I understand that if there is a backdoor, it will eventually be exploited. But try explaining it to the public over the word of the FBI, who's no doubt going to claim that the existence of a backdoor helps fight terrorism.
This may be easier now that it would have been 2 years ago, given the high-profile virii that have been around the media lately. People may (I say may, not will) realize that this is asking for something to happen. Then again, they may not.
Still only urging, for now. I'm sure at some point one of our fine elected officials will introduce some 'anti-terrorism' bill that mandates government backdoors in crypto, in the interest of 'national security' and 'definding against terrorists', of course.
This would require demonstrating to mainstream voters -- those ordinary folks ofted derisively referred to as "users" -- why the DMCA threatens them and why this one issue, by itself, merits changing their vote.
And therein lies the problem. First, one would have to muster up enough people voting (hard in and of itself), and THEN convince them why the DMCA is bad. (or do that in reverse, I'm not sure which would work better).
We (most/. readers) understand the impact of the DMCA. Most ordinary people don't, and now the *AAs are planning to try and reach out to those people and effectively tell them the DMCA is good (not directly, mind you, but they'll get their shots in). Like it or not, the RIAA and MPAA have a huge advantage - money. They can advertise 'copying is bad' all over the place, it's a lot harder for the average/. reader to reach an the same audience with their message ('copying has legit uses, illegal copying is bad' or whatever it is they'd say).
Like AOL really wants everyone to have access to its own proprietary protocols.
Depending on how Peng came about the info on the AOL protocols, it may be perfectly legal reverse engineering. Coversely, it may not be, I don't know, just addressing the possiility that the knowledge was obtained through legally protected means.
I still have not seen the question of expired copyrights being adressed. What steps are being taken to verify that when a copyright expires, putting a creative work into the public domain, that that work will be available? Are DRM tools being developed that check to see if a copyright is expired?
This seems to be a key issue that I don't hear mentioned too often. I would hope that there would be such a thing in the protection, but honestly I don't think there is.
Seems to me that DRM can be a good thing, if done properly; the problem is that every implementation (and possible implementation) I've ever seen/heard/read anything about has no protections for fair use, which IMO makes such a technology (the specific implentation, not DRM in general) illegal.
This is not unlike the anti-virus companies who charge us for new virus definitions.
Actually, this is quite unlike the AV companies. Security problems in Microsoft's products are the fault of Microsoft. Symantec and McAffee do not (to my knowledge) write the virii and then charge for protection against them.
Granted, this would still be different, as the virii would be intentional, and the security flaws are (most likely) inadvertent.
For the most part, the major discoveries (with the exception of asteriods) are made by large telescopes. It's just a simple equation that more money = better equipment, and amateurs generally don't have the money to keep up with the new technology that's available.
There's been a lot of controversy over other 'discoveries' of a 10th planet over the years, I'm just curious as to how sure these guys are, and what evidence they have that will convince their colleagues.
Does this mean that every user is stuck using the Aqua interface? I don't like it (I don't own a Mac, but I have to use them sometimes), and if Apple is going to dictate what a user's computer can look like, I'm never going to buy a Mac.
.the.product, while not a game, is a demo in 64kb. 7 fully 3d scenes, 12 minutes of music, and a cool scroller. It's amazing enough to look at on it's own, but when you consider it's only 64kb, and runs on today's computers, it's unbelievable.
A lot of things are possible, they just take a little work to get done. With the right soldering and such you could probably have a 4U fitted for 2 mobos.
Do they mean that I should be Trusting Them worthy of writing my code?
The best analogy I can think of is a car. Most people (myself included) don't know what happens inside. We trust in GM, Ford, Chevy, or whoever, and we trust that they did their part right and the car won't spontaneously crash or corrupt itself. If it did, there would be an outrage and most likely a recall. Microsoft is the software equivelent of a car manufacturer (excepting open-source, there's no place in the analogy for that, but I digress). The thing is, their products crash and corrupt themselves spontaneously. While a malfunction in(most) software has a lot less risk to human life than a malfunction in a car, it's still the same kind of situation.
Re:Lance Bass might be good for NASA.
on
Space News Roundup
·
· Score: 1
We put men on the moon, and then stoppped caring. I doubt this is going to be much different, since anyone who does care that he's going is most likely too stupid to even comprehend what space is.
And this comes from the same company that put PGP into 'maintainance mode'. How long do you think it'll be before they put this promising technology to a premature end?
I understand the need to keep wiretap info to the people who need to know, but there are court cases all the time in which the records are sealed by the court. The FBI, having been involved, already knows what they need and can pass that along to it's agents, while that same information is not accessible to anyone else.
