Just watch what you are hoping for because you know that they'll come after OSS at some point. Just becuase software is free and developed in the open doesn't mean that it is immune to somebody coming after it - or its users even if they use it for legitimate reasons (RIAA).
Baring any spy movie BS, fingerprints or retina scans are about as secure as you can get for something like this.
I would love to have more stores adopt something like this. Though I always have my wallet I would love to not have to carry it. You are more likely to get mugged on the way to the store than have someone fake your fingerprint and buy things!
My feeling is that they are going to track us any way they can (except for cash) and the less that I have to carry around the better.
Not only are you "trolling a dead horse" with you argument but you are stretching your analogies extreemly thin just to prove under any examples that you hold the most correct opinion.
Don't you see the difference between writing software "because it needs to be written" then releasing it GPL and writing software and selling it (or giving it to your employer) because you saw the weakness in someone elses IP?
You are taking an extreme view in a fairly clear cut case. Adobe is a company with interest wordwide... Afganistan is is a terrorist country that is being delt with. And by the way, if I were to go back in time and start a company there and hire female CEOs I would have to accept the consequences of my actions. But thats where your argument falls apart - I wouldn't because I'm not that stupid. A better example would be someone producing drugs in a south american country where they don't have laws against it and trafficking the drugs around the world. No one would see much of a problem with going after them if they bring it here.
If it was legal for Dimitry to do this in Russia then more power to him. But, again, by giving it to his employer he knew what he was doing and the hacker community needs to growup and take some responsibility for their actions.
Who cares if it was legal in his country? The target of his work was a US company where there is a law and thus a US interest. If a US citizen exploited the software of a Russian company then the Russian government would be within their rights to prosecute the US offender.
Dimitri knew full well what he was doing when he wrote the software and gave it to his employer. If he had released it under GPL then we both would probably be on the same side. But, by giving it to his employer who then tried to profit by it he lost all credibility. An the only reason to give it to his employeer was for them to offer it for sale on the web, in which case it would benefit him by paying his salary.
So, he may have started out with good intentions but he got $greedy$ and wanted to profit at someone else's expense.
So the Government lied... So Dimitry lied... I guess that cancels each other out.
The main issue is that he did create a piece of software that's only purpose (once released to the public) was for the illegal decryption and reading of eBooks.
I make the distinction that if he had kept the software to himself then the government would have no case. But no, in typical computer geek pseudo penis waving fashion he wanted to show off. The difference is knowing when to have self control and Dimitry did not exhibit any self control.
I do not claim to be a hacker or even understand the mindset of a hacker. What I do know is that he went beyond just investigating the encryption and protection of eBooks and moved to the exploitation of its weeknesses.
Slashdot Mirror
Just watch what you are hoping for because you know that they'll come after OSS at some point. Just becuase software is free and developed in the open doesn't mean that it is immune to somebody coming after it - or its users even if they use it for legitimate reasons (RIAA).
It seems to me that Apple is now entering the never ending patch cycle.
With in the year they have put out about as many "patches" and security updates as M$ and the others.
I would love to have more stores adopt something like this. Though I always have my wallet I would love to not have to carry it. You are more likely to get mugged on the way to the store than have someone fake your fingerprint and buy things!
My feeling is that they are going to track us any way they can (except for cash) and the less that I have to carry around the better.
Don't you see the difference between writing software "because it needs to be written" then releasing it GPL and writing software and selling it (or giving it to your employer) because you saw the weakness in someone elses IP?
You are taking an extreme view in a fairly clear cut case. Adobe is a company with interest wordwide... Afganistan is is a terrorist country that is being delt with. And by the way, if I were to go back in time and start a company there and hire female CEOs I would have to accept the consequences of my actions. But thats where your argument falls apart - I wouldn't because I'm not that stupid. A better example would be someone producing drugs in a south american country where they don't have laws against it and trafficking the drugs around the world. No one would see much of a problem with going after them if they bring it here.
If it was legal for Dimitry to do this in Russia then more power to him. But, again, by giving it to his employer he knew what he was doing and the hacker community needs to growup and take some responsibility for their actions.
Dimitri knew full well what he was doing when he wrote the software and gave it to his employer. If he had released it under GPL then we both would probably be on the same side. But, by giving it to his employer who then tried to profit by it he lost all credibility. An the only reason to give it to his employeer was for them to offer it for sale on the web, in which case it would benefit him by paying his salary.
So, he may have started out with good intentions but he got $greedy$ and wanted to profit at someone else's expense.
So the Government lied... So Dimitry lied... I guess that cancels each other out. The main issue is that he did create a piece of software that's only purpose (once released to the public) was for the illegal decryption and reading of eBooks. I make the distinction that if he had kept the software to himself then the government would have no case. But no, in typical computer geek pseudo penis waving fashion he wanted to show off. The difference is knowing when to have self control and Dimitry did not exhibit any self control. I do not claim to be a hacker or even understand the mindset of a hacker. What I do know is that he went beyond just investigating the encryption and protection of eBooks and moved to the exploitation of its weeknesses.