chance to configure them properly. So much for your company's firewalls having a chance to do their job.
When broadband over power lines came up as a possibility in the United States, the American Radio Relay League (now the association for Amateur Radio operators) raised concerns about potential interference.
I believe the claim was that Broadband over Power Lines caused so much interference on HF (High Frequency) bands that this world-wide amateur band would be rendered inoperable.
Is this proving to be the case where this technology has started to be rolled out, or did it turn out as something else?
> Maybe I've watched one too many movies, but am I the only one concerned about what happens when > the bag guys get ahold of this and are able to shut down any hazardous truck they want?
No, you're not the only one. What occured to me was that a group that is interested in stealing hazardous materials for their own purposes just had the hardest part of the hijacking (stopping the tractor-trailer) solved for them. They bring their own older tractor that isn't succeptible to remote shutdown, cause the target tractor-trailer to stop using the shutdown signal, secure (or more likely kill) the driver, uncouple the trailer, hook it to their tractor, and make off with the goods.
Done correctly, it would look like a trucking company transferring an important load to a new tractor because of mechanical troubles.
IF this technology is implemented with sufficiently strong crypto and proper authentication before accepting a shutdown order, AND it's only used in emergency situations, it might be a good thing.
However, we know that the former will suffer shortcuts in design and implementation, and that abuse of authority and power is inevitable.
Bad guys, good guys, it doesn't matter. This idea is going to cost more than it saves.
Okay, I had a nice example from my bash scripts on how I keep SuSE 8.2 updated automatically using rsync on the file server, NFS exports on same, and pointing my 8.2 machines to an nfs mount to pick up the updates from, but it just won't make it past the lameness filter.
Seriously though, SuSE 8.2, Yast Online update, and you can rsync the SuSE distributions from any of the mirrors listed via ftp.suse.com - just fine one that's rsync-friendly.:-)
Rsync via an entry in/etc/cron.weekly, edit/etc/exports on the files server to export that tree, make SURE your local tree matches the remote tree so Yast Online Update doesn't get confused, and you should be good to go. It works for me.
Until such time as we learn a new method of observing its state such that it is no longer changed by the observance. At that time, our previous assumptions will be proved "not entirely correct".
The only thing I count on in terms of humanity's knowledge is that we don't know everything yet. Oh, maybe one more thing: We'll try to screw up the act of discovering new things by using the U.S. Patent Office.;-)
See the following link. Cairo is listed as "Originally Windows NT 4.0, later a designation of technologies, which were planned partly for NT 4 and/or NT 5. Cancelled.
Why was it running Windows? Because a lot of SCADA software like what's available from GE Fanuc, Citect, and Tascomp, (just to name a few) are designed for Windows.
The business needs of a company drive the decisions of what to purchase and implement, and many things are taken into account and weighed against each other.
Security isn't the only concern, because even it is weighed against liklihood of risks happening, and Risk Management isn't perfect. Thankfully, given these incidents, the risk factors just got increased and lit up with a VERY bright spotlight.
Network Administrators are given the responsibility to keep a variety of equipment, operating systems, and applications running and talking to each other appropriately, without necessarily being given all the authority they need to keep stuff like this from happening. Frankly, I pity them. Everyone remembers the bad incidents without realizing how much good they do, silently and behind the scenes.
And your informative followup illustrates exactly why it's a really bad idea to group trademarks, patents, copyright, and trade secrets under the umbrella term of "Intellectual Property" (IP).
Though they do share some things, they are fundamentally different in how they're structured, enforced, used, and in what they protect.
One can only hope that whatever judge and jury look at this thing can properly weigh each of the issues against the proper area of this "family" of law.
> Please explain to us how using legal avenues > to keep a company from stealing your property > is unethical, and unconscionable, and illegal.
Except that the avenues are not legal. Germany already pressed that issue, and SCO shut down their website in Germany rather than tangling with that beast.
They may well be facing prosecution for extortion and racketeering under the RICO Act in the United States if they keep this nonsense up.
If you sue me for financial damages, you do NOT get to collect from me (or 1,500 others) in advance of a verdict in your favor.
> Redhat and SuSE should use some of SCO's tactics.
Absolutely not. The actions of the SCO executive are unethical, unconscionable, and at least in Germany, illegal.
Were RedHat or SuSE GMBH to comport themselves in this manner, I would be forced to take a similar dim view of them, and would no longer buy their distributions.
A very large message needs to be sent to companies everywhere: Act reasonable while providing quality products, and customers will stay with you and be loyal. Act like McBride, and go down, hard.
The real application for these is an on-demand assembly line to replace a multitude of expensive single product lines that probably don't need to run all the time.
Picture an automotive assembly line that has 300 assembly stations, each one of which gets the "next part" supplied by a chain driven conveyer bringing it to the station on a hook.
