The megacorp where I work recently outsourced netadmin to a location in Asia. The results are _horrible_! Incredibly bureaucractic and slow. Two weeks for a simple DNS change. Internal firewalls that go up and down with the sun.
In one word: DON'T! Users don't much like Asian tech support. And it isn't that much worse. Higher level stuff truly _is_ worse.
Any right to keep cryto keys private is probably rooted in the right against self-incrimination. I don't know how strongly that right is protected in the UK. Common Law yields to Statute Law. Maybe the EU Charter of Rights and Freedoms over-rides. Maybe not.
In the past, the cops didn't care where you kept keys, 'cuz they could smash open any physical place. Or subpoena non-incriminating testimony. Now with crypto, they can no longer smash and grab.
I rememeber the Clipper, but not the guy who attacked it. IIRC, it died a market death.
The problem with subpoenae is they're handed out like handbills. Just start a lawsuit, and you've got the power. Of course, you could plea the Fifth. I'm not sure if that's been ruled upon wrt cryptokeys.
One more thing to go wrong and increase support costs. Or if you like tinfoil, 'cuz the NSA want their job easier. There's no way they could snarf anything beyond src/dst/vol/time traffic analysis if most of the net were encrypted.
I suspect some netzis like China (Singapore?) would ban encrypted traffic if they could.
Seriously, who are your opponents? You cannot do any security planning without threat scenarios. If the NSA wants you, they pwn j00 d00d! But fortunately, they're seldom interested , and even more reluctant to disgorge their capabilities by revealing info.
So you have to decide what is cost effective. For me, for most things, no security at all the the perferred option. I _want_ people to read my postings and email. I'm far more concerned with my msgs not being received/read than unauthorized people reading them.
Still horribly risk skewed. How much "little cach" would you demand for success?
Human risk preferences have been found to be profoundly asymmetric. That's what makes pooling risks (insurance) so attractive in spite of heavy overheads.
They need to find a way to bundle 1000 of these guys together os it becomes a sure loss of ~3% vs 97% zero loss and 3% total loss.
P2P financing is called "disintermediation" and actually has been going on in the finance world for 20+ years as borrowers approach lenders directly, rather than through banks. The commercial paper market. There are problems, mostly around collections and default. Not economically solvable for small loans.
But the very idea ignores what drives P2P: very low costs to the provider of service. Lending money is nothing of the kind -- there's a big default risk. You'd find P2P s3x to be easier!
Sure emails can be mis-read. Anything can be. A better question is: Does the misreading of email so taint their information-passing ability that they're useless? The answer is clearly no. So just live with and try to minimize the frustrations.
One thing I find that helps is mroe lines per screen. It helps keep the whole thing in prespective, and not jump to immediate conclusions while looking to scroll. A second thing that helps is the use of emoticons [smileys]. When I first saw'em, I thought they were needly frippery. An affectation. Now I see they are just as important as punctuation. They convey mode and serve as humor/sarcasm markers in the absense of long text that serves the same purpose in conventional articles and letters.
I'm sorry, but it's really simple: If it's HTML, it's deeply suspect. I need text to convince me that the HTML is worth opening.
When in doubt, look at the headers. The spam relays are obvious. If the provider allows one of it's genuine servers to get corrupted, then they should bear the phishing losses.
This conclusion isn't the slightest surprising. VidRAM has heavy demands upon it. Lots of bandwidth is eaten just refreshing the screen. More in calcing textures, etc.
With only main memory in an "integrated" system, the CPU loses significant access while the video is being refreshed/calced.
Laptops get stolen. It's a reality of life. The worst thing is to compromise cutomers/other's data. This can easily be prevented by using crypto for data directoris. GPG has a Windows drop-in for the clueless.
So Grok! is looking for some higher level taxonomy to organize information: I suggest the classic phases of computing: Input, Processing and Output. Plus Misc, of course.
Unix, and other Linux-like systems:) has important innovations in all three areas. Processing could be further broken down by kernel tasks: memory mgmt, scheduling, threading, filesystems, device drivers. And misc.
Much the same question -- why must power cause excessive abuse? Abuse (and error) are certain. But are there _no_ benefits?
Much as FDR abused his office, the unconstitutional collectivization did permit the US to defeat the Axis Powers in WW2. Wasn't that a beneficial use of power? Russia might have defeated Germany anyways (a very close thing). But the Japanese Empire would be unchecked.
AFAICS, the worry is that data collection will automatically lead to abuse. Something like Pizza.
OK. But do we have a right to use anonymity/privacy to hide wrongdoings? At the time of the founding of the Republic and drafting the US Constitution, the world was a very different place. People knew each other, and would watch strangers. We now have mechanized mobility and electronic communications. Shouldn't monitoring be similarly enabled to preserve balance?
Clearly abuses must be avoided. But at what cost? Aren't there better ways (like "Fruit of the Poisoned Vine") to stop abuse without unduly impairing activity? Aren't the police & government "innocent until proiven guilty" too?
Since it cannot happen, if it happens, Linux must cease to exist!
More seriously, this guy is too stuck on the MS commercial model of selling commoditized code. He doesn't "get it". Few biz/commercial people do. The code has a life of it's own, as untameable as the wind.
His argument would have been more convincing 5 years ago when ReadHat was bidding fair to become the MS of Linux. Now he's just 'way late to the party.
Yes, the DA has to share (criminal discovery). Defense is not required to. But this brings in the NSA, and a request for information the NSA would be hard pressed to deny, even though they would claim NatSec. The best they would do is details in chambers, but pen-trace public.
