By providing free internet access, you are effectively saying that it's OK for someone you don't know to commit crime
Of course not.
He says that he doesn't think "there's much of a risk". Ha!, let's see how far his "good manners" get him in jail!
Bruce has had his wifi open for quite a while (years, I think). So he's gotten pretty far.
Bruce is a security expert. A lot of his writing is about how people obsess over dramatic "risks" that hardly ever happen in the real world, while ignoring the less exciting ones. Or worse, making the real risks worse.
My stealing wifi you can end up in hot water.. there are laws concerning data theft, etc. just as much as car theft.
The eternal Slashdot analogy "It's like a car". No, it's not, in any way.
And by using the word "stealing" you are begging the question. What "data" is stolen, anyway? If I connect to a neghbour's wifi router to read Slashdot, whose data has been stolen?
If however the courts can show that you knew the risks and consequences to having your network opened, and you had the means to do it, yet did not, you are much more likely to be held accountable.
As Schneier says, there are innumerable nearby coffeshops, public libraries, etc, offering open access. So he is not increasing the "risk" in any real way. It's not 1975. Internet access is not the limiting factor on whether online crimes are committed.
SSID hiding: There is no such thing as "SSID hiding". You're only hiding SSID beaconing on the Access Point. There are 4 other mechanisms that also broadcast the SSID over the 2.4 or 5 GHz spectrum. The 4 mechanisms are; probe requests, probe responses, association requests, and re-association requests. Essentially, youre talking about hiding 1 of 5 SSID broadcast mechanisms. Nothing is hidden and all you've achieved is cause problems for Wi-Fi roaming when a client jumps from AP to AP. Hidden SSIDs also makes wireless LANs less user friendly. You dont need to take my word for it. Just ask Robert Moskowitz who is the Senior Technical Director of ICSA Labs in his white paper Debunking the myth of SSID hiding.
The only effective measure there is the WPA. If a hacker gets through that (and that's *hard*)
Aircrack can supposedly do this in minutes to hours. So you'd be safe from driveby leechers, but not anyone who seriously wanted to break into your network.
Well, the actual article is pretty silly. His response to "if you're accused of downloading child porn you're better off pleading that going to court?" Ya, just want I want to do, have that on my record.
Why does "downloading child porn" ALWAYS come up in these articles? How many people have been charged, let alone convicted, of sitting in a car outside someone else's home using their wifi to download child porn? Please name one.
I realise paranoia is the order of the day, but get real. This kind of "threat" is of the same order as the "liquid explosive threat" that has made airline travel so much fun. Lots of hysteria; no evidence.
Bah, I'd say even of those 'in the know' 95% are jaded cynics like me who have never and will never believe Windows to be magically secure after an update and really can't be bothered patching.
My PC runs Win2k, my wife has an XP laptop. I've updated both to the last full service packs, but not any of the incremental patches. I hide or delete IE and Outlook, have a router and software firewalls. In 6 years no virus or exploits. And yes, I would know -- in previous discussions people smugly say my PCs must be zombies and I'm just too dumb to notice. If you don't believe me, sorry.
you'll still lose data if you yank the drive while a file is being written. Windows will warn you if you yank the drive without telling it to disconnect the drive precisely for this reason.
It's not a "warning" if it's too late to do anything about it when it tells you.
Intel is just like any other company that has a responsibility to its shareholders.
It signed agreements with OLPC, so it has a responsibility to live up to that. "Maximising profits for shareholders" does not make it okay to break contracts, lie, cheat or steal, despite what many MBAs seem to think.
They give power to those with infrastructure, i.e. the parties. But if you want to have a party-based system, why not go straight to party list PR?
The point is that if a voter WANTS to, he can just follow a how-to-vote card as recommended by the party or candidate of his choice. But if he prefers, he can order the candidates as he wishes. Independents can, and occasionally do, win seats.
One thing is for certain: any system is better than the West's out-dated plurality voting system.
You do realise that the USA is not the only country in "the West", surely?
Obviously, by "the West" the writer meant that realm inhabited by cowboys, ranchers and Red Indians. In that land only white men of substance are allowed to vote, I believe. Truly long overdue for reform.
ASIDE: Come to think of it, why is only the wireless bit encrypted? Shouldn't the wired links also be encrypted? It's not like that's compute expensive anymore.
Why would you want to do that? What possible use would it be? I can SEE exactly what is wired into my router.
How about encrypting the link between your keyboard and PC? Your monitor?... Looks like you've just invented Palladium.