Jane, who takes care of placing and tightening down the intake manifold on the engine block in front of her, no longer has to either think about what torque to use, what bolt pattern, or really, anything. Follow the instructions, tighten the bolts per the visual overlay pattern at the designated torque, and on to the next block coming down the line and intake manifold coming off the parts conveyer belt.
The ultimate end of this is much like the Microsoft commercial where the guy in the showroom is picking whether he wants a black car or a red car, and the manufacturing plant is responding almost instantly. Now extend this to not beginning the production on a car until an order is placed, and it'll be ready that day for delivery to the customer's city.
And yes, this reduces Jane to a non-thinking bio-machine for the assembly line. That's the really awful part of this process.
Cast in the Name of Efficiency, Ye Not Cognizant. Big Ugh.
Frankly, I think an icon of a monkey humping a football would pretty much sum up the caliber of executive decisions we're seeing out of SCO these days.
This is just yet another attempt by a government agency at empire building. SPAM is nowhere NEAR a level of importance or National Security that would require investigations or legal proceedings to be held in secret. Conduct those in the proven existing methods. Very little NEEDS to be kept secret.
Have the representatives of the people once again intentionally forgotten that little fact: they represent the will of the people, and they govern solely at the sufferance and will of the people?
Has anyone checked the watering schedule for the tree of liberty recently?
The RIAA keeps getting more bold (and ridiculous) in its strong-arm techniques.
Someone very wise once said "Follow the money". The major labels are the RIAA's clientelle, and I think I can reasonably assume they give their ascent to the RIAA's "business practices" (read: extortion), otherwise they'd be very upset about public relations backlash against them and their products. This backlash may happen eventually.
Now assuming that this ascent to these techniques is present, perhaps contractually, what happens when the wrong student is sued, and a very wealthy, but up to now quiet and non-pressworthy relative (such as a rich uncle that the RIAA didn't count on), steps forward and says to his nephew, "No, you are not caving, and I've secured the services of an excellent law firm that specializes in the RICO act."
As I said, follow the money. I look forward to the day when some unassuming student, that was doing nothing wrong, takes the major labels for a few billion. Yes, with a B.
Frequency Range? Consumers with RFID readers?
on
Walmart to Push RFID
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Does anyone know what frequency or frequency range these passive RFID's work in? It should be possible to build a 1 milliwatt transmitter on that frequency for one's own house, thus ensuring that products at home remain well behaved (anonymous).
Secondly if something I purchase is going to be sending an ID to readers that I don't specifically authorize, I'd like to get my own reader so I know with certainty that I've located and disabled the RFID on or in the product, since my own reader stops picking up a response/reply from the RFID.
Anyone know where consumers can purchase RFID readers?
Imagine if you will that you have an old home where running CAT-5 in the walls was going to be one of those nightmare projects that you just _so_ didn't want to face. Since your file servers live on your (currently CAT-5 wired) trusted internal network, the AC/Powerline version of this device (minus the wireless access point) starts to look pretty appealing!
That is until one question occured to me. What _exactly_ stops my TCP/IP ethernet traffic from heading out past my breaker box and to my neighbors on the same side of the big step down transformer that feeds my street?
So far, the answer I've come up with is: Absolutely nothing.:-(
Which would mean using IPSEC on every connection, and so much for my internal network being quite as "trusted" or behind a firewall. Shielded conduit, CAT5, and a whole lot of plaster, here I come.
Slashdot Mirror
"No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."
Here, read it for yourself: Constitution for the United States of America.
There are just so many ways to look at this (specifically where Bill Gates is concerned), that this could keep constitutional lawyers happy for years.
He's in a position of profit and trust, but is it Under the States? Is geographic location, making that much money, and having your software so deeply enshrined in so many State governments enough to make that connection? Note: Office does not specifically say POLITICAL office...
Oh yeah, HUGE can of worms.
This may be obvious, but this is yet one more reason that re-affirms my pre-9/11 decision to not fly anymore unless I'm absolutely forced into it, and I'm very inventive about finding justification for other means (such as driving).
I've had it with the airline industry and their rather poor attempt at feel-good security (which isn't security at all). I have no intention of becoming part of the grand experiment of how an agency or company can screw up and compromise my financial records and my privacy even more. I simply will not be their guinea pig.
The more complex they make these systems, the more points of failure they add.
I'm lucky in that I'm at a job that doesn't require me to fly, and anywhere I need to reach in North America, I can do so with my car. Properly planned without a panic-timeframe schedule, such trips can actually be enjoyable, in and of themselves.
I sincerely hope they're going to have these things configured in one of the following manners:
1. Disable the Wi-Fi by default
2. If not disabled, seed the encryption key with a pseudorandom number before the user specifically configures it.
You don't want new computers forming unintended bridges or access points between the untrusted network/airspace and your trusted internal network between when they're first powered up and when the overworked sysadmin has a chance to configure them properly. So much for your company's firewalls having a chance to do their job.