If this database is at all comprehensive, then I do not see why criminal defense attornies won't use it to defend those accused of crimes. The pen trace becomes an alibi.
Defendants most definitely have a right to compel exculpatory witnesses. Especially govt witnesses, including the NSA (who will blather NatSec). In fact, a sharp defense attorney may now appeal past convictions in light of this newly discovered evidence potential.
The thing I found remarkable from this allegedly "high contrast" comparision is how little there actually is.
I used floppies more than I'll ever use flash. I only used the big mobile phone for a few weekends as Dutyman, but it was more important than my cell is now. Everything else is just cosmetic. My old 8088 PC pretty much does what my current one does.
The big difference is the WWW, especially search engines. I used to spend lots of time in libraries and with the Yellow Pages.
I'm a bit surprised: Why would WalMart use an external consultant (especially a lobbyist) to deal with a press inaccuracy? Don't they have people who do that in-house?
If they don't have'em, how likely is it they have people to manipulate a wiki in-house? They'd just contract it out, like the defense. Plausible deniability.
Is it good to blind your enemy? Yes, it makes her attacks less precise. But they become more fearful and likely to lash out. Blindly. There are times you want your enemy well informed. Why else did the USSR reveal so much at May Day parades?
This was basicly the logic behind the ABM treaty. It still holds good.
With our current terrorist enemy, I cannot see blinding any satellites would help. With potential enemies, most of them have nukers and likely would get very edgy blinded.
Yes, I know the recording labels make artists sign over many copyrights. Egregious. But iPOD might look more like broadcasting than distribution of [physical] recordings. I believe artists still retain those rights and receive "residuals" (NASCAP?). Have there been court decisions?
Slashdot Mirror
In one word: DON'T! Users don't much like Asian tech support. And it isn't that much worse. Higher level stuff truly _is_ worse.
In the past, the cops didn't care where you kept keys, 'cuz they could smash open any physical place. Or subpoena non-incriminating testimony. Now with crypto, they can no longer smash and grab.
The problem with subpoenae is they're handed out like handbills. Just start a lawsuit, and you've got the power. Of course, you could plea the Fifth. I'm not sure if that's been ruled upon wrt cryptokeys.
I suspect some netzis like China (Singapore?) would ban encrypted traffic if they could.
So you have to decide what is cost effective. For me, for most things, no security at all the the perferred option. I _want_ people to read my postings and email. I'm far more concerned with my msgs not being received/read than unauthorized people reading them.
Human risk preferences have been found to be profoundly asymmetric. That's what makes pooling risks (insurance) so attractive in spite of heavy overheads.
They need to find a way to bundle 1000 of these guys together os it becomes a sure loss of ~3% vs 97% zero loss and 3% total loss.
But the very idea ignores what drives P2P: very low costs to the provider of service. Lending money is nothing of the kind -- there's a big default risk. You'd find P2P s3x to be easier!
One thing I find that helps is mroe lines per screen. It helps keep the whole thing in prespective, and not jump to immediate conclusions while looking to scroll. A second thing that helps is the use of emoticons [smileys]. When I first saw'em, I thought they were needly frippery. An affectation. Now I see they are just as important as punctuation. They convey mode and serve as humor/sarcasm markers in the absense of long text that serves the same purpose in conventional articles and letters.
When in doubt, look at the headers. The spam relays are obvious. If the provider allows one of it's genuine servers to get corrupted, then they should bear the phishing losses.
With only main memory in an "integrated" system, the CPU loses significant access while the video is being refreshed/calced.
Unix, and other Linux-like systems :) has important innovations in all three areas. Processing could be further broken down by kernel tasks: memory mgmt, scheduling, threading, filesystems, device drivers. And misc.
Much as FDR abused his office, the unconstitutional collectivization did permit the US to defeat the Axis Powers in WW2. Wasn't that a beneficial use of power? Russia might have defeated Germany anyways (a very close thing). But the Japanese Empire would be unchecked.
OK. But do we have a right to use anonymity/privacy to hide wrongdoings? At the time of the founding of the Republic and drafting the US Constitution, the world was a very different place. People knew each other, and would watch strangers. We now have mechanized mobility and electronic communications. Shouldn't monitoring be similarly enabled to preserve balance?
Clearly abuses must be avoided. But at what cost? Aren't there better ways (like "Fruit of the Poisoned Vine") to stop abuse without unduly impairing activity? Aren't the police & government "innocent until proiven guilty" too?
More seriously, this guy is too stuck on the MS commercial model of selling commoditized code. He doesn't "get it". Few biz/commercial people do. The code has a life of it's own, as untameable as the wind.
His argument would have been more convincing 5 years ago when ReadHat was bidding fair to become the MS of Linux. Now he's just 'way late to the party.
Defendants most definitely have a right to compel exculpatory witnesses. Especially govt witnesses, including the NSA (who will blather NatSec). In fact, a sharp defense attorney may now appeal past convictions in light of this newly discovered evidence potential.
or octal?
I used floppies more than I'll ever use flash. I only used the big mobile phone for a few weekends as Dutyman, but it was more important than my cell is now. Everything else is just cosmetic. My old 8088 PC pretty much does what my current one does.
The big difference is the WWW, especially search engines. I used to spend lots of time in libraries and with the Yellow Pages.
If they don't have'em, how likely is it they have people to manipulate a wiki in-house? They'd just contract it out, like the defense. Plausible deniability.
This was basicly the logic behind the ABM treaty. It still holds good.
With our current terrorist enemy, I cannot see blinding any satellites would help. With potential enemies, most of them have nukers and likely would get very edgy blinded.