Well those people are inevitably going to have their switch clicked. Blaming whatever triggered them is pointless, if not one image online, an underwear advert, etc, etc, etc, would have done it the next day. Trying to lock down the entire Internet because of such people is too high a price, and as I said, would be futile if the aim was to keep them "safe".
some people who are vulnerable do not want their lives ruined by involuntary exposure.
Fine. Let them install filters, white lists, whatever they need. same as I am sympathetic to alcoholics. They can stay out of bars, but don't try to stop me drinking my small, or even excessive, amounts. That's MY choice as long as I don't hurt anyone in the process.
Being able to force people to see various kinds of pornography...
Sure, That should actually be a crime as far as I'm concerned. Punish the assholes who push this. Though I must say, I rarely come across porn unexpectedly these days, though I'm sure it happens. Worst thing are the sleazy "Adult Friend Finder" ads that infest various low rent sites.
BTW, It was car fact, not a car analogy.
Most analogies are facts. If it wasn't an analogy, it's a random off topic remark. But you WERE making an analogy. Between "tempting" people to steal a car with "tempting" someone to commit a sex crime, I think.
So you either think that * "good" ideas can sway people to behavior while "bad" ideas have absolutely no power over people or * no ideas have any power--
No, it is not so simple. People are not binary objects. Even cockroaches are more complicated.
Either people are changed by the things they see and learn or they are not. You can't logically hold both positions.
Same "logic" again. Of course people are changed by things they are exposed to. But it is not like seeing a photo will click a switch and turn a normal person into a ravening paedophile. Consider my example of the popularity of serial killer fiction (it seems half the NY Times bestseller list is about this). Normal people think about things they see. But to change a person's outlook requires a lot more than seeing some images or reading some books. "This book changed my life" is a very rare occurrence, and when one examines each case, one usually finds the person was evolving that way regardless and the book gave then a direction, but did not create the tendency.
If you leave your car unlocked with the keys in it,
So it is only logical that some people will develop a taste for kiddie porn once they see some of it.
No,it is not "logical". You may have noticed that there are "children" in the REAL WORLD. Anyone likely to be sexually stimulated by looking at pictures of children would already have noticed he was getting a hard on when walking past a kindergarten, or at the beach or swimming pool.
This kind of thinking is exactly why women are compelled to wear burkahs in fundamentalist Muslim countries.
And besides, even if some people did "develop a taste for kiddie porn", the evidence that that translates into real world action is thin. Lots of people sit on the subway reading horrific serial killer novels on the way to work. Hardly any go n to become serial killers. However, kiddie porn itself should be illegal, because of the harm done to the participants in the making. But that is a completely separate issue, and filtering is going to make zero impact on that.
Because it points out flaws in Linux it's biased in some way?
Actually, it didn't point out flaws in "Linux". The complaints were that the desktop wasn't very functional and that Flash wasn't installed. Also that the hardware was "slow", though he didn't give any numbers at all for that.
So these flaws, if they are that, pretty trivial and not fundamental parts of Linux, could be and probably will be fixed very easily. It wasn't really unfair, but you can see this guy spends his life using top end machines and apps, he's just not interested in a cheap machine. And of course, the page is full of ads for Vista-equipped PCs, as he suggests you "save up for instead".
Because of the RIAA and MPAA, people here usually think of music and movies. But go to virtually any bookstore in most non-European countries, and you'll find most popular titles from the US and Europe are "pirated". Travel books, popular fiction, technical titles...
Really? How do you know this? Do they have "Pirated from the US!" on the title pages? While there may well be pirate editions, there are also licensed, cheap local reprints.
I remember in Taiwan 20 years ago you could get very nice "reproductions" of Western books. But since then these have pretty much disappeared with copyright enforcement. There just isn't enough profit in books to make the risk worthwhile in most countries. But in mainland China, yes, any popular book will be pirated.
Perhaps I'm really bad at writing summaries, but I posted this same story on Firehose almost an hour before this one even came up.
But you probably spelled "sphinx" correctly. It was the extra creativity of fucking it up to "sphynx" that got this one noticed. Remember, it's not accuracy that gets you on Slashdot, it's the ability to distort and misinterpret a story so it will generate the most page views that counts.
. I'm not sure that I, while I have no problem with porn and have even *gasp* watched it, would want to see a giant gangbang going on right next to me, while my rowmate eyes it longingly.
As may be. But who, would watch hard core porn in public, a coffeeshop, or such, now? I'm sure it does happen, but this is something that most of us do in privacy, or perhaps with friends. Someone who openly watches hard core porn on a plane should be stopped by the hostesses, the same as if he started masturbating in his seat.
Anyone likely to use their laptop to watch porn could much more easily load it up with a few GB of videos before they leave the ground, rather than see -- buffering -- at inconvenient moments, let alone probably paying a small fortune for the privilege.