When broadband over power lines came up as a possibility in the United States, the American Radio Relay League (now the association for Amateur Radio operators) raised concerns about potential interference.
I believe the claim was that Broadband over Power Lines caused so much interference on HF (High Frequency) bands that this world-wide amateur band would be rendered inoperable.
Is this proving to be the case where this technology has started to be rolled out, or did it turn out as something else?
> Maybe I've watched one too many movies, but am I the only one concerned about what happens when
> the bag guys get ahold of this and are able to shut down any hazardous truck they want?
No, you're not the only one. What occured to me was that a group that is interested in stealing hazardous materials for their own purposes just had the hardest part of the hijacking (stopping the tractor-trailer) solved for them. They bring their own older tractor that isn't succeptible to remote shutdown, cause the target tractor-trailer to stop using the shutdown signal, secure (or more likely kill) the driver, uncouple the trailer, hook it to their tractor, and make off with the goods.
Done correctly, it would look like a trucking company transferring an important load to a new tractor because of mechanical troubles.
IF this technology is implemented with sufficiently strong crypto and proper authentication before accepting a shutdown order, AND it's only used in emergency situations, it might be a good thing.
However, we know that the former will suffer shortcuts in design and implementation, and that abuse of authority and power is inevitable.
Bad guys, good guys, it doesn't matter. This idea is going to cost more than it saves.
Okay, I had a nice example from my bash scripts on how I keep SuSE 8.2 updated automatically using rsync on the file server, NFS exports on same, and pointing my 8.2 machines to an nfs mount to pick up the updates from, but it just won't make it past the lameness filter.
:-)
/etc/cron.weekly, edit /etc/exports on the files server to export that tree, make SURE your local tree matches the remote tree so Yast Online Update doesn't get confused, and you should be good to go. It works for me.
Seriously though, SuSE 8.2, Yast Online update, and you can rsync the SuSE distributions from any of the mirrors listed via ftp.suse.com - just fine one that's rsync-friendly.
Rsync via an entry in
Until such time as we learn a new method of observing its state such that it is no longer changed by the observance. At that time, our previous assumptions will be proved "not entirely correct".
;-)
The only thing I count on in terms of humanity's knowledge is that we don't know everything yet. Oh, maybe one more thing: We'll try to screw up the act of discovering new things by using the U.S. Patent Office.
Or maybe it's just a subtle bit of truth escaping from SCO's advertising: The poor guy's really sick to be seen there.
See the following link. Cairo is listed as "Originally Windows NT 4.0, later a designation of technologies, which were planned partly for NT 4 and/or NT 5. Cancelled.
Bink.nu: Microsoft Codenames
Dogbert: "Please read me the serial number on the inside of the case of your computer."
End User: 'But that will void my warranty.'
Dobgert: "Call me if anything changes."
Why was it running Windows? Because a lot of SCADA software like what's available from GE Fanuc, Citect, and Tascomp, (just to name a few) are designed for Windows.
The business needs of a company drive the decisions of what to purchase and implement, and many things are taken into account and weighed against each other.
Security isn't the only concern, because even it is weighed against liklihood of risks happening, and Risk Management isn't perfect. Thankfully, given these incidents, the risk factors just got increased and lit up with a VERY bright spotlight.
Network Administrators are given the responsibility to keep a variety of equipment, operating systems, and applications running and talking to each other appropriately, without necessarily being given all the authority they need to keep stuff like this from happening. Frankly, I pity them. Everyone remembers the bad incidents without realizing how much good they do, silently and behind the scenes.
And your informative followup illustrates exactly why it's a really bad idea to group trademarks, patents, copyright, and trade secrets under the umbrella term of "Intellectual Property" (IP).
Though they do share some things, they are fundamentally different in how they're structured, enforced, used, and in what they protect.
One can only hope that whatever judge and jury look at this thing can properly weigh each of the issues against the proper area of this "family" of law.
> Please explain to us how using legal avenues
> to keep a company from stealing your property
> is unethical, and unconscionable, and illegal.
Except that the avenues are not legal. Germany already pressed that issue, and SCO shut down their website in Germany rather than tangling with that beast.
They may well be facing prosecution for extortion and racketeering under the RICO Act in the United States if they keep this nonsense up.
If you sue me for financial damages, you do NOT get to collect from me (or 1,500 others) in advance of a verdict in your favor.
> Redhat and SuSE should use some of SCO's tactics.
Absolutely not. The actions of the SCO executive are unethical, unconscionable, and at least in Germany, illegal.
Were RedHat or SuSE GMBH to comport themselves in this manner, I would be forced to take a similar dim view of them, and would no longer buy their distributions.