Slashdot Mirror
I understand that if there is a backdoor, it will eventually be exploited. But try explaining it to the public over the word of the FBI, who's no doubt going to claim that the existence of a backdoor helps fight terrorism.
This may be easier now that it would have been 2 years ago, given the high-profile virii that have been around the media lately. People may (I say may, not will) realize that this is asking for something to happen. Then again, they may not.
Still only urging, for now. I'm sure at some point one of our fine elected officials will introduce some 'anti-terrorism' bill that mandates government backdoors in crypto, in the interest of 'national security' and 'definding against terrorists', of course.
And therein lies the problem. First, one would have to muster up enough people voting (hard in and of itself), and THEN convince them why the DMCA is bad. (or do that in reverse, I'm not sure which would work better). /. readers) understand the impact of the DMCA. Most ordinary people don't, and now the *AAs are planning to try and reach out to those people and effectively tell them the DMCA is good (not directly, mind you, but they'll get their shots in). Like it or not, the RIAA and MPAA have a huge advantage - money. They can advertise 'copying is bad' all over the place, it's a lot harder for the average /. reader to reach an the same audience with their message ('copying has legit uses, illegal copying is bad' or whatever it is they'd say).
We (most
I don't see any sort of release announcement either.
Like AOL really wants everyone to have access to its own proprietary protocols. Depending on how Peng came about the info on the AOL protocols, it may be perfectly legal reverse engineering. Coversely, it may not be, I don't know, just addressing the possiility that the knowledge was obtained through legally protected means.
This seems to be a key issue that I don't hear mentioned too often. I would hope that there would be such a thing in the protection, but honestly I don't think there is.
Seems to me that DRM can be a good thing, if done properly; the problem is that every implementation (and possible implementation) I've ever seen/heard/read anything about has no protections for fair use, which IMO makes such a technology (the specific implentation, not DRM in general) illegal.
Yeah, with neither of the original hosts, who IMO were much better than their current ones.
Right after the /.'ing is done and they can see for sure...wait, no, they've probably already done it.
Actually, this is quite unlike the AV companies. Security problems in Microsoft's products are the fault of Microsoft. Symantec and McAffee do not (to my knowledge) write the virii and then charge for protection against them.
Granted, this would still be different, as the virii would be intentional, and the security flaws are (most likely) inadvertent.
For the most part, the major discoveries (with the exception of asteriods) are made by large telescopes. It's just a simple equation that more money = better equipment, and amateurs generally don't have the money to keep up with the new technology that's available.
There's been a lot of controversy over other 'discoveries' of a 10th planet over the years, I'm just curious as to how sure these guys are, and what evidence they have that will convince their colleagues.
Actually, according to some new research, the similarity is only about 95%.
Does this mean that every user is stuck using the Aqua interface? I don't like it (I don't own a Mac, but I have to use them sometimes), and if Apple is going to dictate what a user's computer can look like, I'm never going to buy a Mac.
The state of NJ is perpetually crying out in pain.
too late
.the .product, while not a game, is a demo in 64kb. 7 fully 3d scenes, 12 minutes of music, and a cool scroller. It's amazing enough to look at on it's own, but when you consider it's only 64kb, and runs on today's computers, it's unbelievable.
A lot of things are possible, they just take a little work to get done. With the right soldering and such you could probably have a 4U fitted for 2 mobos.
Do they mean that I should be Trusting Them worthy of writing my code?
The best analogy I can think of is a car. Most people (myself included) don't know what happens inside. We trust in GM, Ford, Chevy, or whoever, and we trust that they did their part right and the car won't spontaneously crash or corrupt itself. If it did, there would be an outrage and most likely a recall.
Microsoft is the software equivelent of a car manufacturer (excepting open-source, there's no place in the analogy for that, but I digress). The thing is, their products crash and corrupt themselves spontaneously. While a malfunction in(most) software has a lot less risk to human life than a malfunction in a car, it's still the same kind of situation.
We put men on the moon, and then stoppped caring. I doubt this is going to be much different, since anyone who does care that he's going is most likely too stupid to even comprehend what space is.
And this comes from the same company that put PGP into 'maintainance mode'. How long do you think it'll be before they put this promising technology to a premature end?
Not with DVDs you buy, but there's definite competition hampering the adaption of recordable DVD, DVD-R and DVD+R, which of course are incompatible.
not a new way to cast votes, but rather a whole new voting system.
a new system of voting
I understand the need to keep wiretap info to the people who need to know, but there are court cases all the time in which the records are sealed by the court. The FBI, having been involved, already knows what they need and can pass that along to it's agents, while that same information is not accessible to anyone else.
with the fact that a secret court exists and issues wiretaps authorizations?