So I'm not saying that watching porn is appropriate on a plane, but trying to filter it out of the net is not going to stop it, and we all know the silly side effects of overbroad filters.
What I'm trying to say is that society should - IMHO - constantly strive to encourage and recognize diversity.
And obviously a top down, monolithic, state run education system is a great way to accomplish that.
Yes, because a completly private education system means that only the children of aristocrats can get or afford a quality education, the peasants' children mostly get none and end up as stoop labourers or factory fodder. A few very bright (or just lucky in who they know) will get scholarshops, but most will have no chance to better themselves above their family's station.
Yes. Words are invented, words change meaning. The problem with this particular word is that it has an accepted meaning: "permanently unusable". It is being used in cases where the damage is software and easily repaired. It reverses the meaning, it misleads and could conceivabley lead to people losing money if they throw away a perfectly dfine PC because of this.
Neither link provides any detail about how they're going to make such rules stick. What will be the fine for a blogger in Brisbane that talks about goat sodomy?
According to TFA, it applies:
tougher rules for companies that sell entertainment-related content on subscription internet sites and mobile phones.
I emphasise the word "sell"; thus your blogger, unless he charges for access, is free to discuss goat sodomy or whatever else they do up in Queensland.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course not.
He says that he doesn't think "there's much of a risk". Ha!, let's see how far his "good manners" get him in jail!
Bruce has had his wifi open for quite a while (years, I think). So he's gotten pretty far.
Bruce is a security expert. A lot of his writing is about how people obsess over dramatic "risks" that hardly ever happen in the real world, while ignoring the less exciting ones. Or worse, making the real risks worse.
The eternal Slashdot analogy "It's like a car". No, it's not, in any way.
And by using the word "stealing" you are begging the question. What "data" is stolen, anyway? If I connect to a neghbour's wifi router to read Slashdot, whose data has been stolen?
As Schneier says, there are innumerable nearby coffeshops, public libraries, etc, offering open access. So he is not increasing the "risk" in any real way. It's not 1975. Internet access is not the limiting factor on whether online crimes are committed.
The six dumbest ways to secure a wireless LAN
Aircrack can supposedly do this in minutes to hours. So you'd be safe from driveby leechers, but not anyone who seriously wanted to break into your network.
Why does "downloading child porn" ALWAYS come up in these articles? How many people have been charged, let alone convicted, of sitting in a car outside someone else's home using their wifi to download child porn? Please name one.
I realise paranoia is the order of the day, but get real. This kind of "threat" is of the same order as the "liquid explosive threat" that has made airline travel so much fun. Lots of hysteria; no evidence.
My PC runs Win2k, my wife has an XP laptop. I've updated both to the last full service packs, but not any of the incremental patches. I hide or delete IE and Outlook, have a router and software firewalls. In 6 years no virus or exploits. And yes, I would know -- in previous discussions people smugly say my PCs must be zombies and I'm just too dumb to notice. If you don't believe me, sorry.
Could 30 horses not pull a wagon with 4 fat Americans in it? Perhaps not at Ben Hur speed, but they'd get there.
It's not a "warning" if it's too late to do anything about it when it tells you.
It signed agreements with OLPC, so it has a responsibility to live up to that. "Maximising profits for shareholders" does not make it okay to break contracts, lie, cheat or steal, despite what many MBAs seem to think.
The point is that if a voter WANTS to, he can just follow a how-to-vote card as recommended by the party or candidate of his choice. But if he prefers, he can order the candidates as he wishes. Independents can, and occasionally do, win seats.
You do realise that the USA is not the only country in "the West", surely?
Obviously, by "the West" the writer meant that realm inhabited by cowboys, ranchers and Red Indians. In that land only white men of substance are allowed to vote, I believe. Truly long overdue for reform.
Why would you want to do that? What possible use would it be? I can SEE exactly what is wired into my router.
How about encrypting the link between your keyboard and PC? Your monitor? ... Looks like you've just invented Palladium.
Well those people are inevitably going to have their switch clicked. Blaming whatever triggered them is pointless, if not one image online, an underwear advert, etc, etc, etc, would have done it the next day. Trying to lock down the entire Internet because of such people is too high a price, and as I said, would be futile if the aim was to keep them "safe".
some people who are vulnerable do not want their lives ruined by involuntary exposure.
Fine. Let them install filters, white lists, whatever they need. same as I am sympathetic to alcoholics. They can stay out of bars, but don't try to stop me drinking my small, or even excessive, amounts. That's MY choice as long as I don't hurt anyone in the process.
Being able to force people to see various kinds of pornography...