A very large message needs to be sent to companies everywhere: Act reasonable while providing quality products, and customers will stay with you and be loyal. Act like McBride, and go down, hard.
There should be no other outcome.
I believe the following (adapted) moment out of Ghostbusters sums up my opinion:
Linux community: "Are you a God?"
McBride, "Uh, no?"
Linux community: "Then DIE!!"
(Hopefully we'll fare better than the Sta-Puft Marshmallow Man.)
> but U.S. cellular telephone frequencies are blocked =(
;)
But not north of the border. Find a Canadian Dealer (example here) that sells the unblocked Canadian version. Take a vacation, make the most of it.
The real application for these is an on-demand assembly line to replace a multitude of expensive single product lines that probably don't need to run all the time.
Picture an automotive assembly line that has 300 assembly stations, each one of which gets the "next part" supplied by a chain driven conveyer bringing it to the station on a hook.
Jane, who takes care of placing and tightening down the intake manifold on the engine block in front of her, no longer has to either think about what torque to use, what bolt pattern, or really, anything. Follow the instructions, tighten the bolts per the visual overlay pattern at the designated torque, and on to the next block coming down the line and intake manifold coming off the parts conveyer belt.
The ultimate end of this is much like the Microsoft commercial where the guy in the showroom is picking whether he wants a black car or a red car, and the manufacturing plant is responding almost instantly. Now extend this to not beginning the production on a car until an order is placed, and it'll be ready that day for delivery to the customer's city.
And yes, this reduces Jane to a non-thinking bio-machine for the assembly line. That's the really awful part of this process.
Cast in the Name of Efficiency, Ye Not Cognizant.
Big Ugh.
I'll answer this troll.
The answer is: The future. Why open the door for abuse so that a future government can come along, and abuse its citizenry at will?
Only those who want to abuse others like this would even suggest such a thing.
And with the waterproof version, can you imagine the advertising campaign?
...
"Now you no longer have to worry about the wet spot..."
Uh oh, I can smell the Karma forest catching fire now.
Frankly, I think an icon of a monkey humping a football would pretty much sum up the caliber of executive decisions we're seeing out of SCO these days.
But why do I feel like I just walked out of a showroom for this year's new cars?
"He slimed me, Ray"...
Seriously, c'mon, give me the negatives. There had to be some negatives. Nothing's perfect.
This is just yet another attempt by a government agency at empire building. SPAM is nowhere NEAR a level of importance or National Security that would require investigations or legal proceedings to be held in secret. Conduct those in the proven existing methods. Very little NEEDS to be kept secret.
Have the representatives of the people once again intentionally forgotten that little fact: they represent the will of the people, and they govern solely at the sufferance and will of the people?
Has anyone checked the watering schedule for the tree of liberty recently?
The RIAA keeps getting more bold (and ridiculous) in its strong-arm techniques.
Someone very wise once said "Follow the money". The major labels are the RIAA's clientelle, and I think I can reasonably assume they give their ascent to the RIAA's "business practices" (read: extortion), otherwise they'd be very upset about public relations backlash against them and their products. This backlash may happen eventually.
Now assuming that this ascent to these techniques is present, perhaps contractually, what happens when the wrong student is sued, and a very wealthy, but up to now quiet and non-pressworthy relative (such as a rich uncle that the RIAA didn't count on), steps forward and says to his nephew, "No, you are not caving, and I've secured the services of an excellent law firm that specializes in the RICO act."
As I said, follow the money. I look forward to the day when some unassuming student, that was doing nothing wrong, takes the major labels for a few billion. Yes, with a B.
Does anyone know what frequency or frequency range these passive RFID's work in? It should be possible to build a 1 milliwatt transmitter on that frequency for one's own house, thus ensuring that products at home remain well behaved (anonymous).
Secondly if something I purchase is going to be sending an ID to readers that I don't specifically authorize, I'd like to get my own reader so I know with certainty that I've located and disabled the RFID on or in the product, since my own reader stops picking up a response/reply from the RFID.
Anyone know where consumers can purchase RFID readers?
Imagine if you will that you have an old home where running CAT-5 in the walls was going to be one of those nightmare projects that you just _so_ didn't want to face. Since your file servers live on your (currently CAT-5 wired) trusted internal network, the AC/Powerline version of this device (minus the wireless access point) starts to look pretty appealing!
:-(
That is until one question occured to me. What _exactly_ stops my TCP/IP ethernet traffic from heading out past my breaker box and to my neighbors on the same side of the big step down transformer that feeds my street?
So far, the answer I've come up with is: Absolutely nothing.
Which would mean using IPSEC on every connection, and so much for my internal network being quite as "trusted" or behind a firewall. Shielded conduit, CAT5, and a whole lot of plaster, here I come.