Sure, That should actually be a crime as far as I'm concerned. Punish the assholes who push this. Though I must say, I rarely come across porn unexpectedly these days, though I'm sure it happens. Worst thing are the sleazy "Adult Friend Finder" ads that infest various low rent sites.
BTW, It was car fact, not a car analogy.
Most analogies are facts. If it wasn't an analogy, it's a random off topic remark. But you WERE making an analogy. Between "tempting" people to steal a car with "tempting" someone to commit a sex crime, I think.
So you either think that
* "good" ideas can sway people to behavior while "bad" ideas have absolutely no power over people or
* no ideas have any power--
No, it is not so simple. People are not binary objects. Even cockroaches are more complicated.
Either people are changed by the things they see and learn or they are not. You can't logically hold both positions.
Same "logic" again. Of course people are changed by things they are exposed to. But it is not like seeing a photo will click a switch and turn a normal person into a ravening paedophile. Consider my example of the popularity of serial killer fiction (it seems half the NY Times bestseller list is about this). Normal people think about things they see. But to change a person's outlook requires a lot more than seeing some images or reading some books. "This book changed my life" is a very rare occurrence, and when one examines each case, one usually finds the person was evolving that way regardless and the book gave then a direction, but did not create the tendency.
If you leave your car unlocked with the keys in it,
It wouldn't be Slashdot without a car analogy.
No,it is not "logical". You may have noticed that there are "children" in the REAL WORLD. Anyone likely to be sexually stimulated by looking at pictures of children would already have noticed he was getting a hard on when walking past a kindergarten, or at the beach or swimming pool.
This kind of thinking is exactly why women are compelled to wear burkahs in fundamentalist Muslim countries.
And besides, even if some people did "develop a taste for kiddie porn", the evidence that that translates into real world action is thin. Lots of people sit on the subway reading horrific serial killer novels on the way to work. Hardly any go n to become serial killers. However, kiddie porn itself should be illegal, because of the harm done to the participants in the making. But that is a completely separate issue, and filtering is going to make zero impact on that.
Actually, it didn't point out flaws in "Linux". The complaints were that the desktop wasn't very functional and that Flash wasn't installed. Also that the hardware was "slow", though he didn't give any numbers at all for that.
So these flaws, if they are that, pretty trivial and not fundamental parts of Linux, could be and probably will be fixed very easily. It wasn't really unfair, but you can see this guy spends his life using top end machines and apps, he's just not interested in a cheap machine. And of course, the page is full of ads for Vista-equipped PCs, as he suggests you "save up for instead".
That's what I meant. Or is one, or both, of us missing the other's irony?
Really? How do you know this? Do they have "Pirated from the US!" on the title pages? While there may well be pirate editions, there are also licensed, cheap local reprints.
I remember in Taiwan 20 years ago you could get very nice "reproductions" of Western books. But since then these have pretty much disappeared with copyright enforcement. There just isn't enough profit in books to make the risk worthwhile in most countries. But in mainland China, yes, any popular book will be pirated.
But you probably spelled "sphinx" correctly. It was the extra creativity of fucking it up to "sphynx" that got this one noticed. Remember, it's not accuracy that gets you on Slashdot, it's the ability to distort and misinterpret a story so it will generate the most page views that counts.
As may be. But who, would watch hard core porn in public, a coffeeshop, or such, now? I'm sure it does happen, but this is something that most of us do in privacy, or perhaps with friends. Someone who openly watches hard core porn on a plane should be stopped by the hostesses, the same as if he started masturbating in his seat.
Anyone likely to use their laptop to watch porn could much more easily load it up with a few GB of videos before they leave the ground, rather than see -- buffering -- at inconvenient moments, let alone probably paying a small fortune for the privilege.
So I'm not saying that watching porn is appropriate on a plane, but trying to filter it out of the net is not going to stop it, and we all know the silly side effects of overbroad filters.
And obviously a top down, monolithic, state run education system is a great way to accomplish that.
Yes, because a completly private education system means that only the children of aristocrats can get or afford a quality education, the peasants' children mostly get none and end up as stoop labourers or factory fodder. A few very bright (or just lucky in who they know) will get scholarshops, but most will have no chance to better themselves above their family's station.
Yes. Words are invented, words change meaning. The problem with this particular word is that it has an accepted meaning: "permanently unusable". It is being used in cases where the damage is software and easily repaired. It reverses the meaning, it misleads and could conceivabley lead to people losing money if they throw away a perfectly dfine PC because of this.
TFA: "rules for companies that sell entertainment-related content".
Not free sites.
According to TFA, it applies:
I emphasise the word "sell"; thus your blogger, unless he charges for access, is free to discuss goat sodomy or whatever else they do up in Queensland.